What would Biko say?

Xolela Mangcu wrote a book on Steve Biko. The title of the book is Biko: A Biography. At the launch of the book it was lauded as an overdue and necessary work on Biko. Please get yourself a copy of this book, read it and make up your own mind on the book. It is a great pity and a poor reflection on all of us that it has taken this long for a book to be written and published about one of the greatest South Africans. Well done Xolela; I hope there is more coming.

Andile Mngxitama wrote this review of Xolela's book in the Mail & Guardian. The content of what Andile wrote is not important for the purposes of this post. In fact the content of what Andile wrote could be a distraction. Xolela then wrote this review of the review of Andile. The content of that latter review is similarly not important.

My disappointment in these two students of Biko defies all descriptions I could muster. At one point the only response to both was a heavy heart and tears. They will probably have nothing but contempt for my tears, especially Andile (he is not sentimental type). Here is the thing, I have children who I would very much like it if they were to get to know about Biko and Sobukwe. Compared to the beloved Mandela, there is very little written and published by these two giants. Giants that Mandela himself has conceded their greatness. Look at the number of books written about Mandela - look past the fact that there is yet to be a book written by a black author - do you see anything even close to what these two have done? Fortunately, no writer will ever diminish the greatness of Biko or Sobukwe. What Andile and Xolela did does however diminish what I presume (I take responsibility for that presumption) Biko represents. What Biko represents as a black man, an activist and as Andile points out, a philosopher.

These two chaps kept the Black Consciousness torch burning while they were students at Wits. They were comrades facing the challenge and sometimes the wrath of the "Congress" types. They know first hand about the "black on black" violence of those dark days. They are both very gifted and in that sense, this country needs them and others like them if we are to make progress. Selfishly, I need them both for the education of my children. Of course they look at things differently, such is the nature of brilliant minds; but for blackness sake must they exchange insults in the process? I am all for robust debate, that is the only thing that will save us from the rubbish politics of greed and destruction. That however is no licence to be crass. Robust engagement should not take the form of black on black violence albeit of the intellectual kind.

Nobody and nothing is ever just one thing; that much I have learned and that much I believe is true. What stops these two from collaborating on a book about Biko? Instead of accusations and veiled insults could they not trade ideas about the next great book on Biko?

Would Biko read their respective contributions to the Mail & Guardian and then say: "ok, you are right and you got it wrong"? Would that even matter to Biko? Or would he tell them to each write what they like? What about their responsibility to those who do not know what they know? What about their responsibility to black thought? Something tells me that Biko (of whom I know very little) would be less than impressed with all of this.

Black leadership, in all spheres of South African life should take no prisoners as critiques of each other. That I believe is how ideas are shaped and how they become better for the benefit of us lesser mortals, more so for our poor radar-less children. The leadership, especially thought leaders owe us a duty to keep the dialogue respectable. An attack always begets defence; conversation on the other invites  participation in the exchange of ideas. Unfortunately this is not what Andile and Xolela do. They call each other names and in the process the valid points they each make gets lost in the noise of attack and defence.

With the greatest of respect to you Andile and Xolela, you can and must do better. The great work of the leaders and youth of the 70's has been largely undone by the brutal activism of the 80's. There is a lot of work to be done to reclaim the dignity of the black people - who better than the two of you and others like you to undertake that project?

Purity, Certainty and other intellectual vices . . .

Andile Mngxitama is nothing less than a gem. He would of course not take kindly to being called a black diamond but a gem he is. There is never a doubt in his mind (as reflected in his writing) on the issues he holds dear. He provokes thought and debate and all things dear to a healthy democracy.

In this, his latest offering in Sowetan, he pulls no punches. This piece is one in a chain whose recent link was this post on Thought Leader, by Sentletse Diakanyo. Sentletse like Andile habours no doubts about his views. Please take time to read these two pieces of riveting reading; while you are at it, read a whole lot of other writings and offerings by these two writers - it is the right thing to do.

Unlike Andile and Sentletse I am not so certain on the question of who is an African. It is with this uncertainty that I disagree with Sentletse. There was a time when there was no Africa, no Europe and no Blacks. The physical land mass we now affectionately refer to as Africa was there but I am not sure what it was called before the days of compasses, discovery and conquest. I suppose if the question Sentletse was answering was "who were the Africans?" then I would agree with him.

What I find most disagreeable in the piece by Sentletse is his reliance on the term Black as if it is real. On what basis do we now rely on a social construct to support a proposition of what is fact? There seems to be some reality that dictates the identity of an African outside of the meaning of where such is located. To illustrate: we look to Nigeria for Nigerians and Namibia for Namibians. So, at a certain level African should similarly denote those who are located within the extent of this land mass.

It may well be true that many years ago, long before the white man came to Africa, it was the home of the Black people. The problem is that before the white man came, there were no Black people. Those were created by the white man. In spite of all sorts of horrible things visited upon Africa by the settlers, Africa is here and is populated by its people - the Africans. These however come in all manner of shapes, colours and interests.

Now what point is there to the declaration of being or not being an African? So I am an African, me and Van der Walt both, so what? This is a question Andile asks. To him, unless you have a point to make about being or not being an African, you best shut up on the matter. It contributes nothing to the betterment of the down-trodden (I am putting words into his pen here). Well, it is the Blacks among the Africans who are cowards - I believe Andile meant to say. In fairness to the Blacks though - the horse bolted when the nation decided back in the 90's to just get the hell on. In short, we got played. One can understand how we got to be played. I mean we were so excited to be free to go and come and go again as we please, in our own country, that we forgot to focus on the detail. Besides, when the guys in charge have been out of the country for so long (yes, Robben Island is out of the country) how could they know better?

All this talk about African coming only in one colour like the old ford is dated if you ask me - just look at the ford fiesta, it too has come a long way since the famous words of Mr Ford. Africa has come a long way too. Even though some countries still view albinos with suspicion, Africa has come a long way since the days Sentletse speak of. In any event I would rather listen to what Sobukwe had to say on matter African rather than some automaker.

To now insist on purity and certainty would probably be intellectually mischevious if not downright devious.