Book Times: past, present and future

by Lia Snijman

Firsts

“Miesie Muis is ’n klein, liewe, grys muis wat baie van koek en boeke hou.”

The first significant library in history, we’re told, was the Library of Alexandria, built and opened in the third century BCE. The earliest libraries were archives of transactions and correspondences. These were mostly run of the mill things: who bought what at the market; messages between government officials; legal texts. A quotidian record. Later on things got more interesting with myths and religious texts also being written down. Stories and ideas became much more concrete and easier to share. It was no longer just facts that were deemed worthy of sharing, but inherent beliefs and stories that shaped people’s lived cultures. And so we have records of texts such as the Book of the Dead, an Egyptian funerary text with spells to help the dead through the underworld and on their way to the afterlife, equipping them with anything from knowledge to protection.

My first significant encounter with a library was rather more recent in the larger scheme, and yet feels like ages ago, maybe because I got my membership to the Stellenbosch public library at the age of two, in 1999. My mother considered this quite late, and was annoyed that The System would not let her get the card any earlier. I mean, why wait? She was itching to show me all the lovely children’s books. But at the relatively late age of two, my journey began, and my mother claims that when she woke up in the mornings, she would find me sitting next to my pile of borrowed books, paging through, reading quietly and contently. I wonder if I remember this, or if it’s my mother’s record that forms the archive of my memory.

Now, I look through my childhood books, archives of what little Lia liked: flowers and kittens, in books like the Secret Kitten series and my compendium about flower fairies. My favourite fairies were the ones who coloured their outfits a bright yellow by rolling around in   pollen. Later on things got more interesting, with pirate princesses and magical books - Portia the Pirate Princess and the Harry Potter series both still hold dear, if very different, places in my heart. Portia was a princess who became a pirate because her dad had chosen a drippy husband for her. She thus opted to rather sail the seas and bravely save her cousin from a similar fate. And then people wonder why I grew up a feminist. As for Harry Potter, well, everybody knows about him. The mixture of funny lines, clever word usage and incredible fantasy world building and character development stretched over seven books, and this laid the foundation for my love of fantasy.

Catalogues

“We like lists because we don’t want to die.” – Umberto Eco

The philosopher Laozi was the guardian of books in China’s earliest library and we know of his, and other librarians’, presence thanks to catalogues. Catalogues are fantastic for organising and remembering things. What is the point of having all these amazing texts and all this information if you can’t find the right things? Or, even worse, if it’s not documented properly. I too have catalogued my reading experience, leaving my Excel sheet behind for future generations to philosophise about how I made the jump from Reënboogrant maats (think 7de Laan, or any TV soapie really, but for kids) to Language Wars: A History of Proper English (a book that is somehow simultaneously more and less pompous than it sounds). There’s something very appealing about the order and accessibility of catalogues. They promise us we’re in charge not only of the present, but of how the future will access us and our information.

 

Bibliophile

“If you have enough book space, I don’t want to talk to you.”- Terry Pratchett

The one thing that did stay consistent during that transition from kids’ books to serious books, was books. Books and more books. More accurately, my love for books.

I’ve discovered that I am a ‘bibliophile’, a lover of books, a term which entered the English language in 1824. Being a bibliophile is not all sipping hot chocolate and reading in rainy weather mind you – either you have to shell out hundreds for your paperback babies (and if you’re spoiling yourself, hardcover keepers who break your back), or you commit to some form of e-book only to be reprimanded for killing off books, reading and culture in general. Buying new books is a costly exercise (and the increased VAT is not helping) which unfortunately makes it quite elitist and much less accessible than it needs to be. Conditions like this can give book lovers a bad name, and make bibliophilia sound like a communicable disease.

Back in 1812, Lord Spencer and the Marquess of Blandford were well known for being bibliophiles – I suppose their stations in life offered them the necessary affordance - and they famously competed over a first-edition of Boccaccio’s The Decameron, the book that tells of some Italian gentlewomen and gentlemen who share stories in a secluded castle to keep out of mischief while they wait for the Black Death to pass. A frivolous luxury, some may sneer, but as a book lover I can imagine worse ways to spend my limited lifetime.

And think: can’t you just imagine the auction of this rare edition of The Decameron? Everyone excited about seeing what they could snatch up from the Duke of Roxburghe’s library, ready to try and outbid their friends. Spencer and Blandford’s bidding and counter-bidding raised the price of this rare book to a previously unheard-of sum:  £2 260. The figure seems astronomical and it would be far beyond my book lover’s pocket. But luckily, in the long run, they must have boosted the growing second-hand book trade, because thanks to them (I like to think) I was able to purchase Boccaccio’s The Decameron for R2 at a book sale on the Neelsie’s deck, at Stellenbosch University. Not a first edition, granted. It’s only an Everyman Paperback that contained an old moth who is now encased among knowledge because of its ignorance. But I have still had the rare pleasure of spending almost an hour rifling through old books and junk to find this gem, mine for the taking because I happened upon it and realised its worth. Which surely is more than two rand?

So I’m hooked on books, and have been since I was a child. In school, finishing with my work quickly in class was great because it meant I could read. I remember feeling personally offended when one silly primary school teacher told us that if we were done with our work we had to draw. Draw? I was stunned. What had happened to reading as an option? I think I settled for drawing a picture of me reading, hoping the teacher would catch my not so subtle hint. I love reading, and I think it might be because I’m somebody who likes observing more than participating. I can disappear into a book, paradoxically finding out more about myself by delving into the lives of others. Perhaps I love books because of the interesting ways that they can offer knowledge and insight. Yes, yes, we have Google, I know. But it’s not just about the information, it’s about how the knowledge is presented to you – in a story where it is much more memorable and pops up without having used cookies to track whether or not you’ll like it. From when I was a child, every Christmas I would ask for a book, and I would be given the newest book in the series I was reading or a dependably engaging Terry Pratchett novel. Even now, each Christmas, books are high on my list of desirables. For this Christmas, though, I don’t want new books that I haven’t read yet; I still have too many waiting for me. However, I am planning on expanding my personal library by asking for

George Orwell’s classics Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm, books that I have already read but would very much like to hoard in my room all the same.

 

The Language of Taste

Bitterbessie dagbreek

bitterbessie son

’n spieël het gebreek

tussen my en hom. – Ingrid Jonker

 

A shift that I have noticed in my reading habits is the move away from Afrikaans books. Being a mother-tongue speaker of Afrikaans, practically all of my first books were in Afrikaans. I learned to read with Miesie Muis’s pictures and Otto’s lift-the-flap books. “Waar is Otto?” asked the text, alongside clear and colourful pictures of the playful puppy busy with his adventures. “Hier is ek!” Otto would bark from under the flap of a table, a basket or a window. Otto showed me around in the world of early language, allowing me to explore. But my mother exposed me to English books from a young age as well, and I was sent to a bilingual preschool, so from as early as I can remember there was always the pleasure of both languages, and the opportunity for choices.  Roald Dahl or Pippie Langkous, Secret Seven or Maasdorp. I could choose if I wanted to go sleuthing and have tea or if I wanted to be in a boarding school and get up to kattekwaad. Sometimes worlds collided when we read the excellent Afrikaans translations of Roald Dahl’s books, making these wonderful stories easier to read for us and helping us believe that we too could pay R5 for a chocolate bar and win a life-changing trip to a chocolate factory net soos Charlie.

However, as I became a teenager the Afrikaans books started to fall by the wayside. I felt that most of them were either babying me (trying to push their patronising agendas down my throat), or otherwise they were way too grownup and grandiloquent, too esoteric. It’s hard as a teen to become excited about an Afrikaans girl called Iris, who learns to be happy about staying at home because that’s where she flourishes. (Kwart-voor-sewe lelie. It was our prescribed book in matric, I swear). And the comparison doesn’t gain when you juxtapose this kind of fiction with Harry Potter, The Hunger Games and novels by John Green such as The Fault in Our Stars or Paper Towns, literary hits which have subsequently been turned into movies. Oh, and before some among you accuse me of being a verraaier or hensopper, let me say that my interest in Afrikaans books has recently picked up again, now that I’m studying the literature and the language at university and am mature enough to make sense of  the writers of the Sixties, Sestigers such as André P. Brink, Ingrid Jonker and Adam Small, and their cultural-political legacy in major Afrikaans authors like Eben Venter, Antjie Krog and Wilma Stockenström. I can finally grapple with the devastating historical truths of apartheid, Aids and slavery at the Cape, while also experiencing the described joys of womanhood, child-like wonder and intellectual as well as passionate love. Still, it’s a difficult business, for Afrikaans writers. Their novels must compete for attention – mine and that of a wider public – with a plethora of classics and recent fiction in a worldwide English. Shame. But somehow they seem to pull through, and there’s a market for Afrikaans fiction even beyond South Africa’s borders, in countries like the Netherlands, and Belgium. Increasingly, too, award-winning Afrikaans fiction by major writers such as Marlene van Niekerk and Ingrid Winterbach is being translated into English, and other languages, reaching the world audience these authors deserve.

 

Books and Looking to the Future

“Fiction is the great liar that tells the truth about how the world really lives.” – Dorothy Allison

Recently I started thinking about the future of our world in general, but also specifically about the future of reading, thanks to Margaret Atwood’s brilliant The Handmaid’s Tale (1986) and the Hulu TV series based on the novel. Both show us a dystopian USA where women’s rights are a thing of the past because the theocracy believes that the only way to deal with the alarming drop in fertility is to force the women who are fertile to be handmaids to powerful men. The job of the handmaid is to be impregnated by a commander in a ritualistic rape, the situation excused by the perverted twisting of a Bible verse. What specifically made me think of reading is that the handmaids are forbidden to read, or to write. This implies that the government recognises the power, the authority, that can be gained from authoring something to be read, an empowerment which is potentially spread further via the process of reading and the thought and identification so often prompted by reading.

Given, the focus is not just on books, but also articles and other non-fiction. Offred, the protagonist and a handmaid, is frustrated that she cannot go and check the facts, or the lines of scripture given to them, she can merely passively accept. Some newspapers are censored, and the rest are shut down. Even shops’ names are removed to avoid having women read. Offred becomes excited when she finds a pillow with “FAITH” embroidered on it in her room. The fact that she is so delighted by illicit games of Scrabble, calling this a freedom and a luxury, shows that the act of reading is also about the pleasure of words and the expressive agency of making meaning in language. The pleasure of women, in all its forms, should not be underestimated; we see some rare moments of pleasure carry Offred through her otherwise abusive and dreary life. She constantly keeps herself amused by thinking of things that she had once read, transgressive thoughts such as how flowers are the genital organs of plants. Another thing that keeps her going is reading the quotation which has been carved on the floor inside the cupboard by a previous handmaid: “Nolite te bastardes carborundorum”. As she discovers – after asking the Commander to translate the phrase, during one of their tense, secret Scrabble games – this is more-or-less joke Latin and means “don't let the bastards grind you down”. The expression may be crude pig Latin, schoolboy rather than scholarly, but for Offred it is a radically rebellious text and it becomes her feisty mantra.

Surprisingly the feminist movement that takes place before the theocratic government takes over was known for burning books, or more specifically, pornographic magazines. Offred knows this because her mother participated in these burnings. So we are coaxed to think about books and their content; to consider who has the right to judge what is and is not permissible, when it comes to subject matters and forms of knowledge. Radical feminists? Religious fanatics? We ponder the challenging question of what should and shouldn’t be allowed to be published, and read, and known. Anything goes? Are constraints an unjust limit? Where freedom of speech is guaranteed, does it take into account attacks on the rights of others?

Atwood, having published The Handmaid’s Tale in 1986, could not have foreseen how relevant this would be in an age where everybody can publish their thoughts and feelings online. One need only look at the current American president, an overt misogynist (not to mention racist and homophobe) who seems to tweet, unfiltered, whatever he ‘thinks’ or hears third-hand on the television, to see the problems associated with giving everyone free reign. Yet third wave feminism has been all about choice and allowing women the freedom to follow paths that society doesn’t necessarily condone, such as using porn, or being a porn star, or becoming famous by writing a memoir about your years in the sex industry, servicing Hollywood’s celebrity men.

 

Reading and Meaning

“Better never means better for everyone... It always means worse, for some.” – The Commander in The Handmaid’s Tale

I have always valued the use of wit and words to shut down sexism, whether it’s a strong argument or a witty retort, and reading helps us understand words and their power. It also allows us to develop the tools to analyse texts that come our way. In The Handmaid’s Tale we see that many verses from the Bible are used to justify the atrocities committed against women and other marginalised groups in society: black people are called The Children of Ham and moved to separate areas; Genesis 3:16 - “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception: in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children” - is expediently invoked to justify the lack of anaesthetic when women are giving birth. Offred also mentions that the wives of the household are allowed to hit their handmaids because there’s scriptural precedent, and every ritualistic rape through which handmaids are potentially impregnated is preceded by a blessed (in my reading, sanctimonious) intoning of a verse from the Bible.

It’s fiction, I know; just a story from a book, and I should not be so affected. Of course life isn’t really like this. But it’s not like this is completely preposterous in the real world, or near future, either. It doesn’t take much to imagine elements of The Handmaid’s Tale happening, Atwood has after all famously mentioned that she based all events in the novel on real events all over the world. My ex-roommate kept on getting messages from her highly influential church to help ban abortion. They spoke of how abortion means killing an unborn baby which is a sin. These intrusive texts not only sought to police her consciousness, and conscience, implying that she was morally obligated, as a member of the church, to support their zeal. The texts also sought to extend wider social power over women’s bodies, in effect policing women’s bodies, based on the indisputably-claimed authority of religious values extracted from isolated pieces of text.

Reading: our own Stories

“All the reading she had done had given her a view of life they had never seen.” – Roald Dahl

Offred speaks of how she is telling her own story and constructing it. She mentions how it helps to think of what is happening to her as “just a story”, making it more bearable. I think of how, when I’m arguing with people about the prevalence of rape and rape culture, they always want facts. But I don’t have handy statistics most of the time (and these anyway usually get dismissed as being out of context). I only have stories. The story of my friend who got raped by her abusive boyfriend. The story of how Hannah used to be in my French classes but now she’s dead, raped and killed by random men. The story of how a girl was raped by someone she knew right outside the residence we both live in. The story of the friend of a friend who was sexually abused by her uncle. Yet most of these women can’t share their stories with the public because the person is close to them, because it happened so long ago and they’ve only been able to talk about it recently. And many women and girls cannot speak about their rape because they’re dead. #MeToo unfortunately only gives us a partial glimpse into what happens when the patriarchy naturalises male power, and educates men into violent forms of masculinity. Surely there are other, better stories for the kinds of lives we’d like to live, as human beings?

Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale not only emphasises the importance of stories being told, but also the importance of perspective. Fred, the commander to whom Offred belongs (hence the name “Of Fred”), is surprised when he finds out some of the conditions under which the handmaids live, making her angry at his ignorance, especially because he is on the side of the governing patriarchy that is implementing the bans on reading, writing and almost any control over her own body, and the torture that will come if she resists these proscriptions. Recently, across many popular media contexts, people have been realising how important it is that cultural forms and processes embody the world’s diversity, rather than repeatedly reflecting only the views and experiences of powerful coteries, and historically dominant groups such as white people, in particular straight white men. Audiences have realised that perspective is important if we wish to understand important issues. We have Hollywood calling out…well, Hollywood for not having enough female directors and not giving enough credit to black actors at prestigious events such as the Academy Awards. And within this influential cultural powerhouse, too, we have different factions which challenge the authority of potentially exploitative directors and producers over young actors. In Atwood’s text nobody can risk such open criticism, but we do see Offred hungering for the perspectives of others, wondering about what they’re thinking and what they’re going through. We also see the mistrust created among people because they have no idea what to expect from one another.

So when Offred tells us that the women can’t write and that they can’t read, we need to realise what this means: the women are stuck with only their own, insular perspectives drawn from the brutal constraints of their horrendous experiences, and even these they are not permitted to share. Stay in your lane. Do not look to others for help or comfort. It’s just you who is experiencing this. And it’s your fault. The handmaids are rendered isolated and vulnerable, which is what keeps them subservient, rather than being able to radicalise into a powerful collective with the capacity to effect change. If you think this isn’t relevant for now or the future – take a look at Malala Yousafzai fighting for girls to be allowed to be educated – take a look at how it took 60 women accusing Bill Cosby of sexual assault to take him down – take a look at how Christian women are less likely to report domestic abuse – take a look at all of this and then tell me how women’s voices and opportunities do not need to be amplified in the future. And just remember that, as Offred says, “Ignoring isn’t the same as ignorance, you have to work at it”.

So if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to do something that is equal parts revolutionary and entertaining, traditional and relevant, fictional and truthful – I’m going to read.

 

Posted in Blogs, Essays | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Your autobiography isn’t about you

by Elodi Troskie

How honest are you allowed to be when writing about your own life? A ridiculous question, it seems. 100% honest, of course. Dive into the truth. Cut it all open. Lay it out. It is your life, after all. Isn’t it?

But what if the deep waters of your truth are a drained concrete swimming pool for someone else?

What if the antagonists in your story are not only still alive and likely to read what you write about them, but they are also the ones you love most? When your writing implicates others – when you start questioning how objective, how fair, how justified your truth is; whether your story really belongs to you and you alone – are you still allowed to share it? These are difficult, ethical questions.

My father was an alcoholic until he died of brain cancer when I was fifteen. He started believing in God before he became ill. Actually, he had been believing in God for many years by then, but he had trouble staying convinced of what he could not see. Then there is my brother. Addicted to drugs and drunk as a sailor round the clock, he stopped studying after three months at university. He lived at home for another three years and studied at night. He could have been a doctor or an astronaut. He never brought girls home, but he moved out to live with his girlfriend a year ago. He never hit me but sometimes he spat on me. My mother renovated his room to rent it out on Airbnb. She still sees him on Mondays when he cuts the grass for her. She caused me to develop an eating disorder but she doesn’t pay for my antidepressants.

Some of these statements are true – or they might be true - but there is no way for you to know, is there? Only those directly involved in these stories would be able to confirm or deny and besides, if they are indeed true, who are they true for? The question, really, entails a difficult mix of factual, documentary truth, and the powerful emotional, affective truths which accrue depending on how well a narrative is told.

There are the facts. And there is the shaping of the facts into a story. Then, somewhere between these poles, there are different forms of the truth, if not The Truth. Ask a writer like James Frey, who got himself into a whole lot of trouble with his so-called memoir, A Million Little Pieces, published in 2006. The book was initially marketed as a memoir, but after it came to the light that many of the events described in the book were completely made up by the author, it was rebranded as a semi-fictional novel. Frey faced accusations of literary forgery and responded by saying he never denied altering small details. In an interview with Seth Mnookin published on Slate, Frey said he stands by the book as “being the essential truth of [his] life”.

Again, this raises the question: who is your ‘truth’ true for?

Am I allowed to fictionalise my life? If I fill the gaps with twisted truths and writer’s freedom, am I lying or am I merely imagining?

Allow me to bring this issue home by referring to the melodramatic teen-girl television series, Gossip Girl (a joyous day for 14-year old me, who would not in a thousand years have predicted that her future self would be presented with the opportunity to write about the scandalous lives of Manhattan’s elite). A quick background, for those not informed: the story starts with Serena van der Woodsen’s return to Manhattan after mysteriously disappearing for six months. The opening scene at the train station shows Dan Humphrey, who has been in love with Serena for many years, longingly stealing glances at her while she impatiently waits for her mother to pick her up, all the while performing subtle but perfectly executed hair flips. Fast forward about four drama-packed seasons: Dan and Serena are finally dating (after their parents married each other and then divorced again – it’s a lot to keep up with) and he releases his first novel titled Inside. Although he changes all the names, it is very clear that the book is an exposé of the lives, loves and lies of the who’s who of the Upper East Side. Perhaps he could have been a little bit more creative with the renaming – merely changing “Serena” to “Selena” might have been underestimating the reader, just a little bit.

I’m getting side-tracked.

My point is: we are presented here with a beautiful example of someone writing his story but strongly offending his friends and family when they read his (truthful) take on things. Teenage-me, watching this show, was taken aback. I wanted to become a writer. I had always thought my own life to be a great source of dramatic inspiration and watching the fictional Dan Humphrey’s life crumble and fall on account of his controversial autobiographical writing, I decided rather to stick with fiction writing and never to look back upon the treacherous terrain of the autobiographical.

That lasted for a good few years. I was happy, dreaming up distant characters unrelated to my own life, writing my little stories at a safe remove. (Confession: I wrote poems too, but I kept those buried in a drawer.)

Then I turned 18 and sent in some of my writing for a poetry anthology, while I was learning online using a Proofessor site online. (This was understandable; I’d just finished high school, started learning French and liked to think of myself as an artist.) The poems I regarded as the best and most creative pieces of ‘my work’ were turned down. Meaning all those poems in which I tried to comment on Important Issue and The Hopelessness of it all – the vastness of being legally allowed to buy cigarettes and tequila and open a bank account without your mother’s signature – having the entire world in front of you but having no idea what to do with it. What I considered to be creative revolution – rhythms and rhymes and shapes and words beyond the wildest imagination – was probably laughed at by the fellow poets-cum-judges who were filtering through the slew of submissions.

I was hurt. But what hurt more was that the poems that were accepted for publication were ones with real potential to hurt. They were about my mother and my father and my brother. They were about me and my life and they were true, never mind that I’d filtered content, or given artistic shape and poetic patterning to the facts. I revisited my section; I edited my memories and rephrased the lives of the people around me and cut the poems down to what I could most bear for my mother to read.

These are the kinds of tough issues that autiobiographers must grapple with: issues engaging a raft of serious scholars in the field of life writing. Truth. Relationality. The various forms of the ‘I’ and their relative relations of distance and immediacy, masking and exposure.

In previous writing exercises, the ideas of people like Sidonie Smith and Julia Watson have proven useful; their Reading Autobiography: A Guide for Interpreting Life Narratives has helped me clear my mind a little about the ethics of responsibility and life writing. But in a sense it has also muddied the waters even more. So right now, I’d prefer to move on to discuss Indian-Dutch writer, Ernest van der Kwast, who writes his autobiographical novel, Mama Tandoori (2010) about his mother who moved from India to the Netherlands, where she married his Dutch father and raised their three sons. While he beautifully portrays the proverbial baggage she brought with her from India, growing up in war and poverty, along with the continual struggle and pain of raising her mentally handicapped eldest son amid the hints of a strained marriage, Van der Kwast uses his imagination and creative freedom to exaggerate and amplify events and family members’ distinctive characteristics to comically recount his childhood and young adult memories. For example, a recurring anecdote threading its way through the novel is his mother’s habit of negotiating discounts on everything she buys: from houses to linen to train tickets to chicken. It seems unlikely his mother was able to bargain her way down to paying only 20% of the original price on a piece of furniture, but this exaggeration of one of her determining characteristics paints a very specific picture of this character, according to the likes and wishes of the author.

In an interview with the NRC Handelsblad in 2010, Van der Kwast says he considers the text the truth, thickened with the tools he has at his disposal as a writer: exaggeration, selective portrayal and colourful imagination. He says he never questioned whether he should publish the book under a pseudonym, which he had done before with other books, because he did not doubt that he would personally be identified as the focaliser in the novel. In some interviews, he describes the text as “fictive biography” rather than autobiography. What is the difference, I wonder? The term ‘autobiography’ seems self-explanatory: an account of a person’s life written by the person himself, or herself. But ‘fictive biography’? If ‘biography’ refers to an account of a person’s life written by a different person, does the genre Van der Kwast categorises his novel in mean that he differentiates himself from the first-person narrator in the text? Which cannot be, since he clearly states that he confidently identifies as the focaliser. Perhaps ‘fictive biography’ then opens a whole new world of relational writing where the author writes a text in such a way that he or she serves the role of an audience member in his own life; where understanding a close family member of the person in question is so crucial in understanding the person that the narrative finds itself almost completely woven around characters other than the autobiographer. (I should probably go back to Smith and Watson here, looking for scholarly guidance. There must be subtle distinctions and understandings that are eluding me, still young in the thoughts of life writing, person, and personae, narrating self and experiencing self. I will have to study the works, and get my thoughts sorted.)

Van der Kwast recently visited South Africa for the annual Woordfees in Stellenbosch and I attended a panel discussion where he was one of the speakers. After reading Mama Tandoori – all the while aware of the fact that it was based on the truth – I was completely awestruck listening to him talk about the characters in the book. He reminded me that they were – and still are – real, even still alive; that the events he wrote about, however humorously handled via the liberties of narrative and character, however inflated and coloured in, really did happen. Material facts. He was sitting there: the book, a product of his imagination; but also him, he himself, sitting there as a product of the stories in the book. I could not separate the embodied person from the person of the book.

Someone asked him how his mother reacted to his portrayal of her as an impossibly strong-willed woman who ruled their family with an iron hand (and sometimes a rolling pin). He answered that she was not always amused by the picture he paints of her – that, while he describes the text as something of a fictionalised autobiography, she likes to refer to it as ‘friction’: fiction occasionally inspired by truthful events, which can rub some people the wrong way. Jokingly, he added that his mother, when talking about her children, uses provocative categories. She disappointedly refers to her eldest as ‘the intellectually handicapped’, her middle child as the one who betrayed her by marrying a Muslim woman, and her youngest as a writer.

He laughed while saying this. And I am sure his mother does not intentionally compare her children based on their intellect, marriage or career choices. Yet his joke did not leave me. Would my mother one day feel the need to defend herself to her friends and family when talking about her children, telling them she is unsure about the whereabouts of her son, who once kicked her door in and thrashed the house before he broke into the safe, oh and of course, her daughter (glancing around to make sure no one else is listening) – yes, she is doing great, but, you know (an almost inaudible whisper now), she is a writer.

One of the characters in Van der Kwast’s novel in his father’s brother, a man with whom he, as a child, had minimal interaction. Yet he dedicates an entire chapter to his uncle’s travels, written as though the writer had accompanied him on all his adventures. The narrator in the novel says something important about this: he is writing this story because no one else will, because no one else knows it. The author admits that he does not know all the details about the lives of everyone he writes about, but that knowing the broad outlines is enough for him to fill in the gaps with his writer’s creativity. I wonder: might a distant niece one day pick up my book in a bookshop, recognising my name but only vaguely remembering me from that one family Christmas way back in 2004, and, much to her surprise, find a section dedicated to her botanical work in South East Asia? Perhaps. As the books I’ve been reading make clear, much stranger things have been known to happen. And writing and writing lives: they are terribly entangled.

At the same discussion where I met Van der Kwast, the South African writer, Dominique Botha, was interviewed about her debut novel, False River (2013). The book is based on the true events of her eldest brother, Paul, an evidently brilliant mind and talented, budding writer, who tragically dies in his twenties after a drug-overdose. When reading this novel, initially, it was as though someone was repeatedly beating me with a shovel against my chest. It was too close to home. It was too familiar. But more than a year after I first read it, I now perceive it in a completely different light, especially when presented alongside Van der Kwast’s novel: both can be read as form of familial tribute. Both focus on relations with close family members and the impact these relationships had on their own lives, thus almost forcing them into a back seat in the show about their own lives. I find that both of these books work as biographical fiction rather than fictionalised autobiography since the narrative is so strongly centred around a different character, one whose mind the author does not have access to.

However, while the texts deal with subjects of severe emotional trauma, and the authors find a way to create a distance between themselves, their fictional equivalents and the events that inevitably overshadowed their childhoods and continual adult-life, Botha’s novel lacks the element of humour so ever-present in Van der Kwast’s writing.

Humour in self writing is important. Wilma Stöckenstrom opens her novel, Die Kremetartekspedisie, with the words, “Dan met wrewel. Dan met spot”. Translated: “Then with resentment. Then with ridicule”. If tackling one’s memories with resentment seems a task too impossible to bear, it must be done with laughter. Humour is multifunctional: it makes the writing process slightly more endurable for the writer and it makes the reading process much lighter for the reader. It helps us drag ourselves through the waters with a bit more ease.

I think I understand. I understand that most of us are gravely sad. We need humour not to ridicule our pain, but to endure it. And if writing has often been considered a form of therapy, we can see that therapy does not always mean soothing harp music and candlelit stretching sessions. Often therapy is tearing and bleeding and scratching. (And this can sometimes be only a slight exaggeration.)

We use humour not to diminish ourselves, but to get through life. This is true both for the writer and the person sitting in the audience, laughing at a poem, but understanding.

Am I allowed to take ownership of my family’s pain and write it into something light enough to read? Does that mean I am lying? Or am I simply enduring it?

 

Posted in Blogs, Essays | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Alternate Universe in Which I Am Unfazed by the Men Who Do Not Love Me

by Aaliyah Davids

I watch as she steps onto the stage and speaks into the mic, glancing down to read from her pink-clad iPhone: “Alternate Universe in Which I Am Unfazed by the Men Who Do Not Love Me”. The title strikes against my heart, hollow and resonant. And so I start the video again – just in case I misheard. A poet creating another world, speaking the words I cannot.

In her spoken word video of a reading at Button Poetry Live, in just a few beautiful moments, Olivia Gatwood makes simple what so many of us struggle with.

When the businessman shoulder-

checks me at the airport,

I do not apologize.

Instead, I write him an elegy on the

back of a receipt

and tuck it in his hand as I pass

through the first class cabin.

Like a bee, he will die after stinging

me.

Unlike the traditional page poet folded into an anthology, Gatwood embodies her words, stepping out into the gaze of the uncomfortable (Crescenzo, 2018:np). Her spoken word performance allows for an interaction with her audience, during which she shares a glimpse into unrequited love, and the emotions this brings. She is approachable. Emotionally articulate. I feel so easily connected to this poet and relish the retort she has written and now delivers, in person, to her audience: a sardonic elegy, casually drafted on the back of a till slip and delivered in passing to the self-important man, now an indifferent man reduced to ephemera.

***

I stand in the doorway of what is to be my third casting – for some drink I’ve never heard of, called Power Horse. Nervous, the butterflies in my stomach have become bats in a cave,  flipping and flicking blindly against my cavernous insides. I take a step through the door, only to be shoulder-checked by a tall man who does not look back to apologize.

Excuse me?

Did he not feel his bone hit mine?

I say sorry under my breath,

yet still await an explanation of some sort.

It does not come.

I walk up three flights of stairs, collect my number and sit down, leaving two seats in between the next person and myself. I avoid eye contact and pretend that modesty is the reason I do this. A white man in a brown leather jacket walks past me, looking for the right door. He makes his way to the next floor, pausing on the staircase long enough for me to look up and for him to gesture with a simple nod: I should join him.

Later still, this white man in a brown leather jacket would be part of the group that I cast with. We will act out the scripted scene: “Youthful and Passionate Entrepreneurs Pitching a New Idea”. Consumed with awkwardness, I drop the ball. He quickly picks it up, maintaining cool composure throughout his performance.

The pudgy director with socks pulled up to his knees, steps in. Tells us to become more intimate; we are colleagues and friends after all. Tells me not to be so shy. The white man in a brown leather jacket, with glasses on the tip of his nose, wearing the glasses as if he didn’t actually need them, puts his arm around my shoulder, for a reason not apparent to me. I continue to follow his lead, improvising my way through the director’s outlined routine.

A few months later, this man and I would be sitting on the beach. He would put his arm around my shoulder in a different performance, wearing a different jacket and a pair of sunglasses that hid his gaze. And I would follow his lead again, this time improvising my way through his own outlined routine.

***

I am 24 and have never cried.

Once a boy told me he ‘doesn’t believe in labels’

so I embroidered the word

‘chauvinist’

on the back of his favourite coat.

 

I listen. Watch Olivia Gatwood closely. She does not stutter, or falter. She does not seem to be nervous at all, as she confidently brings to life the intense and personal challenges that come with growing up female (Weinstein and West, 2012: 288). Despite her being worlds away, her power becomes my very own. Through the re-ordering of cultural customs and conventions that  spoken word poetry involves, she invents a universe where things are otherwise, where the lines between what is and what is possible become blurred (Weinstein and West, 2012: 289). Gatwood paints a world where women no longer cower at the side of the patriarch or the sexist or the chauvinist, but rather embrace the power we’ve always had. She gives us strength not only to say no to the assumptions of gender and cultural chauvinism, but to tear up this script and throw it back.

Her poetic space becomes a “noetic space,” the “zone of the collective imagination that is teeming with alternatives to the actual” (Weinstein and West, 2012: 289). Her spoken word poetry offers inventive ways of knowing, that express her grounded, insightful intelligence. She offers me an alternative reality filled with possibilities that so many young female lives tentatively open up to, but never fully realize. Olivia Gatwood is refreshingly and beautifully outspoken.

***

We sat on the beach and he explained how she had broken his heart, and thus I was made to understand why he did not believe in labels. Or pretend to understand why he did not believe in labels. A label would create expectations that he was not ready for, and despite my wondering what would change if we were to name our relationship, call it what is so clearly was, I did not say anything. I didn’t think myself very demanding. I could not make demands.  I reminded myself to be laidback, nonchalant, mysterious even.

He put his hand around mine

and told me how wonderful it was

to be with someone who understands.

“You understand me so well.”

I didn’t answer.

I looked away to the sea

and thought

about how difficult it would be

to embroider something onto the back of a coat.

 

Did Olivia Gatwood struggle with her stitching? Or was it easy for her to embroider the word ‘chauvinist’ in a painstaking labour of love refused? ‘Chauvinist’ is just one word. Now Gatwood speaks multiple words, online, on stage and in coffee shops, performing her spoken word work. Her words stimulate the concept of the noetical space that “makes possible the imagination of multiple connections, outcomes, and explanations,” and so I see myself pushing the needle through his heavy brown jacket, with ease (Brenneis, 2008: 159). Through Olivia Gatwood’s words, I am capable of anything and everything. Even this strenuous emotional labour of stitching is not beyond me.

 

***

 

While the boy isn’t calling, I learn

carpentry.

Build a desk.

Write a book at the desk.

 

He did not call and he did not message so I did not say anything. I did not do anything. Time passed by quickly yet I remained in the same sad state. Any advice offered fell on deaf ears. Any advice would not, did not, still my aching heart. My heart still ached. I thought of the stories I had heard about people dying of broken hearts. I thought back to each moment spent with him and wondered why he remained so determinedly untouched, when my own poor heart had touched him.

Why?

Why was I so upset?

Why was he not?

Why was I not learning carpentry, building a desk and writing a book, at the desk?

Why not?

In Olivia Gatwood’s alternate universe, I perform differently. I build a desk, a shelf, a chair, another desk. I. Am. Busy. Making. Sense. My time will not be taken up waiting for him to acknowledge me, my feelings and what happened. I need not worry myself over being ready for a call that may never come. Instead, Olivia and I take up the responsibility of handing out hours to the women who have lost their watches, clocks and ability to check for the time on their phones, rather than for his name.

***

I do not slice his tires

I do not burn the photos

I do not write the letter

I do not beg

I do not ask for forgiveness.

Olivia Gatwood’s female speaker does not do these things. Though I notice how the phrasing leads in through “I do” and so I wonder if, at first, at least in thought, she did. At this point, the poem is a long line of agency withheld by a matching sequence of “nots” and their coupled verbs, so roughly paired: “slice”, “burn”, “write”, “beg”, “ask”. The verbs are finite; firm monosyllables. And yet they tumble over one another, in suppressed, unfinished anger.

In the face of all my own stifled rage and regret, I had to act.  After sitting idle, I did what I thought was necessary to forget him. And then I did what I thought was necessary to perhaps win him back. I could not decide between the two. I could not consolidate what I knew was best for me and what my heart so desperately yearned for.

I did delete the photos.

I did write the letter.

I did write another letter

And while I did pretend to be unfazed

during the day,

night time meant the moon moaning with me.

I did ask for forgiveness,

despite having done nothing

worth forgiving.

He was online

but he did not reply.

***

The final act sees us sitting on a  battered couch. A blanket has been thrown over it in an attempt to hide the holes where the stuffing peeps out and where the cat has clawed too deeply. Empty blue and red cigarette boxes lie on the stained coffee table, as they always do. Everything in the room speaks (screams) of all-male occupancy. The empty glasses forgotten on the window sill; the dirt on the floor that sticks to your socks; the strangely-placed vase in the corner of the room, and the lingering smell of too much cologne.

I do not make eye contact as he sits next to me, placing my legs over him and handing me a cup of Earl Grey tea, in what he deems an act of intimacy. It is never quite sweet enough. I wait for perhaps a different response, for this time, he knew that what he did was wrong – or rather, this time he chose to acknowledge it and take responsibility.

I do not say anything despite having rehearsed this confusing confrontation in my head at least twenty times. I do not say anything despite the one hundred and twenty voices telling me to yell out something obscene and leave. He pulls me closer. I prepare to improvise through yet another one of his outlined routines. I wonder how many others have performed this scene with him before.

Had a different girl sat on this couch before me? Probably. She was probably tall and thin; long dark hair and fiery eyes that could face his. She was probably the one who broke his heart. Clearly, she had been able to make a decision. I wonder what decision I will make.

 

He tells me he’s sorry.

“Do you believe me, baby?”

Baby

I’ve always hated being called that.

I look up

from underneath dripping eyelashes,

looking for some sort of sign,

any sign,

that I should

believe him.

Olivia Gatwood’s “Alternate Universe in Which I Am Unfazed by the Men Who Do Not Love Me” loops and echoes in my mind. I remember an interviewer asking her what she would like readers with similar struggles to take away from her writing:

For readers who have read my book and see themselves, I hope they feel, in some                 way, held by the understanding that they’re not alone, that the process of life and sex and love is not an even or simple trajectory, that shame is not an organic emotion but is instead handed to us by the outside world, and that their memories, regardless of how mundane they seem, are deeply valuable and worthy of being shared. (Crescenzo, 2018:np)

And I do. I do feel held by the understanding that I am not alone in my experience.

This thing called unrequited love.

Such an old-fashioned term,

and yet it pierces me.

And I do. I do believe that he is sorry for what he has done. I can forgive because there is no reason for me to hold onto anger. It does not matter whether he is genuinely sorry or not. He is not worth my anger. He is not worth any more wasted hours. Olivia Gatwood’s enthralling spoken word poetry fills me with a power that does not need this man.

So I take my legs back. I get up. I face him. I look into his brown eyes; allow him five more minutes. He becomes nervous under my gaze but continues to ramble on. For the first time, he holds no power. He is just a man.

 

The man tells me he doesn’t love me

and he does not love me.

The man tells me who he is

and I listen.

I have so much beautiful time.

Posted in Blogs, Fiction | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Archiving Loss and Longing

by Chris Khoury

Visitors enter an exhibition space that contains a curated assortment of items: parquet blocks, handmade books, framed mats, shelves, pictures, trestle tables and boats. I found this mix of the homely and the unhomely jarring, at first, the packed venue unsettling, even overwhelming. And yet because the space very uneasily ‘held’ the art, it also reinforced the intended displacement and sadness of the archive within. I found myself opening to ideas of the archive as both a material space and also something more elusive, along the lines of feeling, emotion, and dis/placed memory.

At the centre of the exhibition space: trestle tables arranged into a large cross shape that both centres the experience of the exhibit, and disperses attention and movement, directing the viewer’s attention outwards. On the tables are assemblages of curious books or book-like objects, covers made from individual parquet blocks crafted by the artist. On the walls hang artworks in media such as lino-cut and oil, as well as digital prints on archival paper, depicting grief and loss. There are also several heavy wooden shelves and cupboards placed along the walls, as if serving the purpose of ‘furniture’, although they do not strike a viewer as reassuringly domestic. Among these is a discarded South African Railways’ ticket cabinet, repurposed to house tightly packed slivers of parquet blocks in its numbered slots, along with some of the original, numbered baggage tickets.

In many respects, the physical archive made and assembled by Willemse is an assortment of ordinary items, but these objects also feel pulled loose, unhoused from their original contexts. The countless parquet blocks, for example, keep appearing and re-appearing. They do not settle into the foundational form of ‘flooring’, that stays put. They are present in their functional form as blocks which can be placed and re-placed, though they are never anything as stable as a grounded floor of an actual house. Instead, they are fugitive, loose, lifted, sad fragments of an absence of human home and happiness that seems to haunt the artist’s imagination. Filled with parquet blocks is a large, dark wooden shelf. Upright. Strong. The shelf seems capable of carrying any weight it is destined to bear. But look: next to this solid structure is a jumbled pile of parquet blocks. So many shades and degrees of unevenness, even though the basic size and shape is constant. The blocks seem to spill out like emotions that cannot be contained. They seem to become life forms that stand for something else that the Willemse exhibition cannot fully represent. Memories? Homes destroyed? Lives lost? I cannot quite put my finger on it.

(MIND THE STEP, instructs a paper card on a gallery plinth. And beneath that, also in upper case, the injunction: DO NOT TOUCH…)

What makes an archive? This one certainly contains many small pieces and uneasily-aligned ensembles that portray loss while simultaneously also serving as a vulnerable storage space for memories and facts, and even the intangible, salvaged ruins of emotion. So Willemse’s archive will always be an incomplete repository, undermined not only from without, but also from within. (I overhear an exhibition guide explaining to a group of visitors that the artist comes into the space every day, and re-arranges the objects on the table. An intriguing gesture, I think: can she take agency over the archive as incomplete? Is this a fragile attempt to control, or to acknowledge the impossibility of emotional completion on the subject of home and displacement?)

A piece that stood out for me is the monoprint of a worn, frayed bath (?) mat titled What lies beneath (blue). I wondered how the adjective worked: blue print, blue mat, blue artist? Was I being trite? (I found myself reminiscing about a mat that I had grown up with in my childhood home.) The gaping hole in the middle of the Willemse mat print not only exposed the multi-layered texture of the woven rug, threads splayed, disconnected,  but reminded me that people too are made up of many diverse layers, disparate strands that don’t always link up neatly, and are not necessarily even visible. The print of the mat, a representation which emphasises the unravelling of the string-like material from which it is made, and then, by association, also the handmade materiality of the object as bearing the marks of someone’s living, elicited such a deep response I couldn’t help comparing it to the unravelling of an unknown life. I imagined something pulling a person apart. Thread by thread. Skin by skin. Synapse by synapse. Until identity became a faint shadow of former self. Perhaps the art piece portrays the wear and tear that we experience through life, or the state of the psyche after experiencing the loss of a home? Made uneasy, I think of what makes a homely, safe house: a simple mat – however worn? A chair in which to sit? Books? Lounge furniture? Perhaps Willemse is pointing out that even the loss of ordinary objects – which some will think of as merely superficial things – can have a devastating effect upon a person.

In the exhibition “Archiving of Loss and Longing”, Emma Willemse succeeds in using utilitarian parquet blocks to create a range of items that points to the desired yet fruitless attempt to record waves of ongoing human displacement. The exhibition seems to begin with the loss of home in her own life, but it also washes outwards, hinting at connections with South African histories of forced removals and, even further beyond, to contemporary  global pressures of migrancy and displaced people. The fragments and fractures which characterise the exhibition are solemn. Some of the images make me think that she is speculating about the human loss of ‘the world’ as home. And yet, inspirationally, she also makes a creative attempt to reimagine the effects of the loss of home, knowing that her efforts are limited.

The most daunting of the art works is the disintegrating boat, an odd canoe suspended above the book objects arranged on the central table.

This boat, so full of holes, captures the essence of loss and longing. Bare and broken, it is clear that the skeleton of the boat has suffered tremendously. The torn, tattered cloth looks thin, wrecked. I look up at the boat, and think of the small, vulnerable handful of people such a small, handmade craft could ever be expected to carry. I think of the human body on water, with so little between it, and drowning. I look at the ragged gauze stretched across the bones of the boat’s structure, and the strips hanging down. I think of skin, of a person who has sustained wounds. This boat, so broken, seems to lose its coherent identity, its sense of what it is, and to become something else. This boat is clearly not able to float on water. My heart sinks, as I think of the boat. Human hardships take their toll. Someone’s home is gone. Perhaps that person is gone, too. My ideas waver, moving to and fro. If this boat represents a vessel of movement, this boat as it physically is, is an object incapable of taking us anywhere. And yet it has carried my thoughts. Is carrying them still.

Posted in Blogs, Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why South African short films should be seen

by Elodi Troskie

What difficult social issues do you allow into the space of your everyday life? What do you – like most of us - prefer to keep at a distance? Here are two South African films that offer intimate, moving takes on questions that many of us would like to avoid. And they do so without hammering home lessons.

Valma Veronica, a 5-minute short film by award-winning South African director, Jolynn Minnaar, does not waste any time. Made script-to-screen in just three days, it utilises every intent second to bind the viewer by inviting you into the house of an elderly character called Mr Basil Twine, where you follow his loving thoughts and comments as he prepares tea for his wife, who will be home soon. In terms of mood, this is a quiet film, but there is hardly ever a quiet moment. The elderly Mr Twine is charismatically talkative, chatting easily to the person interviewing and filming him. His constant stream of loving anecdote and ordinary observation  hints that he spends his days in this way: talking to himself. Watching an elderly family member slowly decline is a common family situation, making this heart-wrenching  film very quickly hit the viewer where it hurts, where the heart is raw.

Following her debut feature film, Unearthed, a documentary digging deep into the shale gas industry from an international perspective in the fracking debate in South Africa, Minnaar has proved herself a teller of stories that matter. You will be left quietly chastened, after sharing in Basil Twine’s small daily routines, especially once you appreciate that he is not an actor, but the engaging subject of a visual documentary in which the filmmaker has curated powerfully honest glimpses of his life, in order to reveal something of his story. Valma Veronica – the name of the wife whom we never get to meet - won the shnit Real Time Competition in 2014, an annual event in which three amateur Cape Town filmmakers are invited to compete against each other to produce a very short film over the course of the festival week. The theme was “Home” and Minnaar created Valma Veronica in 72 hours.

Another South African short film, Buitenkant (The Outside), went viral in 2017 after being selected as a Vimeo Staff Pick. The film premiered at the 2016 shnit International Shortfilmfestival in 2016, where it won the prize for Best Made in South Africa Short Film.

Buitenkant, created by William Nicholson, follows a homeless woman around the streets of Cape Town, where she manages, after some trying, to break into a flat after finding a set of  keys lying in Buitenkant Street in the city centre. The experience of an intruding stranger in this warm little home serves as reminder to the viewer of the life taken for granted, implicitly posing difficult question: how much control do any of us really have over our lives? How can chance intervene? Criminal act or human need?

For a minute (since I was still fresh from watching Valma Veronica), Buitenkant tricked me. Only when I recognised Rehane Abrahams, the actress cast in the lead role, did I reluctantly adapt to the idea that this film was generically different from Minnaar’s: it is not a documentary but a fiction film scripted and staged to mimic the effects of real time doccie footage. Despite my near slip – maybe because the fiction so cleverly created a mirror of a familiar reality - I found the film very engrossing. At the time of Buitenkant’s production more than 7000 people in Cape Town were homeless, and Nicholson very specifically speaks to South African viewers (while not excluding a wider audience), using the film to start a humane conversation around homelessness. A quick Google search informs me that “There is no national census on homeless people in South Africa; researchers instead rely on individual studies of homeless persons in particular cities. The South African homeless population has been estimated at approximately 200 000”. Those, apparently, are the facts of the matter. Homelessness is a phenomenon we are all distantly aware of but, for the most part, are not emotionally brave enough to see and attempt to understand. By focusing on a small part of the life of one homeless woman, Buitenkant humanises a potentially remote ‘problem’ and might subtly persuade viewers to imagine making a difference.

In Buitenkant, the woman breaks into the apartment, a stranger in a stranger’s home. Socially estranged and marginalised through her denigrated homeless status, for a very short time – time out of time - she lives in the flat like its owner: she eats left-over food from the fridge, pours herself a glass of wine, takes a shower, washes her hair and gets dressed. A viewer is drawn towards understanding the simple human needs that bond a homeless woman and the absent occupant of the flat – and those of us participating in the spectacle of watching the events on screen. While the film deals with clear material poverty, it also makes me think unusual thoughts: how are we to know which of us has “broken into” our lives? Or: how many among us have paid for our homes but still live in these places as strangers to ourselves, and to others? Rented lives. For a while, the affective narrative of Buitenkant draws me inwards, and sees me getting metaphysical. But soon the film’s arc pulls me back to more everyday matters, for Nicholson so quietly draws the viewer’s undivided attention and unbroken eye contact with the screen that a person who would normally receive nothing more than a wilful blind eye is now intently focused on and paid attention to as a human being. By spending 10 minutes on this one character, she is set apart from the “rest”. This is skilfully portrayed in the scene where, through the window of the flat she has broken into, the woman watches another homeless person. His face is turned away from the camera, at once claiming the right to privacy and stripping him of his identity and masking him, blending his identity into the mass of anonymous people who live on the street. A viewer is left uncertain: should I be looking? Must I look?

Buitenkant and Valma Veronica: these are two brilliantly crafted, South-African produced short films that not only proudly represent the local film industry on a broader, international level, but do so by avoiding easy abstractions about ‘the nation’ as a clichéd home identity. Instead, these films show aspects of the small, ordinary lives of people who, in different ways, are socially unhomed, and whose vulnerable lives so often go unnoticed when we focus on the larger picture of what counts as ‘the South African’.

Watch the two films here:

 

http://between10and5.wpengine.com/2014/10/23/valma-veronica-the-shnit-real-time-winning-short-film-made-in-72-hours/

https://www.channel24.co.za/Movies/News/sa-short-film-goes-viral-on-vimeo-20171004

 

Posted in Blogs, Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment