This research focuses on exploring the social and political significance of South African Drama, particularly examining the impact of authors like Fugard and Kani on South Africa's political landscape. The study aims to analyze the historical context from the 1950s to the 1990s, highlighting pivotal events and the influence of plays such as "The Blood Knot" on public perception. Additionally, the paper seeks to underscore the importance of theatre performances in South Africa and their role in expressing societal issues.
This paper delves into the historical evolution of the Republic of South Africa, emphasizing the enduring legacy of apartheid and its profound effects on the nation's populace. It traces the origins of racial segregation and oppression, detailing the socio-political landscape that shaped the country from the 1950s onwards. The analysis will explore how theatre became a platform for dissent and catharsis amid turbulent times, reflecting the struggle against apartheid through artistic expression.
The study acknowledges the limitations of a seminar paper in fully encapsulating the breadth of South African literature and history. Despite challenges in accessing primary sources and lacking firsthand experience in South Africa, the research aims to offer a comprehensive overview of pivotal decades in the nation's socio-political narrative.
South-African Drama
1. Introduction
Writing about the social and political importance of South-African Drama and the impact authors such as Fugard and Kani had on the political landscape of South Africa implies having to deal with the past of South Africa, not only as far as politics but also as far as legislation, social circumstances etc. are concerned.
Being aware of the fact that this is too much for a seminar paper I will concentrate on the period from roughly the 50s to the 90s to show what has happened in those decades, how the political climate was and how performances of plays such as The Blood Knot affected the public. I will also attempt to show how important theatre performances were and still are in South Africa, and why that is so.
This paper will by no means be complete as far as authors and their works of literature are concerned, and I do not think that it should be. In addition to never having been to South Africa, which would definitely help writing a paper on it, difficulties in finding secondary literature do not make the task of writing this paper easier. Nevertheless I hope that I will succeed in giving a general account of what has happened in the past few decades.
I will first concern myself with the history of the Republic of South Africa, then go on to the effects the apartheid regime had on the people and finally how they found a way of expressing their anger and frustration in non-violent ways by performing on stage.
2. History of the Republic of South Africa
For fourty years the name South Africa was connected with the darkest human feelings and values: racism and brutality, dominance and repression, prejudice, fear and irrationality. In this country all the disasters man has caused in the 20th century gathered: colonialism, exploitiation, oppression etc. More distinct than in any other country good and evil were marked black and white here. In a world in which almost nothing was clearly defined South Africa stood out as the one country where it was more than easy to chose on which side to stand.
However, the story starts a few centuries earlier, namely in the 1650s when the Dutch settlers came to South Africa. Around 1875 a special ethnical segment formed: people of Dutch, French and German origin have mixed into one group in the course of the 18th century. They only married within this group, spoke Dutch or Afrikaans within the family and shared a history of slavery and colonialism. During the centuries a nationalism formed that put a special stress on volkseenheid and volksverbondenheid.
From 1899 to 1902 there was the Anglo-Boer War which resulted in South Africa being split up in 2 British colonies and 2 Boer republics. In 1948 the National Party of the Boers got into power and introduced the strictest form of racial separation that ever existed in South Africa and probably in the whole world: apartheid. Four racial groups were defined in legal terms, each of which had its own political and social ‘autonomy’. The Nationalists also created homelands for each and every black group.1
During the years the government introduced several laws to maintain and strengthen its position, such as the infamous Pass Law which forced all black citicens to always carry a book around with them which had their name, address and working place in it, or the Urban Areas Act which forced blacks out of the big cities as soon as they were finished with their work there. The devices the government invented were very effective especially as police controls were extremely strict and could happen to anyone at any time, even within their own houses.
Police were executing the laws in extremely brutal ways but always had the government behind them so that they thought nothing could happen to them. The most prominent and cruel example for this is the Sharpville massacre in 1960 when 69 blacks were killed. It was also in 1960 that the ANC was banned, which meant that the situation for blacks was getting worse.
The ANC moved to the underground and kept fighting, but nothing changed until 1989 when Frederik W. de Klerk became the President of South Africa. In his historical speech on the 2nd of February 1990 he stated three things that should change the political landscape of the Republic: He will have Nelson Mandela, who spent 27 years in prison, set free, the ANC was unbanned and he wanted to negotiate with the black majority about the future of the country.2
Although the history of South Africa is of course much more complex and sophisticated, especially as far as the feeling of racial superiority on the side of the Boers is concerned, I believe it should be enough to sum this brief history of South Africa up by saying that by 1990 a change of the system was more than overdue.
2.1. The Role of the Arts in the process of Social Change
The only thing that is really amazing, considering that the apartheid policy worked until the early 1990s, is that nobody seemed interested in bringing a change to the country from abroad. The knoweldge that a state could exist that was ruled by a minority government and maintained by the most cruel deeds should shake us all into awareness of prejudices and the dangers they imply.
Saying that the rest of the world did not react on what was going on in the RSA is not quite true. But protest came mainly from artists: musicians, actors, producers. There is a line in a U2 song - ‘ In the
name of love ’ - where Bono, the singer, accuses the world powers of not reacting on Bishop Tutu’s call for economic sanctions on South Africa for their politics, Peter Gabriel wrote a song on Steve Biko, there are some films on the topic, such as ‘ Cry Freedom ’ by Richard Attenborough or ‘ Sarafina ’. What I am aiming at is that arts can bring about a change of society, but only with the help of the people it is addressing.
As Speech said: “Music cannot revolutionize...only the people can revolutionize!“3
It is not only music, though. It can be, and in the case of South Africa actually was, also theatre that made the people think about what was going on. According to Ehmeir4 the new laws of the early 1960 was a hard blow on theatre performances because censorship was, naturally, directly effecting theatre performances which had to be, or at least should be, performed in public and were thus easily controlled.
In 1965, mixed-cast performances were prohibited which also affected the audiences. There has already been a trend towards that, but there were also exceptions, mainly as far as the music bussiness was concerned. Those laws could not change the attitudes and the lives of people living in places like Sophiatown of District Six, places for poor whites and blacks who wanted to move to the cities:
[...]Black as well as white musicians were playing in cellars, garages, bars, pubs or brothels. The enemies are the officers of apartheid who tell them that musicians of different colour of skin are not allowed together on one stage. The heroes are those among the musicians who didn’t care about that but rather cunningly fooled the state.[...]In order to satisfy the state the organizers drew a curtain across the stage, back to front.[...]They then told the controllers: Don’t you see, black musicians on the left stage, white ones on the right! Of course the state hit back and prohibited this as well: a stage seperated only by a curtain must be seen as one stage and not as two! So the black musicians got into overalls and entered the stage sweeping it. So far nobody prohibited black cleaning personell to stand on the same stage as white musicians and now and then to join them!5
This example makes clear that artists were not giving up although their situation seemed pretty desperate. As far as theatre was concerned, white playwrights in the sixties tried hard to avoid the controversial topic of apartheid, they more or less simply ignored what was going on in South Africa. With one exception, the man who started the protest theatre with The Blood Knot, Athol Fugard.
Athol Fugard’s play The Blood Knot triggered it all off: the play was about two brothers who were seperated into two different racial groups, in this way showing the cruel absurdity of the apartheid system. It was first staged in 1961, and many were to follow. Plays like People Are Living There or Hello and Goodbye were called theatre of defiance by Fugard himself:
Perhaps you could describe it as ‘theatre of defiance’; yes, my object is to defy. I am protesting against the conspiracy of silence about how the next man lives and what happens to groups other than our own.6
3. South African Drama during Apartheid
The indomitable Athol Fugard was just the spearhead of many more South African dramatists to come, such as John Kani, Winston Ntshona, Mbongeni Mgema and many more. Since this is a seminar paper I shall restrict myself to those and a few others and discuss their approaches to theatre performances, protest against the apartheid regime and the actual plays themselves.
It seems like Athol Fugard is the most popular and best known name in South African theatre, so I will start with a play we already discussed in class , ‘ Master Harold ’ ...and the Boys. The topic of the play is the highly complex relationship of a white boy to his servants.
Harold is a young boy who feels left alone by his father who is never at home, so he takes to one of the servants, Sam, as a substitute father. The boy is too young to understand what is going on, nevertheless he is quite aware of the power he has over Sam. Most of the time they get along just like father and son, but there are incidents, especially when phonecalls from Harold’s father come in, when the relationship all of a sudden changes. Eventually Harold gets really mad at Sam because he criticises his father, and orders him to call him Master Harold in the future. This evil act, be it deliberate or not on Harold’s side, marks the end of their friendship, and even while reading it one senses that it is a very intense scene, with emotions running high on both sides.
Fugard succeeds in conveying a very sad message to the audience: although Harold loves Sam more than his own father he cannot escape his upbringing, his education and his social and political surroundings. He has always seen blacks being treated as servants and not as friends, his mother constantly told him to be careful when he is with Sam because friendship with a black is impossible and dangerous, Sam might turn against him etc.
In the end the audience is left not with a solution to the problem but rather with more questions than before: what can one do to overcome those subtle, subconscious and deeply-rooted prejudices? Is there a way out of this complex situation at all, can one person bring about a change? Fugard as an author does not leave any chance to violent solutions but rather wants peace, thus leaving mainly despair on stage and with the audience after the performance because violence has to win for reasons that have to do with the system as a whole.
I believe it is safe to say that Fugard is very good at what he does - stating questions and making the audience think - but he does not offer any solutions to the problems. Nevertheless he certainly is a leading figure in South African theatre because he moved people. Apart from that he was also very much involved in founding the famous Market Theatre in Johannesburg together with John Kani, his prodigy, who is still director of the place.
The next play I would like to mention is Woza Albert! by Percy Mtwa, Mbongeni Ngema and Barney Simon, the last of which was also involved in the founding of the Market Theatre. The basic assumption of this play is the idea that Morena, Jesus, is coming to South Africa to help the poor and oppressed. First the audience gets an idea of what people would expect from him if he came. In the second part the impossible happens: Jesus comes to South Africa. Naturally enough he is arrested, manages to escape twice and gets killed. As good Christians might expect, this is not the end of the play though. Resurrection is expected, and is granted. It is not the old story as it is told in the Bible, though. This resurrection is much more spectacular: Jesus resurrects with all the heroes of the long and bloody fight against apartheid, the most famous of which is probably, at least for us Europeans, Steve Biko who was beaten to death during a police interrogation.
I will not go into a discussion of the understanding of Christianity in South Africa because this would be a topic for a dissertation. Rather I would like to point out what the difference between ‘ Master Harold ’ and this play is: both plays have the same topic, the atrocities of the apartheid regime and their effects on the population, black and white, but whereas Fugard only poses questions Woza Albert! also meditates on the options for resistance, for a defence against what is done to the people.
Very openly the play makes a distinction between good and evil. Apartheid is the evil that has to be fought, the liberation struggle is the good that has to be supported. Of course the fact that Woza Albert! works mainly with faith in a better future and the idea that the solution and the liberation will come at some stage from an unexpected side must also be taken into account when considering the value of the play, but then again theatre is also there to give people hope and optimism.
Another play that is outstanding is Sizwe Bansi is Dead, a play for two people which was first performed by the author John Kani and Winston Ntshona. John Kani, as I have mentioned before, is a very prominent figure in South African arts because of his plays, but also because he is director and leading manager of the Market Theatre. Quite obviously it was important for him, too, just like for Fugard - the two names are closely related - to get plays on stage which make the audience think about the more than strange and absurd situation they and the whole country are in. The topic is the infamous Pass Law which has been mentioned before which restricted the personal freedom of movement very strongly. This law was introduced to more or less ‘keep the blacks in their place’, to control and to torture them.
Two friends find a dead man and take his pass off him. One of the two friends, Sizwe Bansi, is in a very desperate situation because he was caught having an invalid pass for the region. He does not know what to do, he has to support his family financially but cannot find a job anymore - and if the pass is taken from him he is more probable than not to get killed by police. In this difficult situation they find the dead man, and his friend, Buntu, has a brilliant idea: why not change identities? After a short time of consideration, hesitation and reconsideration Sizwe gives in, and they start preparing the pass of the dead man for their purposes, well knowing that if they get caught they will be imprisoned and probably killed.
The name of the dead man they found is Robert, and the last few lines of the play are Buntu taking a picture of Sizwe and telling him to ‘Smile, Robert Smile Smile’.
The end of the play gives the impression that their plan works but leaves us with a lot of questions: Is this a solution to the problem as a whole? Is the only way to survive in a racist and cruel system to play a sly and cunning trick on it?
I had the impression that this play serves to entertain and to make people aware at the same time, and on the same scale. It is undoubtedly amusing to see the two protagonists get away with what they do, but I also got the feeling that it tells people to just stand what is done to them, not to protest in public but rather do all they can to undermine the system which was probably not a bad idea. Honestly I do not really know what to make of it, but then again I am and always was far away from what was going on in South Africa, and during the course of this seminar I got a first but still faint impression of the people, of their mentality and of their feelings. I reckon one must have experienced the apartheid regime to be able to fully understand the different ways of resistance.
My unability to really grasp the full meaning and impact of those plays continues with a discussion of the play Sophiatown by the Junction Avenue Theatre Company, premiered at the Market Theatre in 1986 with a mixed cast, which describes events in the famous and infamous region in Johannesburg.
Sophiatown was something like a small triumph over the system. Sophiatown as well as District Six in Cape Town were torn down in the 50s, but until then they were multi-racial meeting points for artists, whores and players. This definition serves very well to show that Sophiatown was not a safe place to be, it was actually very dangerous. There were several gangs around all of which claimed their own rights to the place, so that there were lots of fights going on between the gangs, and also people not involved in any of the gangs were robbed .
And there is something that cannot be mentioned often enough: the role the magazine Drum played at that time. Drum resulted from the Sophiatown Renaissance, a cultural movement in the district of Sophiatown, destroyed in 1955; black photographers, poets and musicians all worked together for an institution which allowed all of them and all forms of art to express themselves. Made by blacks, stories, poems, pictures and critiques of concerts were published, social circumstances of rural workers discussed etc.7
The magazine Drum can be seen as the only forum blacks at that time had. Drum was entertaining, informative and interesting because it dealt with the topics which really concerned the people.
The play Sophiatown is an account of what life was like in that place in the 50s. It was not easy, and nobody said it was, but people there were openminded. Among the protagonist of the play there is also a man who writes for Drum, a Jewish girl who moves in with a black family, and a few gang members. As the play develops, it becomes more and more clear that it is not only an account of the lives of those few people but more about the attitude of the inhabitants of Sophiatown towards the system and the apartheid regime. Jakes and Ruth both realize that they are not only black and Jewish but that there is much more, that their identities are a lot more complex.
The message of the play as I understand it is that nobody can say that he belongs to this or that ethnic group, everybody is a mixture of different cultures, beliefs and groups. At the end of the play the audience is given a direct account of the removals, bitter as they were. And in addition to conveying the frustration and despair of Sophiatown’s inhabitants there is also clearly a call for liberation, for social and political change in the country which the protagonists love as much as they hate it. To give an idea of the intensity of the play in general and the last act here are a few lines from the last scene:
FAHFEE: These Boers, they are very tricky. Three days early they came, and we were not prepared. [...] But what could we do against eighty lorries and two thousand police? [...] They can’t stop us forever. JAKES: This bitterness inside me wells up and chokes. We lost, and Sophiatown is rubble. The visions of the mad Boere smashed this hope, turned it to rubble. [...] Sophiatown was a cancer on a pure white city, moved out at gunpoint by madmen. With its going, the last common ground is gone. The war has been declared, the battle sides are drawn.
[...] This destruction is called Triomf. I hope the dust of that triumph settles deep in the lungs like a disease and covers those purified suburbs with ash. Memory is a weapon. Only a long rain will clean away these tears.8
With today’s knowledge we could say that dramatists already sensed that a change in politics was imminent, but I would go only so far as to say that by showing that apartheid and its brutal rule have been going on for far too long resistance was re-activated. I presume that a lot of people have already given up and in to compromises, that a lot of people have learned to cope with and accept the circumstances they had to live and mainly survive in. For all those people this play must have been quite a boost to get going again, to keep fighting again a system of injustice and oppression.
I just want to mention Saturday Night at the Palace before going on to Ubu and the Truth
Commission. The TV-production we had a chance to see in class was one of those films that leave the viewer utterly angry at what has happened, and the awareness that it was not fiction but could have, and probably has, happened does not really help to calm one down.
All the plays mentioned so far were staged during the 40 years of apartheid, and each of them, although they all had a different approach, had a few basic ideas, assumptions and possible solutions to offer. What they had in common was the call for liberation, the intention to make the audience think for themselves, being a start for discussions and the call never to give up, never to lose hope because things are going to change at some stage.
Now, after having given a very general and by no means complete overview of the theatre scene before 1990, it is time to look at what has been done once apartheid was officially abandonded.
4. South African Drama after Apartheid
I hope I succeeded in conveying how much the black majority of people in South Africa suffered under the apartheid regime, how many were killed, maimed, tortured and raped during those 40 years of terror. I believe that the arts in general and especially theatre performances can help people cope with their losses of friends, family members and of hope, and how it can motivate people to not just accept the status quo but do something about it.
What the dramatists wanted to and had to write about was clear during this period of time, but what was there to write about or against now? This brings us to the basic question whether it is better to forget and forgive or whether the memory of the atrocities committed should be kept alive. I think that things like apartheid or the Nazi regime should be forgiven but never forgotten, they should be kept alive in the minds of people to keep them from committing the same mistakes again.
From my point of view this makes clear what the next task, which certainly is a very delicate and difficult one, for dramatists, novelists and musicians was. Nadine Gordimer stated that she is often asked “What do you have to write about now that apartheid is dead?“, and her answer to that always is that apartheid is not the only thing to write about in South Africa. And she is right, of course there are many more things to write about, especially when writing novels.
Drama, on the other hand, is always strongly connected to its environment, it depends on the public taste and on the taste of the theatre audience.9 And this is exactly what makes it so important for society: it reflects on topical events, and theatre and reality, at least as far as we have seen in the case of South Africa, are interconnected, influence each other.
Now I get to the play which touched me personally the most: Ubu and the Truth Commission ! In 1996, a commission was set up to work up what has been done to whom in the past. This commission was the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) which plays an important role in coping with the past. It gives victims as well as agents of apartheid a chance to tell what they had to endure and what they have done. It is up to the commission to grant policemen amnesty - that is if they can persuade the TRC that they were only carrying out instructions and were acting politically and not for personal reasons.
This throws up many questions, of course, and it is certainly not easy to find a way to get the different people of various races to forgive each other, not to speak of trusting each other. This approach to coping with the past was heavily criticised, many people were convinced that the agents were getting away with what they have done too easily: a full confession was a ticket to amnesty! Emotions were running high, even the chairman of the TRC,Bishop Tutu, suffered a nervous breakdown when hearing the accounts of victims.
Another difficult and absurd point was that the statements of victims and agents, both of which spoke in ‘their’ languages, were translated so that one got, for example, an emotional account of the burning of a black boy by his mother in an extremely calm and sober translation. There was the idea that the interpretors should imitate the emotions in their translations, but that was quickly abandonded.10
Apparently the TRC did not have an easy job in deciding whether or not to grant amnesty, and they also had to take into account the reaction of the public. The TRC hearings were the first ones to be open to public, and thus to heavy criticism. The author and the director of Ubu and the Truth Commission are definitely not satisfied with the ongoings, and they wanted to give a voice to their frustration. Kentridge and Taylor found a very haunting way of performing a drama on this complex topic: they created a multi-media performance.
I will not go too deep into the performance and its devices, only so far as to say that with the help of puppets and puppeteers, on-screen captions of drawings and pictures and a very limited cast of two human actors - but the limited resources are a characteristic of South African drama and theatre performances in general - the play has a great effect.
What I believe to be much more important and interesting in the context of this paper is the way in which the TRC and the problems mentioned above are explored and discussed in this play. Working with puppeteers proves to be a highly effective way of showing the horror of apartheid, the on- screen captions are also extremely haunting, and the fact that Pa Ubu walks around on stage only in underwear that is extremely dirty and old conveys the impression that the perpetrators are cowards, ugly, but also just as normal as everybody else.
I already mentioned that the author and producer of the play have the distinct feeling that the TRC makes it too easy for policemen and undercover agents to get anmesty granted from it. This feeling is also given in the play: Pa Ubu knows exactly how cruel the things were that he has done to other people, and he cannot really decide wheter it is better to hide or to tell. He relies on his connections:
PA UBU: Oh, Niles, such a vision I had. I saw the Great Truth approaching, a rope in its hand. It demanded I speak the truth of our land.
NILES: Well, as I understand things, you have a choice. You can
take your chances, keep silent, and wait to see if the law comes
after you. But once they have unmasked you, you’ll have to face
the music. My advice would be to pre-empt it all. I hear there is
to be a Commission to determine Truths, Distortions and Proportions. [...]PA UBU: So - a full confession?
NILES: Quite.
PA UBU: Place my own neck in the noose? It is a poor tailor who has to make his own suits. Besides, our Reign of Terror was no Reign of Error. We knew what we did, and still we did it. NILES: All you did was your job. And really, what harm did you do? A little killing here and there never hurt anyone. PA UBU: But if I keep mum, how will they find out? I still have friends in high places.11
This excerpt from the text goes to show how high the danger of corruption was and still is, and I am sure that the fictional Pa Ubu was based on some real characters. Also the statements of the witnesses were taken from actual TRC hearings. I will not go deeper into the complexities of the play, that would be too much for this paper which should only summarize the development of theatre in South Africa.
One more thing I would like to mention, thought, is that in the play Pa Ubu’s wife, Ma Ubu, is played by a black actress whose face is painted white, an inversion of the famous - or rather infamous - device of blackface that was already used in the early days of filmmaking, and that she apparently does not have a clue of what her husbands occupation was until she discovers the documents in Niles’ mouth. This makes clear that nobody trusts each other, everybody seems to have a secret to hide.
5. Conclusion
I hope to have managed to give a satisfying general overview of the ongoings, developments and changes in South African drama. As already mentioned in the introduction this paper is by no means a complete account of events and theatre performances and developments.
I tried to point out the importance of the arts in bringing about a social and political change, and I also tried to discuss the different approaches the plays mentioned have to the politics of apartheid and the liberation struggle. Some were posing questions, some were offering possible solutions, some were simply stating the facts, and the last one tries to help people cope with their past and the past of their country.
With the end of apartheid a new era began that is hopefully leading to lasting peace. I think it is going to take very long until the situation in South Africa is stable and people can treat each other with respect again, being aware of human dignity. It will be hard in the future to keep people from taking revenge for what has been done to them, but I believe that it is also a challenge to find out if they can forgive. Especially theatre can help in the process of reconciliation.
As a final remark I would like to say that the seminar was very interesting, but the time was too short to really understand. Writing on South African drama would be a brilliant topic for a thesis, but to fully grasp the implicit messages in the plays I presume one should have spent at least two or three years in South Africa to get an idea of the living conditions, the anger and frustration of the people etc. I am sure that would have helped a lot for writing this paper, too.
I am aware of the fact that I have by far not mentioned everything that is worth mentioning, but I tried, and I tried hard.
6. Bibliography
6.1. The Plays:
Fugard, A., Kani, J, Ntshona, W. Statements. Three Plays. London, Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 1974.
Fugard, Athol . ‘ Master Harold ’ ... and the Boys. Cape Town, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Junction Avenue Theatre Company. Sophiatown. Cape Town, Johannesburg: David Philip, Junction Avenue Press, 1988.
Mtwa, P., Ngema, M., Simon, B. Woza Albert! Cape Town, 1981.
Taylor, Jane. Ubu and the Truth Commission. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press Ltd., 1998.
6.2. Secondary Literature:
Behrens, M., von Rimscha, R. S ü dafrika nach der Apartheid. Aspekte des politischen,
sozio ö konomischen und kulturellen Wandels in der Ä ra de Klerk. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1994.
Davis, Geoffrey V. (ed.). Crisis and conflict, essays on southern African literature: proceedings of the X1th Annual Conference on Commonwealth Literature and Language Studies in German Speaking Countries, Aachen-Liege, 16-19 June, 1988. Essen: Verl. Die Blaue Eule, 1990.
Fuchs, Anne. Playing the Market: The Market Theatre, Johannesburg, 1976-1986. Chur, Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1990.
Hauptfleisch, Temple. South Africa: A laboratory for theatre research. Research address delivered in the HSRC Boardroom, Pretoria on 12 June 1984.
Maree, Cathy. Resistance and remembrance: Theatre during and after dictatorship and apartheid. SATJ 12 (1998): 11 - 33.
Pietersen, Isaac Dudley . South African Drama and Theories of the Apocalypse. Unpubl. Thesis University of the Western Cape, 1998.
6.3. Websites related to the topic:
http://www.anc.org http://www.mg.co.za/mg/saarts/hist-history1.htm http://www.mg.co.za/mg/saarts/theatre1.htm
[...]
1 Transl.from Drechsler, Wolfgang. In: Behrens, M.; von Rimscha, R. 1994. 91.
2 Transl.from M., Behrens, R.,v. Rimscha, eds.1994. 7
3 Arrested Development Unplugged. Mr. Wendal. EMI, 1993.
4 Ehmeir, Walter. 1995. 59-62.
5 Transl. from von Rimscha, Robert.In: Behrens, M., von Rimscha, R. 1994. 157.
6 Ehmeir, Walter. 1995. 61.
7 Transl. from von Rimscha, Robert. In: Behrens, M., von Rimscha, R. 1994. 161.
8 pp. 73, 74.
9 Maree, Cathy. In: SATJ 12, 1998. 11.
10 Kentridge, William. In: Taylor, Jane. 1998. 14.
Frequently asked questions
What is the general topic of the provided text about South-African Drama?
The text is a language preview focusing on South African drama, particularly during and after the apartheid era. It explores the social and political importance of the plays, their impact on the public, and how they reflected and influenced the political landscape of South Africa. It also addresses the role of the arts in social change and the challenges faced by artists during apartheid.
What historical context is provided in the introduction?
The introduction discusses the need to understand South Africa's past, including its politics, legislation, and social circumstances, to appreciate the significance of South African drama. It concentrates on the period from the 1950s to the 1990s, examining the political climate and the impact of plays like The Blood Knot.
What does the text say about the history of South Africa?
The text briefly outlines South Africa's history, starting with Dutch settlers in the 1650s, the formation of the Afrikaner identity, the Anglo-Boer War, and the rise of the National Party, which implemented apartheid in 1948. It also mentions discriminatory laws like the Pass Law and the Urban Areas Act, as well as the Sharpville massacre in 1960 and the eventual release of Nelson Mandela in 1990.
How does the text describe the role of the arts during apartheid?
The text highlights that during apartheid, the arts, including music and theatre, played a crucial role in protesting against racial segregation and injustice. It mentions the challenges faced by artists due to censorship and prohibitions on mixed-cast performances. It cites Athol Fugard's The Blood Knot as a pioneering example of protest theatre.
Who are some of the key figures in South African drama mentioned in the text?
The text identifies Athol Fugard as a central figure, along with John Kani, Winston Ntshona, Mbongeni Ngema, Percy Mtwa, Barney Simon, and others. It explores their contributions to protest theatre and their different approaches to addressing the apartheid regime.
What plays are discussed in detail in the text?
The text discusses several plays in detail, including 'Master Harold'...and the Boys by Athol Fugard, Woza Albert! by Percy Mtwa, Mbongeni Ngema, and Barney Simon, Sizwe Bansi is Dead by John Kani and Winston Ntshona, Sophiatown by the Junction Avenue Theatre Company, and Ubu and the Truth Commission by Jane Taylor and William Kentridge.
What is the central theme of 'Master Harold'...and the Boys?
'Master Harold'...and the Boys explores the complex relationship between a young white boy and his black servants, highlighting the ingrained prejudices and social structures that perpetuate racial inequality, even in the context of personal affection.
What is the premise of Woza Albert!?
Woza Albert! is based on the idea of Jesus, Morena, coming to South Africa to help the oppressed. The play explores themes of resistance and faith in a better future.
What is the play Sizwe Bansi is Dead about?
Sizwe Bansi is Dead focuses on the impact of the Pass Law on black citizens and the desperate measures they take to survive in a racially oppressive system.
What did the Sophiatown play portray?
Sophiatown depicts life in the multi-racial Johannesburg district of Sophiatown before it was demolished during apartheid. It explores themes of identity, cultural mixing, and resistance to the apartheid regime.
What is Ubu and the Truth Commission about?
Ubu and the Truth Commission explores the complexities and challenges of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) through a multi-media performance. It examines the process of granting amnesty to perpetrators of apartheid crimes and the difficulties of achieving reconciliation.
What does the text say about South African drama after apartheid?
The text addresses the challenges for dramatists after the end of apartheid, including the need to address new social issues and the question of whether to forgive and forget or remember the past atrocities. It emphasizes the role of drama in reflecting on topical events and influencing society.
What role does the Market Theatre in Johannesburg play in South African drama?
The Market Theatre is identified as an important institution for South African theatre, founded with the involvement of key figures like Athol Fugard, John Kani, and Barney Simon. It has been a venue for staging plays that challenge the status quo and address social and political issues.
Does the text provide a bibliography?
Yes, the text includes a bibliography listing the plays and secondary literature cited. It includes Fugard, A., Kani, J, Ntshona, W. Statements. Three Plays, Fugard, Athol . ‘ Master Harold ’ ... and the Boys., Junction Avenue Theatre Company. Sophiatown., Mtwa, P., Ngema, M., Simon, B. Woza Albert!, Taylor, Jane. Ubu and the Truth Commission as well as secondary literature such as Behrens, M., von Rimscha, R. S ü dafrika nach der Apartheid. Aspekte des politischen,sozio ö konomischen und kulturellen Wandels in der Ä ra de Klerk.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Andreas Steinbauer (Autor:in), 1998, South-African Drama, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/96004
