Winnie writer ignores key scholar

LETTERS

The article by Ntombizikhona Valela on Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (“The woman who helped forge an icon”, published on April 13) fails to acknowledge the likely influence of Dr Babalwa Magoqwana, who has been instrumental in presenting uMakhulu as a social institution of leadership and knowledge.

Magoqwana, who was a lecturer at Rhodes University at the same time Valela was a student, has been presenting her work on uMakhulu publicly for several years now.

The formulation of uMakhulu as an institution of leadership and knowledge has been received with great enthusiasm and warmth by many audiences, especially because this formulation clarified what most African students and scholars organically know about their own grandmothers and their epistemic role in African communities.

I note that Valela, in her own 2017 thesis on Madikizela-Mandela, threw in one line on uMakhulu and the names of some African feminists without so much as citing a word from their work.

This does not surprise me, since in Magoqwana’s public presentations on uMakhulu, she consistently referred to these African feminists, except she did so knowledgeably and with rigour.

I am glad that Magoqwana, who has spent years carefully working out this formulation as her contribution to African sociology, was acknowledged in 2017 when she was awarded a National Research Foundation-FirstRand Foundation sabbatical award to pursue a larger research project on uMakhulu as an institution, based on a thorough proposal.

Ask anyone who was at Rhodes, this specific formulation of uMakhulu was promoted by Magoqwana, who has patiently targeted the long and arduous, peer-reviewed process to publish her work.

It seems to me Valela fails to honestly acknowledge Magoqwana’s influence in her recent tweets and newspaper article, effectively erasing Magoqwana in service of acknowledging the significance of Madikizela-Mandela— Dr Nomalanga Mkhize, Grahamstown

Thank you for publishing my letter. I note that a key line was edited thus altering what I actually said in the published paper. I did not say “threw in a line on Magoqwana” as was edited in, I said, Valela “threw in a line on uMakhulu”. While it is now a minor point, I wish someone had asked before making such a crucial but inaccurate edit. — Dr Nomalanga Mkhize, Grahamstown

*The Mail & Guardian apologises for the editing glitch that resulted in this error.

These are unprecedented times, and the role of media to tell and record the story of South Africa as it develops is more important than ever. But it comes at a cost. Advertisers are cancelling campaigns, and our live events have come to an abrupt halt. Our income has been slashed.


The Mail & Guardian is a proud news publisher with roots stretching back 35 years. We’ve survived thanks to the support of our readers, we will need you to help us get through this.

To help us ensure another 35 future years of fiercely independent journalism, please subscribe.

Advertising

Judge trashes entire lockdown regime as constitutionally flawed

The high court ruling will delight gatvol South Africans but is unlikely to stand the test of time

Eusebius McKaiser: Two important lessons to learn about racists

The racially intolerant act to keep black people in “their place”, some even while claiming they're allies
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…

The best local and international journalism

handpicked and in your inbox every weekday