The Unspeakable in Pursuit

of the Unbeatable:
The Press, UCT and  the

O'Brien  Affair

Eve Bertelsen

Prefatory Note:

"The Chickens of O'Brien"
This paper was written in October  1986 as an  immediate  response to
events at UCT and in the local media, and apart from a brief  reference
to changes  in the political  climate since February  1990, I have  made
no  attempt  to  update  it.  It  is  offered  without  apologies  as  a  period
document  which  captures  some  of  the  atmosphere  of  its  time,  and
proceeds  m  a  way  which  seemed  to  me appropriate  then,  but  would
now  probably  require  elaboration.  "The  O'Brien  Affair"  has  since
tound  its  niche  in  local  folklore,  and  is  periodically  invoked  as  an
object  lesson  whenever  issues  of free  speech,  university  tradition  or
campus  discipline  become  critical.  The  most  recent  example  was  a
disruptive  week-long  strike  by  UCT  campus  workers,  which,
ironically, occurred almost five years later to the day. This was cast in
an  i 
media  Chaos  at  UCT", "Fiery  Barricades  Block  Campus" and  (the
Dean  of Arts  obliging contribution)  "Professor  on Fire!" were closely
followed  «.running headlines by relieved "UCT Backlash" stories. For
a  major  difference  this time was the almost  universal disapproval  by

t he  u^ e r s i ty  administration  and  the

<SLal  m°U ld  by  b°th 

£ 2 r£ 

TfTic  staff of the tactics 

ld  bh

The  O'Brien  incident  was  nonetheless  predictably  recalled  in

^ 

" 

~ 

" 

• 

—

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

(of  whom  more  below)  asked  whether 

editorials  and  leading  articles, and  this  latest  "disgraceful  display of
hooliganism"  equated  with 
that  earlier  episode  in  which  the
University  "sacrificed  a  hallowed  tradition  of  free  speech  to  the
dictates  of  a  mob"  {Cape Times,  11 October  1991).  Professor  David
Welsh 
'Violence,
intimidation  and  mindless  thuggery  of  the  mobs"  might  not  be
"chickens of the Conor Cruise O'Brien episode of 1986 coming home to
roost?" {Cape Times,  7 October  1991). A thoughtful  diagnosis  of the
present impasse remains to be written, but it seems worth noting that,
as  in  the  earlier  case,  both  newspaper  editors  and  academic
commentators  have exhibited  an  uncanny reluctance to contextualise
such events in the historical moment and the political culture at large,
falling  back,  rather,  on  easy  and  timeless  absolutes  of  "civilised"
versus "savage" behaviour.

the 

On 7 October  1986 a  group of students  at  the  University of Cape
Town protested against the presence on campus of a visiting lecturer.
The event was experienced  as  a crisis of unusual  gravity by both the
press  and  the  University  itself.  In the  local  newspapers  it became a
running  story  for  a  full  fortnight.  At  UCT  over  the  same  period  it
monopolised  campus  debate  and  generated  numerous  meetings,
motions,  petitions  and  pamphlets  in  an  atmosphere  of  considerable
acrimony.  There  was  a  high  level  of  interaction  between  the
University and the press. This paper offers  a reading of the event and
this  response  to  it,  conceptualising  the  process  as  a  struggle  in
discourse, a contest to determine the meaning of the event. I read it as
symptomatic  of  both  the  wider  popular  rebellion  of  the  period
1985-86,1  and  more  particularly  as  an  instance  of  hegemonic  crisis
within  South  African  'liberal' culture. My mode of reading  is  drawn
from Marxist cultural studies, and my chief explanatory ideas are the
Gramscian notions of hegemony and crisis of hegemony.

The  university  and  the  press  are  here  identified  as  sites  of
hegemonic struggle,  inter-involved  in a cultural crisis at  a  particular
moment  of  South  African  history.  I  make  no  claim  to  exhaustive
analysis. This is simply offered as one possible intervention.

Hegemony 
f
It seems redundant  to say that  the South African  state at the best ot
times, rules  rather  than  leads. Over the  past  forty years, even in its
ideological  agencies,  the  tendency  has  been  toward  authority  rather
than persuasion. For example, the various social classes/racial groups

,  ,, 

, 

. 

Vol5No4  1991

CRITICAL ARTS

are  subjected  in  their  schools  respectively  (the  names  of  the  three
separate  Departments  of  Education)  to  Education  (whites),  Culture
('coloureds') and Training (blacks). On a national level the  thresholds
of permissible behaviour have been (until February  of 1990, with  the
unbanning of black political movements) coercively fixed  and  policed,
with  political activity of a 'normal' kind being grouped  together  with
criminal  transgression.  This  is  before  we  even  begin  to  address  the
law, prisons or the absence of a universal  franchise.

Within  this  system  of  enforced  obedience  to  the  state  and  its
economic imperatives it may seem out of place to invoke the concept of
hegemony understood as permanently organised consent. However, in
this  situation  no less  than  in any other,  dominant  ideologies  are  not
simply imposed as complete 'things' upon subordinate groups. Because
of  Apartheid's  dual  strategy  of  political  oppression  and  economic
exploitation,  the  task  of  an  active  and  ongoing  reaching  into  and
structuring the daily culture and  experience of people becomes a  task
of critical  importance.  Periods of relative 'normality' depend  here,  as
elsewhere,  on  the  success  or  failure  of ruling  interests  to  neutralise
potential  antagonisms:  to  produce,  via  discourse,  social  knowledge
which  will  mark  the  limits  of  acceptable  thought  and  action;  to
translate  inequalities into terms which will ensure, if not  widespread
consent, then  at  least  a  modicum  of compliance. Thus  powerlessness
and  unequal  distribution  of  material  and  cultural  advantages  are
repetitively  represented  as  natural  or  personal  divisions  between
individuals  or  groups,  and  especially  racial  groups.  During  1985-6
even  this  tenuous  hegemony  was  in crisis. Such  consensual  terms of
reference  as  did  exist  within  the  education  system(s),  the  press  and
the  university  were  challenged  by  the  campaign  of  the  United
Democratic Front (UDF) to "make the country ungovernable".

A crisis of hegemony marks  a profound  rupture  in  the political
and economic life of a society, an accumulation of contradictions.
If in moments of hegemony everything works spontaneously so as
to  sustain  and  enforce a particular  form  of  class  domination
while  rendering  the  basis  of  that  social  authority  invisible
through  the  mechanisms  of  the  production  of  consent,  the
moments  when  the  equilibnum  of  consent  is  disturbed  ...  are
moments  when  the  whole  basis  of  political  leadership  and
cultural authority becomes exposed and contested.
(Hallet al, 1982, p. 217. My emphasis).

1 18 

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

I  am  not  competent  to  take  on a  discussion  of  the  overall
distribution of power  within the South African  social formation and
am aware that  hegemony in the pure Gramscian sense can hardly be
said  to have  ever  existed  within the racial-capitalist  state. My task
here is more modest. I wish to consider the power relations  obtaining
in  that  fraction  of the system  which  is the locus of liberal  English
culture: that  island of liberal ideology of which the University of Cape
Town and the liberal English press form a part. How then, wrthm the
system,  does  minority  liberal  culture  operate?  With  its considerable
stake in the economy it is obliged, in spite of its tenacious commitment
at a high  level of abstraction to First World freedoms  (free  markets,
'individual  freedoms',  'free  elections'),  to  negotiate  a  share  m the
power bloc. At the same time, within the cultural space that is secured
through  such  an  alliance,  this  fragment  produces, 
*™&J™
institutions  it  controls,  an ideology  which  serves to  obscur>  these
interests. In the period in question liberal culture *£  " P J J ™^
serious crisis, which is still in process. One aspect of this crisis may be
seen  in the plethora  of conflicting  scenarios  for reform  wh*h  wi
restore  peace  without  threatening  economic  " ^ " " ^ T h e se  are
invariabry 
Government's  oppression  of the masses  couPl«i
silence regarding their  economic exploitation. ™
the heterogeneity of this ensemble and its internal d
debates has served to validate its claims to the « "^
debates has served to vali
discussion, it is quite clear at present that 
contradictions" threatens to rupture  its limited sphere,
h 
Profound polarisation in the 
unstable  alliance  to  pressures  of a_ra<hcal  kind 
which it can no longer recuperate  E* & * £ £ £! 
wing,  in its protean  guise  over  the.past  decadea 
Progressive  Party, and more  recently,the  Uemoc 
longer sustain the myth  that rt ™?T°Sen%*™^Z 
present  system.  Since the 1989 elecUon this  flmrt on  m
has been taken over by the right-wing, andhrfthe  t me 
written  the DP was negotiating  an «!f  t l°
National Party. Assaults  ^
(economic sanctions, unacceptable dema 
redistribution);  the realignment  of the non-ra  aU
political mobilisation of the ^ff,^ 
and  the strength  of the powerful  black  trade

„  with  the ruling
the Western world
economic
iia; the
ies,

accompanied  by  rhetorical  * ^ ^"  *  Jj

^
%nltJfparty,
^
to 
^
Parliament

^ 

t t ht Gra

^f^^S
f

^

^ S^

^

t^

^

^p

^

^

^

£

;,  had

Vol5No4 1991

During  1985-6 they conducted  a virtual  shuttle service  to consult
with the ANC in Lusaka. There  is considerable  heartsearehing  as  to
how  institutional  procedures  might  be  adapted  so  as  to  redress
'disadvantage' and appear more acceptable within a changing political
climate. What  is noticeably absent  from  this  concern,  though,  is  any
sense  that  inequalities  are  generated  by  the  underlying  economic
relations, and that a minimum prerequisite for any real change would
involve not simply a rearrangement  of perceptions via  'reform',  but  a
major  paradigmatic  shift  - a  complete  and  radical  reassessment  of
their  value 
their
underpinning structures qua institutions. This is the "unthinkable" of
my  title.  For  to  think 
in  this  way  would  require  strenuous
self-criticism,  an 
is
constructed  in all  its  differences,  selections  and  exclusions. To allow
the system, with all its interest and compromise to reappear is for our
fearless seekers after truth, one task too dire to contemplate.

interrogation  of  how  one's  culture 

their  professional  practices  and 

system, 

itself 

CRITICAL ARTS

jointly  worked  to expose and  contest  the moral  and  cultural  bases of
liberal politics.

The Cape Times and the University of C ap  Town appear to share
equally  in  this  crisis.  They  operate  as  institutions  with  a  common
discourse and common economic interests. By and large they  function
to support and service the interests of capital and of a class society. At
the  same  time  they  have  been  engaged  in  an  attempt  to  establish
channels of communication with the ascendant political forces.

Taking  both  journalism  and  university  teaching  as  hegemonic
practices  in  which signs  are  referred  via  codes to 'maps  of meaning*
which have  naturalised  assumptions  inscribed  into them,  I  will  read
the signfication  of the "O'Brien Affair" in the press and on campus  as
an instance of hegemony-in-crisis. I will identify some of the  signifying
procedures  - signs, codes, discourses  - and trace their  complicity with
the  consensual  view.  In  conclusion  I  will  suggest  an  alternative  or
oppositional reading of the event.

Event into story
Firstly, in order to be communicated, the 'raw event' must pass under
the  sign  of  discourse,  be  given  narrative  form,  become  a  story.  The
formal  sub-rules  of journalism  will produce  the  event  as  a  message,
giving  it  its  necessary  'form  of  appearance'.3  From  the  numberless
events of 7 October  1986 this event  is selected as  newsworthy by the
application  of  'newsvalues'  interacting  with  local  agendas  and

1 20 

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

concerns.4 Here I will tabulate for brevity.

O  The  protest  took  place  in  a  single  evening,  fitting 

the
production  schedules of the  local papers. Subsequent  activities
fulfilled  this criterion as well.

O  By  local  (white)  standards  the  event  qualified  as  sufficiently
follow-up

dramatic 
reportage as a 'running story' over the period of a fortnight.

treatment  and  to  justify 

to  warrant 

O  In news terms it presented a clear profile: an insult to a foreign
visitor of status and violation of a sacred space. As we shall see,
any  ambiguities  were  further  reduced  and  anchored  by  its
narrative construction.

O  It  was  an  event  associated  with  central, official  culture  and  a
perceived  threat  to  it.  Proximity  is  also  relevant  here:  it
impinges  on  the  'home' culture  both  in  national  terms  (black
versus white) and local (liberal) traditions.

O  The desire  for  the event by the media  is of particular  interest.
As  the  story  unfolds  it  becomes  apparent  that  such  an  event
has  been  anticipated,  even  prophesied,  for  some  time both  by
UCT and the press, drawing in associated issues: maintenance
of  standards  in  the  face  of  the  increasing  black  enrollment;
differing cultural norms; the cultural boycott etc.

O  The  unpredictability  or rarity  of the event  figures.  While  this
may  seem  to  contradict  (4)  and  (5)  above,  it  is  withm  the
meaningful  and  the  consonant  that  the  unexpected  is  to  be
found:  the  'newness'  of  the  (largely  black)  student  protest  is
produced within the frames and norms of local culture.

O  The story has continuity. Once having passed the threshold (2),

it continues in various forms as is thus covered for some time.

O  In  terms  of  the  structured  balance  of  he  papers 

their
'news-slots', this is a 'hard news' event, mvo ving™l e™J  *<£
a precise event deemed to be 'factual'. In local condihons, dug^to
stringent  Emergency  restrictions  on the  press  ^ ™es  of 
type have been hard to come by. It thua serves to flesh outthe
ra'ge  of stories  in both papers, as well as satisfying  a  certem
local 'news-hunger'.  (That  morning's  Tunes head line; had  read
"Sanctions  Details  in Five Days" - a strong rival  to  Dog Bltes

t h*

O  T h T e t nt  involves,  by  local  standards,  an  'elite;
institution.  Boycott-buster  O'Brien  is "an  ™*«™j»
and diplomat of status", and the University, which

Vol5No4  1991

CRITICAL ARTS

as  "the Oxford  of Africa",  has  considerable  local standing  with
the English press and populace. "O'Brien" and "UCT" dominate
the headlines.

O  The event  is  represented  as  the  action  of individuals  (up  to  a
point - see below). The students are seen as an ad hoc grouping
of anarchic  individuals, and  O'Brien  as  a  free  agent,  untied  to
any political strategy.

O  Bad  news 

is  good  news.  As  an  event  unexpected  (6),
unambiguous  (3),  that  happened  quickly  (1),  consonant  with
general  expectations  as  to  the  state  of  the  country  (5),  and
passing the threshold  of the dramatic  (2), the  negativity  of the
protest  is  high.  I  have  tried  to  stress  the  way  in  which  this
selective  paradigm  of 'newsvalues' inherited  from  the  Western
media  articulates  in  complicity  here  with  local  discourses  of
consent,  their  own  peculiar  certainties,  differences  and  fears.
The  entire  procedure  of  encoding  is  premised  on  structured
deviations  from  a  set  of  local  norms:  at  their  most  reductive,
what is white, European, bourgeois and conventional - in short -
'civilised  behaviour'.  In  scrutinising  the  construction  of  the
story, I shall concentrate on the two initial reports in The Cape
Times, which offer  a  model for  the routine  procedures  adopted
in virtually  every  report  on  the  issue.  My texts  are  the  front
pages of this paper of 8 and 9 October 1986.

Day!
The  front  page  of  8  October  gives  the  story  a  major  headline.  The
i^™* 

1S S h g h t ly  o ut  h e re  • t he  Page had been  laid out before  the
A  I10"7  C a me  m'  B ut  ifc g 6 tS  e q U al  t r e a t m e nt  with a  mine  disaster

and  the  threat  of reprisals  against  Mozambique.  (The  next  day  it  is
the lead story. The picture is on page 3, but will also move to the  front,
in colour.)

Sff  Ml g n i f i C a t On  aChi6Ved  in  which  a  u n i t a i?  ™eaninS  is

Narration: The narration  is routine. The story  is structured  around
four  narrative  moments', in the process of which the event is  framed,
focussed, realised  and  closed/  In  the  process the  material  is  worked
cons? 
constructed for the event and any ambiguity contained or suppressed.
f r a mi  O?f  > (fJ^  &hsenCe  °f a  Photo>  suPPlies  *e  primary
the  bTfic 
the  basic oppositions  established.  O'Brien  is a  'known',  as  is UCT. A

disrUpted  The  e l e m e»te  •» ™™*  a nd

t

f  UCT ^ 

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

famous  speaker  has  been  silenced 
for
speaking-freedom.  On reading  the  whole story,  we find  that  little  is
added  to  this  initial  assertion.  The  framing  throughout  repeatedly
identifies  these  referents:  the speaker,  the  University and  those who
refuse or violate speech.

in  a  site 

respected 

The  moment  of  focusing  tells  us  what  the  event  is  'about'.  It  is
about freedom  of speech, bad manners and contempt for freedom. The
overall disposition  of the  narrative  makes this clear  in its use of key
words:  "broke  through",  "disrupted",  "demanded",  "shouted  down",
"intolerance", "contempt", "disrepute" etc. versus "lecture", "meeting^
"decided", 
communication",
"principles", "academic freedom", "the good name of UCT".

"communication", 

"intellectual 

The topic is made  "real" by accessing the voices of witnesses who
offer an interpretation of the event or provide "actuality" in the form of
a  graphic  account.  While  the  reporter 
is  constrained  by  the
professional  code to give an "objective", if compelling, account, s/he  is
free  to  choose  those  who  will offer  comment.  In  this  case there  is  a
complete  equivalence  between  the  two. (In cases  where  oppositional
views  are  admitted,  the  hegemonic  narrative,  anyway,  recuperates
such views.) In this instance we are offered glosses by:

O  O'Brien  himself:  he  is  given  10  of  the  total  55  lines,  and  is
accorded  direct  speech.  He  tells  us  "what  universities  are
about"; defends  "intellectual communication", and recommends
that  the  University "make a BtancT since "there is no place for
such people on a university campus";

O  The  Moderate 

O  the SRC president: she is vouchsafed  5 lines of indirect speech
in  which  she  supports  the  Principal's  decision  to  permit  the
protest; 

. 
(conservative
pro-government),  by contrast  gets  13 lines  and  makes  a  full
statement  regarding  "the  intolerance  of  left-wing  students
(sic),  "disregard",  "contempt",  "disrepute",  and  (surprise)
"academic freedom" and "freedom of speech".

Students  Movement 

,.

It would be tedious to pursue further  the cohesiveness of this account
At every level of the narrative the foregone concluswns of  theframm
headline  are systematically  reinforced.  So that  what; purporto to be a
piece of "hard  news" turns  out  on closer inspection to be 
^even
before  it begins. However, let us dignify the story by summariau«  s
strategies:  a  multivocal  event  has  been  producedI  as  a  heav^y
redundant  univocal  item  by  the  constraints  of  h e ^ u ^ w r a t r ve

Vol5No4  1991

C O n s t r u c t ed  in  differences,  it is instructive to

TT  ?'w h at has been altogether excluded

to 

r l ng  o m i s s i°n  ™ the  absence  of  the
t he  dispute, namely the protesting
aPParently  ^e  name of the game in fief

of  t r, 

JTT

that

F 
1S
u

group  does  not  have a point of

••Cape  Times,  Wednesday.  October 8  1986  3

below

right)

npped 

in 

^^ 

^^

C°n°r

Ptctura:  Guy  Tmim

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

The  picture  is  unduly  ambivalent  for  a  newsphoto,  which  would
normally  be  constructed  so  as  unequivocally  to  convey  its  message
(angle  of shot,  visual  codes  anchored  in  much  the  same  way  as  the
report).  In  this  case  we  see  several  adult,  white,  uniformed  men
restraining  what  appears  to  be  (left  background)  a  couple  a  fairly
innocuous  black students.  But  all  is not  lost  (for the  message or our
hypothesis), for we are supplied with a hefty caption which fixes all of
these unstable elements and urges us to a preferred  reading: "a UCT
security  guard  his  shirt  ripped  open  in  tussles  with  students  ...
struggles  in  vain  to  stop  them  invading  a  lecture  ...  O'Brien  (seen
below right)... etc."

in 

this 

event. 

routines 

Ideological 

Day 2
By the time The Cape Times of 9 October appears the shit has hit the
fan.  And  this  is  where  our  task  becomes  more  interesting.  For  it
becomes apparent  that  the  Cape Town press are  not going to rely on
their  normal 
closure
notwithstanding,  the editors themselves are going to intervene, firing
volley after  volley of didactic prose at their readers. The headlines do
not  let  up,  but  these  are  now  reinforced  by  explicit  position
statements, as the papers' regular contributors (local figures whom we
have been assured speak from positions of scholarship and objectivity)
are rapidly promoted from the ranks and move into full exposure with
polemics on the centre page spread. I stress the word exposure, for the
way I read this development is not so much a reaction to the crisis  out
there',  but  an  index  of  another  crisis,  a  crisis  of  confidence  and
leadership  in  the  liberal  hegemony  itself. As Stuart  Hall phrases  it:
the  contradictions  of  the  South  African  liberal  position  are  here
precipitated. And so the press shifts  from a mere translation of reality
into its own terms, into a more coercive mode. The continuum may be
briefly  summarised  as  follows.  For the press: from  a most subliminal
rearranging  of  perceptions  to  implicit  position-taking  to  didactic
editorialising. FoTthe University: from reading/teaching to examinng
to rebuking to punishing (rustication). In either case, crisis allows the
system itself to reappear.

In the  Times of 9 October and  over the succeeding two
are treated  to saturation coverage, not only of the precir ~
j
itself,  but  also  dis 
itself,  but  also  dissections  of  the  Academic  Boycott;
Boycott; the Anti-Apartheid Movement; 
i^™f™V*^VZ
students and academics; AZASO; NUSAS; the SRC the UDF and the

Vol5No4  1991

• 

• 

" 

" 

" 

125

CRITICAL ARTS

ANC - it is open season on the acronyms, which are all  characterised
as  inimical  to  civilised  society,  academic  freedom  and  freedom  of
speech. What  is happening  is  a  symbolic  transaction.  Pervasive  and
generalised  fears  about  black  'unrest',  the  increasing  numbers  of
blacks  at  UCT,  threats  to  'civilised  standards'  etc.,  which  cannot,
within  liberal  discourse,  be  signified  and  confronted  head-on  as  a
racial problem, are all focussed on one symbolic incident, economically
affording  a  relief  of  tension.  How  else  does  one  explain  the  gross
over-reaction to a fairly run-of-the-mill campus event?

But back to the Times of 9 October. A major  headline extends  the
issue: "Boycott Row: O'Brien vows to stay at UCT". The hidden line-up
emerges.  O'Brien  is  not,  as  signified  heretofore,  simply  a  man  of
letters, a diplomat and a disinterested  scholar. Rather, he is someone
who has  expressly come to  South Africa  as  an  act  of defiance. In  his
own words  "I deliberately  broke  the  alleged boycott"  (my  emphasis).
The language gains momentum: a "boycott", a "vow", he "throws down
the  gauntlet",  he  "challenges" the  protesters  to  keep  him  way  from
UCT.  (On  the  state  media,  both  radio  and  TV  he  has  already  told
interviewers  in  strong  terms  what  he  thinks  of  the  Anti-Apartheid
Movement: in Ireland it is dominated by Sinn Fein, who are a front  for
terrorists;  he  has  debunked  "so-called"  Peoples'  Education;  he  has
identified "radical" forces within education as "sinister" etc.).

On this particular front  page a colour photo of O'Brien  is centered
in  the  lead  story  and  linked  to  a  large  flanking  colour  photo  of  the
event of the previous night. This time the picture has been taken  from
behind the student  lines and from  a high angle. It presents a melee of
heads, clenched  fists  and  tangled  arms. The caption summarises  the
event.  Within  the  collage  of  the  page  O'Brien  (white,  adult,
reasonable)  gazes  down  disparagingly  on  the  fracas  (youthful,  black
and  angry). The primary  visual anchorage  is strong. Two journalists
have spent  the day on campus, and to their credit, they do access the
voice  of  one  student  protester  (unnamed)  as  well  as  using  a  full
statement  from  the  SRC  president.  But  the  professional  narrative
holds  these voices in check. There  has been  a  second "storming" of a
lecture by "wave after  wave" of protesters "fist-fights",  "battle", 'Tray",
an "occupation" of the Political Studies Department  (hosts to  O'Brien)
etc.  The  protesters  (black  and  radical)  call  for  the  removal  of  a
"provocative reactionary"; the  SRC (white and  radical)  contextualises
the  matter  and  calls  for  a  moratorium;  the  Principal  promises  an
enquiry and  possible action; O'Brien says he will certainly  return.  In

126 

" 

^  ~ 

' 

" 

~ 

~~
Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

this case oppositional material is recuperated  by the overall  framing.
O'Brien as VIP is given both first and last word on the subject, and is
permitted to close its meaning.

The Running Story 
+•„„<>
Over  a period  of two  weeks  the story  is kept  alive by reporting of
related  events:  UCT  Council  and Senate  meetings  and resolutions;
petitions by staff  (the 'Gang of 81' radical  lecturers  otherwise  known
as  'intellectual  terrorists');  petitions  and meetings  of every  student
society etc. 

. . 

,, 

.  ±.=

The  SRC and  Ad Hoc Boycott  Committee  organising  theprotests
are offered  space in the Times to state their case (IS and 14 October ,
but  both  times  this  is derisively  contradicted  m a flanking  editor^
O'Brien  and  Welsh  (Professor of Politics and  his  host) are  q-otodad
lib in editorials  and  contribute  numerous  leader page article^ Wefeh
threatens to resign: "unless the University takes steps to'  P ™ « *^
kind of action,  tSey  should  close down or cease  calling
university".  And so on.  Until  18 October  the paper  ^
Heard returns from  abroad and changes *« 
to™\|?^
calm, admits to privilege, suggests that we deal wt 
^
even ventures  that  the whole affair  may turn out to be  a
T a Se  with Heard that there is a blessing; ta
here,  but probably  for different  reasons.  One of
reveals  to'the  media  critic  is the 
alliance  at  this  time,  especial y the
experiencing  as  it  begins  to  lose  to
long-vaunted role as ^ 
The  sheer  vehemence  and bulk  of editorialising 
event  signals  also  a  crisis  in hegemonic  practice  within  the  Pr
itself. 

?  ™rf ^ J ^p

his  particular

things

7t

J^

r

.,  heading  "Intellectual
of  v i e w:

For  example,  on 10 October,  under  * * j £™

Terrorists" the  leader  turns on all who do not
the students are equated  T * £ £ £ ^ X£
like "intellectual  terrorism ,  'brainwashing  a
which  must  be eradicated" are the key  On the other 
midst of this extraordinary battery of ^ l e r a n ce  it offers  t
tradition ... its concern for human values ... its broad toiera
points of view (sic) ... the real middle ground .

^

Vol5No4  1991

CRITICAL  ARTS

6  Caps  Timos,  Thursday,  October  9  198

Cape Times
Intellectual
terrorism

npHE  violent disruption by a group of students
1  of  Dr  Conor  Quite  O'Brien's  lecturing
programme  at  the  University  of  Cape  Town
raises the question whether such students belong
«  t  univeniry  at all.

If they are opposed to the free exchange of
ideas which is the essence of a university, should
they not go elsewhere to pursue their "studies"?
In  some  rather  more  congenial  brain-washing
institution,  perhaps,  dedicated  to  the
advancement  of  totalitarian  ideology?

II this suggestion seems somewhat crass, it is
open  to  the  students  concerned  to  explain
precisely why they wish to stop their can to the
words of  a man whose  distinction of character,
background  and  experience  equip  him  so
admirably to offer South Africans some insights
into  areas  of  intractable  ethnic  conflict,  as  in
Ireland,  Israel  and  the  then Congo-

All  reasonable  people,  who  maintain  the
scholarly  -practice  of  open-minded
communication-,  will  concede  the  students  the
right to state their case and to be heard. They are
endeavouring  to  give  effect  to  an  academic
boycott, it appears, which has been initiated by
the  anti-apartheid  movement  abroad.  It  is  not
only Dr O'Brien's presence which offends them,
it seems. They are against any boycott-breaking
visits  by any academics  from  abroad,  whoever
•they  may be.

The students concerned, we do not doubt,
are for the most pan articulate young people of
some  intellectual  grasp who uphold the highest
ideals.  Presumably  they  have  thought  through
the  purpose  and consequences  of  their  actions
and so are abie to offer an explanation of their
disgraceful  and  unachotariy  behaviour.

Unless  this  explanation 

is  quickly
forthcoming  and proves  to  be  compatible  with
the essential values and ideals of a university, it
will  be concluded  that the students who  favour
the  academic  boycott  are  essentially  anti-
univereity in their philosophy. And the university
will  need  to protect  itself  and  its values  by the
application of appropriate disciplinary measures.
Our  contributor,  Robin  HaUett,  recently
noted on this page the view that any progress so
far  has  been  due  to  the  scholars and  scientists
rather than the politicians and generals. Indeed,
it  is hard to imagine  how  any advance  at ail is
possible in human- affairs in the absence of a free
flow of  ideas.  As  Hallett  noted,  scholarship  is
concerned with exploring the complex reality of
the world. Only the free mind can conduct such
explorations  —  not  the  mind  that is censored,
bullied  or intimidated.  Intellectual freedom is a
moral neccfstty. To a university, it is the breath
of  life.

And  its  defence,  surely,  requires  a
preparedness to fight ail those who seek to erode
it.  Should the University of Cape Town be held
to ransom by a small group of bigoted zealots?
Or  have  the  students  been  grievously
misunderstood?

•  Let UCT near what they have to say —
and  then  act  accordingly  in  the  interests  of
freedom.

128

UCT's  Response
The  University's  response  to  the  event
presents  a  profile  almost  identical  to
that  of  the  local  press:  the  bulk  of  its
members  demanded  that  the  offenders
be rusticated, with a minority adopting a
more mollifying stance. There is no space
here  to  discuss  the  meetings,  motions
and  ephemeral  literature  generated  by
the  event.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  the
language  and standards  applied  at  UCT
were identical to those used in the press.
I  shall  conclude with  a  brief  alternative
interpretation of the event.

the 

to  read 

terms  as 

I  have  preferred 

When  an  apparently  minor  event
elicits  an  over-reaction  of 
type
described  above  it  soon  becomes  clear
that one is witnessing what is sometimes
described  as  a  'moral  panic', a  situation
that 
in
Gramscian 
"a  crisis  of
hegemony".  I  am  not  about  to  suggest
that  one  can  identify  a  single 
'true'
meaning  for  an  event  which  is  clearly
multivocal  and  susceptible  of a  number
of  explanations  and  as  many  narrative
representations.  I  shall  simply  try  to
contextualise the "O'Brien Affair"  within
it 
the  current  cultural  crisis  as 
is
experienced  by  South  Africa's 
liberal
universities.

Until very  recently  UCT, along  with
the 
other  English-speaking  South
African  universities,  was  successful  in
establishing  and  maintaining  its  moral
leadership 
the  classic  hegemonic
manner.  An  educational  institution  is
ideally placed to influence perceptions, to
translate  potential  antagonisms  and  to
incorporate threats into forms acceptable

in 

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

to  the  dominant  culture.  This  is the  function  of liberal  education  in
South Africa,  given that its paradigms, codes and approved discourses
are all, as  we are  repeatedly  reminded,  European.  Members of UCT
were, until the mid-1980s, always drawn from  the dominant group or
the petit bourgeoisie, people who either fully  shared  its discourses  in
the  first  place, or  whose  interests  were readily  realigned.  Thus  UCT
has always been able to depend on its ability to lead rather than rule.
This  renders  rather  tautologous  the  central  idea  of  the  'liberal'
institution:  it  is  free  to  such  members  as  will  accept  incorporation,
since all of its structures  and intellectual practices from top to bottom
are distinctly  class and  culture-bound.  Credos of academic excellence
and the pursuit  of truth  and the assumption that all are equal  before
the examination  ensure  the maintenance  of order in the  lecture  hall,
and the traditional hierarchies of cultural authority are secured. What
has  occurred  during  the  1980s  with  the  opening  of  the  'white'
universities to blacks (who now number some 30<7r of UCT's intake), is
that  contradictions  have  accumulated  in  spite  of  these  refined
mechanisms  for the production of consent  (book knowledge; approved
modes  of  argument;  course  content;  examinations).  These  new
students  are  mostly  first  generation  literate,  from  working  class
homes.  In  addition  to  this  class  position,  their  political  orientation,
influenced  by  the  radicalism  of  grass-roots  black  movements 
is
nationalist  and  socialist.  This  opposition  of  interests  has  coated  a
symbolic  crisis  in  the  universities,  an  impasse  which  is  difficult  to
describe  in  liberal  terms.  Lacking  the  conceptual  framework  with
which  to  make  sense  of contradictions  arising from  the  antagonistic
interests  of classes, UCT translates the tensions  into the  terms> of its
own  discourse  - into  divisions between persons, albeit  a  collect™.of
persons  who  are  seen  to  be  severely  'disadvantaged.  In  all  th^  the
University persistently ignores the possibility that these students may
be consciously resisting the process of incorporation as such, that they
may  perceive  the  world  in  a  globally  different  way  and  t h a t h e*
interests  may  not  easily  be  aligned  with  the  'neutral  values  of  the

university as institution. 

.  «, nfutuarai
This response is remarkably similar to that in other sites of liberal
control.  On  the  one  hand  there  is  a  marked  ^eppmg  u?  of  pubhc

m3S£=

Vol5No4  1991

CRITICAL ARTS

and special University Assemblies convened at which the liberal litany
is ritually chanted by the participants. All of which appear to impress
the  new intake of students  not a jot.  They seem obstinately  resistant
to having their perceptions rearranged.  How to account for  this? It  is
clear  from  black  student  discourse  that  to  these  South  Africans  the
apparatuses  of  the  South  African  state  are  by  no  means  'taken  for
granted', shared or transparent, a case of simply 'the way things  are'
As they make their daily trip from  township to campus, they not only
perceive  but  physically  experience  their  society  as  unequal  and
exploitative.  Their experience  of Bantu  Education  has  left  them  with
lew illusions about strategies of neutralisation  and  incorporation  and
the ways m which education services the economic system. Insulted by
both  economic  and  political  structures,  they  finally  manage  to  cross
the difficult  threshold  to UCT only to find themselves  up  against  yet
another discourse of incorporation, and they must sink or swim.

Which  brings  us  back  to  O'Brien.  Given  this  immediate  context
(never  nund  the  volatile  situation  in  the  country  at  large), a  visitor
arrives  at  UCT. He  not  only  breaks  a  boycott  mounted  by  (banned)
organisations respected by this group, he does so militantly,  throwing
down  the  gauntlet  on  the  day  of  his  arrival.  In  the  name  of  'free
speech  he uses platforms  such as the suspect state media to denigrate
the  peoples  organisations  and  their  allies  abroad.  In  the  press  he  is
given column  inches  ad  lib  to pursue  his  cause.  (Many  black  papers
had  been  banned  at  this  time,  as  were  all  of  the  major  pohtTcal
c i r c u m s t a n«*  "  would not be too difficult  to
const 
ScTtfr  *hl" d 6 g r ee  °f  cal^lated  insensitivity as deliberate political
^  h°W h iS P6**™*"* was read by the
student 

^  ^ 

a ny 

TS\ 

' 

n 

t h is  ***** t h at  b e c a u s*  ^e  black
T w T*  ""  i n t e r e s tS  °f a  m aJor constituency in the
coultrv  at  1 
have tried t lT  t 
t hT Ji eW  s h o u Id  b* P-ferred  to  O'Brien's.  I
^ a^und this event as a cultural transaction, and to
To m lt 
^
S To  m lt 
i ^ rP l ti 
ZSZl 
Piece of potitieaL
S liberal  culture
that  the  press

f ^

U  WOUld

^^ 

t he

to cfan^he  ru?es .

S 

"  To  *> **  we will probably have

m o re  t h an  e v er  to  be

Vol5No4  1991

Eve Bertelsen

Cape Times

•feWMMBtoMTt

|Ned Geref  Sendingkerk crisis averted

Boycott  row:
O'Brien vows
to stay at UCT

violence?

KtfANHUMIM  -  TU  t*

"KT£.T:i£TE £J5a*Xm— ». *

Those  who  made  the  most  of  '86

Vol5No4  1991

131

CRITICAL ARTS

Notes and  References
1.  Martin  Hall, "Resistance and Rebellion in  Greater Cape Town, 1985-6",
and Colin Bundy, "Street Sociology and Pavement Politics: Aspects of the
1985 Education  Crisis  in  the  Western  Cape",  both  Centre  for  African
Studies, University of Cape Town, 1986.

2.  My use of Gramscian terms is influenced by Stuart Hall in Stuart Hall et

3. 

4. 

5. 

al. (eds.), Policing the Crisis, Macmillan, London, 1978.
Stuart  Hall, "Encoding/Decoding",  in  Stuart  Hall  et  al  (eds.), Culture,
Media, Language, Hutchinson, London, 1978.
Johan  Galtung  and  Mari  Ruge,  "Structuring  and  Selecting  News",  in
Stanley  Cohen  and  Jock  Young  (eds.),  The  Manufacture  of  News,
Constable, London, 1973.
John  Hartley,  Understanding  News,  Methuen,  London,  1982,  pp.
118-9.

6.  A  recent  article  which  explores  the  philosophical  and  contextual
dimensions  of  the  concept  of  "freedom  of  speech"  as  deployed  in  the
O'Brien  affair  is:  John  Higgins,  "The  Warrior  Scholar  Versus  The
Children  of  Mao:  Conor Cruise  O'Brien  in  South  Africa",  in  Bruce
Robbins  (ed.),  Intellectuals:  Aesthetics,  Politics  and  Academics,
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1990.

132

Vol5No4  1991