Rhodes statue shows the rough road ahead for UCT

I ARRIVED back at UCT on Monday from the African Higher Education Summit in Senegal. Since my return I have been engaged in consultation with senior colleagues – although I was unsuccessful in seeking meetings with the SRC. I would now like to share the following proposals.

As part of our plans for addressing various transformation issues in 2015, we have initiated a process to review statues, building names and other symbols that affect the institutional climate of UCT, and how these affect the sense of inclusiveness or alienation felt by staff and students.

This was announced in October last year, with explicit reference to the Rhodes statue. Such university-wide discussion seems not to have taken place during previous years on the campus, and certainly not in governance structures such as the university council, senate, the institutional forum, nor as far as I know, the SRC.

The first seminar on Heritage, Signage and Symbolism, planned jointly with the SRC a month ago, took place on Monday. Other discussions and public fora were planned for the year and it was expected that we would bring some concrete proposals to the council by the end of the year.

Last week’s student protests have resulted in a massive outpouring of anger and frustration – much about the issue of the statue, much more about experiences of institutional racism, aggravated by students’ perceptions that they are not being heard, or that their demands are not achieving the response they seek.

There are also similar frustrations experienced by a number of staff members. There have also been many voices critical of both the mode of the student protest, and the view that the statue should be removed. Given this escalation of debate and protest, I think it appropriate to replace our original programme with a more accelerated process.

Only the university council can decide to move the Rhodes statue (and then it would have to seek approval from Heritage Western Cape). I am therefore requesting the chair of the council to call a special meeting to discuss the transformation issues and plans, in particular the question of the Rhodes statue.

I believe that there is a significant view that the statue should be moved. However, there has never been any formal consultation or organised discussion on this matter, and it would not be appropriate for the UCT executive or council to make such a recommendation without undertaking such a discussion.

Therefore we propose the following: (where information such as time or venue is missing, it will be confirmed later on the UCT website):

March 25, 6pm – an assembly of the university in Jameson Hall (for all staff and students).

March 27 – a meeting of the university sen-

ate.

Week of April 7 to 10 – a special meeting of the convocation (all graduates of UCT, the academic staff and emeritus professors).

April 15 – special council meeting. From next Monday, staff and students are invited to express their views on the statue and broader issues of transformation on the university’s Vula website. Alumni and members of the public can voice their opinions via e-mail.

UCT’s senior management have put this proposed programme together in haste.

The SRC has to date declined to have any meetings with us. Their condition for meeting is that we agree to remove the statue and provide a deadline for this action. We cannot do this for two reasons.

First, it is a council decision. Second, we do not feel there has been an opportunity for all views to be considered. We hope that our acknowledgment of the import of the issue, and our commitment to a short and definite timetable for making a decision, will persuade the SRC to join the discussions.

I expect that in the debates and discussions that ensue, I will be asked to say what I think about the statue. I trust it will be clear that these are my personal views and not those of the university.

I have previously stated that the Rhodes statue is a symbol of UCT’s colonial past. As it currently stands, the statue is unmediated by any critical commentary or historical context. There is nothing to suggest to any passer-by how the university situates itself in relation to Rhodes’s actions and their impact. At the very least, we need to engage with that.

One option is to leave the statue as it is, but to place a plaque on its base that acknowledges the many injustices of colonial conquest enacted under Rhodes’s watch.

This might be accompanied by another artwork to be located alongside Rhodes, to “speak back” by way of alternative values and convictions.

However, in my view it is the particular location and setting of the Rhodes statue that is the problem and it cannot be addressed by contextualising the statue or installing alternative icons.

It is because the brooding presence of Cecil John Rhodes is located in pride of place, at the focal point of the campus, that it acquires the connotations of founder, hero, patron, role model, and embodiment of UCT’s heritage.

I do not think the statue should be destroyed or hidden away. I just think it should not be there – it should be moved.

This will not compromise our ability to record and debate the role Rhodes played in the city’s and continent’s history. And it will not change our acknowledgment that UCT acquired its site from the Rhodes estate, and the positive contribution that it has made to our institution and its students. MAX PRICE Vice-Chancellor University of Cape Town WAS RHODES a racist? Yes. A narcissist? Yes. A colonist? Definitely.

However, I do not think that tearing down the statue of Rhodes is the answer to the systemic racism at UCT. We need to be mindful of the role history plays in our lives. Do we burn

because it represented the views of one of history’s most evil, racist dictators? No.

We don’t have to praise the book, but we don’t eradicate it from the Earth’s existence either. It is important to allow the narrative of history to penetrate our lives today, to remind us of where we came from and why we will not accept going back there.

Would Rhodes have condemned the presence of fellow brown and black students and myself at UCT? Most likely.

However, my way of sticking it to him is by walking past that statue every day with a smirk on my face, to have him watch me walk the very land he gave for UCT to be built on. Let him see us, as we see him, and allow tolerance to triumph.

Instead of destroying the historical figures we do not like, we should demand that we be inserted into the historical narrative of UCT.

Perhaps we should erect a student declaration next to the Rhodes statue stating that although we are not inspired by, nor happy with his image, we do recognise the role history plays in our lives and will exercise tolerance and forgiveness imparted to us by Madiba, Desmond Tutu, the TRC and the countless freedom fighters who fought and died for our democracy.

This is how we make our history. It is not the time for destruction; it is the time for enlightenment.

Let the legacy of Rhodes wither away, but leave the statue as a reminder of what we will never allow ourselves and our country to be reduced to again.

This is the test our generation faces, and this is the test we must succeed at: restoration, not retribution. UVANIA NAIDOO MA student UCT