escritora, periodista y crítica literaria

Nadine Gordimer: literature and politics

The poli­ti­cal novel is that dif­fi­cult com­bi­na­tion of esthe­tics and ethics that mer­ges anec­do­te into his­tory. To be truly suc­cess­ful as art, it most fore­go “poli­ti­cal speech” as such, unless it be cons­trued as the true con­vic­tion of fic­tio­na­li­zed cha­rac­ters. Nadi­ne Gor­di­mer is a mem­ber of that elu­si­ve eli­te, the wri­ter who recon­ci­les the con­flic­ting demands of both lite­ra­tu­re and poli­tics. She was awar­ded the Nobel Pri­ze for Lite­ra­tu­re in 1991 as a recog­ni­tion of her talent.

Born in 1923 in the mining town of Springs, South Afri­ca, of Jewish immi­grant parents –her father came from Lithua­nia and her mother from England- she acqui­red her real edu­ca­tion from reading due to a childhood ill­ness. Her first novel, The Lying Days  (1953),  is the story of a young girl, Helen Shaw, who in the cour­se of her life comes to grips with the dread­ful reali­ties of her country. She is res­tric­ted by cir­cums­tan­ces of class, race and gen­der which she must break through in order to unders­tand the black world of the mining town, and even­tually, of South Afri­ca as a who­le. This con­fron­ta­tion leads to her invol­ve­ment in the libe­ral move­ments of the for­ties and fif­ties, and ulti­ma­tely to disen­chant­ment befo­re the rise of power of Afri­ka­ner natio­na­lism in 1948. How much of this disen­chant­ment is Gordimer´s own, we can only guess. What we do know is that it led to a life-long strug­gle against Apartheid and in favour of free­dom for the black popu­la­tion of South Afri­ca.  

In her Nobel accep­tan­ce speech, Gor­di­mer said: “This aesthe­tic ven­tu­re of ours beco­mes sub­ver­si­ve when the sha­me­ful secrets of our times are explo­red deeply, with the artist’s rebe­llious inte­grity to the sta­te of being mani­fest around her or him; then the writer’s the­mes and cha­rac­ters inevi­tably are for­med by the pres­su­res and dis­tor­tions of that society”. Sub­ver­si­ve her ven­tu­re cer­tainly was, so much so that her novels were ban­ned in her country for a time. But they brought a new focus on the plight of more than two thirds of the popu­la­tion of South Afri­ca, sub­ject to life in the townships ‑tho­se slums depri­ved of the most ele­men­tary of com­forts- to carrying a pass in order to enter the whi­te man’s world and be allo­wed to per­form hard or unwan­ted tasks.

Gordimer´s world is whi­te, hers is the life of a whi­te libe­ral, her books are read by her peers. The repres­sed world of blacks she wri­tes for and about beco­mes the Other in her books, this Other she must stri­ve to unders­tand in order to bes­tow a voi­ce on tho­se who can­not speak for them­sel­ves. Gor­di­mer tells, in an arti­cle in the New York Review of Books, of a family she knew. The father, a whi­te poli­ti­cal acti­vist, dies in jail. She is fas­ci­na­ted by this group of peo­ple, by their life haun­ted by dan­ger and a fier­ce self-dis­ci­pli­ne. Gor­di­mer met the daugh­ter, a young girl dres­sed in a pri­va­te school´s uni­form, wai­ting to visit her father in jail. When she was about to publish her novel ‑which she does not men­tion by name, but we can iden­tify as Burger´s Daugh­ter- the sce­ne haun­ted her. What would this girl –now an adult- think of the woman who used her dead father as a cha­rac­ter in her book? Com­pa­ri­sons were inevi­ta­ble, and she could ima­gi­ne this young per­son fee­ling betra­yed, accu­sing her, Gor­di­mer, of using the life and death of her father for her own bene­fit. She sent her the manus­cript, wai­ted for weeks, and one day saw the young woman at her door: “This was our life” she told her. We can indeed feel the cha­rac­ters of Burger’s daugh­ter (1979) ‑perhaps Gordimer´s best-known novel: the con­flict of Rose, daugh­ter of a martyr dead for the cau­se, who­se inhe­ri­tan­ce weighs hea­vily on her pre­sent and her futu­re; the reluc­tan­ce of cer­tain black lea­ders to accept the whi­te man´s life as an offe­ring. Linel Bur­ger knows that his goals will never be attai­ned in his life­ti­me: “No more hun­ger, no more pain”. During the trial that impri­sons him for life, he sus­tains that, if whi­tes are guilty as a group, that guilt must be ato­ned for indi­vi­dually and not collec­ti­vely. His sacri­fi­ce is volun­tary, in the name of that collec­ti­ve guilt, of a régi­me of oppres­sion that his actions are inca­pa­ble of trans­for­ming. “My cove­nant is with the vic­tims of apartheid…I would be guilty only if I were inno­cent of wor­king to des­troy racism in my country”.

The­re is a hid­den con­flict within the book: is the leit­mo­tiv of the strug­gle the blackman´s triumph or the whiteman´s gift? Whi­te Euro­peans are sub­cons­ciously awa­re of their superio­rity; if not their own, as indi­vi­duals, of the superio­rity of Wes­tern cul­tu­re, values, civi­li­za­tion. In their role as heroic prophets, they are willing to die in order to bes­tow all of them on the mise­ra­ble mas­ses ens­la­ved by their peers. They do not know, or are unwi­lling to accept, that Wes­tern values may not be ade­qua­te for a peo­ple as yet immer­sed in tri­bal con­flict. “Black­ness is the black man´s refu­sing to belie­ve that the whi­te man´s way of life is best for blacks”

Burger´s Daugh­ter, The Late Bour­geo­is World (1966), A Guest of Honour (1970), July´s Peo­ple (1981) are all links in the chain that ties Gor­di­mer to her role as social and poli­ti­cal figh­ter. What hap­pens after? A wri­ter with one aim in mind, with one the­me made up of many sto­ries, must feel at a loss when chan­ge finally comes about. Apartheid is dis­mantled, Nel­son Man­de­la comes to power as the first black Pre­si­dent of a pre­do­mi­nantly black peo­ple. “The dan­ger lies in that we don´t  see what the­re is after the strug­gle, we don´t think of what the­re is on the other side. We have to know whe­re we´re going, man” says Gor­di­mer through one of her cha­rac­ters. On the other side of the strug­gle is a country torn by ens­la­ve­ment and mas­sa­cres, by deca­des of bit­ter enmity and hate; 80% of the peo­ple lack run­ning water, drai­na­ge, elec­tri­city; mas­ses of depri­ved, une­du­ca­ted youngs­ters roam the streets whe­re not so long ago they were expo­sed to sei­zu­re and jail. But poli­ti­cal exiles start the jour­ney home, the inte­li­gen­tsia that took refu­ge abroad bring back foreign-lear­ned skills. The recons­truc­tion slowly begins.

Gor­di­mer unders­tands chan­ge, and her the­mes chan­ge accor­dingly. Whe­re befo­re “my novels are anti-apartheid…because, if you wri­te honestly about South Afri­ca, apartheid damns itself”, now the empha­sis is on the tur­moil of recons­truc­tion. None to Accom­pany Me and The Hou­se Gun (1998) belong to this later sta­ge of cons­cious­ness. In the first, the story deals with two women, Vera, a whi­te law­yer, and Sibon­gi­le, a black expa­tria­te. Vera through her legal work, Sibon­gi­le as a mem­ber of the Com­mit­tee in char­ge of the new Cons­ti­tu­tion face a new epoch, and an inter­nal con­flict with their hus­bands, not as suc­cess­ful or invol­ved. Gor­di­mer is a lucid obser­ver of the new midd­le clas­ses, so vastly depri­ved in the past and now arri­ved at an unex­pec­ted well-being. Inter­ra­cial rela­tionships flou­rish, no lon­ger res­tric­ted or oppo­sed. The strug­gle is now for power and suc­cess: the whi­te man´s legacy.

The Hou­se Gun is ele­gant, inte­lli­gent and dra­ma­tic. A midd­le-aged whi­te couple meet with one of life´s dee­pest shocks: their bri­lliant, hand­so­me son, a suc­cess­ful archi­tect, is in pri­son accu­sed of mur­de­ring a clo­se friend. The law­yer in char­ge of defen­ding him is black. He stu­died in England, came back trai­ling a story of pro­fes­sio­nal pres­ti­ge. The ques­tions mul­tiply: Is he up to the task? What is it that we did wrong? Guilt and bla­me threa­ten a here­to­fo­re affec­tio­na­te marria­ge. But this is not only about pri­va­te tra­gedy. The hou­se gun speaks for itself: a wea­pon bought by other­wi­se pea­ce­ful young men in fear of assault, rob­bery, kid­nap­ping. The streets of Joha­nes­burg are pla­gued by that con­tem­po­rary urban cur­se, vio­len­ce. If the­re had been no gun, would the­re have been a mur­der? The plot unra­vels with Gordimer´s accus­to­med pre­ci­sion and insight. “As I began to wri­te it, I reali­zed it had something to do with the cli­ma­te of vio­len­ce that we feel so strongly about us, and not just in our country. It is a cha­rac­te­ris­tic of big-city life everywhe­re”.

When we read Gordimer´s latest novels, we reali­ze that a good writer´s, a good poli­ti­cal writer´s con­cern is not only with society and his­tory, but with human beings trap­ped in his­tory.