|
|
drawn conclusions
Cheerleader or critic? A fine line
By Kotie Ferreira and Ida van Tonder
American cartoonists are experiencing increased pressure to be politically correct. How are South African cartoonists faring in the new dispensation? Local leaders in the field share their experiences.
"In 1986 I went into hiding after producing a struggle poster that incensed the Security Police. My disguise included dyeing my dark-brown hair blond, but it went bright orange instead, and I was likened to a low-flying naartjie."
In our new democratic dispensation, it is almost inconceivable that cartoonists like free-lancer Jonathan Shapiro were subjected to such restrictions. Yet criticism of the government was virtually impossible, especially during the state of emergency. Fierce restrictions were, however, not only put on cartoonists, but on the media in its entirety. The issue was rather what you were allowed to report on than what you were allowed to criticise. Tony Grogan, cartoonist for the Cape Times sums it up, "If vital information was being withheld from the public, I could hardly comment on it if people weren’t even reading about it."
Needless to say, certain newspapers were biased towards specific political parties or ideologies. Anything going against the grain of what the publication championed, would upset not only the editorial staff, but also the general reader. Restrictions were quite often imposed by the publication itself, for its own viability. Lou Henning, cartoonist for Rapport, writes for a paper whose news approach supported the old dispensation. "Criticising the Government, especially before Mr De Klerk came onto the scene, more often than not invited a lot of reaction.
"Now we support the opposition and we can, within the limits, let rip." This is possibly one of the reasons why cartoonists from so-called pro-Nationalist publications are especially experiencing new-found freedom. In criticising the new Government the possibility of infuriating the traditional reader is not a factor to consider any more.
In the new dispensation all media is allowed more freedom in the decision to criticise. Grogan declares, "I have taken President Mandela at his word when he says that the role of the press is to criticise and to keep the government on its toes. The areas of failure of government are that much easier to detect because of this openness. I’ve certainly experienced no discouragement to go easy on the new Government from any quarter and from Government members themselves no offence at criticism."
Charl Marais, cartoonist for Die Volksblad, says the witty criticism at the core of the cartoonist’s art fulfils an important role. "A piece singing the praises of a politician will hardly be remembered for long... the logic of the caricature must be such that the reader says, ‘Well, that’s what will happen if we don’t watch out!’"
Madam & Eve is a prime example of the freedom the new dispensation can tolerate, despite the world-wide tendency to be politically correct. Madam & Eve copywriter Harry Dugmore says, "Madam & Eve is de facto politically incorrect. It depicts an employer/employee relationship without challenging (too overtly) the basis of that relationship. It depicts a white/black relationship without (too often) reminding its readers of how whites are ‘previously advantaged’ and blacks are ‘historically disadvantaged’".
The harsh realities of running the new democracy in the face of a struggling economy and rising crime gives the cartoonist more than enough material for scathing comment. In the words of Grogan, "The honeymoon and euphoria of our miraculously peaceful political transition is over." Shapiro adds by saying, "Things are still conducive to strong social criticism in cartoons due this country’s highly-charged politics." Yet, he says, with such an obvious target as the Apartheid regime gone, it is actually tougher to be hard-hitting these days.
Growing readership tolerance therefore does have its downside for the creator of cartoons. "So we have this provocative strip," Dugmore laments, "but no-one appears to be overtly provoked."
On the flipside of the coin, readership tolerance stretches beyond that which political correctness dictates. Dugmore continues, "We do not experience so much pressure, for in South Africa we have real issues. This is a life and death country where we have no time for arcane debates about political correctness."
Shapiro finds the public and editors alike not only more tolerant to sensitive political issues, but ready to accept touches of irreverence. "An American editor was amazed I’d managed to publish a cartoon of Jacques Chirac with a mushroom-cloud erection."
Yet in the cartoonist’s immediate surroundings, the powers that be still sit behind doors marked ‘Editor’. New South Africa or not, each publication maintains a hierarchy of decision-making, and the cartoonist may find himself receiving orders. He may on the one hand be a political commentator in his own right, or on the other a draughtsman putting others’ ideas to paper.
Says Lou Henning of Rapport, "The idea is hatched by the political staff, and I just pen down the images. The editor of our publication feels the political team should put its seal on the cartoon."
The decision-making structure is unique to each publication, and Grogan’s words reflect the policy of the Cape Times on cartoon origination. "Since joining the paper 22 years ago, I have never experienced any pressure to adopt a particular line or to tone down criticism."
Moegsien Williams, editor of the Cape Times, agrees, "Sometimes I don’t agree with the cartoon, but I close my eyes and let it get through. I told my political staff on my arrival, that they should tell me to go to hell if I ever interfered."
Tom Roy, Deputy Managing Editor of the Daily News, says the role of the editor as arbiter of the cartoon is not clearly defined. "If a cartoonist is experienced and well-known, he practically has carte blanche in creating his own cartoon. But let’s face it, there aren’t that many experienced cartoonists in South Africa. Senior editors will provide inexperienced cartoonists with an idea and he will be expected to draft the copy on that idea."
Freelancers like Shapiro, having to sell their product to editors, find that lessened pressure from behind those dreaded doors corresponds with a decrease in political pressure. Certain issues remain sensitive, however, and both cartoonist and editor have to tread lightly.
Shapiro says, "Powerful cartoons about Buthelezi are still difficult to get past editors. Buthelezi’s libel-machine is legendary. He says he does not like being called Gatsha, and even the editors listen."
Yet greater tolerance by government and the reading public has not left the cartoonist without a challenge. Cartoons may yet provoke, shock, or at least force people to laugh at themselves.
Grogan finds, "...our real difficulty is in adapting from a single-minded focus on the evils of apartheid to a wider-ranging look at the general performance of government and all aspects of society."
Rosy political transition aside, the country has many crises on its hands; the role of the cartoonist is now to bring the average South African back to earth and to face up to reality.
Harry Dugmore feels strongly about the role of the cartoonist in allowing people to view their own situation from a fresh angle. "Our message is: don’t just whinge about injustice, but strive to change society, strive to win respect and get your sense of self-worth from your achievements, not from your membership of a ‘disadvantaged’ group."
He continues, "South Africans are learning to laugh at themselves, while, in other parts of the world, the cry is defensive: ‘don’t you dare laugh at me’...Cartoons play a role illuminating the nation to itself, and in building bridges over the prejudice that we satirise in our cartoon strip."
|
[ Tuisblad ] [ Publikasies ] [ Inhoud / Index ] [ Publications ] [ Home Page ] |
|