Subject: Re: Cultural Landscape: renaming streets, [re]locating monuments
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 17:17:43 +0000






Eastern Cape
WHY CHANGE THE NAMES?
COSTS?

DESTROYING A HERITAGE?

WHAT ABOUT THE TOURISTS?

HOW DO YOU FIND A NAME?

WHO GETS TO PARTICIPATE?

WHY ARE SOME NAMES MORE ACCEPTED THAN OTHERS?

WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?

WHAT ABOUT POLITICS?

HOW ARE IDENTITITES AFFECTED BY THE NAME CHANGES?

WHAT IS THE AFRICAN RENAISSANCE?

It has been almost 8 years since South Africa has become democratic and this 
year has seen a furor in the government proposing certain name changes for 
various places as well as going ahead with changes as we saw in the Northern 
Province (now Limpopo) in February.

Many of the changes that went straight through after democracy in 1994 were 
the obvious choices like the major symbols of apartheid (e.g. statues, 
airports and dams). The changing of names did not only have to do with the 
physical part of the name but also their entire meanings and what they stood 
for for many people in South Africa. It has taken the government some time 
to organise a policy to change the names that are reminders of British and 
Dutch colonialism and it is these names that are creating a feeling of 
injury amongst various communities of the Eastern Cape.

Renaming is a demand of the present era. In tracing the history of South 
Africa some place names were changed because they were depicting a 
particular culture for certain people and this symbolised something that the 
name changers were not willing to accept. Now days the symbols of apartheid 
have become dead and obsolete because the culture that surrounded that era 
has long gone. South Africa is a democratic and free society and because of 
this we need new symbols and new names in order to reflect this within our 
country and as well as to the world.

It would seem to me that it would be a daily insult to many to have to be 
continuously reminded of a past that oppressed you especially when that past 
no longer exists. In order to broadly transform our society we need to also 
transform the culture that goes a long with it and in this the symbols of a 
new society must reflect on what has changed. It seems quite obvious that 
you cannot democratise and then still keep the names of places or landmarks 
that were representing people that were completely against democracy.

I don't think that the government is planning on changing names for the sake 
of changing them, they are changing the names to reflect the new values and 
culture that you want society to practice. Its not about ridding South 
Africa of all white English and Afrikaans names, its about creating a new 
culture for new South Africans, not black South Africans, not Indian, 
coloured or white South Africans, but just people who are known as South 
African regardless of their race.

WHY CHANGE THE NAMES?
There are two issues one has to consider when thinking about the name 
changes in the Eastern Cape. There is principle on the one hand which weighs 
up very strongly because British Imperialism was a very aggressive policy 
and when you look at the people involved in these policies they were very 
cruel indeed. Then there are other considerations, like those which involve 
the practical considerations like costs, inconveniences and confusion. What 
one also has to look at is how to go about the changes with the maximum 
amount of sensitivity in order to not offend and get peoples backs up which 
will result in widespread resistance to what should be a simple process.

COSTS?
The costs involved are not only in terms on monetary value but also 
inconvenience and even loss of brand value in some cases. Maps, letterheads, 
road signs and number plates have to change all of which occurs for personal 
expenditure. The Eastern Cape has already gone through a number of new 
license plates in the last few years and if the name changes, they will have 
to change them again -their own expense. The Northern Province (one of the 
poorest in the country is budgeting for an initial R2 million for start up 
costs and then a further R40 million to have everything changed. Is this 
really worth it when a good majority of people have no employment, housing 
or even electricity?

Many people feel that this should be the major deterrent for the governments 
plans for extensive name changing because the average person on the street 
if asked what they felt they needed more, a name change or a roof over their 
head would more than likely respond enthusiastically to the latter. Many 
people are asking how it is going to affect them personally and this is also 
a valid point. Once your tax has been paid, the government is free to do 
with it what it wishes (including spending money on changing names) but when 
this means you have to pay for letterheads to be changed it affects people 
personally and this is when the consternation begins. If the province had 
also not waited such a long time in deciding to change its name, these costs 
would not have been seen as being so bad in terms of monetary value and the 
changes would have gone through as smoothly as they did in Gauteng.

The Eastern Cape is not a wealthy province and surely if the government were 
interested in restoring the pride and dignity of black people they would 
provide them with good schools, a good health system, a decent income and a 
clear plan in dealing with AIDS. Once people have satisfied their basic 
needs they will be more capable of contributing meaningfully to the process 
of deciding on a new name.

What do others see as the overriding benefits of changing names? The point 
of changing names is trying to transform society to show that it is no 
longer associated with the values it once held, and in this case, the 
changes are an attempt to rewrite a history where all people in South Africa 
are represented. The government is trying to transform society and it has a 
number of transformational programs running at the same time, name changes 
are just one of them. If you do things gradually and in a disciplined manner 
there should be no reason that people would be opposed to what they other 
wise might feel threatened about.

What is important is our history and the upliftment and the transformation 
of society to show its new values. The costs according to some are 
outweighed by the long-term benefits that would see the restoration of black 
pride and dignity and why should the changing of colonial names be so costly 
that it gets relegated to the end of the governments priority list. Africa's 
renaissance means that there are going to be costs. Changing a society does 
not come cheap and the costs are going to be there through out any 
transformation.

This is a very sticky issue and it doesn't seem that either side really has 
a convincing argument. There is so much that this province lacks in terms of 
education just for one. Education is such a vital tool for development and 
it is sometimes difficult to believe that people are willing to spend such 
vast sums of money in order to change names that could maybe wait for a few 
years while the money is spent on worthwhile causes. Then again giving 
people a place in history consolidates their identity and makes them proud 
of who they are. A feeling of self worth can spur people on to accomplish 
great things.

DESTROYING A HERITAGE?
Many people have felt though that the way in which the government has gone 
about these changes has been suspect and that this is a reason why many 
white people are adverse to the proposed changes. There have been cries of 
"you're taking away my history and my heritage!" and these are valuable 
points. Many people have felt personally affronted by the proposed changes 
because names have such significant cultural meanings for many people. The 
NNP (New National Party) says that getting rid of the heritage of certain 
communities while attempting to impose an exclusively Africanist cultural 
policy is in itself racist and totally unacceptable. The Conservative Party 
is also saying that it is a slap in the face for whites who are responsible 
for the development of most things in this country.

It is not an attempt to try and rewrite history only from a black point of 
view because their heritage was destroyed by the settlers, it is an attempt 
to have an inclusive history for all people that call themselves South 
African. It cannot be stressed enough that South African society has changed 
and this change needs to be reflected in our symbols and our names for 
things. If people are given enough of an opportunity to participate and 
their views recognised and debated thoroughly then nobody will feel 
marginalised. It is the reality of South Africa that things need to change 
and people need to start recognising this and reorganising their minds to 
get used to the idea. It is fundamental that the government makes sure that 
everybody is included and consulted so that they will be able to associate 
themselves with the proposed changes and that there won't be a situation 
where people can claim that their heritage is being destroyed.

"That's why in the Albany museum, in these museums you'll find that some of 
the statues that were taken away from these institutions like parliament, 
they are not being destroyed but it goes to the archives of the country and 
I don't think that in that fashion you are destroying anyone's heritage 
because whilst it becomes part of the museums, society is going to go to 
those museums and learn about that culture and that heritage."

Bonisile Nesi

South Africa is getting a new and exciting history and there are many new 
things that are waiting to be rediscovered and learnt. Verwoed is not going 
to be forgotten, he will still be remembered as being a fundamental part of 
South African history and people will learn of his contributions but what 
has changed is that he will no longer be honoured by having his name on 
things because his era, what he stood for has come to an end.

WHAT ABOUT THE TOURISTS?
Where does tourism fit into all of this? Does it in any way? If you were a 
tourist would you be more enticed to go to a place called Rhini over 
Grahamstown? The tourism industry in South Africa believes that the changing 
of certain names will give them more of an opportunity to market themselves 
internationally but many do not see the correlation between tourism and name 
changes.

"I think the tourist wants the African Experience and the tourist brochures 
will tell the tourist what the tourist experience is and I think that people 
are also interested in the historical experience. A lot of tourists like to 
go to the battlefields in Zulu land and if the battle fields in the Eastern 
Cape were renamed for the Xhosa leader who was fighting in that particular 
battle rather than Fort Brown it was Fort Nkomo, I don't really think it 
would make much difference."

Prof Whisson


Place names have their place and it is difficult to see why people would be 
less attracted by the name Eastern Cape than something else like Kei.

Perhaps the name changes can be worked into a new kind of tourism where if 
the tourist knows why something has changed and the history behind it, they 
will be enticed even more to visit the are and feel they have experienced 
something of what the "real" Africa is like because the names seem more 
African. It gives them the opportunity to come and relearn Africa because 
now Africa is authentic. One could say that tourists are not going to 
Zimbabwe because it has changed its name from Rhodesia, but that they are 
more likely to go to a place called Zimbabwe because it sounds more 
interesting. This could be the case for the Eastern Cape as well.

HOW DO YOU FIND A NAME?
One of the most valuable resources the government has is its people and they 
cannot ignore their needs or their say in this matter. Because of this, the 
Premier of the Eastern Cape Makhenkesi Stofile set up a task team to try and 
find out what the people of the Eastern Cape wanted their province to be 
renamed to. For many it seemed the task team went about their task in the 
wrong way, making false statements and accusations that got several people 
flared up and angry. After two months of research around the province the 
task team collected and came up with the five most popular names:

" Madiba - Nelson Mandela's clan name "The world will rejoice it this 
province is called Madiba province" Xolani Dambile

" Intsike Yesizwe - "The pillar of the nation" The Eastern Cape is 
recognised as the pulse of the revolutionary struggle

" KwaNtu - derived from "abantu" which means people

" KwaXhosa - historically the Eastern Cape is the place of the amaXhosa

" Robert Sobukwe - founder of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC)

The name should not enhance racial and ethnic divisions but should unite 
people and also promote tourism. However looking at the five names above, 
three of them relate to Xhosa which is not representative of the different 
black ethnic groups that live in the Eastern Cape. Other people have 
proposed names like the Great Kei or Amathola because they are both in the 
middle of the province and don't favour any one political group because they 
are geographical regions.

The criteria for a name change should have several concerns and the first 
being that it is easy to pronounce, acceptable to the majority and that is 
has some connection with the Eastern Cape historically. Gauteng was chosen 
because of the impact that mining had on that province and it is the Sotho 
corruption of the Afrikaans word goud (meaning gold). Mpumalanga means "the 
land of the rising sun" and Limpopo "a place of water that gives life". 
Names that reflect the past are very important and the Eastern Cape has a 
rich history of struggle and resistance so there are plenty of different 
names to choose from - Steve Biko, Chris Hani, Nelson Mandela, Robert 
Sobukwe, King Hintsa and other traditional leaders killed during the 
Frontier Wars.

There are concerns that the name changes are going to turn into an ANC 
dominated affair with no thought being given to other non- ANC participants 
in the struggle and this is why participation is vital at all levels so that 
all those who should be honoured are.

WHO GETS TO PARTICIPATE?
The key to a good working democracy is the participation of its voters at 
all levels. Sometimes it is not practical to consult over every small matter 
but when changes are going to influence many, many need to be included. 
Unfortunately sometimes the public is almost unwilling to be informed and 
then becomes ignorant of the issues around them that are of a big concern to 
them. In this case however everyone needs to participate and the Premier has 
tried his hardest to include everyone but if meetings are held and people 
don't go then the government cannot be held accountable for the shock you 
might get when waking up and finding that your streets name has changed.

Within Grahamstown, a proposal was drawn up to change some of the key 
streets in the town and was supposed to have represented the general public 
however the council gave no idea as to who was being represented in this 
proposal. This is a possible reason why there has been such an outcry 
because people feel that they are not being included in something that they 
feel is terrible important.

The PAC say that they will not be unscrupulous about changing the names if 
they come to power and that it has to be done in the interests of the people 
and that if the people don't agree with what they propose then they are 
unable to do it. If all the people in the province participate then everyone 
will be able to hear the others views on why or why not the names should be 
changed and from there new names can be decided on. Through participation 
people will be made to understand the reasons and eventually they will 
accept the new changes.

The DA (Democratic Alliance) is against the idea that the majority can 
decided without taking the minorities views into account and say that there 
is no evidence that the vast majority of people in the Eastern Cape are 
eager to change the names of institutions, roads, buildings and towns.

"Mass participation or talking about community involvement is not something 
I'm talking about only today because maybe we're talking about transforming 
it has been there even when we were fighting for freedom. Its something that 
is very, very serious because if you don't consider their views and you tell 
yourself you are in power those people might resist. And resistance is not 
something that is going to be taken by hundreds but individuals that resist 
might be able to mobilise millions"

Bonisile Nesi

The government is going to act with community support but there are some 
names that are quite rightly not negotiable because they have no positive 
meaning for local residents and do not speak well of the country for 
example, Kaffirskraal.

WHY ARE SOME NAMES ACCEPTED MORE THAN OTHERS?
Post 1994 there was such a spirit of national unity that people had never 
had before and this great change itself allowed for many name changes to 
happen.
The next phase began with the new names of provinces and towns and this 
seemed to arrive so smoothly because they were not names that had been 
changed but rather they were naming new geographical entities and because of 
these new names had to be found for these new cities.

The consolidation of hundreds of small towns into larger municipalities has 
meant that these new "mega cities" must adopt names reflective of the 
diversity of their populations. Gauteng is an example of this as is Buffalo 
City in East London, Mandela Metropole in Port Elizabeth and Makana 
Municipality in Grahamstown. Because there were only four provinces in the 
old government, when the former homelands were included back in South Africa 
nine new provinces were established which also meant that the region loosely 
known as the eastern Transvaal could change its name to Mpumalanga because 
previously it didn't exist.

The objection comes for two reasons; firstly people are habituated to names 
which are part of who they see themselves as and secondly because people 
feel they will be personally inconvenienced by something they don't see 
needing a change. If the Eastern Cape had come up with a new name in 1994 
then the same acceptance that Gauteng and Mpumalanga experienced would 
probably have also happened here. People are now asking, why now, why eight 
years after democracy do we need to be "inconvenienced" with this? The 
Premier believes that the only reason this process has become so adversial 
is because of white resistance to change. This is in a way true because it 
is the whites in the Eastern Cape that feel as if they are being 
marginalised and their way of showing it is to resist the change at every 
level.

WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?
It seems to some that it would have made strategic sense to follow in the 
steps of Kadar Asmal in setting up committees to investigate the 
possibilities of changing names in South Africa soon after 1994. However, an 
initiative was made on the part of the national government soon after 1994 
and it is a process that has taken and will still continue to take some 
time.

The key to creating understanding in the Eastern Cape as well as South 
Africa is through education. South Africa's history is largely unwritten and 
unknown which means that there are many people who were instrumental in our 
history that we don't know about. If we are to begin a process of 
understanding our education needs to reflect that and in turn when people 
are educated about a certain topic (in this case history) they would 
probably find that they no longer fear it as much as before. Name changing 
is a process and there are many channels that it needs to travel along. The 
process is now at the stage where people are hearing about it and reacting 
to it. People are talking about it now is because the process has filtered 
down through different levels over the last seven years and because it has 
become such a contentious issue, people are starting to engage in political 
discussion about it.

WHAT ABOUT POLITICS?
Most things are closely wrapped up and reflective of the political 
environment around us. The name change debate in the Eastern Cape has become 
increasingly political because of various actions of different political 
parties. It is interesting to note that the "white parties" are the ones 
resisting the change while the ANC and PAC (to the extent of changing the 
name of the country) are active in promoting change. It is the nature of 
politics that politicians are determined to alter the landscape of their 
country to reflect themselves and their constituencies. Changing names goes 
together with the winds of change in Africa.

This is perfectly understandable for the party in power to do, especially if 
it is taking over from a colonial government - In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe 
named all main roads after himself when his party won the elections in 1980. 
The trend throughout Africa is to change the names as soon as the victorious 
party emerges.

One of the reasons that it has become such a politically motivated argument 
is because of the diversity of our society. There are some people that see 
things in different ways to others and because of this when they get 
together to discuss these issues they become issues of conflict instead of 
understanding. Through the actions of the task team appointed by the Premier 
people felt that they were getting attacked personally and this also turned 
a simple issue into a bitter war of words.

It is unfair to say that the reason for the sudden resurgence in name 
changes in because the ANC is trying to cover up its failings on a 
provincial level and this is the type of political mud slinging that happens 
when such a contentious issue is at hand. Yes, it is true the government has 
failings but changing names is a part of their vision for transformation and 
at the rate in which it is going they seem to be doing a very good job at 
it.


HOW ARE IDENTITES AFFECTED BY NAME CHANGES?
When the Gold Coast was granted independence Kwame Nkrumah renamed it Ghana 
in a gesture to honour the memory of an ancient and highly civilised west 
African empire. Timbuktu, a legendary center for learning older than most 
European university towns was reincorporated in Mali. Zambia, Malawi and 
Zimbabwe followed the same route to renaissance and went back to the names 
that colonisers had dismissed as being uncivilised.

In South Africa a large majority of pre-colonial names carried with them 
particular meanings that indigenous communities attached to their own 
identities. These peoples identities became subjugated through the 
marginalisation of pre-colonial geographical names and this had the impact 
the colonisers wanted - feelings of inferiority. It also confirmed the 
stereotype that there was no creative thinking in Africa before the settlers 
arrived. One of the main reasons for transformation is the upliftment of the 
African identity and name changes go hand in hand in being an integral part 
of the presidents vision for an African Renaissance.

WHAT IS THE AFRICAN RENAISSANCE?
"The African renaissance is not about rediscovering, but about reiterating 
who we are and what we as Africans are all about. The reconstruction of 
Africa should have its foundations in the consciousness of African peoples 
about their being, i.e. their identity, their history, their 
culture/civilisation and their languages"
Thaninga Shope

"The Africa renaissance is a unique opportunity for Africans to define 
ourselves and our agenda according to our own realities. It is about 
Africans being agents of our own history and masters or our own destiny"
Malegapuru Makgoba

The restoration of the stories of Africa are there to give people a sense of 
identity and a sense of belonging and if you want Africa to be born again 
you need it to reflect exactly what you want - the Eastern Cape does not 
want its heritage to reflect the remnants of colonialism but rather a new 
and reborn province that is facing the future with a fresh outlook.

"The Shaka and the Zulu empire I believe does give many Zulu people a sense 
of self-confidence and identity which is probably lacking in other 
communities which haven't got a glorious mythologised outstanding leader. 
And the hunt for those through out the Eastern Cape is I think a very 
valuable aspect in nation building"
Prof Whisson

We have said that names have very important associations for people and one 
only has to look at the universal icon that Mandela has become to know that 
this is true. He was a symbol to people in the struggles of the 1970's and 
the 1980's and today he is symbol world wide of hope and dignity. If the 
Eastern Cape and the people who live in the province are serious about 
wanting to be South African it is essential that they realise that.

>
>
> > Does anyone know of material relating to policy decisions regarding the
>transformation of a city's cultural landscape?
> >
> > I am specifically interested in material relating to the changing of 
>names
>of roads that previously honoured a person associated with a colonial 
>power,
>but am also interested in material dealing with the removal or relocation 
>of
>statues.
> >
> > Grant McKenna
> > Education Officer
> > Old Court House Museum
> > eThekwini Heritage Department
> > eThekwini Metropolitan Unicity Municipality
> > 77 Aliwal Street, Durban, kwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
> > GrantM-AT-prcsu.durban.gov.za
> > +27 82 876 9635
> > +27 31 311 2228
> > !KE E:/XARRA / /KE
> > The disclaimer for this mail is at
>http://www.durban.gov.za/emaildisclaimer.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >      --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>
>
>      --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup



     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---