Michael Coetzee - an activist who was 'the best of the best'

Michael Coetzee’s passing away brings with it a profound sense of loss but also a reminder of the organising style of this gentle but highly effective activist. Coetzee has since 2002 served Parliament, first as deputy secretary but more recently as secretary. But, for me, what stands out most is his striking contribution during the heady eighties and his powerful expression of leadership in those times.
 
In the eighties, when the struggle was at its boldest and most wide-ranging, people like Coetzee were the salt of the struggle and the vital middle layer that made the struggle so resilient, rooted and effective. They did so by providing information to communities and making links between the local level and larger processes. They built support for non-racialism not just through strident rhetoric but on the basis of community organisation. They helped build the appeal and popularity of leaders of the mass democratic movement; because communities knew and trusted such activists, community members were willing to accept these leaders whom they did not know but had been rapidly elevated to national leadership roles. In short (in a country riven by divisions and unevenness and for communities caught between the past and future) such activists helped to stitch together the struggle.
 
Michael (or Mikey as he was known to friends) was at one level easy-going and humorous. But he could switch in minutes and engage reflectively on serious matters. He had an astute analytical sense. He could effortlessly link local popular struggles occurring in the eighties to events like June 16, to the vision of ANC’s founders, to the "pillars" of the liberation struggle, to anti-colonial struggles and to global systems of oppression and exploitation.
 
Activists like Michael knew (almost instinctively) how to build a movement. At a certain point, they were too young to be formal leaders; or they generally did not see themselves in figurehead roles. But they were leaders in so many other ways; they were the walking evidence of a leader-filled movement. They could be sent anywhere with very little apart from a contact name and, relying on their initiative, they would make their way and begin organising. In so many ways, Michael was the best of the best. For him, the overriding and yet simple and obvious goal was to advance the movement for freedom He was a prime example of activists who are driven by a clear mission, who are skilled social change practitioners, who rise above hidden agendas and who maintain a selfless commitment to the end.
 
Speaking to others (who knew him) after his passing away on 13 June 2014, it is clear that Michael is remembered with respect and veneration. I recall my own moments of engagement with him over the years. In discussion, he always provided insight, wisdom and a clear exposition about possible ways to go forward. But the start and the end of meeting would always be ‘real’ at a human level; moments in which to find a shared sense of belonging. In this regard, Michael always exuded warmth and a genuine welcome. A reminder that, despite painful realities and many aspects to the contrary, the struggle was also a place of friendships and profound human connection. 
 
Michael leaves behind his wife Bridgette, his son Matthew and his mother Bertha and siblings Alexandra and Reggie. And he also leaves a compelling legacy of selflessness and activism as well as pockets of comrades/colleagues/friends who honour him for the life he led.

Frank Meintjies

New Ministry of Women should use astute strategies to drive fundamental shifts

The launch of the Ministry of Women in South Africa may be a welcome change – a streamlined ministry may be just the right thing for a country groaning under the weight of sexism and gender violence.

But to get the Ministry working as a high performance unit will first require that we – both the public and those who will work in it – get over prejudices and inferiority complexes about a gender ministry.

 
A Ministry of Women is regarded as one of the most marginal ministries, vying for bottom spot with Arts and Culture. Why should this be so? True, these Ministries are not the ones who influence economic policy or command huge budgets. But the gender ministry, insofar as it seeks to reverse the oppression of women and girls, addresses the needs of more than half the population. And Arts and Culture – amid the trauma, dehumanisation and alienation that haunts our dreams – has the potential to help us find the soul within us.

Minister of Women in the Presidency Susan Shabangu could do a lot worse than adopt the Kader Asmal approach. The late minister took the Ministry of Water Affairs, then seen as marginal, and made it a star department. He simply tackled his job with vigour; concentrated on outcomes and ensured his top officials built a department with capacity for focused delivery. The Ministry regularly received an A in end-of-year newspaper assessments.

 
The minister of this new portfolio has immense opportunity to make a difference on critical issues. I propose several strategies.
 
The new ministry should approach gender as a crosscutting issue. In this regard, it does not require a huge staff complement and a budget running into billions. It can use the crowbar effect – using innovative strategies and minimal resource to bring about great shifts. It can work with other Departments to help them use their much larger budgets in a manner that advances gender equality and better addresses the needs of women and girls.
 
The ministry can, for example, intervene by using gender planning, a method pioneered by Caroline Moser. It can require that all government departments submit all major plans to this Ministry for assessment from a gender perspective.

Using a gender lens to evaluate a plan means assessing whether the plan, when referring to stakeholders or beneficiaries, clearly spells out whether women or men will have most of the action. It calls for terms like community, entrepreneurs, beneficiaries and the poor to be broken down to clarify what percentage of men and women are included in these target groups. Once such information is known the principals in each department – the Ministers, Directors-general and others – can better assess whether such plans comply with our constitution and truly advance equality or improve the position of women in society.

 
Gender planning does not try to dictate to other line departments. It offers itself as a resource. The idea is to work more intensively with willing departments, while keeping an open line of communication with others.  Working in this way gains traction through the success stories and role models that show how proper accounting can change the position of women, propelling them into the forefront of socio economic development.

Apart from assessment of plans, the Department of Women can initiate studies into selective areas of public life. For example, it can:

§  assess the work of the prosecuting authority in relation to gender violence cases, examining aspects such as success rates and relevant capacity.

§  commission studies into the media and how women are portrayed, paving the way for constructive recommendations.

§  probe the situation in, for example, the mining sector and examine whether there are specific impacts on women and girls and call for gender-aware social changes.

§  launch a review of the current position and ongoing grievances of women who testified at the Truth Commission and who maintain that government has reneged on commitments made to them. 

 
It can also hold public hearings on specific gender issues, for example the rise in violence against women and girls, raising awareness and seeking solutions from interested and affected persons. Such studies and hearings can be undertaken in partnership with the Gender Commission.

Decisive and strategically effective gender work that empowers women can be undertaken with a lean staff complement. Capacity can be sourced in, as government often does with legal teams and auditing firms. In this regard, the Gender Ministry can complement its own staffing capacity by using gender specialists based at universities or in other parts of civil society.
 
Doing gender work in government will have setbacks – and in this case may or may not receive backing from the big men in the Presidency who may be uninterested or otherwise occupied. But it is not impossible. A great advantage is that most departments claim to properly address the needs of women and girls and to reverse marginalisation. The problem is that the reality of non achievement is often masked behind planning systems that don’t allow them to face up to what is and what is not achieved. A good place to start, therefore, is to offer to help a few line departments do gender work more effectively and with demonstrable impact.

Frank Meintjies
This article appeared in The New Age on 6 June 2014.

The elections show an unabating demand for change

The 2014 national and provincial elections can reasonably be dubbed an election for change.
Over ten million people came out and voted for the ANC precisely because it argued that it would do better and “redouble” its efforts to ensure a better life for citizens. A smaller but important number voted for the EFF, the newcomer encroaching on the ANC’s turf and which is making waves with its agitational style and radical ideas for South Africa. The DA also did well and showed a gain in black voters – and that is because it has made internal changes and has done more to acknowledge the need for redress.

So although huge numbers voted to return the ANC to power, these people are not voting for continuation of the status quo. Undoubtedly, the mass of voters want more done to overcome poverty and inequality. They believe the ANC when it promises ‘change from within’, so to speak. They want it to lead the change and trust it to take the country to higher levels of achievement.

Going forward – and in addressing the need for sustained change – the ANC should focus on three things. The first is service delivery. Although there has been life-changing delivery to millions of people in the last twenty years, developmental problems are huge and grow if they are not addressed. About 20 million live in poverty and 10 million of those are ultra poor. There are huge flashes of impatience in informal settlements, on the edges of townships, in rural areas and in decaying urban cores.

Sometimes the burning issue is water, at other times it is housing, sanitation, space for informal business, a cry for better hospitals and concern with the costs of higher education. On some of these issues, such as hospitals, the ANC has a good policy and a plan; the expectation from the masses is that the ANC move faster on such issues. In other cases government machinery, for example dysfunctional local government systems, poses a huge obstacle.

The second issue is the matter of clean government. People from all walks of life, whisper or complain about the waste, misuse and plundering of government funds. It is not only people in suburbs. Key leaders within the ANC have also raised the alarm, calling for stronger measures to stem what they see as a rising tide of corrupt practices.

The third critical issue relates to job creation and the economy. Much of what government can do about job creation will follow form effective governance. If government uses its resources well and delivers through a capable state, more investors will be attracted to South Africa and jobs will be created. In addition, the ANC has a few interesting initiatives including the planned campaign to encourage local buying and more focused government support for small business. The ANC can also take ideas and proposals from opposition parties.

Regarding economic transformation, the ANC itself has set big targets around this. At Polokwane and Mangaung, there was talk of “the second phase of the transition” – the need to ensure greater participation of black people in the economy. At one level, the drive is to ensure that more black people should operate at higher levels in the economy. They should have significant influence, for example at shareholder level, senior management level and in major new government–business initiatives linked to industrialisation. At another level, economic freedom means that significantly more black people must begin to benefit from jobs with good wages as well as from employee share ownership schemes. A critical issue here is the need for government to meet and negotiate with big business, captains of industry and other power holders in the economy. Business must share in a vision, a clear plan and some concrete commitments regarding economic transformation. Millions of South Africans would like to see government use the carrot and stick more effectively to change the structures of the economy.

The voting process has the strongest connection with Parliament. Anyone who is keen on following up on the elections (of tracking the work of their representatives) should keep their eye on this body which is charged with making laws and ensuring the executive implements them. Our Parliament(s) should become more vibrant with the entry of EFF and a fresh crop of representatives from ANC, DA and other parties. A major priority for the ANC must be to get a better – more balanced – relationship between Parliament and the executive. Parliament should not just be a conveyer belt for executive thinking and explanations. ANC comrades in parliament should, on behalf of us all, ask their comrades in the executives all the pertinent and tough questions they need to ask about programmes, budgets, setbacks as well as performance against planned results.  

It would be great if this election leads to a renewal of parliament – if this body led the drive for greater accountability.

In recent times, parliament has been upstaged by the courts (in handling of the textbook saga, for example) and the Public Protector. But Parliament can claw back its place as the leading body as far as protecting the interests of all South Africans are concerned. There are enough people within the ANC who are bold, who care and who have strong values to ensure a system of greater accountability. The electorate certainly believes so.

Frank Meintjies

This piece was first published in The New Age on 16 May 2013 under the headline: "ANC must start delivering".

Support Mathunjwa as he battles anti-strike propaganda and bias

It is time to rally in support of Joseph Mathunjwa, head of the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Workers Union (Amcu). He is no angel – such beings are very hard to find in our vexed, messy and conflict-ridden set-up. But Mathunjwa is leading a strike for a legitimate cause. It is actions such as the Amcu strike on the platinum belt that seek to fundamentally change the cheap the labour system that so much of capitalism in South Africa is so hooked on.

The union started off by demanding a monthly basic wage of R12500. The union has – contrary to propaganda – not stuck rigidly to this demand. It has compromised and its revised demand is that the R12500 basic wage be reached in a few years time.

The hard-headed, intransigent and over-confident employers ignored this shift for a long time. In their most recent response, the employers have made an offer which effectively shifts the goalposts – they agree to provide R12500 demand by 2017 - but including all allowances. This is the opposite of good faith negotiations. All along, the wage negotiations focused on the cash component – it is disingenuous to pretend to agree to meet the unions’s demand – but to do so by counting allowances already enjoyed by workers as part of the offer.

The union held a briefing on 5 May 2014 in Johannesburg. It argued that mine bosses have not been open and transparent about what they can afford. They have in fact miscalculated the number of miners, Amcu argued, and downplayed the resources available for employee remuneration. Amcu provided information that showed that mining companies can afford the R12 500 basic salary. “There is money to pay the workers. They can afford it. The amount budgeted for wages can in fact meet the demand,” Mathunjwa said.  

Sadly, some media representatives have joined the bullying tactics used against Amcu. In interviews, they have often been blatantly unfair to Mathunjwa and Amcu. In the presence of the management representatives, they often asked him questions such as: “When will you call off the strike?”, “Are you aware that workers are suffering?” and (in one case) “Are you still earning a salary?”. They also constantly remind Mathunjwa (not management) that the strike has led to losses of R23 billion in revenues and wages. They follow up this type of interrogation with sweetheart questions to the management spokesperson, often encouraging the latter to blame the union and to wax lyrical about the strike’s damage to South Africa.

Some sections of the media are more interested in ending the strike than finding the truth and attaining a just and sustainable outcome.

If one follows this shallow perspective on labour matters on the part of some media representatives, every strike in a major company is “damaging to South Africa”.

Apparently, the furthest thing from the minds of some in the media is the need to end huge income disparities that fuel conflict in our society. Or the need to engage with the reality that increased investment (something a strike-less society is said to ensure) often leads to jobless growth and a widening of the gap between haves and have-nots.

Journalists interviewing representatives of mining companies seldom ask them:

·       Whether wage increases for workers over the last 20 years have merely kept pace with inflation or significantly increased household income and improved workers’ lives?

·       What companies’ long term plans were to increase workers wages and benefits, and to end other evils associated with mining?

·       To what extent employers have actually moved from their initial position in the wage talks?

·       Details about revenue and expected profits.

·       Information about shareholder profits at different points in the last twenty years.

·       To discuss comparisons regarding remuneration for the same or similar mining jobs in other countries such as Australia.

The struggle for a living wage on South Africa’s platinum belt is an important one. How it is settled can take South Africa forward and, in a small way, transform things to ensure that more people share in the country’s mineral wealth. The employers and the unions are engaging each other in a robust manner, and thousands of workers are sacrificing to advance their interests. Other role-players such as the media and government should either back off or step in to ensure, firstly, that “truth” prevails about the realities facing workers and management and, secondly, that a fair fact-based settlement is reached.

Frank Meintjies

Ben Turok exits parliament with honour

Veteran ANC leader Ben Turok recently announced his retirement from Parliament. This decision comes after a long and consistent role in progressive politics.
 
Why an article focusing on Turok and the milepost he has reached? There are more flamboyant characters saying farewell to the hallowed halls of parliament and its green benches. Unlike notable figures such as Kgalema Motlanthe and Trevor Manual, Turok has continually functioned in more behind-the-scenes roles. His exit is also interesting because it comes when the ANC faces stronger opposition to its left, when left-leaning views such as those held by Turok are sorely needed inside the broad church that is the ANC.
 
Born in Latvia, Turok arrived as a child in SA in the 1930s. He went on to train as a land surveyor and was drawn towards politics. In his mid-twenties, he joined the Congress of Democrats (COD) in the Western Cape in 1953, becoming a full time organiser. In 1955, Turok stood trial for treason, but the charges were later withdrawn. In the fifties, Turok worked as a trade unionist, was as a national official of COD and partook in the drafting of the Freedom Charter. As an MK operative, Turok was arrested in 1962 for sabotage and subsequently served three years in prison before going into exile.
 
Despite this longer history, it is his work in recent times when he has served “in both political and academic capacities for the ANC” that captures attention. Turok made a salient contribution to fostering a culture of debate and reasoned discussion on policy in the ANC in the last 20 years.

Since the unbanning, Turok has been a campaigner for a stronger stance on economic transformation within the broad forum that is the ANC. In the early nineties, using his Institute for African Alternatives, he worked to set up local development forums. These forums were mechanisms for increasing power from below, inviting communities to set their own development priorities. But these structures were abandoned – we all forsook them. We took “the line” that centralised political mobilisation was needed for the 1994 elections and that, thereafter, ward committees should be used to discuss local development needs.

 
Turok has continued to promote ideas, thinking and debate through his journal, New Agenda. The journal provided information about democracy, explored continental issues, carried union leader interviews, and looked more closely at strategies such as beneficiation and industrialisation. These debates helped to sustain democracy. They continued to highlight the difference between economic growth – an increase in economic output – and development, which Turok says means “an improvement in the human condition”.
 
However, New Agenda remained within defined parameters. It broadly tracked alliance debates. However, it gave little space to radical voices beyond the alliance camp, those heretical and provocative voices that could have warned leaders and officials of dangerous future scenarios that they would rather not think about. It also did not sufficiently showcase struggles on the ground nor properly analyse the role of civil society activism in driving policy change.
 
Turok has reflected deeply on how the ANC, at the point of transition, adopted a “conservative” approach to economy change. He has noted that although this was not what the country needed, he could see that there were reasons this position was adopted. He told the Financial Mail: "It was a very tense time. Our grip on power seemed provisional. One had to take into account the environment, which included the fact that the Soviet Union had told the ANC that it would not continue helping it."  
 
He has held on to his basic criticism over the years. He argued in the African Communist last December that “the ANC government has been rather cautious in the implementation of economic policies and has pursued orthodox economic policies. This has led to stalling in some key sectors of the economy”.

Turok remains a critic of the 1996 Growth, Employment and Redistribution strategy, a policy which reduced the budget deficit but which failed to generate jobs. Referring to Gear, Turok argued that the ANC had two strands: “the one was a progressive agenda of redistribution; the other focused on budget austerity and macro-economic stabilisation, and the latter won out.”

Turok’s departure from parliament is not without controversy – but certainly with his integrity intact. He received a grilling from fellow ANC parliamentarians after he chaired a committee that found Dina Pule guilty of breaching the code of conduct for MPs. Last November, the ANC also rebuked Turok after he walked out of parliament to avoid voting for the Protection of State Information Bill.

It is an irony that, as the old stalwart bows out, tired and bruised, Dina Pule has made it back on to the ANC’s electoral list. A sign of changing times, generational shifts as well as a change in culture as the ANC completes the change from movement to party in power.

Although he steps out of formal politics, Turok has not thrown in the towel. Indications are that, through his writing, he will continue to engage us on the need for progressive economic policy that will help South Africa overcome inequality and unemployment.

Frank Meintjies

OP trial sparks discussion of 'Intimate Partner Violence'

The Oscar Pistorius trial provides the opportunity to highlight the issue of intimate partner violence. It again highlights the need for greater public awareness of this issue, its prevalence and how it takes place.

 
Setting out his defence at the trial on Monday, 3 Mar 2014, Pistorius argued that he was in a loving relationship with Reeva Steenkamp. If his defence team understood anything about intimate partner violence (IPV), it would have realised that, on its own, a loving relationship provides no clue one way or another. His legal team would have known that most instances of domestic violence occurred in the context of intimacy, love and closeness.
 
Most people are familiar with terms like violence against women and girls (VAWG) and domestic violence. These terms have relevance – both gender organisations and international media reports have drawn attention to the fact that this case takes place against a backdrop of high levels of gender violence South Africa. The beauty about the lesser known IPV is that it zooms in to violence within the love relationship.
  
IPV is rooted in macho culture. According to Soul City’s Sue Goldstein, this culture includes the sense, on the part of men, that they “own” the woman in their lives. 

 In my own social circles, I know a few women who have been beaten up by someone who in every sense was their nearest and dearest. The violent attack came as they shared a home – and, indeed, the love relationship continued on both sides of the rage, the anger and the bruises.

 
Society’s anger against itself often expressed itself as violence against women. This violence does not just manifest in the alleys or the streets or public places; it lives in the home. This location of crime (in the form of attacks on women) in the home usually confounds those with moral and legal authority and interferes with their duty to protect women. Religious leaders, the police and others in the justice system would like to maintain the fantasy of the home and intimate relationships as a refuge against badness and harm.
 
Thus, within a patriarchal society – and as gender justice organisations point out – IPV creates many challenges for the criminal justice system. When faced with this kind of unjust action, many otherwise good policemen seem unable to do their work. Often, for such officials, their lack of knowledge of IPV goes together with a lack of will and motivation to act against the man. That is because they too are often infected by the idea that it is a man’s right to control and discipline “his” women.
 
Ours is also not just an ordinary patriarchal society. It has endured dislocation, instability, racial conflict and deep levels of alienation. On all sides and affecting people from any and every level of society, there is dehumanisation.
 
Where does this anger and madness go? How does it manifest? We don’t have all the answers to such questions, but it is true that much of this anger is expressed in our society as violence against women. In out patriarchal society, the national trauma manifests as attacks on women, in turn causing new cycles of trauma and social dysfunction.  
 
Let’s take a look at some IPV statistics. Researcher Lisa Vetten found, in 1995, that “every 6 days, a woman in Gauteng would be killed by her intimate male partner”. Vetten was also involved in a 1999 study – by the Medical Research Council and two other bodies – which found that approximately half of all women died at the hands of their intimate partners. Ten years later a third study showed a decline in the killing of women. But alas, the main decline was in killings by strangers, friends and acquaintances; by comparison, there was only a negligible drop in the rate of killing by lovers, partners and husbands remained constant. This means, as Vetten said recently: “The most common way women are killed is by the hands of an intimate male partner.”
 
The Pistorius story again throws the spotlight on South Africa’s gun culture. Gun Free South Africa has long called on South Africans to give up their love of guns. It has pointed out that guns are four times more likely to be used against the gun-owners themselves than in successful self-defence. There is also evidence that shows how guns in the home play a role in teen suicides. And from a gender justice perspective, when easy availability of guns mixes with a macho culture, it heightens the dangers faced by women.

In the middle of the voyeurism, the media frenzy and the highly-publicised legal sparring, we should remember that, on the fateful night, a woman died needlessly. We should remember that guns in the home often end up shedding the blood of those they are meant to protect. We should grasp the truth about intimate femicide in South Africa.
 
Even if Pistorius’s version of what happened on Valentine’s Day 2013 triumphs and the lesson related to IPV is ultimately lessened, the urgent and cautionary lesson about our obsession with guns will remain.

Frank Meintjies
(This article first appeared in The New Age newspaper on 7 March 2014)
 

Long Walk to Freedom: the 'powerfully moving' story of Nelson and Winnie Mandela

An ambitious movie featuring towering figures, The Long Walk to Freedom attains success on many levels. Cinematically, it puts South Africa on the map in a way it has not been before. It conveys momentous and background happenings in our turbulent and painful history in interesting and powerful ways.
 
The movie has also generated a great deal of discussion. Even though not everyone agrees with the lines taken in the movie, it reflects a boldness of choice on the part of the director. How to sketch processes that cover a vast period of time; how to present a colossal historical figure; how to represent complex and often fraught social change processes? Director Justin Chadwick chose to make the Nelson-Winnie love story a central theme and the driving force of the movie. From certain vantage points, this strategy can be criticised, but it makes The Long Walk to Freedom (LWTF) accessible and enjoyable to a very wide audience.
 
In the make-or-break role of Mandela, Idris Elba’s performance helps the movie (in significant ways) to crack it. He succeeds admirably in conveying the moods, temperament and presence of Mandela in his middle and later years. In a documentary on the making of the movie, Chadwick says he asked the actors to jettison any worries about accents and copy-cat resemblance to the figure they were playing; instead, they were directed to focus on discovering and transmitting the essence of the characters they played. This helped the lead actors to dilute the sense of intimidation they felt at having to play the ‘huge’ figures of Nelson and Winnie Mandela.
 
The success of this approach shows in the strength of Elba’s performance. Given Mandela’s penchant for reinventing himself, Elba may well have felt like he was being called on to play several distinctive characters in the same movie. He excels as he interprets a Mandela that transforms from new rural arrival to the city, to suave lawyer, to bearded pimpernel, to reflective prisoner.
 
Similarly, Noami Harris takes hold of her Winnie role and gives a star performance. She walks the road with Winnie as the latter changes from “very young” wife to leader and ‘voice of resistance’ during times of intensified oppression and brutal repression – as Winnie travels from innocence to angry leader standing tall on the South African stage.
 
The movie carefully creates the atmosphere and idioms of the different time periods. It is clear that for producer Anant Singh and Chadwick, situation and context matter very much. But they are under pressure – because of the sweep of the movie, they sometimes have to establish the setting very quickly, through the use of a relatively few shots and dialogue. Despite what they achieve – and at several key points the visual articulation is superlative – there are a few gaps or missteps. The Sharpeville segment is awkward and cryptic. “Sharpeville” and the issue of pass laws, let alone the role of PAC, are barely introduced before the gunshots go off and the camera jumps to narrate the international reaction. Also, the movie skips over the early years and the rural world in which Madiba grew up. Chadwick does take the viewer back to Qunu/ Mvezo area at several points in the movie, but many viewers may still miss the significance of the role of rural Eastern Cape played in the making of Mandela.
 
The movie’s excellent portrayal of Winnie Mandela is one of its powerful features. It tells her story, effectively highlighting her largely undervalued contribution to the anti-apartheid struggle. The movie shows her brutalisation and radicalisation – and helps us understand her role and position in South Africa today.
 
On the positive side, the movie is no sugar coating and, despite producer Singh working in close consultation with key family members and the Nelson Mandela Centre of Memory, cannot be said to be politically correct.or providing a sanitised perspective. Viewers are shown the hard edge of resistance and struggle. As activists take up the cudgels for justice, children and family members pay a high price. Mistakes happen and comrades die due to human error when planting home-made bombs. The movie also showed the lax security arrangements that prevailed at Liliesleaf farm in Rivonia – the easy comings and goings of random people that contrasted with measures such as the careful disguises for Mandela and the ultra-secret locations for the revolutionary leader's media interviews.
 
The Long Walk to Freedom foregrounds the remarkable strengths as well as the ‘warts’ of the main characters. It is about heroes, but about flawed heroes. The movie shows how Mandela relied on the advice and insights of senior comrades, and how this mentorship helped minimise the possible negative impacts of his shortcomings. When Mandela said, as he often did, that other leaders should share the credit for success in the anti-apartheid struggle, many people think he is referring to the execution of courageous actions. But he is also referring, directly, to others' contribution to shaping him: to the fact that key comrades helped to balance his thinking and temper his impetuousness. In this regard, the character of Walter Sisulu in LWTF should not only be read literally; it is emblematic of all the key leaders, including Oliver Tambo, who honed Nelson Mandela.    
 
LWTF lifts the veil on Mandela’s promiscuity as he enjoyed the buzz of Johannesburg in the forties and fifties. It also conveys that, even though they had become incompatible, he could have handled his split from his first wife Evelyn with a great deal more sensitivity. Reading between the lines, it was only when he was in prison that he got a chance to think properly about the burdens he placed on his young wife, not just when he went to prison but when he disappeared from family life and went underground. In this regard, author Du Preez Bezrop argues that Mandela simply informed Winnie of major changes in his life; that the young Mandela “appeared to lack the skills needed to comfort his loved ones when they needed assurance”.
 
LWTF gives a sympathetic interpretation of Winnie Mandela. But it does not shy away from the shadow side associated with her. It shows how ‘necklacing’ evolved and was popularised, and proposes that Winnie Mandela had a central role in this evolution. In this regard, necklacing was an angry reaction; but little thought was given to the wider chain of human destructiveness (and self-destruction) that would be unleashed. The ‘flawed heroes’ angle endows the movie with a particular grittiness and provokes deep reflection about the qualities and requirements of leadership, especially in repressive and violent times.
 
It seems that most South Africans who have seen LWTF loved the experience. At the same time, in social media emanating from South Africa, a small but significant number of people complain about the accents of the lead actors; others fume about insufficient acknowledgement of the ANC’s collective leadership. Yet others highlight some factual inaccuracies as compared to historical records. Of course, it is important to remember that a film is a dramatisation (unlike a documentary); the information it contains has to be cross-referenced with other data that forms part of the archive.
 
Writing on Twitter, Author Zakes Mda says he was disappointed, most likely because his expectations of the movie were too high. Using the same medium, Eusebius McKaiser wonders how people can rave about LWTF, given that it contains so many narrative inaccuracies. For Mfundi Vundla, writing in a newspaper column, LWTF erred in trying to cover too large a time-period. It would have had more depth, he argues, if it focused on, say, a ten year period. Arguing that a “biopic on an iconic figure” is not the only way to go in capturing the past, he calls for local movie-makers like himself to be given a chance to give their version of the “liberation narrative”.
 
I believe LWTF should be celebrated. Though not perfect, it is a brilliant effort. Aside from its high production values, LWTF presents the human side of Nelson Mandela alongside the great achievements and extraordinary leadership.  In a move that has strong gender-equity implications, it further provides a compelling re-reading of Winnie Mandela, calling for greater appreciation of her sacrifice and courage.  
 
The LWTF is not without shortcomings. But, despite these, Long Walk To Freedom is impressive and powerfully moving - a film that everyone should try to see.

Frank Meintjies