Shane Moran - Alternation Journal

-.
'/lj.r(,t?f 7ktzds ill t/le ~'I*OCL~~C~;~~II cf.y(l,(l/l ,~[f
Ile\v conditions of 'uncompleted revolutioll. l-emove a Illaterial ining and the mines in South African histo~y in a numbel of new works; a spate of
~lflc~c~-Pin~li~g of ~viiionist ideas. A~iti-capitalii~~ and idcas ofclass become vely
U1lfjshiollable ill official society. But what is to take their
in historjogf-a13hy? D~~~
'lot transition from the revolutionaly clilnate of the 1980~ to the bland cljlnate of
'recollciliatioll' of the 1990s part way to explain why the trailsition has not (as yet
m~iva~) beell associated with breaks or erplosiollS ill histol-iogl-aphy?
c('mmcntalor on the 'Future ofthe Past' confererlce held at uwc last yearLVrote how:
istorical and political biographies; and a growing literature on the lbr~ns of rule and
ature ofopposition to apartheid, anlongst others. We can do little justice to the rarlge of
pics, critiques and fields of attention that are visible within and about this growing
outh African historiography. Instead we will focus on what are variously regarded as
'The Mn~ihu~lc Ccntre was concerned to criticisc tire pl.olkssional llistol-yproducing
cstahlishme~lt. including 111cil. collcagLles in !listoly
r)c~~al'fn~elit. for not \criting tlie history of- b7~'l~c Struggle. and for
laI?Ollt.il?g 3t tll~ 'rockfkce' oftlie political S~SLIS~[C (j{;lilli]t~~~ 1996: 146). The three books we wish to focus on are Charles van Onselen's The Secd is
B~it what kind of lli~toly of the struggle is being delmnded in this critique1] ls it a
1'o~~~ar histof7 'fi.oln bclo\~'? Or is it a triutnphalist nationalist llistoly? or a
'11-econciliation' history?
r1le1-e are certain cornlnon features between the approach of Sout], Afi-ican
social 1lislorialls and the 'subaltern studies' school ill llldia. ~ 0th ]lave stressed ~l,istoly
fionl below' popular agency. Both have expressed tllelllselves llostile to salne time, though, each of the three books moves beyond a social histo~y 'Srorn
nationalism and to a triumphalist nationalist histow of 'great men3, say this,
howevel; disguises their differences. 'Subaltern studies' arose ill a quite difkrent
context. It represented a challenge from 'within the nation' to the hegelnony of
nationalist (and 'Marxist' which were in fact nationalist) ideas in post-colonial Indian
historiograp~~y". South African social history arose while society was still 'colonial3 to
challenge first liberalism of the 'coloriisers' and the11 a nationalist prpselltatior, ofthe
ofthe colonised It might be considered merely a brancl~ of the 'historiography
arch and productioll (Nasson 1996). Despite having emerged earlier as a historical
of the colonisers'. In this case, particularly under conditions of an 'uncompleted
revolution', the historiographic break rnight express itself as a nationalist reaction to it.
ect in the work of Nkadimeng and Relly (1 983), Kas Maine has been Put on *he
At the same time, the challenge 'fro~n below' represented by social history to
'nationalist ideas' cannot be wished away. To move fi-om a concerll lYith nationalism to
a ca~cern with subalte1llity seems a logical progression. TO retun, from collcerll with
In this sense The Seed is Mine represents a kind of 'flagship' of the social
subaltemit~ and conflict to concern with nationalism and/or reconciliation seelns a
rather harder road to travel: more difficult, perhaps ilnpossible.
recent 'social history' writing: its strengths and limits
At the same time academic histoly productioil in South Africa has continued to
generate a range of and divergent works. In recent years there has been a
revitalisatioll of 'precolonial' studies; intense debates aild ilew analyses of early
colonia1 histories in southern Africa; reassessments of the role aild importance of
108 109