Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
16 October 2020 | Story Prof Theodore Petrus | Photo Supplied
Prof Theodore Petrus is Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of the Free State.


The recent events in Senekal in the Eastern Free State have, for the umpteenth time, thrust the related issues of farm murders, racial tension, violent crime, and the responses of political leaders to these issues on the national agenda. The latest outrage was sparked by the murder of farm manager Brendin Horner. On Tuesday 6 October 2020, demonstrators – mostly white farmers – embarked on a violent protest at the Senekal Magistrates’ Court, following the appearance of two suspects for allegedly murdering Mr Horner. According to reports, a gunshot was fired, and a police vehicle was set on fire. 

In response, EFF leader Julius Malema called on his ‘ground forces’ to attend the Senekal trial of the murder accused, scheduled for 16 October 2020, to ‘defend’ state property and democracy. This response has generated a polarised reaction from the public, with some supporting this call, while others criticised Malema for inciting violence and racial division.

This drama is playing out while the country is still reeling from continuing incidents of gender-based violence and violence against children.

Violence in South Africa

This begs the question: Do we have a culture of violence in South Africa?

The concept of culture is often used (and misused) to refer to a range of different things. For some, culture refers to the observable distinctive traits of a particular group or collective, such as dress, food, or technology. For others, it refers to more abstract traits such as language, beliefs, or customs and traditions. For still others, culture refers to an appreciation for human expression in the form of art and music. Culture is all of these things, but it is also more than this. 

Anthropologically, culture is a central concept that helps us to make sense of human social dynamics and behaviour across all times and locations. As such, culture is seen as a complex system that both shapes, and is shaped by, humans within specific contexts. Culture thus has three key characteristics that concern us here. First, culture is shared. Second, culture is learned. Third, culture is symbolic.  

The question of whether or not we are in a culture of violence in South Africa raises further questions about whether we can, or should, speak of a culture of violence in the first place. What can we observe if we analyse this concept in relation to the three characteristics of culture outlined above?

Is violence shared?

As a country, we indeed share a history of violence. We share a history of multiple levels of violence, including structural, political, economic, social, and even cultural violence. We also share in the mass media consumption of violence, be it through movies, television, or even news reports of violence in our society. 

Is violence learned?

A culture survives over time because it is learned by successive generations. Values, beliefs, customs, practices, language, and many other symbols of culture are transferred from generation to generation through enculturation or socialisation. Experiences of violence, whether as perpetrators or victims or both, are inherited by successive generations. This is why we see many examples of history repeating itself in, for example, violent protests, or excessive force by police, or perceived violence inciting rhetoric. None of these are new, as there are various examples throughout our history as a country.   

Does violence have any symbolic significance?

What does violence mean in South African society? What is its symbolic value? Violence has become like a language. It is a form of communicating or expressing a range of negative emotions and attitudes, including anger, frustration, fear, anxiety, intolerance, and disrespect for basic human rights. It is still perceived by many as a valid symbol of resistance and may be justified on this basis. How often do we hear people involved in violent protests saying that “violence is the only language the government understands!” Thus, violence certainly has symbolic value in the South African historical and contemporary context. 

From the above, it could well be argued that, in terms of the three characteristics of culture, there indeed exists a culture of violence in South Africa. 

Addressing the culture of violence 

But what can we do about it?

Perhaps the best way to address the culture of violence, is to start with the successive generations. In any society, if you want to change the culture, you need to start with the youth. Cultural values are more easily shaped and adopted by the youth than by older generations who tend to be more rooted and set in their ways of thinking and behaving. If we want to change the culture of violence, we need to start changing the values, attitudes, and traits that may engender violence among the youth. These changing values then need to be enculturated among the youth in the hope that it will be internalised sufficiently to promote new ways of thinking and behaving.

How do we achieve this? By demonstrating proper leadership and by being the examples that we want our youth to become. We cannot expect to dismantle the culture of violence if we have leaders who, whether intentional or not, are perceived to be promoting the very values that encourage violence and anarchy. We need to demonstrate a willingness to use more productive and constructive ways to resolve differences or conflict, other than resorting to destruction of property or harming others. 

Lastly, it is imperative that we address the structural violence of an enduring social and economic system that continues to victimise and marginalise many. Culture and environment are interlinked. In order to change the culture of violence, we need to change the environment of violence. 

 

Opinion article by Prof Theodore Petrus, Department of Anthropology, University of the Free State .

News Archive

Traffic in translation between French and Afrikaans follows unique direction
2017-11-21

 Description: Traffic in translation between French and Afrikaans  Tags: Traffic in translation between French and Afrikaans

At Prof Naòmi Morgan’s inaugural lecture were, from the left:
Profs Corli Witthuhn, Vice-Rector: Research; Morgan;
Heidi Hudson, Acting Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities;
and Angelique van Niekerk, Head of the Department of Afrikaans
and Dutch, German and French.
Photo: Stephen Collett

Translation is normally done from a so-called weaker language into a mightier one. This is one of the ways, according to author Antjie Krog in her book A Change of Tongue, which is used by a ‘weaker’ language to help it survive.

However, according to Prof Naòmi Morgan, Head of French in the Department of Afrikaans and Dutch, German and French at the University of the Free State (UFS), this is not the case with French, which is the mightier language, and Afrikaans.

Influence of translators on Afrikaans

“The number of translated titles from French into Afrikaans, from ‘great’ into ‘lesser’ language, is far more than the other way round, almost as if the translators wanted to make the Afrikaans-speaking readers literary self-sufficient, but did not feel the same need to extend the Afrikaans literature into other languages.”

This was Prof Morgan’s words on 8 November 2017 during her inaugural lecture entitled, Van Frans na Afrikaans: 100 jaar van byna eenrigting-vertaalverkeer, in the Equitas Auditorium on the Bloemfontein Campus. A PowerPoint presentation, with a symbolic background of the South African and French flags and relevant texts, formed part of her lecture. She also played video clips and pieces of music to complement it.

Among others, she has a doctorate in Modern French Literature from the University of Geneva, and her translations have earned her a French Knighthood and various prizes. She is also well-known for her translations and involvement in dramas such as Oskar en die Pienk Tannie and Monsieur Ibrahim en die blomme van die Koran.

Greater challenges in this direction

In her lecture, she looked at the two-way traffic from French into Afrikaans and from Afrikaans into French.

Three French citizens, Pierre-Marie Finkelstein, Georges Lory, and Donald Moerdijk, have translated from Afrikaans into French. Of course, their background and ties with South Africa also had an influence on their work. “In Moerdijk’s case, translation from Afrikaans, his second language, was a way in which to recall the country he left in his mind’s eye,” she said.

Prof Morgan is one of only two translators who translates works from Afrikaans into French, the other being Catherine du Toit. However, translations in this direction pose greater challenges. She said it involves “not only knowledge of the language, but also knowledge of the French target culture and literature”. In addition, there aren’t any good bilingual dictionaries, and the only Afrikaans-French dictionary is a thin volume by B Strelen and HL Gonin dating from 1950.

Prof Morgan still believes in translation

She believes there is a need to hear foreign languages such as French in the form of music in Afrikaans, and the speaking of a language alone might not be enough to ensure its survival. 

She still believes in translation, and quoted Salman Rushdie’s Imaginary homelands: essays and criticism 1981-1991 in this respect: “The word ‘translation’ comes, etymologically, from the Latin for ‘bearing across’. Having been borne across the world, we are translated men. It is normally supposed that something always gets lost in translation; I cling, obstinately to the notion that something can also be gained.”

Click here for Prof Morgan’s full lecture (only available in Afrikaans).

 

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