RESPONSE TO MICHAEL MORRIS
Dear Editor
I have noted a claim by Mr Michael Morris, author of Apartheid: An Illustrated History, that I misquoted him in my article reflecting on Mrs. Helen Suzman's political career during apartheid. At the centre of the dispute is an extract from his book, which refers to Mrs. Suzman's Progressive Party (the party she represented as a lone MP for many years in Parliament) as "a token in itself of the political complacency of the bulk of white society". What Mr Morris does not dispute though is that he has indeed referred to Mrs. Suzman's party, which includes her as its public face and parliamentary representative for many years, as such. This quote is not a figment of my imagination but directly sourced from his book, and indeed Mr Morris himself confirms it by repeating it word for word in his complaint.
Mr Morris' main gripe, which drove him (as an author) to take an unprecedented step of castigating me (as a reader) for allegedly "misusing" his work, is that I quoted him "in such a way as to appear to have cast the long-standing MP for Houghton in a damning light". So Mr Morris doesn't like it when his literary words are quoted in a piece that portrays those he likes in bad light, tough luck. As an author, Mr Morris ought to know that once a literary work is published, the author cannot dictate the context within which it may be used by those who refer to it. The work can be used as it is understood by the reader in whatever context the reader desires.
Whether Mr Morris' description of Suzman's party as "a token in itself of the political complacency of the bulk of white society" was meant to cast her and the party she belonged to in bad light is a matter that is open to different interpretations by different readers. It is not the duty of the reader to enter into the mind or the thinking of the author. For this reason, students of literature usually employ the SIFT SEI method (which stands for Sense, Intention, Feeling, Tone, Style/Symbol, Emotion and Imagery) to analyse the written word. The essence of the SIFT SEI method, which is widely practiced in the literary world, is that once you write a piece of work it does no longer belong to you as the author but to the interpretation and appreciation of readers or audience.
Mr Morris may argue today that he did not mean to refer to Suzman and his party in a "damning light", however, his own text vividly betrays this. Mr Morris might also disapprove of the fact that a text from his work was quoted in a piece that cast Suzman in "damning light". But that should not be a reason for him to attempt to either dictate to readers how to think or impose upon them how, when and under what circumstance or context they may quote him.
Mr Morris ought to have the courage of his convictions and stand by what he writes, or simply leave the interpretation of his work to readers. It looks clumsy for an author to engage in some cheap propaganda in an attempt to justify or modify the things he himself wrote in order to appease a certain section of society.
Clearly Mr Morris is annoyed by my critique of Mrs. Suzman's role during apartheid. He is therefore welcome to enter the debate and factually defend Mr Suzman's legacy, rather than raise silly and biased objections regarding the usage of his work.
Moloto Mothapo - ANC Spokesperson in Parliament
May 5, 2013
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
