Memorialising minority groups in post-independence Zimbabwe and South Africa : a critical analysis of oral history programmes

Abstract

The study was prompted by a substantial gap when it comes to the oral history of the minority groups in the mainstream archival centres. This was compounded by a perceived hesitation and reluctance of minority groups’ participation in oral history programmes organised by mainstream heritage institutions. The study was anchored \non the research methodology of constructivism ontology, critical emancipatory epistemology, qualitative approach and using a comparative case study from both Zimbabwe and South Africa. The substantive theory of the study which was used as a lens in understanding power relations between minority groups and the elites was the power elite theory. \nThe findings of the study revealed that the national mainstream archival institutions in Zimbabwe and South Africa are struggling to document the oral histories of the minority groups. This is mainly caused by their organisational culture which is obsessed with the documentation of the stories of those in power, a situation worsened by the concentration on liberation struggle history. For example, in Zimbabwe the focus on oral history was on Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Party while in \nSouth Africa it was on the African National Congress. This was so because the two liberation movements are in power. It was found that the role of ruling governments both in Zimbabwe and South Africa was unfavourable to the documentation of the minority groups as they mainly pushed the agenda of their political parties including \nmemorialisation of their party heroes to the exclusion of the ‘other’. Excessive centralisation of archival services at NAZ in Harare meant that the institution was invisible to the minority groups who, in most cases, are located on the margins and peripheries of society. In South Africa it was found that the NARS has limited success in documenting the minority groups because of the minorities’ hesitance in cooperating \nwith the institution. \nWhen it came to community archives it was found that they tended to coalesce around the politics of identity such as ethnicity, race and sexuality among others and some of these identities were usually ignored by mainstream archives. Private mainstream archives such as Sinomlando and South African History Archive were found to behaving a broad definition of minority groups to the extent that they were even \ndocumenting the oral history of those affected by HIV/AIDS and also the township history of blacks. \nThe study recommended the decentralisation of archival services not only to the provinces but to the lowest unit of governance such as municipalities and rural districts. Furthermore, it was recommended that there should be de-politicisation of mainstream national archives by creating independent ones which report directly to parliament rather than to central government and its ministers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.