Latest News Archive

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

As we as a South African nation prepare to celebrate Heritage Day on 24 September, and as we reflect on our heritage during Heritage Month, what stands out clearly is that this year’s heritage celebrations will be somewhat … different. It will not be like previous celebrations because as a country, we – along with our fellow continental and global citizens – have experienced what can be described as one of the greatest health, social, and economic challenges that we as a species have ever faced. The repercussions and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will be felt for some time to come. And it is this realisation that may cast a little damper on our celebrations during this #Heritage Month.

But what can our shared heritage as South Africans teach us about who we are as a people, and how can this knowledge help us to adapt to and overcome the long-term challenges wrought not only by the pandemic, but also by the many other challenges facing us? 

Heritage Day is a celebration of our cultural heritage and diversity as a nation. It presents us with an opportunity to reflect on our individual and collective heritage. It is also an opportunity for us to take stock of the cultural and other resources that enable and empower us to take ownership of what we want to be as a nation, as a country, as a people. 
So, in view of the questions raised earlier, here are some ideas on what I think our shared heritage can teach us:

1. The heritage of where we come from

Inasmuch as our past is a painful one – a past that still has lingering effects decades after the transition to a democratic dispensation – it still plays a fundamental role in shaping who we are now, and who we want to become.
Colonialism and apartheid sought to suppress our indigenous cultures and traditions, and had a negative impact on our psyche, self-confidence, and dignity as indigenous and African people. But one positive that came from this, is that if it was not for our shared heritage of colonialism and apartheid, we probably would not have become the nation we needed to become to bring it to an end.  

Instead of destroying symbols of that painful past, we need to shift our perspective to re-interpret those symbols in a new way. The power of cultural symbols lies in their meanings. Symbolic anthropologist Victor Turner spoke about the ‘multivocality of symbols’, meaning that we can ascribe whatever meanings to our cultural symbols we choose. Let us reflect on how we can change the current meanings we ascribe to our cultural symbols that reflect an awareness of how the heritage of where we come from does not keep us trapped in negative and painful meanings of these symbols, but instead inspire us to create new positive meanings.

2. The heritage of where we are now

After 1994, we began the process of creating a new contemporary heritage as a nation struggling to free itself of the burden of a painful past. And while it was difficult, we have made significant strides. Yes, we do still face challenges rooted in the past: institutional and structural violence; race and diversity-related issues; intercultural and intergroup conflicts; crime and violence against men, women, and children; corruption at various levels of governance; and others. We are also faced with ‘newer’ challenges as a country that is part of the globalised world. Poverty, inequality, unemployment, slow economic growth, and ailing infrastructure are all contemporary problems, some of them rooted in the past, others the product of the contemporary context. 

What can we learn from our shared heritage of where we are now that can help us to overcome these contemporary challenges? We need to remind ourselves of what we are capable of as a nation. We have ended an oppressive regime, not once but twice. And, with all of the challenges, problems, and obstacles, we are still here.

3. The heritage of where we are going

This might sound strange, because heritage usually refers to the past and present. Rarely do we speak of heritage in a future-oriented context. However, as a nation, given our past and given our present, where we come from and where we are now determines where we are going. 

As South Africans, we need to ask the question: where do we want to go? Are we heading in that direction? If not, how do we change course so that we do go in the right direction? I have no simple answer. But what I can suggest is that it should start with critical self-reflection, both individually and collectively. We also need to ask ourselves what legacy we want to leave for future generations. Do we want them to still be struggling with the same problems and challenges that we are dealing with right now? Or do we want to leave them a legacy of a nation that stood up to its challenges, took ownership of them, and found a way to overcome them?

A globally devastating pandemic. A painful past. A present wrought with seemingly insurmountable obstacles. As a South African, as a child of the soil, I know that as a nation we can overcome, and we can emerge better and stronger. That is our heritage. The heritage of hope.

 

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

News Archive

UFS study on cell development in top international science journal
2008-09-16

A study from the University of the Free State (UFS) on how the change in the packaging of DNA with cell development influenced the expression of genes, will be published in this week’s early edition of the prestigious international, peer-reviewed science journal, the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (PNAS).

The PNAS journal has an impact factor of 10, which means that studies published in the journal are, on average, referred to by ten other scientific studies in a two year period. The South African Journal of Science, by comparison, has an impact factor of 0.7.

The UFS study, funded by the Wellcome Trust and the National Research Foundation (NRF), looked at how the change in the packaging of DNA with cell development influenced the expression of genes. It is very relevant to research on stem cells, an area of medicine that studies the possible use of undifferentiated cells to replace damaged tissue.

Prof. Hugh Patterton, of the Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology at the UFS, who led the study, said: "We are extremely proud of this study. It was conceived in South Africa, it was performed in South Africa, the data were analysed in South Africa, and it was published from South Africa."

When a gene is expressed, the information encoded in the gene is used to manufacture a specific protein. In eukaryotes, which include humans, there is approximately 1m of DNA, containing the genes, in every cell. This length of DNA has to fit into a cell nucleus with a diameter of only about 10 micrometer. In order to fit the DNA into such a small volume, eukaryotic cells wrap their DNA onto successive protein balls, termed nucleosomes. Strings of nucleosomes, resembling a bead of pearls, is folded into a helix to form a chromatin fiber. The study from the UFS investigated how the binding of a specific protein, termed a linker histone, that binds to the length of DNA between nucleosomes, influenced the formation of the chromatin fiber and also the activity of genes.

"We found that the linker histone bound to chromatin in yeast, which we use as a model eukaryote, under conditions where virtually all the genes in the organism were inactive. It was widely believed that the binding of the linker histone caused the inactivation of genes. We studied the relationship between the amount of linker histone bound in the vicinity of each gene and the expression of that gene for all the genes in yeast, using genomic techniques. We made the surprising discovery that even through the linker histone preferentially bound to genes under conditions where the genes were shut off, this inactivation of genes was not caused by the binding of the linker histone and folding of the chromatin,” said Prof. Patterton.

He said: “Instead our data strongly suggested that the observed anti-correlation was due to the movement of enzymes along the DNA molecule, involved in processing the information in genes for the eventual manufacture of proteins. This movement of enzymes displaced the linker histones from the DNA. This finding now requires a rethink on aspects of how packaging of DNA influences gene activity."

Prof. Patterton said that his research group, using the Facility for Genomics and Proteomics as well as the Bioinformatics Node at the UFS, was currently busy with follow-up studies to understand how other proteins in nucleosomes affected the activities of genes, as well as with projects to understand how chemicals found in red wine and in green tea extended lifespan. "We are certainly having a marvelous time trying to understand the fundamental mechanisms of life, and the UFS is an exciting place to be if one was interested in studying life at the level of molecules," he said.


Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
18 September 2008
 

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