NEW FORMS OF STRATEGY
NO CHANGE OF HEART

Nadi ne Gordi rrer

now becorre

preoccupations

the

and that

conviction,

Sharing
the
few books by well-known
to write,
the
among us who are
those
tu the media
access
books;
second,
and white writers
ial
the Directorate's

treatment,

since

the measure

of my fellow writers,
a general
white writers
action
carries
uncompromising

stand,
is not
two sinister
opponents
by speclal
solidarity

of hard-won

off

can be bought

can be divided

by 'favouring'

no ban on any black writer's

own application

to the

Jlppeal Board.

I was the
release
that
the
a major
victory

implications:

0f censorship

treatrrent

that

exists
white writers

first

to express
from ban of a
for

freedom

the
first,
with wide

accorded

to our

between
with

black
such spec-
by

work has been challenged

Daughter
of
package
all

claim any prescience
- Burger's
as a consequence

the
after

that

I should

themsel ves

these
received

rre to examine
intact,

I don't
viction
released
for
ap~arently
eVltable
company of my colleagues.
for
Jl.ndre Brink
Season
Chairman
up for Etienne
pentance
Dr Koot Vorster
as
hlS Committee's
publ1shers
books were'

transparently
reinstated'.

(1979).
of

two other

and the

the

le Roux with
ribbon
red
- of
course,
books were,
bannings,

And then,

in
the Appeal Board,

or distinction
for
(1979), my novel,
the Directorate's
carefully
very
it
the mauling
devices

come upon the
It was not

booby-traps
the

set
same package

neat
surprising
for
us all,
containing

arrival

early
happened
new tactics.

at

this

con-

to be the

first

It was natural

when my book carre back to me -
had been through.

timed to go off
they
that
should
since
a week or
his
and the
literature's
of

the new
eg?,
all
the old Appeal Board s re-

It was in-
in the
recognize
two later
The Drv White
of
Easter

novel
seating

got

for April
time
came Afrikaans
roses

sugar

the
defiant

of Aksie Morale Standaarde,

Maqersfontein
as a result
release
its
to the

but
belongs

0 Maqersfontein
of
the Director's
on an ultimate

same strategy

in which the other

was not
own appeal

the :1GKand
rele~sed
agalnst
author's
two

by the

appeal

always
we are
blunt

belleved
rid
of
statement

changes

of how to conduct
imrrediate

ends,

is
and over-riding
decisive

the

a constant
lS behind me

this

with
the possible

of

I am one who has
censorship
until
preface
sors~ip,
conSlderation
att?inment
agalnst.
banner
whose background
until we are
rid
necessary
the
secret
sorship
by apartheid,

powers

I
of
to maintain
police.

hanos
or

and still

apartheid.

any comment

in its
the
partial,

scope,
struggle

belleves
Personally,
I have

degree,
against
pragmatic,
To-day

we shall

I

find

never
be rid
it necessary

the effects

about
and methodology.
it, how to act
existential
as always,

the

of
to
of cen-
Any

for

the

'7sp~n~e
lnv:slble
agalnst

seen

factor.
chalked
to say. We shall

text

on the blackboard,
not be rid

Censorship
regime
as
apparent

is
that
victory

of whether
it

to erode

that
from within.

the
other

ann of mi~d-control

ann of
we may galn
is

victory

lnte~al
agalnst
in fact

of censorshill
and a~
represslon,
the
cen-
contained

I have

;ay what
apartheid.
a racist
Over every
the question

can be clairred

What exactly

has

changed

since

the

1st Apri 1 1980?

W~at exactly
tlvely
last
lntellectual

the
does
appearance
musculature

'born
of

again'

cultural

Judge Lammie Snyaan
displayed

by 37-year-old

evangel1sm 5tar=d with
of

and the prevlews

~he ~osi-
rlppllng

?
Dr Kobus van Rooyen, mean.

The Censorshlp
practice

Act

remalns

of embargo will

the

same.

continue.

It

1S stlll

on the

s~tute

The same anonylOOus cornmttees

bO~k.
wlll

The
read

27

cOlTll1ittee having

whose menbers

the Supreme Court

as

capacity,

appellant

a censorship
and ban;
of
Division
administrative
whom the
not
fair
required
experts
bonder,
powers of

required
trial,

to afford
has
and the new ones

some of

to have
regard
whose proceedings

are
the Board are what

has no right

of
to the

are not
any reasons
for
the old names,

'An extra-judicial

audience,
rules
of

been defined

in 1978 by the ~ppellate
body,
need I'ave no legal
who in their
Justice

ope~a~lng
tra1n1ng,
del1beratlOns

1n an
befol"P

designed

to achieve

and who are

are
a
not
The enlarged
of
leas t one known Broeder-
The

cadres.

panel

at
same old white

in public

the,r
decision'.
among whom is
from the

conducted

recruited
they

always were.

There 1S no change
even hinted

at.

in the

la\v or procedure,

then.

Nor

is

any promised,

or

ultimate
\~e also

authority
know that

a new Chairman

of

the Appeal Board,
he does not make decisions

although

the

is

know:

What we have
we already
the Appeal Board is
process
of censorship.
censorship
absol utes
objectives
ed.
His
fications
way.the
capltal

is
and di rects
according

flair
being

same thinQs
or a Directorate

an institution
the
to his OIvn personal

ca 1 course

in our national

tacti

- for which quality
equal

- will

influence
are done, whether

he will

of Publications

1n a position

whose power
of

the Chairman
in the whole

alone,
and decision-maker
the

head of
life
towa rds
ideas

-
that

any institution
the

interprets
ins ti

of how these
chosen,

tuti on's
should
all
make innovations
a bank

have been

- and

doctrinal

avowed
be achie~-
qual1-

in the.

other

accumulat1ng

is
people's

minds

procedure,
the

institution
controlling

It

asmall

certa1n wh1te writers,

Therefore
have changed. Why and ho.v is
months
to <;:orre, beyond a first
the unbanmng.of
placate
lnterests
the produc~ of Dr van Rooyen's
f~r
f1rst.show
relat10n
well
as colour,
of what we are

of the
l1terature
the
up against

sorre t1rre before

of black

quality

of

.;an only be the philosophy

censorship.that

of
to delve

something we shall
snap understanding
in quick
of
actions
he was

and psychology
have
into
of what was plain
succession
an attempt
were
running

suggestion
These
since

thought,

surely

_ the
to divide

hope

already

1n ~he
behwd
to
the

group of books

the
and wh1te writers

he was appointed

Chai rman in April

of mind,

to society,

tile concept
to politics,

culture,

of
to economics,

ilew Chairman has

and on wnich

_ as we see

1980.
the

now will

b~ dependent.

the Appeal Board
the
the

They were
of
concept
as
to
class
nature

_ the

statements
grid
ambition

of his

_ signification
purpose,

Taking
and good pay in his

from
as
accep-

we need

to know how he sees

0

the

...
~

J'ob

he has made policy
to trace
the
of personal
censor,

Since he t~ok office
Possible
w~lch lt w1ll.be
glVen the ordmary motives
tance
f
h'
f
c 1e
1
u ar mlSSlon. We need to know what his
tnat
censorsh1p,as
ln~,
celVed.
p:1~ate
~t

and other
a them.
his widefy

in the praxis
social

A~
sensedeciding

factor
a form of

on th1S sense

to fin~ out,

lS ~he v1tal

controlling

aye the

self

of

is

atements

rlght
presently;

and cultural

or hacltlOns behindwhich
hlg

y controversldl

f"'st
his
books.

Dr van Rooyen won't
affective

thoughts
ask you to look
to retum
to the

111
I want
hand can be detected

_ the

self

of

sense
of censorship,
control.
authority

the

is.

.
h1S part1c-
For
of
speaK-

phenomenon

and other
the
Philosophically
of censorship
tell

and actions
at
eV1dence

the

unbann1nq

us what
is;
evidence
of his
of

con-
this

but
of ~is
actlOns
certain

-

~rink
y pollce

:~~~
fro
waSmb~~~~dMtui~zel1

has pointed
brutality

out

that

the week that

his

novel

dealing

with

and neglect
s~ory

~1atshoba's

of a black man in prison,
collection,

was
tie Not A Man

Call

,

e reason

for bann1ng supplied

to r1atshoba's

publisher

the
released
(1979)
was

28

objection
the

experiences

to one of
of

stories

the
only,
a black man hired

A Gl impse of Sl aver¥

' deal

out

as prison

labour

to a white

ing with
farmer.

Death in prison
whose factua
court
cases
writers,
ethic:
our

each
"Having

soci ety";

or detention;

the

abuse of

farm labour.

Both are

1 bas i s has been exposed
and,
at

in one instance

and con fi rmed in the proceedi
least,
of enquiry.

a commission

subjects
n gs of
Two

of whom can make with Dostoevsky

a statement

taken
an event,
the work of one

)
is

only

tried
released,

to clarify
the
other

its

banned.

the writer's

of
possibil1ty

in

new regime,
1 iterature,

there

from which we are being
and are
to accept
i1as been much emphasis

asked

persuaded we
this

as a

by the Appeal Board.

the

silver-handled
and prudery,

It
seems
paper-knife
as

the

by a Censorship
the writing

Committee
in this

the

merit

kerrie

the
for

censorship,

in much of

in preparation

it was decided

of narrow-mindedness

for
a new respect

by the African
of
the writing

for
decisions
to substitute

Now,
may expect
new justification
quality
in recent
van Rooyen wants
for
But although
inconsiderable
stories
qu~lity
Wh1Ch he interprets",
erally
Th:y di d this
at10usly
was flatly
was hatched
kick.
They returned,
when dealing
the p~st, when a work was
of
relat10n
chapter,
paragraph.

from the
written
beneath
They banned

to the quality
page,

of a high

or even

quality",

- again

I 1 et

with

on literary
that Dr Kobus

of good taste

arbitrary

weapon.
there was "not

that

collection

... with

regard

of

short
both

to the

in the human situations

found the

stories

"gen-

of a single
r anonylTKlus sel ves

particular

this
improbable.

with his

story.
- ostent-
story
But what
familiar
to be precise.
followed
not
a Slngle

in
in

of

writer Mtutuzeli
and to the
although

author's

~latshQba
insight

the Conmittee members
they
banned
them speak
angle,
accumul ation
feathers

the book because
for
cl aiming
of
was the ostrich

that
events

thei

new "1 iterary"
and the
the
the book on one seventh

peacock

its

its

of
a black writer,

contents,
to the precept

to be judged
the whole,

'undesirable'

but

could

or

'desirable'
be damned because

for

basis

appeal

The sole
calculation
quality,
the
rather
if all
set
De undesirable".

in the

although
to the

made in the
literary
reader
in the objectionable
these

situations
the

story,

the ban on Matshoba's

book rested

ultimately

imperatives
quality

of political
invoked
is
"lies
story
of
the

the
nature
had occurred

of

...

repression,

- the Committee
literal')'

in the

not

not
stated

events wnich are presented
in this

in which they

context

are

on a declared
literary

that

creatlon
...

but
even

presentation

of

these

scenes

in a popular medium would

italics

are mine.

control
so,

~e
~lcal
1S not
Rooyen's
now be rejected,
viewed by the Appeal Board

over
us challenge

statement

that

let

and therefore

the

The standard

used by the

reading matter

likely

to reach

the Directorate
banning

of
ask for

a book by the
the ban on Matshoba's

"lsol

censors

is

here

of po~i-
that
If th1S
the black masses:
in ~ccord~nce w1th p,r van
would

atlOn method

to act

book to be re-

Burger's
among all

My novel,
though,
there were numerous
Act.
p1cked

One was
up from their

the

the

Daughter,

other
examples

was
sections
cited

under D Section

4? (2) of

remark

by English-speaking

pare~ts:

"Bloody Boers,

schoolgHls
dumb Dutchmen,

t~e Cens~rsh1p
mouth1ng preJud1ces
th1Ck Afnkaners

released

al-
under Wh1Ch 1t had been deemed offens1ve,

b~ th: Appeal Board 1n 1979,

Miriam Tlati
and left
of
three
reference
Boer'

's novel
for
under
narrator-character

Muriel
several
the

on sale
offences
by the

at Metropolitan
years,
same section

was banned

of

in the
in 1973 on t~e

version

found inoffensive
sale Objection

the Act,

the pnnc1pal

being
woman as a

the
'lousy

to an Afrikaans-speaking

29

r
I

"

.

ugly racist

are not my personal

ones,

nor,

epithets
they

but

whose habi tual

about

our

otherwise

quite

are heard
inabil

society
inoffensive

us every

around
ity
to express
no honest writer

from the

censors'

is banned while mine is

ul timately

released.

a white South African
is
black

one? What
to prevent

by a black

to be abused
that
clear
from reading
in the work of

is
readers
expression

a Censorship

their

character

given
assiduously

there
most of

is
the

to be taken
one,
so far

an additional
concessions

account

into
operative

for

as bl ack wri ters

I

think,
and ~ere

are
are

day,

themselves Wlthout
Yet
can falsify.
~oint
of view,.
lt more lnsultlng
in a book than
it
t~eir

COlTJ11ittee regards
own pr~judices,

Is

as

fact

these

's book,

characters
another

Well,
they Miri am Tl al i 's;
certain
them is
Tlali
ultimately
for
by a white
necessary
own frustrations,
the
ened censorship
that
nullifies
they may not
a wider black
perience
of being
the bl ack masses
cannot

considerations

express.

say what white writers
readership,
bl ack,
themsel ves

and to speak
to articulate

feel

say because
to blacks
and therefore

they
are
from the

and understand

about

a black wnter;

outslde

bl ack writers

by a new and enllght-
onlj
concerned
to have
the
ex-
what
encourage

calculated
ce,ltre

are

of

r 1 i ves but most

confi nn,
thei

-

And with this
paring
us for
statements
the

taken
advent

trend
event
the
of pol i cy made by Dr Kobus van Rooyen since Apri

by the Censorship
of a new Chai rman, we come to the

Directorate

in the

period

pre-

i tse 1f,

and

lIs

t.

He has not
he intends
publ~c debates
Publ1c debates
helped

speed

said much;
to say even less:
on censorship.
- "these

and one of his
he has
The Star

insi!t1ts

(5/4/1980)
to the workings

the

retirement

of his

predecessor.

statements
announced

has been

to the
th at he wi 11 take

effect
that
no pa rt in
of
mind were what

out,

pointed

be missed."

editorial

a censor's

of
They will

Indeed.

the

to present
of his
any risks.
his
influence

predecessor.
What
philosophy
of counter

image

interests

emerged

that
Nevertheless,
us more

from
Dr
is
that
any more
is

an

of censorship
views.

This

intend

taking

- let
is

appearances

to proselytize

to be open to the

approach
here
consciously
~hat his

Dr Kobus. van Rooyen would be unlikely
the publ1c
and statements
van Rooyen does not
~e does not want openly
han he ~ntends
autocratlc
derstand
that
mlnd, whether
The fact
~nn.
1~ em~h~sls,
d e~,
l~l1Cltly,
eflne~
ls.a
~mp~asls
life
at;on
llteratureto
19nore.
a c ever man cannot
Plowkerthgroupto declde what
1 e
e most ft.
l'
t
.
open-space
tenor
ure must be accepted
w'
..
C~~Sl\S~

'Ie IllYt of
of hlS approach
any necessity

a one admlt

arrangements

real-polltlk

~on~lnced

unc lona

T.

of

e

1

adJustment
has

that
The concept
culture

is

us not call

it

an arrogant

a man whose view of culture
the
nonn is
is

or not,
version M that

is posited

does no~ mean that
al?n~ Wlt~ the

law,

it
in the Censorship

any less

is
idea
likely

one.
el itist
of

someone

From it we can un-
in whose
cultural
and

here

an ~fficial
to differ,
fundamentalist

t~an ~hat

to catch
taken

place

up with

Act.
change
in South Africa,

the

The Shlft
in the
and that

ln
re-

of contemporary

business

may be made to suit
h

_ that
remains

there
the

is

a right
on which

grid
premi ses
the

ten~nt
cuI ture
he ;s not

a single

for
although
'.
all manner
of
the
total
.
sustalns
prepared

'

In-
struc-
d man
to dis-

the South African
to his

jOD that
it.

to defend

t

f

ou

Roland Barthe,
O ..
nglns
0
ower b
~overn~n~~~en~lng
of our
letter

societ~l
words

(1973)
nature's
'.

po'
t
ln s out
f
orces;
a na~ural

ltlas
-
but SOphlstlCatlOn

e ~hen th sceptlcal.

..
that
modern myths

tradltlonal

I':1vth
~

.
Justify

force.
of

Sophisticated
the more
awful malediction
for

be taken

some of
the

must never

explains
and enforce
officials
stic

rituali

a culture's
a secular
this

of
aspects
four-

of
i ghtenment;

enl

et~y _

e I r:mo!"al1 ~y Act,

,

30

of a culture based on an elite dispensation
anything

valid for themselves,

acceptance

to the

of the role

are still finnly based on

that I11Ythcould Judge Lammie Snyman have taken the cultural

'what was 1ike1y to corrupt or deprave an immature

in censorship

this month that blacks are "in-
(The
lit up a whole official men-
five years in which it was his
or disgust' the people of South

at all."

South African'
invoked
of the South African population.

- whose standards of morality
and lit-
during his term of office - was not to

For this
of his own, whose imaginary or

the creature.

But not the idea
will be the deciding
What is regarded
that his
it is, but not, I am

is his announcement

earlier

reader'.

Important

written

to that culture,

it was likely
"Of blacks,

revealed when he said

in the idiom of educated

And what a lightning-flash

in life according
myth of power.

I am sure, are not interested"

and susceptibilities
statement

sensibilities
most important
some.

up his entire
to horrify
I have no knowledge

acceptance of the concept
masses who cannot create
of literature
a particular
Only from within
standpoint
articulate people, who,
Sta:, 8/4/1980).
ta1lty for us when, summing
responsibil ity to decide
mind, or whether
Africa, he added;
His 'average ordinary
erary judgment
he constantly
be found among the majority
reason, Dr Kobus van Rooyen has abandoned
that he has the right to create another
rather conditioned
factor in what shall and shall not be read by all of us.
as Dr van Rooyen's
creature will be the 'probable
afraid, for reasons assumed
is that sexual explicitness
The assumption
cated literature
That complex works dealing with contentious
and events above the level of simple
there the effect
as beneficial;
trained intellect
of the censors.
Is it not?
Snyman confessed
of the crucial
healthy cultural
We should like to be able to put that question
Appeal Board, who evidently
he see the justification
tegy of the myth of hostile
Why may intellectual
Is it because
by w~ites
of nght-wing
initiative
contained?
Why may wh ite write rs deal with in flamma!J1es?
the new censorship
Is it because
dispensation
portant to censorship
as an ann of repression
~redominant1y
critical
and protestant
lona1, and that is why the government

of the change
after all if you have not the educational
to follow

this readership
has been contained
terrorism
while
for social

is predominantly
by imprisonment,
the moderate,

he knew nothing
development

change has passed overwhelmingly

apparently
these works,

readers handle

inflammab1es?

By putting

questions

as an integral part of sophisti-
people will now be passed.
characters
or radical political
And
ends, and so can only be regarded
and
that is hardly the responsibility

rhetoric will also be passed.
background

on the top shelf, out of reach of those masses Lammie
present~tlon
the

that deal with their lives, is one not hamperlng

about,imaginative,

analytical

censorship

purports

to be guarding?

to the new Chairman of the

of that hampering,

does know a great deal ab?ut those .masses.
forces he well understands?

Does
in a misslon to adJust the stra-

white, and radical initiative
exile, bannings
and. the threat
to blacks, and is not

let alone the revo1utlonary

s~~thing
has unders~ood
im-
- while w~l~e Wrltln$S
in mood, black wrltlngs
are lnsplrat-
fears them?

a:e

31

Tne definition
in-the-hair
matter

allowed

of

the

'probable

reader'

can be arrived

at by the old p~nci1-

and finger-nail
him is not

tests,
literary

believe
worth

but

hi s colour.

me.

The criterion

for

read1ng-

culture
not be brought

As a cultural
bable
reader'
visualized,
that
could
has been attained
indigenous
who understands
classes,
songs,
expression

but
dances,
of

as

and not merely
is

a creature
society,

in our
in South Africa

a politically-manipulable
of c1ass-and-co10ur
by those
is

something

of us

sufficiently
still

hierarchy.

along with mining machinery

to be made,
in the
hold
achievement

something
of

a ~hip,

of creat1ng

an

nor

He cannot

be visualized

b~ anyone

remarkable
ones.

language

genuinely
of European
not

by the
out
culture
the vita 1 force
languages,
self-realization

-

sub-literature

in the

as an embellishment

gene rated

by the
as well
life
of

for
crafts,

leisure

of
sk ills,
as
the

literature
people

the mldd1e
1egen~s!
the

-

11Vlng

as a whole.

prototype,

the
He cannot

free-minded

'pro-
be

to see
that

be allowed

is
The new Chairman

will

reader'

'probable

But
to appeal

writing
concession.
colour.

Behind the
bable writer'.
'satirical
elitist
ever his
is unlikely
subject which black writers,
are not
loyalty
sent.
tain,historica1
ceSSlon by this
the

likely
to the black
So effective

circumstances
government
probable writer

to manage;

'wrong'

Of course,
in the
to black writers.

relation

it

living
requires
struggle
for
weapon though
or

'"

surely
of

the

unexpressed
the Appeal Board
to develop'.

nobody stops

anyone

requires

of

literature
It
lives
a licence

their

a spiritual
satire
stages,

may be,
it will

concept

of

the

'pro-

has

assured.!li!rr
this

that
is
an
satire,
at present,

To most of us
from writing
to life
a distancing

from the
their material,

se1 f-criticism

that

wh~t-
sat1re

close within
for
identity

does
as a social
not,
so far
fall

not
probe
it
as
the

into

grant

at pre-

in cer-
is
a con-
hands of

to freedom of expression,

pub 1i c (probable

reader,

di s-,

that

the

general

to accept

literary

works

and therefore

values"
unharmful

in conflict
benefit

often
will
and inoffensive

_ if

and that
with
the
anyone,
to whichever

a Wrlter
accepted
since we

probable

lS

does not have

t~e n;w di rective

and political
to prove ourselves

religious
have
our work is alloted,
?f W?rk in the

S~mil ~rly,
t1nC~1?n agal~)
a CrltlC of hlS society
mo~a1,
st1ll
re~der
wrlt~rs
~he lnsplratlOna1.
1S a dynamic of ?ur
bo?k mus~ be an lce-axe
Ne~ther
~hlte
unconfessed

any sign
are
h1 story".

lS there
and b1ac~,

critical
Yet
there
literature

the only

in the

censors'

and analytical
is no ignoring
at present.

to break

the

of acceptance
recorders

frozen
that
of what

consideration
mode but

_ will

benefit
no barriers

lift

fact

that

the
Franz Kafka's
us"
sea
in South Africa

inside

the
standard,
is not

the
we writers,

inspirational

that

"A
censors.

for

the

poet Eugenio Monta1e

calls

been made, and is being made every

That,ha~
commlss 1o~s and the SAIlC news;
all"
away the protective
in the
carnlVa1

costumes melt

bear1ng

day

deep below the
the deci sive common force
'probab 1e readers'

of

it is
clothing

reports
of
ca ,'ryi ng us
as paper

rain.

t

t

s!

the

new deal

censorship's
view of culture
t
b 1
1 seated

atn dO f' tlme-dlshonoured
ad'
n
is
,rec?gnition
val1d1ty
t'
cre
a lon,
they have no place

k
e obJectlVe
are wor s of genuine
in wh' h

f~na1.ana1~sis,
I~ the
?
1ns ea
0
a rt
chief
did no~ ~at~~'thThls
(there
purpose
by which the
do with ca1cuiati
probable

1ty ~ ,l1terat~re

1.otn 0 1tS Poss1b1e
1 erary

experts

l~ai-ln

Th
e

f~ct!

.

'

'

can be assessed
effect
on the
instructed

recognition
shrewd enough
of
th

literary
ere

.
lS trash)

is
the
already
of

serving

pragmatic
mani festation
dead
,
' t
literary
lS 1 5
to see what LalTfllie Snyman
standards

a concept

repression

standards

,

as
be invo e

k d f

could

or a

and no authority.

have nothing
reader,
to take

probable
this

The criteria
whatev~r
to

or 1m-
into

factor

who are
32

account,
erature.

and do so,

are

not

exercising

any valid

function

as judges

of

lit-

And in affirmation
basis
is not
hands
with

of opposition
a factor
is
that

the
right
principle.

freedom of expression,

of
to censorship,

- what
of

is
that

stake

at
book to be read.

the
each

literary
time

which is

the

single

worth or otherwise

a book falls
Literary

worth

into

the

uncompromised
a work

of
censors'

has nothing

to do

fudge

We must not
read ~ and d~ly
only
be assessed
interested,
complex
There
is
reflect
erary
ctures
this
censors
South African
have
censorsh i p .

standards
on the
respected

to do with

- both

a promi se that
of
the

opinions

future
literary

judgments
experts

by censors
freedom of
and SCholarly
are
public

invalid.

remain

literature;

as a sign

the work;

concept
Let us never
in ignorance
but

literature

truth.
this
judged
as
by critics

such

and difficult

The poor piece
- as

the work of genius.

of work has

as much right
Literary

and readers

free

judgment

to read the book;
takes

it
sometimes
generations.
censors wi11 "more readily

to be

worth may
is
a dis-

that
by the
appointed".
of enlightenment
above
the
could
as one that
forget
- and let
of what we know:

all,

reception

The invocation
and relaxation

of
of

lit-
stri-

by the publ ic of

be enthroned
us not
let
censorship

among
the
ma~
to do wlth

has nothing whatever

References

Barthes,

R.

1973: Mythologies.

Palidin,

London.

Brink, A.

1979:

Dry White Season.

WH Allen,

London.

Gordimer, N.

1979:

Burgher

IS Daughter.

Jonathan

CapE'.

Le Roux, E.

1976: Magersfontein

0 Magersfontein.

Human & Rousseau,

Cape Town.

Matshoba, M. 1979:

Call Me Not A Man. Ravan,

Johannesburg.

Tlali, M.

1975:

r~uriel

at Metropolitan.

Ravan,

Johannesburg.

FRONTLINE

402 Dunwell.

35 JOrissen

Streel

Braamfontein

P O.Boy

32219

BraamfonTeln

2017 Tel. 39-6831

THE NEW MAGAZINE

FOR ALL THINKING

SOUTH AFRICANS. R6 A YEAR, FOR TEN ISSUES OF

INFORMATIVE,

UVEL Y, THOUGHT-PROVOKING

READING.

33