Shane Moran - Alternation Journal

latant attempt to maintain cultural dominance by containing, marginalising an's coi~slruction is particularly surprising given the Chapmail and Dangolexcludi~ig
resistance literature. Ullyatt e~nploys a host of value-ladcn terms lik (1982), which has 'San' md 'Khoi-Khoi' material, and Chapman's
'intrinsic poetic merits', 'authenticity' and 'tradition' while ignoring the effects representation ofbiack poets in a series of anthologies. This seems to suggest
State's repression on black writers and writing. Ullyatt was challenged by S1 to which ideology over-rides data7. This type of contradiction may he traced,
(1978), Sole (1 978) and Maughan-Brown (1979). I.,ess extreme, though s
Eurocenti-ic (and Inore influential than Ullyatt's article), are the approaches of th
Cabral has suggested, to colonial constructions ofhistoly:
editors ofvarious poetry anthologies'. For instance, in their introduction to Voices oft The colonialists have a habit of telling us that when they arrived in Africa
L~md: ,4n Anthology (~Soz~th Apicnn Poewzs the editors, Marcia Leveson and Jonath they put us into liisto~y. You are well aware that it's tlie contrary-when they
Paton (1985:7), make the following assertion:
arrived thcy took us out of our own history (quoted in Brett 1986:83).
Our intention is to give the reader a sense of the development of South er problem with this mode of representation is encapsulated in Chapman's
African poetry since its beginnings with Thonias Pringle in the early d use of the tern ' Soweto Poets' (e.g. in his 1982 collectioi~ Soweto Poetry) to
nineteenth century . oets such as Serote, Gwala, Sepa~nla and Mtshali, when only one of them,
actually lived in Soweto for a time. Mafika Gwala (1 989:70), the poet-activist
Leveson and Paton's identification of South African poetry with white English Sout
umalanga (KwaZulu-Natal), challenged the reductive and inaccurate use of
African poetiy is significant". Their comments indicate the lag between th
phenorne~lon of resistance poetry in English (which had appeared for more than
niationally-recog~~isable name:
generation) and its reception by cultural arbiters. Another example that suggests a I refuse to be called a 'Soweto Poet'. We have all disagreed with the
unconscious Anglocentrism occurs in a press interview with the winner of the Sanla~
labeliing ... a good example of liberal patronizing. I just cannot consider
Literary Award in 1987, Professor Michael Chapman. Discussing the struggles
creative writers to deal with social reality, he remarked:
myself in the nio~ild of a 'Soweto Poet'. Living with constant fear and bitter
anger ill this country does not revolve around Soweto alone.
Poetry in Soutli Africa is not a precious retreat. Since the 1820s it has
engaged itselfwith social problems (in MacGregor 1987: 11).
apmai-r, Leveson and Paton's group interest seeins to prevent them from
lng for the impact of other cultural traditions in their construction of the
ent of South African poet~y. The statements of Leveson and Paton (1985:7)
Both sets of statements clarify the exclusions on wliich conservative liberal discour
was founded. Many South African resistance poems of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980
show the intluence of indigenous oral traditions that predate Pringle and B
settle~nent in this region. The omission of indigenous literarylcultural traditions
nan (in MacGregor 1987:ll) suggest that they could only imagine their
to be conservative liberal white English-speaking South Africans like
ves. Ullyatt's inystification of the continent is part of an approach that chooses
re the inaterial conditions that infonn black culture .and literature, and is
sed by Douglas Livingstone's (I 978: 10- 15) well-ktlown poem 'Ailgust Zulu'.
ding to Ullyatt's (1 978:531) invocation of the 'perennial problem ... ofwhether
'
In the 1960s it was surprising if black writers were included at all: South iifiican WI
cs and poetly can inix', Jos Slabbert (1978:86) counters that such a question is
losed, it 'doesn't exist in a countiy where going to the toilet is political'.
Ilbiiay. edited by Nadine Gordimer and Lionel Abraliams (1967) is more representativ
African writing than The Perzgllit? Book ofSo71tlz Afbical-z Verse (1968) edited by Jack
Uys Krige. The latter included English translations of poets writing in Afrikaans an
languages, although no African writers \vho wrote in English were included (Se
Percyre 1984f:22).
"eveson and I'aton's remarks hat~e a curious parallel in tlre rhetoric of the State in tlic'era
Gwala's objection to the label 'Soweto Poet' has a parallel in Njabulo
le's opposition to the title of the anthology of black poetly, Ask Aizy Black Man,
as edited by Tim Couzens and Essop Pate1 and published by the progressive
hiilg house, Rava~i Press. Ndebele's (1983:45) stated objections had to do with
lication in the title that the collectioil comprised "rotest poctiy' :
reSol-m': the Botha government's claim that Soutli Africans rcjected sanctions was accept
witilout uucstion in no st u~tblic forums (and bv the liberal media), the tacit assum~tion being tl
(lie terlnL'South ~li-ica;s. meant wliite Sou'th Africans. ~ycontrast. Mark 'orkin's (r98
researci~ into attitudes towards sanctions demonstrated that most black South Africans favour
Norre of my poenis have becn writtcn for people who wanted to liear inc
thc imposition of sanctions. and were prepal-ed to endurc short-term hardship to be rid of tl
minority rcgimc.
liapman (1988) lias atlempted to shift l'roni this position.