Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Wits University Press
Wits University Press, as has been seen, is often associated in the literature with oppositional publishing. This is partly due to the university’s own involvement in and reputation for promoting academic freedom. The production of such pamphlets as The Open Universities in South Africa (1957) is, at least in part, responsible for this reputation.
Student and academic activism is another aspect. In its own records, WUP promoted this image: “The Press, over the years, had built up an enormous trust and confidence, particularly among the black population, because of the type of work it produced” (‘Review of WUP’, S87/415, 1987: 1). Another document looks to the future: “Post-apartheid, the Press would enjoy full credibility. It already had a reputation in the black community for publishing on merit” (Minutes of Senate, 15/06/1987, S87/956: 19). But if we examine the actual publications produced under the brand of the university press, then the record is less straightforward.
WUP’s early titles could be placed in a political category – largely what Adam (1977) characterises as ‘liberal retreat’. Both Wits and Natal published a number of ‘liberal’ commentaries (in the special sense in which ‘liberal’ is used in South Africa, as described in Chapter 1) by such stalwarts of the Liberal Party as Edgar Brookes, Hilda Kuper and J.D.
Rheinallt Jones. In particular, at Wits University Press, under this banner, we can cite authors such as W.G. Stafford (Native Law as Practised in Natal, 1935), Leo Marquard (The Native in South Africa, 1944), in philosophy, R.F.A. Hoernlé (Race and Reason, a tribute to Hoernlé, 1945), and in psychology, I.D. MacCrone (Race Attitudes in South Africa, 1957 and Psychology in Perspective, 1932) – although the liberal economist, S.F. Frankel, and the historians, William Macmillan and Margaret Ballinger, hardly published within South Africa. The key focus of WUP’s early years was the publication of liberal studies on native law, as it was then known, and race relations (cf. African Studies, 5 December 1953). Some of the most significant of these studies may be found in a bibliography prepared by Beverley Kaplan in 1971: Race Relations in South Africa, as illustrated by the writings of Mrs. A. W. Hoernlé, Professor R. F. A. Hoernlé and Mr. J. D. Rheinallt Jones. Ally et al. (2003: 79) point out that “[t]he liberalism of this strand of South African sociology was decidedly opposed to racialism, but the paternalism, which underpinned their attitude, is clearly evident in their writings and research postures”.
A feature that emerges from the strong preoccupation with race and race relations is the general acceptance and use of apartheid categories of classification, such as ‘Bantu’, ‘the African’, ‘Coloured’ and so on, as well as the use of both ‘Bantustan’ and ‘homeland’. Indeed, a gradual shift in terminology from ‘Bantu’ (up to the early 1970s), to ‘Black’ (from the early 1970s), may be discerned. There is also a shift evident from the term ‘Hottentot’ (now considered pejorative) to ‘Khoisan’, during the course of the 1970s. An example of a very influential liberal text in this regard is The Cape Coloured People 1652–1937 (J.M. Marais, 1957). This pioneering work, a study of white policy towards coloured people, was not originally published by WUP, but by Longmans. The story of how it came to WUP reveals how external events can have an impact of publishing, as well as the extent of Wits University’s ties, world-wide: 400 copies of the 1939 Longmans edition had been sold, when the rest of the print run was destroyed as a result of a German bomber destroying the Longmans warehouse in London. Owing to their ongoing relationship, Longmans approached WUP to consider a reprint, but this was put off until the end of World War II, due to paper shortages. It was only some time after the war ended that the question of a reprint was taken up again, and the work finally re-appeared in 1957.
University of Natal Press
During the early years of the University of Natal Press, a number of titles dealing with current issues were produced, largely under the auspices of the Natal Regional Survey series. A sample title from this “great socio-economic survey” series (Theoria, 1953), which was produced by Oxford University Press for a few years before UNP was established, is A Natal Indian Community: A socio-economic study in the Tongaat-Verulam Area (Gavin Maasdorp, 1968). This kind of ‘socio-economic’ study drew attention to matters of race relations and demographics, but did not necessarily critique government policy.
1960s: UNP was responsible for producing the journal Theoria, and volume 15 of 1960 bears this comment in the Editorial, which reveals a wider awareness of the political situation while also situating the publishing programme as “non-political”: Non-political as it is, Theoria 15 bears at least one mark of the unhappy situation in which our country finds itself at present. It was the ‘Emergency’ which (no doubt inadvertently) provided one of our contributors with the leisure to write a long article. We are happy to be able to publish a criticism of Antony and Cleopatra written by Mr D. R. C. Marsh during his sojourn in Pietermaritzburg gaol; and we hope it will serve as an example to others who may find themselves in the same box in course of time, of how to make a virtue of necessity and dispel pleasantly and fruitfully at least some of the tedium of their plight. (Theoria, 1960: 1) The opening year of the content analysis, 1960, was not a prolific one for the still small and emerging University of Natal Press, with just four publications produced during the year. One of these, however, was the work of celebrated liberal sociologist Hilda Kuper, on Indian People in Natal. The work was well received, especially internationally, with positive reviews in journals including the International Journal of Comparative Sociology, American Anthropologist, and the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. With continuing popularity, it is unsurprising that more than ten years later, in 1974, a US edition would be produced by the Greenwood Press, having acquired the territorial rights from UNP.
The following year, 1961, saw just one publication being produced by UNP, and that the text of a lecture delivered at the university: A Review of Zulu Literature by C.L. Sibusiso Nyembezi. This publication is significant, however, in terms of UNP’s author profile, because it represents the first publication by a black author at that press. Shortly afterwards, in 1962, the profile would be supplemented by Absolom Vilakazi’s anthropological study, Zulu Transformations: A Study of the Dynamics of Social Change. Also in 1962, the Press was to publish the surprisingly critical proceedings of a conference on Education and our Expanding Horizons (with a gap of a few years after the conference itself was held). Reviewers at the time commented directly on the oppositional stance of the work: “Coming at a time in South Africa’s history when politically and racially the days were full of tension – when, indeed, a State of Emergency had been declared by the Government only a few days before the Conference began – the very forthrightness and free expression of all participants in itself makes stimulating reading” (Review in Race Relations News, quoted in UNP book list,
1969: Like WUP, UNP would come to be associated with a tradition of liberal thinkers. Some were very eminent figures in South African politics, such as Francis Napier Broome, the retired Judge President of Natal, whose memoir Not the Whole Truth was published in 1962. Perhaps the most celebrated liberal author was Edgar Brookes, with such works as A History of Natal (with Colin de B. Webb, 1965) and A History of the University of Natal (1967). These publications were very well received, as evidenced by advertisements and reviews of the time. Similarly, other historical works – notably the James Stuart Archive of Recorded Oral Evidence Relating to the History of the Zulu and Neighbouring Peoples (John Wright has written an interesting account of the compilation and publication of these volumes, see Wright, 1996), as well as others – were also well received by the local press and academic journals alike. The press thus began to develop a reputation for publishing high-quality scholarly research in the areas of regional history (Natal and Zululand, now KwaZulu-Natal) as well as military history.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Publishing studies and the neglect of university presses
1.3 Aims of the study
1.4 Methodology
1.5 Key concepts
1.6 Benefits of the study
1.7 Limitations of the study
1.8 Overview of chapters
Chapter 2: Literature review: The university press
2.1 Current research on publishing and the university press in South Africa
2.2 The Anglo-American university press model
2.3 The university press model in the Commonwealth
2.4 The intellectual role of university presses
2.5 Conclusion
Chapter 3: Origins and publishing philosophy of South Africa’s university presses
3.1 Higher education policies and politics
3.2 Establishing the university presses
3.3 Why a university press?
3.4 Conclusion
Chapter 4: Academic freedom and opposition: Towards a methodology
4.1 The legal environment: Censorship
4.2 The universities and academic freedom
4.3 Between resistance and collusion: A methodological approach
4.4 Oppositional publishing in South Africa
4.5 Conclusion
Chapter 5: Between complicity and resistance: Assessing the university presses’ shifting profiles
5.1 Publishing profiles: A content analysis
5.2 Author diversity
5.3 Gatekeeping practices
5.4 Conclusion
Chapter 6: The wider university and socio-political context
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Mission-driven publishing
6.3 Business models and funding
6.4 List-building and diversity of output
6.5 Distribution and reception
6.6 Conclusion
Chapter 7: Findings and conclusions
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Answering the research questions
7.3 Value of the study
7.4 Recommendations
7.5 Final conclusions
Bibliography
