- PE COUNCIL IGNORED PROPOSALS TO ACT ON BUILDINGS
- PE METRO MUST TAKE ACTION ON HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
- STRAWBERRY LANE PLAQUE UNVEILED, HERITAGE DAY 2009
- UNDERWATER HERITAGE SAVED
- SUN VALLEY CHALLENGE
- PRINCESS VLEI SHOPPING MALL
- DEVELOPMENTS AT KLAPMUTS AND HELDERBERG
- HERMANUS STATION REZONING
- MADIBA HOUSE DECLARED NATIONAL HERITAGE SITE
- 'OLD BUILDING COLLAPSES' – WEEKEND ARGUS, 16 MAY 2009
- ABERDEEN HOSTS GRAAFF-REINET SOCIETY
- OUR SHARED SOUTH AFRICAN HERITAGE
- THREAT TO HERITAGE
- SWARTLAND AND MALMESBURY, A HERITAGE VIEW
- HERITAGE WEEKEND IN PHILIPSTOWN
GRAND OLD LADY Entrepreneur Phil Gutsche outside the Port Elizabeth Club, which is to undergo R24-million renovations and additions by the end of August. Picture: IVOR MARKMAN
RENOVATION AND NEW BUILDING AT HISTORIC PE CLUB
2010/01/13 Ivor Markman HERALD PHOTOJOURNALIST
WORK has begun on the R24-million renovation and additions to the historic Port Elizabeth Club building in Bird Street and is expected to be completed by the end of August. The restoration of the 1906 landmark is a combined project by the architectural firms of Stauch Vorster Architects and Moors, Milne and Kievit. A sectional title register between the two owners, Gutsche Investment and Management Company and the PE Club, has been opened. The building will be administered by a body corporate. GIMC chief executive officer Phil Gutsche came to the rescue after being told the building was to be sold to a third party the club was not happy with. “I agreed to purchase a section of the (building), with the club retaining the original bar and a small section they wanted to retain for club purposes,” Gutsche said. This included a kitchen, bar, dining area and an administrative area. A new and attractive architectural feature will be the enclosure with a glass canopy of the central courtyard of the original building. The front facade of the building is to be restored to its original appearance and a completely new building, which will belong to GIMC, will be built alongside to blend into the surroundings. The new building is of modern design and will be linked to the old building by a passage. It will incorporate two levels of drive-in parking and three floors of office space. “We are going to convert the remainder of the club to accommodate a group of advocates. The building will be totally restored into a very exclusive precinct. Sometimes you have two or three or four advocates sharing suites, each one having his own office but sharing a secretary and facilities,” he said. The club has also agreed to provide a reference library. “They will hopefully be able to use the club diningroom, so the club will benefit from that. We will retain the huge wild fig tree and will enhance and upgrade the parking area and the section in front (with) the flagpole will be retained. “The architects liaised with members of the Provincial Heritage Resources Agency to ensure compliance with its regulations and requirements. We made certain amendments to our original plans so we would produce something the city would be proud of,” Gutsche said. He said all plans had been passed by the municipality and the PHRA permit committee. “We received full co-operation from PHRA and the municipality. They have been absolutely superb in the co-operation that has been accorded us. “There are already a number of landlords in Bird Street who have upgraded their buildings. There is the Old Mutual building (previously the Moth Club) and next to it is what used to be an old residential house, (which was) upgraded by Tony Moore. “We hope this development will be the catalyst for future redevelopment of the entire Central area and more particularly of the Bird Street-Donkin Reserve precinct. “I only wish that the slumlords in the area would equally undertake the upgrade of their buildings. Some of them are of historical value and it is a shocking disgrace that they have been able to get away with it. These properties should be expropriated or alternatively (the owners) should be forced to upgrade. This is an absolute dereliction of authority and misuse of their administrative powers of our city which must be changed,” Gutsche said. – markmani@avusa.co.za
Port Elizabeth residents react against property mogul
Excerpt - The Herald Port Elizabeth 2nd November 2009
COUNCIL IGNORED PROPOSALS TO ACT ON BUILDINGS
PATRICK CULL - POLITICAL EDITOR
The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality ignored key findings of a top-secret report on how to halt the destruction and decay of historic buildings in Port Elizabeth’s Central and Richmond Hill. Three courses of legal action to deal with the buildings – most of which are owned by Irishman Ken Denton – were proposed in the report by Port Elizabeth senior counsel Glen Goosen dated March 23, 2007.
The report, a copy of which is in the possession of The Herald, recommended that High Court action be taken. One of the legal options open to the municipality was to repair the building and then bill the owner.
The report has been kept under wraps for 30 months, despite an attempt by the DA to obtain it through the Promotion of Access to Information Act. It spells out in detail what steps were open to the municipality to halt the destruction of historical buildings.
The municipality has declined to comment, saying that “due to the confidential nature of the mentioned report, the municipality is not in a position to respond to your media inquiry at this stage”
The report states that the “first and most obvious basis for potential action concerns the enforcement of legislative provisions designed to ensure public health and safety”. It notes that the terms of Section 20 of the Health Act are “broad” and that in circumstances in which “refuse and waste are accumulating or sanitation services are in disrepair, or indeed where residential accommodation is overcrowded, it is possible to act in accordance with Section 20”. This would require calling upon the owner to rectify the situation, failing which an interdict could be sought to ensure compliance or criminal prosecution in terms of Section 57 of the Act.
The second course of action proposed was in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act. Section 45 of this Act provides that if an owner fails to comply with an order to prevent further deterioration within the specified time, the Heritage Authority can take steps to repair the building and recover the costs from the owner. is recommended that “urgent representations (are made) to the Heritage Resources Authority to act” in terms of the provision. The report also suggests the possibility of expropriation “where there is a dire threat that a particular heritage resource may be lost on account of the failure to maintain the property”.
The third course of action proposed was in terms of the law of nuisance. The report states that it is “conceivable that Denton’s conduct in managing his properties in a manner that results in the degradation of the area” may fall foul of the definition of public nuisance. It adds that “if a casual relationship can be established between the management of the Denton properties and the general degradation of the area”, then the municipality would be in a position to take legal action.
Transcribed by Allan Montgomery, Port Elizabeth
The Herald Port Elizabeth 2 November 2009
METRO MUST TAKE ACTION ON HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
EDITORIAL COMMENT
It is irresponsible and inexplicable that for the past 30 months the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality has refused to act on a legal opinion spelling out what steps it could take to protect the architectural heritage of Port Elizabeth. Its failure to use the legal remedies available effectively resulted in historical buildings falling into an even greater state of decay. Extraordinarily, the municipality does not believe it owes the people of the city an explanation, saying because of the confidential nature of the report it is not able to respond.
The opinion, drawn up by senior counsel, outlines four legal avenues that could be used, but the municipality decided to do nothing. One result of this is the thousands of people who travel to Port Elizabeth for the Fifa world cup will correctly gain the impression areas of the city such as Central and Richmond Hill reflect neglect and decay.
We have long argued that if the owners of properties, particularly those of historical importance, are for whatever reason unwilling to maintain them, it is beholden on the local authority to act decisively as it is required to do using the legislation at its disposal.
That it has not done so amounts not only to a neglect of duty but also an omission that has damaged Port Elizabeth as a tourism attraction and as a result probably cost jobs in the tourism sector.
The municipality should do four things, the first of which is to provide an explanation for its failure to act.
Secondly, without further delay, it should instruct counsel to proceed with legal action against property owners whose buildings are in a state of decay and intervene where it believes health and safety concerns should be addressed.
Thirdly, it should agitate with the provincial government to ensure the Provincial Heritage Authority complies with its mandate. That this body has been largely dysfunctional has contributed significantly to the current state of affairs.
Finally, the municipality should consider expropriation in circumstances where this warranted. The Old Post Office that is a blight on the heart of Central area and undermines the Nelson Mandela Development Agency to revitalize the area, is an example.
It would be ideal for a new council chamber, and a museum dedicated to the political and social history of the city.
Transcribed by Allan Montgomery, Port Elizabeth
STRAWBERRY LANE PLAQUE UNVEILED
24 September 2009, Heritage Day, saw the unveiling of a plaque in Strawberry Lane, Constantia to commemorate the forced removal of residents under Apartheid legislation, from the 1960s. The blue plaque was donated by the Simon van der Stel Foundation, Cape Town.
For detailed reviews by the press download the pdf
SOUTH AFRICAN HERITAGE RESOURCES AGENCY BLOCK C, CASTLE OF GOOD HOPE, CAPE TOWN, 8000 PO BOX 2771, CAPE TOWN, 8001 TEL (021) 465 2198 - FAX (021) 465 5789
Our Ref: 9/2/069/0166 (Mandiba House, Groot Drakenstein Prison) Enquiries: Gregory Ontong Date: 22 June 2009
Mr. F. Johnson Department of Transport and Public Works Regional Manager – Cape Town Private Bag X 9027 Cape Town 8000 Fax: 021 419 2978 Email: frederick.johnson@dpw.gov.za
Dear Owner
NOTIFICATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 27(8) (a) OF THE NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT, ACT NO 25 OF 1999 OF THE INTENT TO DECLARE “MADIBA HOUSE”, WATERVLIET- PORTION 2 of FARM 942, DRAKENSTEIN CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (VICTOR VERSTER PRISON), A NATIONAL HERITAGE SITE
It is with great pleasure that the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA), which is responsible for, inter alia, the protection of national heritage sites, wishes to inform you that your property, ‘Madiba House’, Watervliet, Portion 2 of Farm 942, Drakenstein Correctional Services (Victor Verster Prison) Paarl, has been identified as a heritage resource with qualities, so exceptional, that it is of special national significance and it is thereby eligible for national heritage status.
CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE
The site can be seen as part of our National Estate because of its cultural significance as explained in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, Act 25 of 1999. The Act defines the ‘National Estate’ in:
Section 3(1) as: ‘Those heritage resources of South Africa which are of cultural significance or other special value for the present community and for future generations must be considered part of the national estate and fall within the sphere of operations of heritage resources authorities’.
Section 3(2) ‘The National estate may include: (a) Places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance; (b) Places to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage;’
Section 3(3) ‘A place or object is considered part of the national estate if it has cultural significance or other value because of- (a) Its importance in the community, or pattern of South Africa’s history; (c) Its potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of South Africa’s natural or cultural heritage; (h) Its strong or special association with the life or work of a person, group or organisation of importance in the history of South Africa;’
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
It was at Drakenstein Correctional Services, formally known as Victor Verster Prison, that the government first engaged with the ‘opposition’ after nearly 40 years of apartheid. The site forms part of other recognised symbols of the history of “The Freedom Struggle” in South Africa and directly relates to Robben Island, a World Heritage Site, where Nelson Mandela was initially incarcerated. Drakenstein Correctional Services (Victor Vester Prison), seen as an isolated yet more ‘comfortable place of imprisonment’, was used as the vehicle to facilitate negotiations between the Apartheid government and the liberation movement. In this controlled environment, the freedom of South African society was contemplated, leading to negotiations around the Freedom Charter and a future democratic South Africa, which ultimately formed the basis of our current constitution.
This democratic constitution, based on the humanitarian tenets of dignity, equality and freedom, is a manifestation of a just triumph over the adversities suffered during the liberation struggle. ‘Madiba House’, Drakenstein Correctional Services (Victor Verster Prison) is presented as the geographic place in South Africa that housed this monumental moment in history.
It was here that formal negotiations between divergent political forces (the ANC and the South African government) were initiated. The former ‘liberation’ movements were recognised by the then South African government as a force to be reckoned with and the foundations for a free South Africa were laid. Victor Verster Prison was elementary to the peaceful transition from white minority rule to an inclusive democracy.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
In December 1988, Mr. Nelson Mandela was moved from Pollsmoor Prison to a house formerly used by prison warders at Drakenstein Coprrectional Services (Victor Verster Prison). It was from this house that Mr. Nelson Mandela was to receive his freedom in 1990.
Mr. Mandela’s transfer to Drakenstein Correctional Services (Victor Verster Prison) signified a change in approach by the Nationalist government towards Mr. Mandela and the broad liberation movement. It was while living in the house on the prison grounds that Mr. Mandela negotiated with the then South African government authorities, and the foundations for a peaceful transition to participatory democracy were laid. It was from this house that Mr. Mandela was to meet representatives of the Nationalist government on an equal footing for the first time. During these last days of apartheid, Mr. Mandela also had many meetings at the house with fellow members of the ANC where the way forward was discussed.
TANGIBLE HERITAGE
The tangible heritage resources comprise the “Madiba House”, the adjacent warder’s house and an open land fronting the two houses. The primary function of this tangible infrastructure was to enhance the quality of life of Mr. Nelson Mandela yet place him in solitary confinement ensuring isolation, effective monitoring and control of movements. The house is a typical, large suburban design with three en suite bedrooms, three reception rooms, study, swimming pool and braai area. It is set within a field at some distance from the prison, enclosed by high fences and razor wire. The route, a dusty gravel road lined with Australian Blue Gum trees, still intact, simultaneously lamented his arrival in continued incarceration and celebrated his eventual departure to freedom.
Some of the furniture used by Mr. Mandela at the time of his incarceration is currently held in storage by the Department of Correctional Services. Items include the table at which he worked as well as bedroom and sitting room furniture etc.
INTANGIBLE HERITAGE
The cultural value of the site is captured mostly in the intangible essence of the site. In these seemingly ordinary tangible structures of confinement, the intangible spirit of freedom and extraordinary intangible achievements were born. This building reflects on the period of preparation, contemplation and negotiation of the greater freedom for all South Africans.
We, therefore, hereby notify you in your capacity as owner of the property identified on the attached Draft Gazette Notice schedule (see Annexure A, hereinafter referred to as ‘your property’) that SAHRA intends to declare your property to be a national heritage site in terms of section 27(5) of the National Heritage Resources Act, No 25 of 1999 (‘the Act’).
THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS DECLARATION ARE AS FOLLOWS:
In terms of section 27(18) of the Act, ‘No person may destroy, damage, deface, excavate, alter, remove from its original position, subdivide or change the planning status of any heritage site without a permit issued by the heritage resources authority responsible for the protection of such site’ once it forms part of a place protected as a national heritage site.
You are hereby given 60 (sixty) calendar days from delivery hereof to make written submissions, on or before 31 August 2009, to SAHRA at the abovementioned address regarding the proposed declaration and to propose conditions under which the declaration will be acceptable to you.
Kindly note that in terms of section 27(10) of the Act your property shall be deemed to be protected as a NATIONAL HERITAGE SITE for a period of 6 (six) months from the date of service of this notice under Subsection 8(a) or until this notice is withdrawn or the place is declared to be a heritage site, whichever is the shorter period.
Kindly note further that section 27(11) of the Act provides that if an owner objects to the proposed declaration of a place as a heritage site or if the owner proposes conditions which SAHRA reasonably considers to be unacceptable, SAHRA may, prior to the expiry of the six months period during which the site is deemed to be protected in terms of section 27(10), renew this notice under Subsection 8(a). Upon such renewal the deemed protection in terms of section 27(10) shall be extended for a further 6 months. If during the period of deemed protection consultation between SAHRA and you as the owner fails to lead to the withdrawal of your objection or to the proposal of acceptable conditions, SAHRA shall be entitled to declare your property to be a national heritage site.
You are hereby invited to furnish the undersigned with any written representations and/or submissions regarding the above notification within the period mentioned above. Should you have any queries you are welcome to contact Beverley Crouts-Knipe at bcrouts-knipe@wc.sahra.org.za or call 021 465 2198. We look forward to your response and your continued interest in the national protection of this unique heritage resource.
Old building collapses and it's just what the owners wanted
It is the responsibility of local heritage organisations to investigate such incidents and take action if justified. Where buildings of 60 years and older – which are deemed culturally or architecturally valuable by the community – are demolished either maliciously or by negligence, heritage organisations have recourse to the Heritage Act (see The Law). It is assumed that the organisation referred to in the news report as the South African Heritage Council, is in fact Heritage Western Cape. – web editor, 17 May 2009.
GRAAFF-REINET
New committee for Graaff-Reinet Heritage Society declares intentions
Members of the public may be interested to know that a new Committee for the Graaff-Reinet Heritage Society has been elected, and this committee wishes publicly to declare its firm intention to actively engage heritage issues in Graaff-Reinet, particularly in the communities of the Horseshoe and Umasizakhe.
Already a survey of buildings which are already protected or are to be considered for heritage designation has been conducted, with photographs, sketches and notes made by architectural students of Nelson Mandela Bay University. This survey will inform a new planning programme directed at the care and restoration of heritage sites, as well as the proclamation of new sites. Each member of the committee has been assigned a sector of the relevant areas of the Horseshoe and Umasizakhe (which have buildings more than 60 years old) to study and make recommendations regarding the potential heritage status of certain buildings and sites, as well as the care and maintenance of historic buildings in general.
Officers of the new committee are Liz van Wyk (Chairperson), Shirley Grindley (Vice-Chairperson), Ann Murray (Secretary), and Claire Sheard (Treasurer). Other members are Rosemary Walker and Jean Watermeyer, Cllr. Theuns Eksteen, Drs Bruce Lakie and Roy Stauth, and Daniel Smith, Mark Fynney, Paul Inman, and Peter Whitlock.
Membership to the Society is open to any individual, organisation or business within the Graaff-Reinet area.
Major objectives of the Society include the following:
- to make all sectors of the people of Graaff-Reinet aware that they have rights to their past and that the concept of heritage is not limited to buildings, but includes (among other things) any place or object of cultural significance, as well as intangible aspects of inherited culture, such as traditions and oral history;
- to actively pursue and execute the maximum powers afforded the Society by the South African National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999;
- to inform the public that any individual has the right to stop the destruction, desecration or modification of any building over 60 years old and the development or alteration of any property exceeding 5 000 m2 unless a permit has been issued by the relevant authority; this right may be exercised by demanding to see the permit, and, if it is not immediately produced, to go to any SAPS facility and demand that a “stop work order” be issued in terms of Sections 34 (1) and 51 (6) of the above-mentioned Act, and that this order be served by a police officer with immediate effect upon the offending person; and finally
- to encourage all residents of the Graaff-Reinet area to assist the Society in maintaining our valuable heritage resources, which are such a source of great pride to our residents, and has helped make Graaff-Reinet famous as “the Gem of the Karoo”, as well as playing an important role in making tourism the fastest growing economic sector in Graaff-Reinet.
The Committee would hereby like to invite all Graaff-Reinet area residents to join the Heritage Society, or to contact any committee member to obtain information about how any individual or group can play an important role in assisting us in protecting our community’s precious heritage resources.
ABERDEEN HOSTS GRAAFF-REINET HERITAGE SOCIETY
On 22 March 2009, Aberdeen was host to the Graaff-Reinet and Districts Heritage Society and their guests. The visitors began their tour of heritage sites at the Kerk-Saal where Estelle Snyman gave an instructive explanation of the beautifully constructed wall hangings designed by Johanna Konig, which Estelle and other committed women members of the NG Kerk had made. These wall hangings, completed in 1999, depict scenes from the Old and New Testament.
The visitors were then shown the NG Kerk which is built in the centre of Aberdeen. This Church, the building of which was instigated by the Rev Andrew Murray, and finally completed in 1908, as it was built in two stages, has a steeple which can be seen from a distance of 27 km outside Aberdeen on the road from Graaff-Reinet. This imposing church is able to seat 2 000 people and has an austere beauty.
The next heritage site visited was Pagel House which is now a B&B. Owned and run by Lynn Dugmore, this stately Victorian home with beautifully designed and comfortable rooms was built in 1852 and has a magical garden with long sloping lawns shaded by overhanging willow trees.
Tea was served in the home of David Miller. This recently restored home was used by the British Garrison during the Boer War. It was here that the British horses were stabled. The Boers successfully made a raid, stealing all the horses and so leaving the British soldiers without transport.
The next port of call was another Victorian/Edwardian home which used to be known as De Denne. This gracious homestead is now a well-known restaurant and B&B. Here in the elegant diningroom of the Karoomoons a finger luncheon of Indian delicacies was presented to the visitors. The setting of this homestead and the facilities, all lovingly restored by Ernest and Ramsay, deserve the four stars recently granted to this establishment.
The visitors were then shown another Victorian masterpiece, Carmen Villa. The exterior and interior of this beautiful old home depicts an era of graciousness, wealth and immaculate taste.
Coffee was served at Moer-Toe. This restaurant will prove to be a traveler’s delight when driving through the Karoo.
These heritage sites mentioned are only a few of the many that Aberdeen has to offer, and of which the town is very proud.
Given that heritage implies shared and cherished
values, is there, in fact, anything that may appropriately,
unambiguously, without any contentiousness, be called “South Africa’s
heritage”?
OUR SHARED SOUTH AFRICAN HERITAGE A talk by Dr Roy Stauth, Committee Member, Graaff-Reinet Heritage Society given at the AGM of the Graaff-Reinet Friends of the Museum 28 June 2007
WHAT IS HERITAGE?
My dictionary defines heritage as anything that has been transmitted from the past (or handed down by tradition), or evidence of the past (considered collectively as the inheritance of the present-day society), or a way of life practiced in the past. These definitions indicate that anything we can discover or know about the past may be considered as our heritage. But heritage is not simply history – that which befalls us – it is rather what we choose to know, keep, and value from the past. Heritage is that part of our history which defines us and which we cherish.
I define heritage as anything which we “inherit”, and which we recognize as rightfully or appropriately belonging to us, and therefore value for that reason if no other. People often speak of “personal heritage” – those things from the past that are distinctly one’s own – but here we are referring to “collective heritage” – those things from the past that belong to groups of people with whom we identify or relate to in some way.
Collective heritage is important for two reasons. First, a shared heritage provides us with a common past, and this gives us a sense of identity and belonging. Second, a shared heritage is like a rich mine from which we may select and emphasize the good that we choose to cherish and to celebrate with others. These two aspects of collective heritage are closely related because both tie us to other human beings, often forging among us the strongest of human bonds. The main difference is that the first – knowledge of our common past - plays a significant role in understanding ourselves, and thus shaping our destiny. This aspect of heritage helps us to see what we are and why we are what we are; it also explains our place in the world. The second aspect of heritage – the ability to choose and cherish what we value in our history – enables us to take pride and satisfaction in who we are; it also points to our possible futures: what we want to be, and where we want to go.
But who are “we”? In South Africa that is a big question. How can so many people who have been on so many different roads call themselves One People? I think the first thing we must do is step back and see the whole of which we are all a part. Historically South Africa has been (and to a large extent still is) an unusually fragmented and fractious country, with many different cultures, traditions, values, and memories; and thus South Africa’s heritage is not only greatly disjointed, it has been deeply conflicted and remains potentially divisive. What is one’s person’s valued heritage may be another person’s lamented tragedy. Given that heritage implies shared and cherished values, is there, in fact, anything that may appropriately, unambiguously, without any contentiousness, be called “South Africa’s heritage”?
I think there is, but to be so regarded we must begin to see South African history and present day society in a very different light than is customary. We must cultivate a new way of thinking about both history and heritage, try to see the past in terms that are positive and tinged with sympathy and understanding, and adopt a view about both the past and the present that is much broader than is the “common view” (usually limited to that of one group or another). If we can better understand and empathize with those from whom we have been historically divided, if we can develop greater appreciation of their part of our national heritage, if we can find it in ourselves to extend greater consideration and tolerance toward all members of this society, then this concept of a “national heritage” – comprising our many distinct cultural heritages - can lead us closer to Nelson Mandela’s and Desmond Tutu’s cherished dream of a “Rainbow Nation”.
WHAT CONSTITUTES SOUTH AFRICA’S HERITAGE?
One of the important things about heritage is that it gives us a sense of identity, defining who we are, as well as seeing that we are part of something that is bigger than we are, and something in which we can take pride. Heritage consists, above all, in those things we are happy to claim, and to cherish.
If you were to go overseas and stay for a long period, and one day you overheard a bit of Afrikaans being spoken, or a strongly accented bit of South African English, or an expression like “Ag Man!”, or a phrase like “just now”, you would probably feel delighted to meet and greet your compatriot. Back in South Africa you might well not pay any attention to each other, but here in a foreign land you would recognize something very special in this person that you would value – no matter his race or ethnicity, or what constitutes his own special heritage. Imagine for a moment what you might talk about, reminisce about. Those topics of discussion are some of the things that would constitute an important part of your national heritage.
Ironically it may be easier for me to see and appreciate, as an immigrant to South Africa, this country’s national heritage than it is for those of you who were born here, and grew up in a terribly divided society. I remember when I first arrived in South Africa, in April 1974, entering an incredibly beautiful, rich, colourful and vibrant world – “a world in one country” (as SATOUR aptly labelled it) – and somehow it all fitted together, not in the neat way that pieces of a puzzle fit, but in the rough, aesthetic manner of a mosaic. It was a powerfully impressive, profoundly fascinating world – and I immediately fell in love with it.
Two things above all made South Africa seem so very rich and appealing to me: the country’s great cultural diversity, and its great natural diversity. Both of these sources of diversity contribute greatly to the great richness of South Africa’s heritage. The first thing that impressed me was the rich diversity of the people and their cultures – diversity of racial and ethnic groups, languages, architecture, dress, food, traditions and customs. Then there were the highly diverse and beautiful landscapes, and the amazing biological diversity. I had come from a place much less varied, and far less interesting – and whenever I go back to visit family in the mid-western United States, I find myself bored - unstimulated – and can’t wait to return to South Africa.
DIFFERENT KINDS AND LEVELS OF HERITAGE
There are really only two basic kinds of heritage: natural heritage and human heritage. There is but one “type” of natural heritage: all those things bestowed by Nature, such as landscapes, wildlife, and plant communities. Our natural heritage is (or can be) a great unifier because it belongs to all of us.
Human heritage is much more complex. There are many levels of human heritage: for example there is personal, family, and community heritage; and there is ethnic, national and world heritage.
A good, general, all-encompassing term for human heritage would be “cultural heritage”, defined as all those special or defining attributes we share with those for whom we feel a unique affinity. This would include, for example, not only the personal bonds we have established with family, friends, and members of our communities and various community organizations, but also associations we feel with our respective ethnic, religious, racial, linguistic, educational, social, and economic groups. We all belong to different ethnic or racial groups, speak different languages, have different religious beliefs, etc. Thus every individual is an amalgam of different cultural threads, and his composite culture may be quite different to that of his best friend.
Unfortunately, cultural heritage can and very often does divide us; and if we are not sufficiently sensitive to and tolerant of the cultural beliefs and values of others, these beliefs and values become divisive. But if looked at from a broader perspective, cultural diversity is extremely enriching. South Africa has an extraordinarily rich assortment of cultural heritages, and this is part of what makes South Africa so special: it is truly “A World in One Country”. And all these cultural heritages taken together – along with our rich natural heritage – comprise another level of heritage – this country’s national heritage - which is indeed something all South Africans can be justly proud of. In fact, I can think of no other country that can boast of having such a rich and diverse national heritage.
At the broadest or most general level of collective heritage there is what we call “world heritage”. South Africa, for example, now has eight World Heritage Sites (the latest – the Richtersveld – has just been proclaimed). These sites are regarded as the heritage of all the peoples of the world; that is, they represent things which have value to every national, ethnic, and cultural group in the world, and as such they give us a collective identity (which we call “humanity”), and provides a special source of pride and celebration for all peoples of the world.
THINGS WORTH REMEMBERING AND CHERISHING
Every sector of society, every identifiable group, has many things to cherish. Consider, for example, the poignant story of District Six in Cape Town – what it once was, all that was special about it, and the terrible thing that finally happened to it. The most obvious challenge facing museums – and other organisations intent on preserving a nation’s heritage – is to identify all those things from the past that are cherished by the descendants of all South Africa’s many cultures, and then not only preserve them but display them in a way that is sensitive and accurately conveys their meaning and value.
A less obvious, more difficult, but no less important challenge is to identify and capture all those things from the recent past as well as the present time that we have reason to believe future generations will cherish. Consider, for example, what the descendants of Umasizakhe will want to know about this community – not only the story of its brave child Robert Sobukwe, but also the special qualities of the Xhosa way of township life: its vibrancy, friendliness, and sense of “ubuntu”.
We must remember that future generations of South Africans will have a very different point of view about our common past from those points of view we hold today. They will lead very different ways of life, have different values and opportunities, and thus will have a very different perspective. We must anticipate this when we think about what we want to save for them and “recollect to them”.
Today many of us tend to focus on the deprivation, the crime and the injustice that has long plagued many South Africans; but that is not what our descendents will want to remember and cherish. And so we need to document and archive the positive things that have been characteristic of all of South Africa’s diverse communities and their past ways of life, as well as the positive ways in which they are now changing. The “New South Africa” has indeed demonstrated many bright and inspiring points of adjustment and development that we must take note of and capture for future generations.
It is also important to discover and document those elements which may be said to comprise our “common national heritage”. A multicultural society may share many common elements: what South African does not understand and appreciate “wors and pap”, or the trials and ideals of Madiba? Museum curators can seek to cultivate or assemble an overarching set of national elements in which all cultural groups take pride, and are pleased to consider part of a grander, national heritage.
Then of course there is our recently proclaimed Camdeboo National Park. This part of our “natural heritage” is a very important part of our common heritage, which also serves to create shared bonds.
A RAINBOW NATION
I would like to conclude by alluding to the well-known metaphor of South Africa being “a rainbow nation”. I like this image very much, and think it very appropriate to South Africa. This country strikes me as being as brilliantly rich and as bright as a rainbow emerging from a storm, and as full of promise that we are now entering a period of freshness and calm. This symbol has deep meaning not only for South Africans, but for the entire continent of Africa, and even for the world as a whole. I believe South Africa is destined to contribute much to World Heritage.
To consider the “rainbow” metaphor further, the separate colours of a rainbow may be seen to represent the many different cultures found in South Africa, and when these are all seen together they form a perfect and entire rainbow: the national heritage we all share. The important thing is to recognize and respect each cultural heritage, and to acknowledge and embrace the larger national heritage of which each is a part.
We must not lose sight of this –each group will naturally place special value on its own, particular heritage, but there is also an overarching, national heritage. A rainbow consists of many brilliant bands of colour – but as beautiful and striking as each of these may be, it is the aggregation of all these bands that makes the truly inspiring spectacle of a rainbow. South Africa is a rainbow nation – it deserves this appellation more than any other country in the world.
Curators of museums must be mindful of this dual nature of a country’s heritage: the individual cultural elements, and the all-embracing national elements. We need to preserve elements of each of these general types of heritage, and communicate the value of each and every one of the “group heritages” found in this country; but we must also not fail to establish more links between these various cultural heritages, and to celebrate them as part of our national heritage. When I saw the Black Tie Ensemble perform recently, I thought of them as a cultural link between different races; Miriam Makeba is also a cultural link, as is Johnny Clegg. The artist Dumisane Abraham Mabaso is another cultural link in our national heritage. I think we should take a leaf from the Japanese notebook, and declare such people “National Treasures”.
We must recognize and emphasize the value of our common, national heritage, because it is something greater than the sum of its parts. The more such links that can be forged, the stronger this nation will be.
ADDENDUM A
A SPECIAL WORLD WITH A SPECIAL FUTURE
I believe that South Africa can become the first country to rise above the barriers of racism and ethnic bigotry, and become a truly unified nation. The national motto of my native country – the United States of America – is e pluribus Unum: “the many are one”. This is, however, still an aspiration, not an accomplishment. I believe there are two reasons for this failure. First, in the United States there has always been one general, standard cultural model, and people were encouraged to jump into the “melting pot” and merge with what was long regarded as the “best” exemplar of the national identity. But many people did not want to forego their cultural heritage and join the “standard model”, and so removed themselves from main stream society. Because the United States is such a vast country, it has always been possible for the various cultural groups to lead completely separate existences - and to a large extent they still choose to do so.
But here in South Africa, it is not so easy for any one group to distance itself too far from any other. And whereas this has certainly caused problems in this country, I believe it is now becoming an advantage. In the “New South Africa”, South Africans have to meet and mix, and forge a national identity. Unlike the people of America, South Africans are so closely intertwined that no group can lead an isolated existence; nor does it seem likely that any one group can succeed in foisting its values on all others.
ADDENDUM B
MUSEUMS OF THE FUTURE
We must also think about what museums of the future will be; they will be very different because they will be re-shaped by new technologies. That means we should, for example, not simply be collecting artifacts, but we should be videoing what is going on around us; and that means more than just demonstrating how things are done, and with what, but what life is like now – the atmosphere, the feeling of the place and times.
Traditionally museums have been concerned principally with the preservation and display of objects, artifacts and photographs to convey what has been interesting or meaningful about the past. But new tools and methods are now available – eg, oral histories can be recorded on DVD, and capture the memories and emotions of the generations that have made and lived through the recent, exciting history of this country.
Moreover, computer generated video has the ability to re-create scenes from the past, and impart movement to images so that we can better visualize and thus more accurately imagine long-gone things that we would like to witness. “Animated exhibits”, for example, could be presented using highly accurate digital recreations in a 3-D format to recreate fascinating or highly cherished scenes from other times – from both natural and cultural history. Such exhibits would be far more informative and interesting than static displays, even though they are “virtual”, so long as they are accurate. A virtual artifact can be as powerful and as useful in communicating the essence of something as an actual one. Capturing our heritage faithfully and fully requires that we explore these new technologies and exploit their promise.
THREAT TO HERITAGE
'Heritage sites, particularly in the Western Cape, are under serious threat by property developers because of the property boom' - NHC
The National Heritage Council (NHC), appointed by President Mbeki, funds the heritage sector and raises awareness of government policy. Sonwabile Mancotywa, Chief Executive, has stated that some valuable heritage sites, such as historical graves and San rock painting sites have already been disfigured beyond repair.
South Africans apparently do not display high importance related to heritage, and there needs to be a balance between development in the commercial sense and heritage preservation.
Environment often plays a pivotal role in development factors, but heritage factors have an equal importance and, for example, the willful destruction of a building in a developmental project has an equally negative impact.
Mr Mancotywa stated, "Heritage is our national pride, and the Western Cape in particular poses a challenge because of its rich cultural heritage. The property boom is economically beneficial, but not at the cost of conservation".
It becomes clear that protection is required for tangible heritage (sites and monuments) as well as intangible heritage (oral traditions and cultural references, for example).
A survey is being conducted on heritage sites to evaluate their appeal to tourists as well as how they contribute to South Africa as a whole. This should lead to the conclusion that they can add to the economy and benefit from a potential increase in funding from the national treasury.
SWARTLAND, AND MALMESBURY A heritage view for 24 September
Heritage Day, a time of reflection about the various cultures and histories that make up the Swartland. We have much to think about: where we all came from, and how we all came to be here – from the original inhabitants (Khoe and San) to European settlers, and the slaves they employed.
We have many heritage resources to refer to, not only to the above with Xhosa, Afrikaans and English roots, but in this modern environment we have a complete smorgasbord: in my experience I have met most of the European ethnic groups, as well as Zimbabweans, Ethiopians, even someone from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
This, as I see it, is a reason to celebrate; this cultural diversity, the fact that we survive without animosity and aggression. We should be proud of this.
No reason to be enthusiastic is our architectural landscape, however. Bearing in mind that the site for the Malmesbury Moederkerk was commissioned by Baron van Imhoff in 1743, the same year as Swellendam, we have far less to commemorate than that town.
Early photographs depict an aspect of great beauty: thatched, gabled houses nestling alongside the Diep River, a focal point for the farms and communities far and wide. But what happened – how can we compare modern day Malmesbury to its origins?
Sadly, subsequent surveyors, town planners, architects and developers have chosen to alter the townscape to the detriment of aesthetic beauty to create a functional town, lacking in character and charm.
It is not too late to correct, as least partially, however. A section of Malmesbury adjacent to the Diep River stands forlorn and semi-abandoned. The structures still extant in the area are of great heritage value as a group, showing early growth in the town.
The vacant land cries for sensitive development. There are no lack of inspirations: inner Stellenbosch adjacent to Dorp Street, De Waterkant in Cape Town. With creative design, architecturally sympathetic to the environs, an area with great economic potential could be created.
Stretching the imagination coffee shops, restaurants, galleries, craft shops for locally manufactured goods, could all overlook the scenic Diep River. Not only would this provide a venue for locals to enjoy (and be employed in) it would certainly attract visitors to a destination (with obvious benefits to the businesses there, but also to guest houses, for example), instead of just passing through the town.
Malmesbury needs a focus: The Riverfront could just be this vehicle. And what a heritage legacy to leave to future generations.
Published in The Swartlander, 1 October 2008
Photograph South African National Archives: Malmesbury c1880
HERITAGE WEEKEND IN PHILIPSTOWN
Heritage South Africa Chairman Len Raymond addresses this conservation minded Bo-Karoo group on local architecture.
HERITAGE WEEKEND IN PHILIPSTOWN