Stoking up the outrage

SIR — “In our communities, to refer to someone as a private part is … war,” declared Blade Nzimande, in a piece of flagrant stirring relayed with every sign of sympathy by Stephen Grootes (The Spear may yet lead to a process of healing, May 29).

For heaven’s sake! To refer to someone as a private part is a casus belli in any darn community. But the angry artist’s intention was to provoke anger, not war. It is honourable to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

Mr Murray’s act of provocation has been stoked on the one side by tripartite alliance elements who stand to gain by causing a furore, and on the other by a media equally well served by another round of “public outrage”.

Who knows if the “furore” reflects what the majority think at all?

The majority appear concerned about where the next meal is coming from. What the newspapers love to call “our leaders” often claim “the people” are up in arms because when it suits them, they possess powerful means to claim it.

The truth is there is no way of knowing, or showing, how this obscene painting is generally received. But we do know from recent polls that a large proportion of the black majority has its doubts about President Jacob Zuma, and could well be as pleased at his discomfiture as his open enemies.

What is clear is Mr Zuma loses if he does not attack the painting and may still lose now that he has.

Society is what it is. The main question from the uproar is political. Has it helped the president’s chances of re-election or not?