Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 October 2020 | Story Motsaathebe Serekoane | Photo Supplied


We need to acknowledge that inherent in opening up spaces that were previously reserved for exclusive inhabitation and use is problematic in the contestation for place and symbolic public representation. Broadening the heritage landscape allows us an opportunity to bridge the existing gaps in the heritage space, in particular, askew representation through monuments and declared sites.

The country’s 2030 Developmental Plan requires South Africa to continuously reflect on progress made since the dawn of democracy in 1994. The scope is big; my focus here is on the heritage landscape. I do not want to create an impression that this matter exists in isolation, the intersectional engagement is imminent. The conversation on heritage is vast. My summary of all I have read and heard is that at stake in South Africa, with the historical legacy of segregation policies, is the competing notion of space, conflicting and often-competing ideological notion of commemoration or memorialisation, and the lack of shared collective memory and meaning of public representation. Effectively we don’t know what to do with our historical text and footprints. 

“A community is divided when their perception of the same thing is divided” …Steve Biko

Three questions 

This is a challenge for the notion of inclusion (aka social cohesion) and a threat to preservation and conservation of the country’s heritage resources material. It is equally important that I bring to your attention related conversations with a position that asserts that forfeiting the past for the sake of the future is perhaps an overly simplistic way of conceptualising and describing how society moves beyond conflict or pain. The argument for imagining inclusive spaces necessitates a paradigm shift in our thinking. The literature argues for a move from multiculturalism to interculturalism because of cross-cultural overlaps, interaction, and negotiation. The interculturalism approach goes beyond opportunities and respect for existing cultural differences, to the pluralist transformation of public space, civic culture, and institutions. In line with this view, reconfiguration of public spaces towards inclusive ends would have to emphasise the politics of recognition and negotiation of difference. So where does this leave us? There are no easy answers. As the country embarks on the process of auditing and spatial identity transformation I put forward the following three questions:
• Whose conception of the past should prevail in the public realm?
• Whose conception of the present should prevail in the current realm for the future?
• How do we balance the old and the new so that we do not dump history?

Sustainable change will require consultation and participation

Advancing change affords interested and affected communities to develop an awareness of layered complexities of our history and intersectional voices (some louder than others), and promotes the practices of collaboration and capacity-building with community members to advance sustainable change. Sustainable change will require, in line with the democratic principles, that the review process acknowledges consultation and participation. Ideally, the audit and review process should be designed to encourage conversation, reflection, and social analysis. The transformation of spatial social milieu should assume collective ownership and management of space founded on the permanent and temporary participation of the 'interested and affected parties', with their multiple, varied, and even contradictory political interests. In the review of the current symbolic landscape for inclusion, the spatial identity transformation must be negotiated. It must be developed from a focal point that understands the interrelationship between space and spatial inscription through the form of street names, symbols, and public art. 

I can’t pre-empt the end of the process, the process should inform the outcome. Should it be that some of the statues are to be “repositioned and relocated”, as also stated in the president's speech, this should not be equated to dumping history/historical dumping. Reposition and relocation are plausible alternative arguments in the spatial reconfiguration discourse. If it is done well it should contribute to the educational programme of the country. It should also be kept in mind that memorabilia are protected by the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) No 25 1999. Subsequently, the audit and review will require a nuanced approach guided by the NHRA (including relevant legislation) and leaning towards a process-oriented, person-based approach to allow for agency/agility and new possibilities (cf. SONA pronouncement of imagining the New City). Imminent is a guiding or reference document that draws lessons from review processes demonstrated by, among others, the University of Free State’s review and ultimately relocation of the president MT Steyn statue to the War Museum. I believe the South African Heritage Resources Authority and its Provincial Heritage Resources Authority should guide the process. 

Heritage serves a social and economic function

Just as a footnote, it is prudent that we remind ourselves that heritage, in addition to many things, serves a social and economic function. Although I acknowledge the views that some of the symbols in the public spaces trigger painful memories of the past, losing those will rob the country of its rich narrative that, in line with NHRA, is to be bequeathed to the next generation, but also that can boost the country’s economy through heritage cultural tourism footprints. 

Ultimately, “Our heritage is unique and precious and it cannot be renewed. It helps us to define our cultural identity and therefore lies at the heart of our spiritual well-being and has the power to build our nation. It has the potential to affirm our diverse cultures and in so doing, shape our national character” …NHRA, No. 25 1999

Opinion article by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer: Anthropology at the UFS.


News Archive

Intervarsity postponed to 2013
2012-03-08

The annual Intervarsity between the Universities of the Free State and North-West (NWU), which traditionally takes place in the third term, has been postponed to 2013.

The Intervarsity between the UFS and NWU is an illustrious event that has already reached the special milestone of celebrating a 70-year Intervarsity tradition. The UFS/NWU Intervarsity is also known as one of the most reckoned events on the local and national sports and student calendars, and it is widely supported.
 
Representatives from both universities could for a variety of reasons not decide on a date which suited both universities.
 
The respective Intervarsity committees and senior managers of both universities have also taken the interests of the respective university communities and alumni of the institutions into account and have decided to postpone the 70th-year celebration of Intervarsity by a year in order to be able to celebrate the milestone properly.
 
The UFS would have received the NWU in Bloemfontein this year and will therefore host the 70-year celebrations of the event next year as well.
 
Mr Rudi Buys, Dean: Student Affairs at the UFS has expressed his gratitude for the fact that both universities are committed to a special celebration of the Intervarsity tradition in 2013.
 
“The celebration of the 70th Intervarsity between the two institutions will be an important milestone to commemorate decades of friendship, collaboration and healthy competition. Therefore we welcome this opportunity to plan a bigger and better programme for 2013,” he said.
 
The UFS-NWU 70-YEAR Intervarsity firstly aims to establish the programme as a proud example for both universities, where students and staff can pit their strengths against one another in a healthy manner.
 
The aim is to extend Intervarsity to various sections of the respective university communities to enable more students to participate. For instance, more sports codes will be added to the traditional competition on the rugby, soccer, netball and hockey fields, whilst various events focusing on arts and culture, i.e. choral singing and debating competitions, as well as dialogue between student leaders, will take place as part of the programme. All campuses of the two universities will participate in the programmes.
 
Students are even investigating the possibility of electronic competitions such as on-line games as part of the Intervarsity
 
During the Intervarsity last year, several new possibilities were already tested to ensure that the 70th anniversary would be a huge success.
 
The Central Intervarsity Committee of the UFS has decided to replace the Intervarsity 2012 programme with an INTRA-varsity programme between its respective campuses. For this occasion, various sports, arts and culture, and leadership events between the Bloemfontein and Qwaqwa Campuses are planned, and the Central University of Technology might be invited as well to participate as guests in some programmes.

Media Release
8 March 2012
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: news@ufs.ac.za


 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept