Statues, memorials, and monuments have become sites of conflict in which the ideas of permanence and impermanence, context and history has been brought to the fore. But they have also established a ground for conversation, on whether certain statues should be removed from public spaces or not.
The statue of Jan H. Marias and the “X” marks the spot statue on the Rooiplein. PHOTO: Anke Nothnagel
Moulded in the traditional medium of bronze or stone, statues hold a value of significance in its materiality in this idea of longevity and permanence.
On close examination of Ledelle Moe’s work one realizes that what appears to have been made from solid, timeworn stone is actually concrete and steel.
“Working with concrete and steel on a large scale, I am working with a ubiquitous material to allude to a sense of monumentality but at the heart of the work are questions of impermanence and vulnerability,” Moe says.
Cement is a very common material – it is everywhere. Therefore, it is not special – yet it kind of alludes to this idea of looking like stone, she explains.
“The work reads from far as a coherent solid whole – but on further investigation the sculptures are hollow, made up of many pieces and moved from site to site,” Moe says.
A limited shelf life
“You cannot expect monuments to last forever – because the world around the monument changes. The context around the statue, changes – but not the statue,” says Albert Grundlingh, emeritus professor at Stellenbosch University (SU).
Statues and monuments have a limited shelf life, Grundlingh says.
Society changes, and with these changes, so do values and mores. For the present generation, a monument or statue may have completely lost its meaning – or perhaps its “power” has increased, explains Jacques Stoltz, chair of the Heritage Association of South Africa (HASA).
For instance, a statue of Cecil John Rhodes might have more “power” today because our point of view and understanding of him as a historical figure has changed, says Stoltz.
“Today we see Rhodes within a post-colonial context – in which we are much more aware of the systematic nature of racism and colonial violence perpetrated against black communities,” Stoltz says.
“The circle” which was one of the projects Stellenbosch University focused on to create a more welcoming space on campus. PHOTO: Anke Nothnagel
Dali Tambo, founder of Artists against Apartheid and CEO of the National Heritage Project Company, explains that the context and the location of a statue – but also its value systems – are of great importance.
“Statues imprint upon the public the values of the decade, the ideology of the day and political messages that one wants to send,” says Tambo.
According to Tambo the new generation of today have said, “no”, as they have rejected certain statues and their values.
“[Statues] should not be in a place of honour if we are honouring the wrong values. We [must] honour the values of equality, liberty and infirmity,” says Tambo.
Statues that uncritically glorify acts which are universally accepted as evil, should be removed from public spaces, explains Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh, South African author and activist.
“They cause harm to people who have to subject themselves to the veneration of figures that are placed on pedestals. They should be removed because they obscure rather than preserve history and they should be removed because public space is always under constant renovation,” says Mpofu-Walsh.
According to Mpofu-Walsh new buildings are always going up and old ideas are coming down.
“The notion of a static public space is actually a very misguided notion because democracies are always involved in the reshaping of public space,” he says.
During August Stellenbosch University (SU) announced the renaming of the Wilcocks Building as it forms part of a long-term and extensive visual redress process on SU campuses. “[This] [is] an attempt to not only remove offensive symbols, but also to introduce new visual symbols which point to a shared history, our diverse stories and public spaces that are welcoming to all,” said Martin Viljoen, SU spokesperson.
A shimmer of history
“History as such is wide and encompassing and it has so many nuances and so much depth that to regard a monument [or a statue] as representing all of history, is mistaken – to say the least,” Grundlingh says.
It only represents a shimmer of history – a tiny aspect of it – from a particular point of view to honour a specific person within a specific set of circumstances, he explains.
There is a way to represent history through statues and memorials, but it is currently represented as one-sided and misleading – and in fact, obfuscation history, says Mpofu-Walsh.
“But the broader point is also that [statues] preserve history. They present a side of history – but the notion that they present all of history is false. History is far more complex than any one heroic statue can possibly reveal,” Mpofu-Walsh says.
There is still a need to re-evaluate public space and public memory as there are still far too many uncritical monuments to apartheid’s precedents – other architects of apartheid and – to the period of colonialism, he believes.
However, Mpofu-Walsh says it is not necessary to replace a statue with a new statue once it has been removed – but context is important.
“The removal of a statue does not need to involve the replacement of that statue with another statue and in some ways, I think rethinking the entire notion of heroic statues is necessary,” he says.
The statue of Jan H Marias on the Rooiplein at Stellenbosch University. PHOTO: Anke Nothnagel
According to Stoltz the National Heritage Resources Act clearly states that public monuments and memorials are automatically protected by the law, which will be taken into consideration first before the decision is made to remove a statue.
“This means that the law is taking a conservative approach and err on the side of caution in favour of heritage sites,” says Stoltz.
However, he emphasizes that this does not mean that change cannot happen.
“It simply means that change needs to be warranted and carefully motivated and that a transparent process is followed when changes are made to the historic environment,” he says.
Intersectionality
“Context is everything. The minute something is recontextualized it changes its meaning,” says Moe.
During the Rhodes Must Fall movement on Stellenbosch campus in 2015, a tire was put over the head of the Jan Marais statue and set to fire. He symbolically was set alit necklaced, explains Moe
“Heated conversations around transformation took place on the Rooiplein at the statue. These conversations raised questions as to the monument’s ability to accurately represent the ideologies of the current student body,” says Moe.
The next day the mess was tidied up.
“So, in response to what needs to be done with the Jan Marais standing there on the Rooiplein, lording there over us – there was no conversation around transformation and diversity being symbolically represented,” says Moe.
Today, a concrete “X” created by Moe’s second year sculpture class marks the spot where many conversations happened – and should happen. Looking at the lines that run across the Rooiplein as an intersection – “X” marks the spot.
“The goal was to create a piece that could spark a dialogue with the Jan Marais statue,” Moe explains. “I think the existence of historic statues, the removal of them, the replacement of them speak to the importance of dialogue and representing new power structures and change.”
Moe’s own work portrays the paradox between permanence and impermanence and monument and anti-monument.
“Ambiguity and questions raised around sites, places and monuments allow for questions to be raised. The more, the better, as long as the conversation keeps taking place,” Moe says.
Stellenbosch University has also focused on other projects to create public spaces that are welcoming to all. Information supplied by Martin Viljoen, Stellenbosch University spokesperson. INFOGRAPHIC: Anke Nothnagel