Book critical review
“Making freedom”
Making freedom: Apartheid, squatter
politics and the struggle for home
Anne-Maria Makhulu 2015
This
book was driven by the underlying similarities between that Apartheid and
Post-Apartheid South Africa in which black people continued to be criminalised
for the circumstances that they are living under, which were the result of
forced removal and being robbed of their land. In Making freedom Makhulu reconnoitres
some traditions of squatting and illegal settlement that exists on the
outskirts of Cape Town during and at the end of the Apartheid in South Africa
as an ethnography to expose the struggles and difficulties that black people
face in making freedom. Land is believed to allow us to build homes and since
colonialism black people were robed off their land, they have been always
trying to get pieces of it to build homes and having home was believed and
still believed to be fundamental hence making freedom is associated to the
struggle of homes. In this book Makhulu underlines laws and regulations that
restricted black people from feeling free.
Makhulu
pointed the passing of the Native Urban Areas Act, no 21 of 1923 and the
stricter controls on the black men’s movement the separation from their
families (p.42) and its results in the expansion of Crossroad and other
informal settlement across South Africa. The failure of government to recognise
black families was a problem that Makhulu could not discuss in this book
although I have noticed that it was discovered. This is in the story of Naledi
and Stembiso, the couple moved together to Stembiso’s workplace and Naledi
experienced difficulties that she was not expected to be with her husband, “Naledi
recalled hiding usually under the bed, during the day time, for fear of being
apprehended by company staff or police” (p.43). Makhulu has noticed this as it
is also expected in a western family to have a “nuclear family” although they
didn’t allow black couples to stay together. However, my point is the way and
structure of black families. Housing allocation has been a problem that drives
people to informal settlements many from the small houses mainly in townships.
black families are usually extended families and it is impossible to
accommodate everyone in a simple four rooms that even the democratic government
provides to black families. This has been exposed when Naledi and Stembiso
share their story, “even so the house was crowded, and before long Naledi’s
niece and sister had joined the family-the latter staying home to care for the
children while Naledi worked” (p.43).
I
would like us to look closer to the issue of facilities that the Crossroad
offered in attraction of many young people from townships as it is critical. Any
government as informal settlement is not ideal it can work for government of
people to engage with youth about what they need as Makhulu encountered it “it
accommodated young love, satisfied domestic fantasies, and provided for
families set free from the strictures of the townships and hostels” (p.45).
Makhulu discovered in her ethnography the social construction of marriage that
resulted from the apartheid laws and situation of blacks at the time and during
the post- apartheid. Many women tended to look for men who are “legally”
staying and with descent incomes “if a woman wanted a family life she had to
choose her husband from the ‘qualified’ [legal] men” (p.45) and I argue that it
was not that black women are not capable to work for themselves but as they
were themselves entitled by the government to work in the domestic services.
From Makhulu’s ethnography I see the gender construction through the
classification of jobs as they were to work in the domestic services and men in
the industries “they were allowed to move, albeit restrictively, between the reserves
and the urban areas” (44).
Makhulu
did not tell about sexualities, but as an anthropologist, I must argue that
although same sex was never promoted. I say it because there must be some
difficulties if men are in the hostels and not allowed to be visited. During this
ethnography, minority sexualities were not a recognised phenomenon in our society
hence it is not included. As the research was to see difficulties men face in
the absence of their women Makhulu did not ask how they satisfy their sexual
needs in the hostels. And at the first place during the ethnography there was
no assumption or understanding that some men might be in sexual relationship
with other men and the ethnography rather shows the way that sexuality has been
understood. This all is an argument that I constructed looking at the story of
Lungile, not that he committed a same sex but throughout his story I have
figured that there was no, not even a single person who assumed there were men
or women who were seeing same sex partners and this shows heterosexuality
dominance “as well as accommodation in what were then termed “single-sex
hostels” in the black townships” (p.44). Makhulu suggests that as an anthropologist
should’ve known of a sex issue but she might have been restricted to mention it
in the interviews as it was a taboo in the society. This is revealed by her use
of inverted commas for single-sex and she understood that it is problematic and
she ran away by even attributing it to the society “in what were then termed”,
this together with inverted commas tells that it is not her intention or she
doesn’t necessary agree with the term “single-sex” because sex is way different
from gender as they assumed.
Informal
settlements such as crossroads resulted from the abuse and discrimination of
black people by the apartheid government. People escaped from strict rules in
the townships to stay in peace in the crossroads. Makhulu named the book “making
freedom” because having home and live in peace with your family means freedom. When
people escape to make homes in the bush they are making freedom for themselves.
“but the point was that you could come to Crossroads to hide from the
authorities” (p.6).
The
insight was given by a key informant Mr Ndima whose engagement gives the nature
of squatter struggle and form of politics in the squatter camps. Gender inequality
in this country may be the result of structural violence that was created
through pass laws and labour laws mentioned and discussed in this book. Women followed
their husbands to the cities and the pressure forced men to look for bushes and
making of homes for their families which automatically given men duty to meet
and discuss the ways in which the land is managed and this is supported by the
fact that one women said, they choose a family life by marrying man who can
obtain land and ability to build home. Being said, this alone result into
gender equality that exists now which was not fully recognised by the members
of the society at the time of ethnography. “and the male elders I had
encountered earlier in the day” (p.5).
In
this book, I also found that poverty, employment and economic power interfered
in the love life and kin relations of people. “if a woman wanted a family life
she had to choose her husband from the ‘qualified’ [legal] men” (p.45). if a woman
must choose a man who can organise materials and a permission to stay over the
man that she loves then love life and marriages are the victims of an apartheid
legacy. This is evident to take place even in the rural areas where men who
fail to take a quest for job in the industries are discouraged by the entire
society “My mother robs me, she takes my money; My father does not like me, he
only likes cattle; My brother does not want me, my sister does not care; The
day after tomorrow I ride off to Benoni” (P.32). The song “eBenoni” suggests
the perceptions and general ideas on what men are required of by their families
and the society in the rural areas as that place is known for its reciprocity
generous and Ubuntu, “critically, however, homes were also understood as places
of reciprocity and care” (p.33). Apartheid destroyed homes,” apartheid proved
particularly effective in gnawing away at the foundations of homes” (p.33).
This
book also shows an impact that may also be viewed as a legacy of apartheid in
the rural areas at which old women dominates in creating warm space for their
families.
The
impact of apartheid laws to generations and a cycle of poverty in black South
Africans. Exploitation of mine workers and other black employees as well as
apartheid legislations that restricted black families from educating their
children structurally repeated itself and may be the reason for Marikana
massacre and Fees Must Fall and Rhodes Must Fall revolutions. Radicalism and praising
of the late revolutionist and freedom fighters tells that Young people in South
Africa are tired and lost hope in all the reactions that took place recently in
making freedom and equality in South Africa. In this book, it is proven when a
parent explained the negative of the demolish of their shacks on the children’s
education “Our worry is our children’s future. We are not fighting, we are
asking. The children write exams in September. If they demolish (shacks) in June,
what happens to their education?” (p.39) and the failure of companies to
provide educational needs to children of their employees can be blamed as well.
I
seek to link the similarities between the challenges we have today such as
protests in higher education institutions, labour strikes and social unrest
that point to the issue of land distribution that was not fully addressed even after
we have gained democracy (p.10), because we have learned about the massacres
similar to Marikana and organisations similar to Opposition to Urban Tolling Association
and protest similar to Fees Must Fall that have been mentioned in this book as
well as the effectiveness of contribution of squatter settlers in the political
organisations despite stigmatisation (p.38). I would like to recognise that the
stigma against squatters hinders the social cohesion and equality and result
into social unrest in South Africa.
Bibliography
Makhulu, A.M., 2015. Making freedom: Apartheid, squatter politics, and the struggle for home:
Duke University Press.
