[DEBATE] : Brett Davidson (formerly at Idasa) on Zapiro-Zuma

[Sean Jacobs]

> At present there's quite a heated debate going on in South Africa  
> over a cartoon that appeared in the Sunday Times last Sunday.  The  
> cartoon depicts Jacob Zuma, the president of the ANC and the man  
> most likely to be the next president of South Africa. Zuma is seen  
> undoing his trousers, while people representing the ANC, SACP,  
> Cosatu and the ANC Youth League are holding down a woman,  
> representing the justice system. The men are urging Zuma to rape the  
> woman.
>
> The cartoon has led to an outcry, with a range of views being  
> expressed in  blogs and letters, and calls to radio stations. Some  
> people have called for Zapiro, probably South Africa's most famous  
> and respected political cartoonist, to be fired. Some of these  
> critics have objected to the implied reference to Zuma's trial for  
> rape, saying this is unfair, since he was found not guilty. Others  
> have objected to the rape imagery, saying either that it makes light  
> of rape, or that it is insensitive given the high levels of rape in  
> South Africa.
>
> Some of Zapiro's critics have likened the cartoonist to David  
> Bullard, a columnist for the Sunday Times who was fired a few months  
> back, after a column of his which praised colonialism and made some  
> disparaging remarks about Africans.
>
> I'm not a knee-jerk supporter of the Sunday Times or of any  
> criticism of public figures -- I think the standard of journalism at  
> the Times has been dropping.  Over the last month in particular, it  
> has carried a couple of front page stories, making serious  
> allegations and splashed with enormous banner headlines, that seem  
> to have been poorly sourced and researched. But I do think the  
> Zapiro cartoon can be defended.
>
> Firstly, I think that the critics misunderstand the nature of  
> metaphor, and of political cartoons. Zapiro is not depicting a  
> literal rape. The cartoon uses the shocking, awful, violence and  
> violation of rape as a metaphor -- to comment on what it is that  
> Zuma and his supporters are busy doing to the rule of law in South  
> Africa. Secondly, the cartoon doesn't make light of rape. Just  
> because it's called a 'cartoon', doesn't mean it is trivialising  
> things or trying to be funny. Its message is very serious.
>
> I certainly don't think the comparison to David Bullard is fair.  
> Bullard's remarks were racist, attributing negative qualities to an  
> entire group of people. Zapiro's cartoon crticisises specific public  
> figures and organisations, for specific actions. That criticism  
> might be overly harsh, but it's not racist, and so does not overstep  
> the boundaries of free speech in my view.
>
> Yes, Zapiro's cartoon is very shocking. It elicits a visceral  
> response - it's like a kick in the stomach. But let's just think  
> about the situation it's referring to. Supporters of Jacob Zuma have  
> lately been making some very disturbing comments about the  
> judiciary. Some have gone so far as to call our top judges -- judges  
> with impeccable credentials -- 'counter-revolutionary'.
>
> These comments, which are being repeated over and over again, are  
> steadily undermining faith in, and respect for, our judicial system  
> and thus for the rule of law. The rule of law is the bedrock of  
> democracy. If that goes, society descends into chaos or tyranny. It  
> is very dangerous territory that Zuma's backers have dragged us  
> into, and that I find that infinitely more worrying and disturbing  
> than this cartoon.