Tag: Jonathan Jansen

Uit sy boek, Knowledge in the blood: Confronting race and the apartheid past (Lansdowne: UCT Press, 2009, 337p), blyk Jonathan Jansen se algemene benadering tot ideologie/politiek en in die besonder sy toepassing daarvan op die akademie. Wat in my bespreking (Praag 24 Maart) agterweë gebly het, is die opsigte waarin hierdie teks voorbrand maak vir sy 2017-boek (besonderhede hier onder). Die duidelikste aanduiding van waarnatoe hy neig, is in die volgende aanhaling gegee: “The single most important challenge they [white students] face to making it in the new South Africa is to move out of their white comfort zone and to embrace, not tolerate, their fellow human beings who, despite the accident of skin color, are in fact no different from them” (p 90).* Wat Jansen predik, is dat alle mense wesenlik eenders is, dat ras-, etniese en kultuurverskille geïgnoreer kan en behoort te word en dat hulle, wit en swart, mekaar (letterlik) moet omhels en dat daardie omhelsing (soos duidelik uit sy jongste boek blyk) gerus/liefs geslagsverkeer kan insluit. [* “There is no biological basis for race” (Jansen, 2017-boek, p 32) en “legislation made citizens white and therefore by exclusion non-white” (43).]

Jansen se passie is rasse-integrasie. Oor sy tyd aan die Universiteit Pretoria (UP) skryf Jansen: “The [education] faculty leadership [ie Jansen] appreciated and encouraged common learning spaces … including eating together. I must say that for me these were sometimes very difficult [eating] sessions. The white and the black students would, predictably, sit next to one another by race” (134). “In twelve years of deanship at two universities in South Africa, I found that the social patterns of students’ social lives were segregated by race and ethnicity even though they shared the same university campus … African students have their marked space on the campus, gathering in groups on the lawn in the same areas day after day. Afrikaner students have their spaces on the grass, as if someone had circled these areas for communal assembly. Colored students, without exception, assemble in much smaller groups but unmistakably have their familiar areas of congregation. Indian student groups are also unyielding to integration, at Pretoria especially, and with a trained eye it is easy to see from the dress of the young people concerned that Muslim students hang out separately from other students in the Indian community. And even though there might be one or two students of color in the white English circles of students, their spaces too are marked by the same language and ethnic affiliations” (135-136).

Oor sy tyd aan Durban-Westville University skryf Jansen: “I saw, for the first time, the real dilemmas of racial interaction, racial intolerance, and racial camaraderie among African and Indian staff and students. It was here that I found how race and ethnicity could be invoked by and among black [ie nonwhite] people for very destructive political interests. For example, being ‘African’ could be cited to demand privilege against ‘Indians’; being ‘Indian’ could be asserted to retain social distance from the ‘African’” (2). “African” en “Indian” word tussen aanhalingstekens geplaas want “the author uses the word ‘black’ to mean every person who is not ‘white’, since he does not acknowledge apartheid-era classifications op people by colour” (vi). Dit kom neer op ‘n ontkenning of ignorering van ras- en etniese verskille by nie-wittes (heel moontlik ter wille van politieke solidariteit). By blankes, daarenteen, tref Jansen ‘n skerp etniese onderskei tussen Engelssprekendes, wat hy redelik goedgesind is, en Afrikaners, wat hy kwalik kan duld. Anders as Jansen onderskei ek vier geykte rasgroepe: blank, bruin, swart en Asiaat.

“If there is one thing therefore that can be said about schools and universities in South Africa, it is that they are legally desegregated but socially segregated spaces. One reason for these stubborn patterns of racial association is that at the level of teachers and leaders, the same trends are to be observed; in other words, there is no adult modeling of alternative ways of being together among those deemed to be different … in each and every one of these [university] spaces, students are segregated by race. Nowhere is this more firmly defended than among the white Afrikaans students. I complained about this in order to gauge their [Afrikaner] reasoning. Their explanations: ‘But our cultures are different’; ‘We are more comfortable with our own kind’; ‘We have the same language’; ‘This is how we were brought up’; ‘Nobody should force us to be together …’; ‘Why is this a problem? It’s natural for people to be with their own’” (136). Jansen se standpunt is egter: “We needed to steer the students by example toward the goals of social integration that we had set for all our students” (214).

Na aanleiding van wat Jansen hier bo beweer, kan aangevoer word dat hy klaarblyklik die mate van eendersheid by mense oordryf. Hy verlang vrywillige rasse-integrasie, maar as dit nie gebeur nie wend hy hom tot gedwonge integrasie, soos hy by die UV-koshuise gedoen het. Hy erken dat ten spyte van statutêre desegregasie sosiale segregasie voortgaan. Enersyds dui dit myns insiens op die diepgewortelde, dus wesenlike, aard van mense; soort soek soort. Hierdie essensiële aard van mense wil Jansen op grond van sy misleide ideologiese ingesteldheid verander. Andersyds keer hy laat dit bars teen die aanduidings dat gedwonge integrasie klaarblyklik minder natuurlik as vrywillige skeiding is, want dit sal apartheid aan redelikheid laat wen terwyl hy apartheid nooit genoeg kan verdoem nie. Dat Afrikaners uitgesonder word as dié etniese groep wat die sterkste teen rasse-integrasie gekant is, beskou ek as ‘n pluimpie. Dit toon dat Afrikaners waarde heg aan wat hulle is en bereik het, al is daar by Jansen geen waardering hiervoor nie. Jansen kla: “It is hard to teach against ‘innate’ understandings of race secured in the minds and hearts of white students” (137). In hierdie verband maak hy egter nie beswaar teen swartes se benadering tot ras nie; ook nie teen sy eie aanhang van swart mag nie.

By die laaste middagete wat Jansen vir UP-studente aangebied het, het 10 swartes opgedaag en geen wittes nie. Toe kon hierdie elftal lekker gesels. ‘n Swart damesstudent sê toe: “I would really like to date some of those white boys” (138). ‘n Swart mansstudent voeg by: “I would really like to date some of the white girls on campus” (138). Dit was welkome water op Jansen se integrasie-sonder-grense meul. Aanvanklik was hierdie uitlatings “too much for my black consciousness state-of-mind” (138), maar hy herstel gou en komplimenteer homself: “As an experienced teacher stumped for a response, I again played for time. ‘Well’, I said to the now eagerly awaiting audience of ten young black adults, ‘tell me more’” (139). Volgens Jansen kla hierdie studente toe: “What was natural among college students, the act of dating, took on severe and rigid racialized forms. When dancing was organized between two or more koshuise, it was white students going with white students, and by language” (139).

“This criticism had little to do with dating per se and everything to do with the artificiality of social relations between black and white students. What would come completely naturally to young people, the act of dating, was the one firm line that nobody would cross on this race-divided campus. Nowhere was this racial distancing between girls and boys more acute than at the former Afrikaans universities. When I travel … to the English-speaking white universities, I would without fail notice interracial dating; though by no means widespread and common on the English campuses, it nevertheless existed and without the head-turning effects this would have on the Afrikaans campuses” (139). Dit is een van die opsigte waarin Engelssprekende blankes, volgens Jansen, beter as Afrikaners is.

“No knowledge has been more forcefully transmitted from parents to children before and after Apartheid than the knowledge of racial and ethnic purity” (139). “White South Africans can tolerate, to some extent, the ‘innocent mixing’ of black and white where the possibility of sexual relations is remote. But the most vivid image of racial fanaticism – black men and white women – remains a powerful knowledge in the memories of white South Africans” (167). Die “racial distancing between white women and the black dean [ie Jansen] would ease for some white women as they became comfortable with the collegial relationship and … overcame the sexual stereotyping of black men that formed part of the knowledge inheritance of white South Africans” (168). Nie-wittes is glo “more comfortable with open relationships across race and gender [than whites]” (191-192).

“A conditional pragmatism does not, however, mean lifting all the barriers to social interaction; it is conditional, also, in its embrace of the Other. These [Afrikaner] parents would resist any intimate social relations with black leaders [eg Jansen] or parents, and some would disown their children if, for example, a black lover was brought home. Many – though certainly not all – Afrikaner parents would frown on and discourage a black-white friendship, especially if it became known in their white neighborhood and among their white friends. Teaching and leading [!] their children on the university campus is one thing; sharing homes, lives, and loves is another” (241).

Jansen beweer: “Every year I would encounter at least one heartfelt story from a black student and a white student who had found love together. They know this is something I admire and applaud as a completely natural consequence of what happens when people interact with one another on the basis of a common humanity, rather than in response to racial essences that trap their emotions and constrict their thoughts” (228). ‘n Blanke vrouestudent het glo gesê: “I love Thabo … The problem is that if Dad finds out, he will kill me … If we go all the way, and ignore my parents, I will be thrown out of my home and will lose all my family; my parents will disown me, I just know that” (228).

“It is difficult to explain the depth of emotional stress that I experience when I encounter such tragedy. Here the bare bones of human wholeness (in the loving students) and human tragedy (in the disapproving parents) are revealed at the same time. In these repeated stories, two knowledges clash: the knowledge of the past and the knowledge of the future. As a leader [!], what do you say? Fortunately, by the time I got to Pretoria I had as academic leader [!] and university teacher encountered similar difficulties among South African undergraduate students [at Durban-Westville University] who defied boundaries – Muslim and Hindu students, African and Indian students, Muslim and Christian students” (228-229).

“The natural response is to want to encourage the students, to tell them to follow their hearts, to hail them as a necessary generation that will need to break the madness of segregation and the persistence of bigotry. At the same time, such a response must alert students to the very real consequences of isolation and dispossession, an often unbearable loss for any human being and especially for those coming from closed cultures where the affection and endearment of loved ones mean so much to their sense of community, purpose, and direction in life. In the end, I found that the only meaningful role for leadership [ie Jansen] was to affirm the courageous actions of young people and outline the positive and negative consequences of their decisions. In the end, however, it is their decision” (229).

“In a racially divided community, it makes no sense for leaders to teach about multicultural education or espouse values of interracial community if their daily lives do not demonstrate the living out of such commitments” (273). In sy jongste boek word dit duidelik waarom Jansen so fanaties behep met seks oor die wit-swart kleurgrens is. Ook in hierdie opsig beskou hy homself ongetwyfeld as ‘n navolgenswaardige leier of pionier.

Making love in a war zone

Jonathan Jansen se jongste boek is, Making love in a war zone: Interracial loving and learning after apartheid (Johannesburg: Bookstorm, 2017, 224p, R300; Amazon Kindle $21,65). Op die eerste bladsy van die teks word drie keer na Afrikaans verwys (p 7). Hoofstuk 1 begin met verwysing na landdros AH de Wet wat ‘n ontugwetsaak hanteer (27) en “the iconic photograph of the peeping magistrate in the Apartheid Museum” (31). Soos gebruiklik is Jansen daarop uit om Afrikaners en Afrikaans af te kraak. Op die buitekant van die boek word doringdraad uitgebeeld. Die inleiding begin met ‘n beskrywing van ‘n insident waarin die “swart” Jansen met ‘n wit vrou (“my fiancée” – 10) in sy motor deur ‘n polisieman voorgekeer word. Die bedoeling is om ‘n toepassing van die Ontugwet uit te beeld. Hierdie paartjie het daarna getrou en tydens hulle wittebroodsreis was daar nog ‘n beweerde ras-insident, hierdie keer in ‘n restaurant in George. Dit bied aan Jansen die geleentheid om na PW Botha as “apartheid’s bulldog” te verwys (10). Sy troue hou vir Jansen in “the memory of personal pain about rejection and reprisal by one side of the family for being the darker-skinned partner in a serious relationship. My father-in-law did not show up for the wedding. My future wife had to leave her family home the moment we asked permission to ‘go out’ together” (20).

“This kind of harassment became routine for us as a dating and now married couple, but it was nothing compared with the thousands of people whose lives were destoyed by the separation of families and the denial of love. I would discover some of these tragic family stories in the Section 5 Chronicles, an archival research project for this book in which I invited members of families broken up by apartheid’s race laws to deposit their stories. Section 5 refers to that section of the Population Registration Act (5), which allowed persons to change their racial identities based on ancestry, appearance and acceptance by the community” (10). Jansen se navorsing is uiteraard daarop ingestel om apartheid te diskrediteer. Soos die voorsitter van die UV-raad tereg aan Jansen gesê het: “You seem to have an obsession with that [racial integration and interracial dating and marriage]” (13). Maar die drie voorbeelde van ongeverifieerde (soos by die Waarheids- en Versoeningskommissie) stories wat Jansen aanhaal, lewer nie veel op nie. Jansen se gevolgtrekking is egter: “These three extracts from the archive are illustrative of the pain and confusion caused by ripping families apart by virtue of the race-classification laws of the time” (10). “While the rest of the world started to move away from an obsession with legalised racial discrimination, the South African state bedded down with a definitional madness that would make it a laughing stock among civilised nations” (36). Rassediskriminasie word sedert 1994 met hernude ywer voortgesit, maar in sy nuwe gedaante (bv regstellende aksie) geniet dit die heelhartige steun van Jansen.

Wat Jansen glad nie in ag neem nie is eerstens dat die destydse rasklassifikasie tot op hede in die praktyk voortbestaan en dat dit tans by uitstek ter benadeling van blankes ingespan word. Ook dat dit tans, soos Jansen erken, ter bevoordeling van “black people in general and Africans in particular” gebruik (eintlik misbruik) word (2009-boek, 29, 287). Tweedens toon die deurlopende moontlikheid van herklassifikasie hoe menslik die destydse beleid, ten minste in hierdie opsig, toegepas is. “Those who saw the gap applied for reclassification; few were denied” (2017-boek, 13). Jansen dink egter daar was geen menslikheid in hierdie wetgewing nie. Die wet op gemengde huwelike en die ontugwet “were applied with a vengeance on South African society” (43). Derdens is dit hoofsaaklik in die geval van bruines (“presumably racially mixed”* – 36) dat herklassifikasie soms nodig was, soos duidelik in die tabel (38) aangetoon word. “Race was therefore very fluid” (39). Dit is omdat rasklassifikasie in die geval van blankes, swartes en Asiate maklik is, maar in die geval van bruines is dit moeiliker omdat bruin almal insluit wat deur daardie drievoudige rassif geval het. Dit is die essensie van wat Marike de Klerk oor bruines gesê het. Anders as Jansen dink ek nie dit was die uitdrukking van “racial disgust” nie (46). Vierdens weet Jansen (soos ek) eerstehands dat ‘n ligte velkleur op bv die kampus van die Universiteit van Wes-Kaapland (UWK) in die apartheidsera baie meer gesog as ‘n donker velkleur was. Noudat die bevoordeling omgekeer is, noem ontwikkelde bruines, soos Jansen, hulleself by voorkeur swart, maar wit bly die norm waarna heimelik gestreef word; dermate dat Jansen erken dat vir ‘n nie-witte om met ‘n blanke te trou (sosiaal/kultureel) opwaartse mobiliteit is (32). Sosiaal is daar ‘n gevestigde hiërargie: wit, Asiaat, bruin, swart, met ‘n nie-wit student “dating a white person as ‘the ultimate status symbol’” (51). “Loving down” vind in bv die volgende drie gevalle plaas: “white to black or coloured to African or Indian to black” (32).

[* “Mixed race (meaning coloureds) implies the existence of pure races, a racist assumption” (45). Jansen ontken die werklikheid van rasse, wat meebring dat hy nie kan verklaar waarom sowel die NP- as die ANC-regering die bevolking hoogs effektief in dieselfde vier rasgroepe verdeel nie. As absoluut suiwer rasse nie (meer) bestaan nie, sou dit in die praktyk steeds moontlik wees om redelik suiwer rasse (of etniese groepe) van erg gemengde rasse of (etniese groepe) te onderskei.]

“People continue to drift towards homogenous groups (their own race) when there is absolutely no [!] reason to do so” (14). Jansen gee hier voor dat hy die rasionele element in ‘n see van irrasionaliteit is. In werklikheid is dit verstaanbaar waarom bruines, in soverre die groep ‘n nie-homogene ras is, (biologies) minder groepsgebonde as die ander drie rasgroepe is. Bruines kon wel poog om kultureel in groter mate groepsgebonde te wees. Tydens apartheid was daar tekens van ‘n ontluikende eiesoortige bruin kultuur op bv die UWK-kampus, wat duidelik van blanke, Indiese en swart kultuur onderskeibaar was en steeds is, bv Afrikaans is die essensie van Afrikanerkultuur terwyl dit opsioneel vir (ontwikkelde) bruines is. Hierdie biologiese nie-homogeniteit bring mee dat bruines meer as die ander drie rasgroepe geneig is om seksueel oor die rastou te trap.

“You are more likely to love across the colour line if you are English-speaking rather than Afrikaans-speaking; or if you are coloured by designation rather than African; or if you are Christian rather than Muslim or Jewish or Hindu. There are class distinctions; you are more likely to love without boundaries if you are middle class rather than poor. And there are generational variations; younger couples are more likely to date and marry across lines of race and ethnicity than was the case with their parents” (14). “Within all these variations there are those individuals who break the trend, who stand out [eg Jansen], who defy expectation and who love whom they like” (15). Hy verwys na hierdie geval: “The husband is [an Indian] Muslim, and he married a Hindu woman, while their Indian daughter went on to marry a Jewish boy. This is rare in South Africa or anywhere else in the world, for that matter. Theirs are, no doubt, stories of hope” (15). Hoop op wat? Sulke “intimate couples … signal hope for social transformation” (206). Niks word gesê oor hoe gelukkig mense in hierdie soort verbintenisse is nie maar “interracial married couples have higher rates of divorce in countries like the USA” (210). “Who are the people who defied laws (then) and who defy convention (now) to create these kinds of unions with all the costs involved?” (15). Die samelewingsnorm is anders: “You love within your race, ethnic group, religious community and sexual affiliation” (16).

Jansen vind sy eie gedrag lofwaardig. “I have always been drawn … to … those who lived against the grain of public expectation” (54). “I have always been drawn to people who dwell in the borderlands … Baanbrekers … pioneers. These are people who refuse to be defined by social norms or constrained by historical patterns of association … Border-crossing people” (16). Dus oor-die-tou-trappers, selfs skoorsoekers. Ek sê nie sulke gedrag moet verbied word nie. Maar diesulkes kan gerus besef dat seksuele aktiwiteit wat ras- en etniese grense misken, uiters riskant is. Die huwelik is ‘n problematiese onderneming, wat kwalik ten goede deur grondige kulturele verskille beïnvloed kan word. Wanneer Jansen, oorbewus van sy gesagsposisie as dekaan of rektor, interrassige seksuele aktiwiteit aanmoedig, kan hy gerus in groter mate die jeugdigheid en gebrek aan insig van die studente in ag neem en ook die voorkeur van hulle ouers, wat meesal (dalk altyd) in groter mate as Jansen hulle belange op die hart dra.

In sy 2009-boek het Jansen heelwat ten koste van UP te sê. Noudat hy daar weg is, kom hy met kritiek op UV. US is seker volgende aan die beurt. Hy noem UV “the Mississippi of South Africa. Rural, argricultural, insular, religious and conservative, this is not a place for breaking out” (17). “In this part of the country the practice of racial exclusion continues as if nothing happened after 1994″ (192). “As in other parts of the world – such as the American South, with its history of slavery – region matters in terms of the intensity of reaction to interracial relationships. It quickly becomes apparent in the interviews that Bloemfontein is such a place, part of the very conservative Free State, compared with other regions of the country … It was one of the Boer Republics, so that distinction offers some explanation when compared with the more liberal Cape and Natal provinces of those days … in the rural Free State, the majority of white-owned farms remained beyond the reach of transformative forces … Children trapped inside these racial enclosures, where relations of white masters and black labourers continue undisturbed, would emerge into urban university life and find the transition disorienting. They lacked the competences to adjust to the Bloemfontein campus, where equality of relations was now required as a matter of policy and practice” (188).

“Just as Mississippi is sometimes referenced as a metaphor for race, racism and negative race relations in American literature and public imagination, so too the Free State has come to signify a place of racial conservatism in South Africa” (23). Jansen se weersin is geaktiveer deur “the long history of Afrikaner republicanism dominating the region” (18). In die Vrystaat kry jy nie boere en werkers nie. Nee, dit is glo “white farmers and impoverished black farm labourers” (18). “Racism would often express itself in muscular form, led by [Afrikaner] men who found ready resort in weapons and who routinely [!] abused black farm labourers … overgrown* men in tight khaki clothing … brutalising, sometimes killing, black men” (19). [* Jansen is self oorgewig met ‘n hangpens.]

Daar was “mean racial policies”, soos dat Indiërs nie eens in die Vrystaat mag oornag het nie. Die rede hiervoor was glo “protecting the Boers from competition” (18). Die Bloemfonteinse Afrikaanse koerant, Volksblad, wat kritiek op Jansen gelewer het, word “a racially venomous mouthpiece” genoem (18-19). Waarmee kan hy Afrikaners verder slegsê? “In Excelsior … White Afrikaans middle-class men came for their jollies. Businessmen, politicians and dominees sought interracial sex with black women until the news leaked and the police arrested the black women. Shame fell on the white men, punishment enough … For this book I was not, however, interested in transactional or opportunistic sex but in romantic love and the close bonds of friendship across the invisible but very real colour line that exists to this day” (19).

Die Reitz-voorval is ongetwyfeld die gebeurtenis waaruit Jansen die meeste slaankrag teen Afrikaners geput het. “There is now a growing research [!] literature on the subject of Reitz, the shorthand reference to the racial abuse [!] of black workers by white students. Reitz was the white male residence where the atrocity [!] occurred” (60-61). In geen normale samelewing sou die veroordeling van wat heel moontlik onskuldige studentepret was sulke buitensporige afmetings aangeneem het nie. “Four white students racially [!] abused five black workers” (52). Hoekom? Want dit is ‘n geval van “one of … the white boys appearing [!] to urinate into food that they then gave to the unaware workers to ingest. When a video of this utterly reprehensible event leaked onto social media, the level of anger from all quaters was unprecedented in the history of South African universities [!]. How could young whites born after apartheid do such horrific [!] things to black people?” (52). Let op tot watter verregaande gevolgtrekking kom Jansen op grond hiervan: “This was a rebellion against interracial residences on a formerly white campus. The very idea of such racial closeness, let alone intimacy, was enough to draw out such violent [!] hatred” (52).

“What brings me to this study … is not lingering pain” (oor sy ervaring van sy eie interrassige verhouding en troue) maar “intellectual curiosity … The first objective of this book is therefore scholarly” (20). ‘n Ander “objective is a political one, and that is to deepen our democracy through the project of nation-building and human togetherness” (21). Tydens apartheid was daar “a nation-building purpose to sex and marriage legislation” (42). Jansen dink dat rasvermenging deesdae dieselfde doel kan dien. Die ideaal is glo om “a more just and equal society” te bou (21). “South Africa might have stood out among nations for ‘its morbid fear of miscegenation unparalleled in intensity anywhere else in the world’, but it was certainly not alone in its obsession with interracial intimacy. In fact the two most notorious race-regulating regimes of the twentieth century were South Africa and the United States” (30). “Reprisal as a practice was an everyday experience in race-obsessed regimes such as the USA and South Africa” (189).

“It was not only words that kept interracial intimacies invisible and interracial marriage so rare in the colonial period, under apartheid and in the democratic period … ‘mixed marriage’ was so visible that social ostracism could be relied on to keep such desires in check” (46). “At the root of the continuation of a practice of racial discrimination is the retention of categories of distinction in the way human lives are regulated in the present, eg South African’s insistence on talking about citizens as belonging to ‘population groups’ … namely white, coloured, Indian and African” (47). Jansen ontken halsstarrig die opvallende werklikheid van ras. Hiervoor blameer hy Afrikaners as die hoofsondaars. “The key institutions rendering white separateness and white standards of behaviour normative remain largely untransformed from apartheid to democracy – the white Afrikaans families, schools and churches” (47).

Oor die drastiese vermindering van Afrikaanse skole en die verdwyning van Afrikaanse universiteite (waartoe hy doelbewus ‘n daadwerklike bydrae gelewer het) kla Jansen nie. Hy wil van rasgeïntegreerde skole en universiteite kweekplekke van onder meer interrassige seksuele verkeer maak. “The desegregated white English schools … offer much greater chances of interracial intimacy … such breakthrough relationships hardly ever happen … in the still largely segregated white Afrikaans high schools” (49). “Undoing oppression in dangerous and divided communities requires bringing together the perpetrators and the victims in the same dialogic space. This means there is diminished opportunity for such a dialogic encounter in segregated classrooms” (2009-boek, 260). Volgens Jansen moet dit nie by gesprekvoering bly nie. Veel groter interrassige intimiteit is sy ideaal. Wit en swart op dieselfde kampus is nie genoeg nie. Ook nie wit en swart in dieselfde koshuis nie. Nee, hulle moet kamermaats wees (2017-boek, 48). Die “hostile reactions to the very idea of shared spaces for living and learning has to do with attitudes ingrained in the hearts and minds of young white South Africans” (48). Jansen het sy posisie as rektor misbruik deur nie net die koshuise op ‘n wit-swart 50%-50%-grondslag tot rasse-integrasie te dwing nie, maar ook om ‘n verpligte indoktrinasiekursus vir alle voorgraadse UV-studente in Jansenisme in te stel. Maar: “A short course in the core curriculum or an occassional speech on a university platform was not going to disturb ingrained knowledge about race, racial purity and racial segregation – let alone interracial intimacy” (48).

“The more black students coming into a residence, the more white students would leave … the racial integration on campus would spark the development of private white Afrikaans residences around campuses such as in Bloemfontein” (53), Selfs dit will die wraaksugtige Jansen nie aan blankes/Afrikaners gun nie. “I had exposed in the media a student accommodation advertisement in the local Afrikaans newspaper for ‘non-affirmative action Christian women’; the words ‘white women’ would have sufficed and yet those very words reflected the language of South Africa’s white-supremacist history” (53). Maar is Jansen se gedrag nie dalk ‘n toonbeeld van swart heersugtigheid nie; dat alles moet voldoen aan die vereistes wat hy ingevolge sy swartmag-ideologie stel? “In the English universities there were no deep attachments to residential tradition as among their Afrikaans counterparts, with the result that all-white residences would eventually become all-black residences at institutions like Wits and UCT” (53). Hiermee word ‘n onreg teenoor blanke studente gepleeg, maar daarvoor het Jansen geen sensitiwiteit nie. Terselfdertyd toon hierdie verwysing na twee histories blanke Engelse universiteite dat (anders as wat Jansen graag voorgee) blanke Engelse studente, wat ras betref, nie soveel “beter” as Afrikanerstudente is nie.

“My campus lectures or public speeches urged integration rather than segregation” (48). Rasgeïntegreerde onderwysinstansies help ook met die vervulling van Jansen se ander wens, naamlik die vernieting van Afrikaans as onderrigmedium, want namate die swart komponent van skoliere en studente groter word, word die instansies al hoe meer eentalig Engels. Sowel Jansen as Russel Botman het hulle uitgespreek teen aparte Afrikaanse en Engelse klasse omdat dit nie rasse-integrasie bevorder nie. Integrasiepolitiek is vir diesulkes belangriker as die behoud van Afrikaans asook akademiese oorwegings soos moedertaalonderrig.

Deel van Jansen se navorsing vir hierdie boek was om ‘n video-onderhoud met elk van 10 UV-studentepaartjies te voer (16). Hulle is “deliberately mixed in terms of relationship status” (54). “What these very different couples have in common is that one member of the pair is black [ie non-white] and the other is white” (55). Wat hulle gemeen het, is dat almal in 1994 of later gebore is en gevolglik “born frees” (46) of “Mandela’s children” (50) genoem word. Foto’s van al die paartjies word in die boek by die teks van hulle onderhoud gepubliseer. In al die gevalle word eers die een en daarna die ander lid van die paartjie aan die woord gestel. Hier onder doen ek dieselfde. Oor die gepubliseerde teks van die onderhoude sê Jansen: “The editing was limited largely to matters of grammar, fluency and relevance” (218).

Wat lengte betref is hierdie rubriek ‘n dubbeldoor; ‘n “double whammy,” soos die Amerikaners so graag sê. Lesers wat tyd wil/moet bespaar, kan die volgende tien paragrawe – waarin die gevallestudies bespreek word – oorslaan en direk na die gevolgtrekkings gaan.

Die eerste paartjie is Afrikaanssprekend: ‘n wit predikantsdogter en ‘n bruin dame. Die blanke sê: “When I was in high school I had this best friend, a black guy, and my parents actually told me, ‘You know what, if you were to date we would not have a problem’” (65) Sy sê ook: “You can always learn something from someone if you can just open yourself up to any experience. I think a lot of Afrikaans people limit themselves. They want to stay in their comfort zone” (66). Haar bruin vriendin vertel: “My dad is the one that encourages anything for us. But for my mom, when you date a black, it’s traditions and it is this and it is that … I think they would welcome a white guy more than they would a black guy” (70). Hierdie paartjie is behep met uitdagings (“challenges”). Albei kom uiters vlak oor, maar dit kan te wyte wees aan die onderhoud wat in Engels gevoer is. Die teks lees moeilik, gevolglik het ek ontsien om die res van die boek te lees, maar die ander onderhoude lees makliker. Jansen hou van hierdie paartjie: “They … worked closely together to solve difficult problems of [compulsory] racial integration and the transformation of especially formerly white men’s residences on campus” (63). By hierdie paartjie is dit ‘n geval van vriendskap. Daar is by hulle blykbaar geen sprake van ‘n interrassige seksuele verhouding nie. Van hierdie bruin student word later gesê: “[She] was dating a black African man at the time of writing” (180). Die verskil-ontkennende Jansen kom vervolgens tot ‘n gevolgtrekking wat hom pas: In hierdie “unusually close relationship … their respective ‘cultures’ are anything but different” (180). Volgens Jansen ontwikkel hierdie blanke vrou “a keen moral understanding of what is right and what is wrong, atypically without any sense of racial-group loyalty” (180). “That capacity for unaffiliated judgement of what apartheid society would regard as ‘your own people’ comes from belonging to a decent family” (181). Die militante pro-swart Jansen het myns insiens in hierdie konteks seker nog nooit self die “capacity for unaffiliated judgement” geopenbaar nie.

Die tweede paartjie is ‘n Engelse blanke man en ‘n bruin Engelse vrou. Die man sê: “I never really was taught, you could say, to see colour” (78) maar hy het tog opgelet: “At school you would never see a white girl dating a black guy … the only exception … my Asian friends … could date white girls, black girls, and coloured girls” (79). “My mom is very relaxed about everything” (81). Hy vertel haar: “‘I am dating a girl of colour’, and then she was like, ‘luckily she is not black’. … she was just thinking from a culture perspective; there is a big culture difference” (81). Hy sê: “I think subconsciously it’s engraved into all white people … that you are better, you are superior … You will obviously never get rid of racism” (81-82). “That type of engraving that occurs over the years creates the stigma and the stereotype” (83). “We are all human. We share that humanity … I don’t enjoy the typical Afrikaner perspective … in my faculty … we have all white people sitting on one side of the class and all the black people on another. I used to sit by the black people because I am English [!]” (83). Sy bruin vriendin vertel: “My father would say he was not white, he was flesh, or he was brown … when I was in high school the first guy I dated was Chinese. Then I dated a Greek guy” (85). “When I was in my first year I dated a very, very Afrikaans guy … he got kicked out of the house for dating me. I was in my first year and he asked me to marry him and I ran away” (86). “My father … would always tell me, ‘You don’t have to feel like they are better than you in any way. You are not different from anyone’” (87). “My mother was just like, ‘… you’re an educated woman from an educated family’” (88). Hierdie bruin student voeg by: “There were people who really went through a tough time, and most of them were the black students, especially in residences. Either they were completely ignored by everyone or everyone stayed friends in their groups” (89). Hierdie paartjie het bereik wat Jansen so hartstogtelik begeer. Daar is ‘n brood in die oond: “there is a baby on the way” (88), “the first child born out of a loving relationship” (193).

Die derde paartjie is ‘n blanke Engelse dame en ‘n swart man gebore in Lesotho. Hierdie vrou sê haar ouers is baie liberaal. Haar pa woon in Kaapstad en haar ma in Durban. Sy besef haar vriend “is a different race … I think initially my mother’s response was how my dad was going to react … I am very close to my mom” (94). Die mansvriend het ‘n enkelma wat in Pretoria woon. “My mother is very liberal” (97). Hy was van die begin af in tradisioneel blanke skole. “I didn’t even know what racism was until I got to Grey. Grade 8 was a big culture shock, having to learn Afrikaans and actually seeing how different people are. As time went from Grade 8 to Matric, you would see even the Afrikaans people who were not necessarily racist but very conservative” (95). Hy het sy vriendin “through mutual friends” ontmoet (96). “It got serious a year later … She made the first move” (96). Dit is na hierdie man wat Jansen verwys wanneer hy skryf: “With one exception, all of the students in the couple pairs are light-skinned to varying degrees” (196). Hierdie verhouding is nie volgehou nie. Hierdie dame “now dates a different black student” (210).

Die vierde paartjie is mediese studente, ‘n Indiërvrou en ‘n blanke Engelse man. Hulle is “romantic partners” en daar is die “challenge of religious and cultural identity” (99). “We have been dating for two-and-a-half years” (102, 110). Hierdie vrou is in Indië gebore en het via Lesotho, waarheen haar ouers verhuis het, na UV gekom. “Nobody thinks I am Indian. They think I am either Greek or Afrikaans, a dark-haired Afrikaner” (104). Haar vriend beaam dit: “Everyone thinks she is Afrikaans” (110). Sy sê: “I have not told my parents about him” (102). “My parents never were racist” (101). Sy vertel van haar vorige vriend wat net matriek gehad het. Haar ouers het geredeneer: “His brain has not matured … We are not the same caste, so their mindset is totally different” (103). “My parents fear that I will not be a Kashmiri any more, that I will not follow the traditions … My parents are very conservative, and at the moment the biggest problem about telling them that I am dating a boy, even if he was Kashmiri, is the fact that they immediately think intimacy” (102). “And yet my brother was allowed to date. He had a girlfriend for six years, which my parents knew about, and eventually he also had to break up that relationship. Not because my parents said so; my parents were fine with him marrying her when they met her. She was Malaysian, and my brother and his partner realised that their cultures and traditions would not fit for some reason, and so they decided to break up” (103). Van hierdie Indiërdame se mansvriend word gesê dat sy ma “still cannot really speak Afrikaans” (108) en “My school was a good place, being an English school” (108). “We have never felt like anyone was judging us [this couple]. I think it is different with the Afrikaans students. They could be in the English class, but they are Afrikaans. They tend to keep amongst themselves. My whole time living in Bloem I have not made many Afrikaans friends” (110). Nêrens in Jansen se boek is daar vanweë etnisiteit en kultuur groter weerstand teen interrassige verhoudings as by hierdie Indiërs nie. Hierdie verhouding het misluk. Hulle is “no longer together” (210).

Die vyfde paartjie is ‘n bruin Engelssprekende vrou wat met ‘n blanke Afrikaanssprekende man getroud is. Jansen is hoogs in sy skik met hierdie dame omdat sy hom gehelp het met lesmateriaal vir die verpligte indoktrinasiekursus in Jansenisme (UFS 101) wat deur Jansen ontwerp en uitsluitlik in Engels gedoseer is, selfs voordat die UV eentalig Engels geword het. Sy sê: “I looked different from the other kids” (115). “I was bullied at school because of how I looked” (116). Soos haar ouers is sy as bruin geklassifiseer “even though I don’t look it … They often actually see me as Asian … sometimes when I speak Afrikaans, people would see me as white” (117). “We were not the general loudness of being coloured” (115). “I had an incredibly strong character” (116). ” I am a very strong-willed person” (120). “I spoke English … I learnt very quickly to become more fluent in Afrikaans … In my first year, we went to the South African War Museum, formerly the Anglo-Boer War Museum. I was horrified at what was happening there. It was a lot of white Afrikaners who had gotten together, and they were basically marching against the putting up of a statue of Nelson Mandela … I remember … not wanting to be seen in a crowd like this at all because of what they were marching against” (118). Sy het haar blanke man na haar ouers in Oos-Londen geneem ‘n jaar nadat hulle getrou het. “They didn’t have an issue with us at all, because the family is quite interracial. If I had brought a black guy home, it would not have been the same reaction” (120). Haar man vertel: “Around Grade 4 … we heard that we were going to get English classes. That meant that now other races were going to join the school … To be honest, there were some groups that were seen as ill-disciplined, sometimes because of their colour” (121-122). Voor hulle troue was hierdie paartjie betrokke by ‘n kerkopvoering. “She wanted to show me the ropes about acting, even though I was the director” (123). “My parents actually never had a problem with our relationship … I think it’s because of the church, the Old Apostolic Church. I think in the church we see that it’s not about your skin colour; it’s about what is on the inside. God wants to take care of your soul, and your soul does not have a colour. So, why should we care about colour if we say we are children of God but we cannot live it?” (124). Van sy vrou sê hy: “She will always put God first” (123).

Die sesde paartjie lyk op die foto asof albei bruin is. “They wouldn’t think anything of us” (129), dus hulle word nie as ‘n gemengde paartjie aangesien nie. Die vrou se ma is Engels en haar pa Afrikaans. Haar vriend is blykbaar eerder Afrikaans. Sy en haar ouers het bruin vriende. “I have always had coloured boyfriends. I don’t think I have had a single white boyfriend” (129). Haar vriend sê: “I actually never knew she was white … I thought she was coloured because her friends are coloured … I think it’s the way that I dress sometimes. They can see I am coloured” (131). “I think I am very charismatic” (130). In die studentekafeteria let hy op: “The non-white people sit here and the white people sit there” (132). Jansen lewer die volgende kommentaar op die onsekerheid rakende die rasklassifikasie van die dame: “Race cannot be read off the phenotype or physical appearance of a student [really?]. And so people around these student couples make active and on-the-spot assumptions about racial identity based on a quick survey of epidermal presentation, language usage, attitudes and company kept” (195).

Die sewende paartjie “might only have been really good friends” (135). “We are best friends” (137). Albei is Afrikaanssprekend. Sy is blank en hy is bruin. Hy sê: “There was a stage when I was in high school when I was seeing a white girl. Back then people would be looking” (138). Sy UV-vriendin “has never been home with me” (139). Sy is die enigste kind van geskeide ouers. Dit is haar grootouers wat na haar omsien. “Even though from the past, they have grown and they have changed” (143). Sy was in ‘n laerskool met baie swart kinders en Engels het spoedig die oorheersende taal geword. Sy het daarna ‘n eentalige Afrikaanse hoërskool bygewoon. Haar ouma sê: “I see now how I must read my Bible, that love sees no limitations” (141). Hierdie ouma se kleinkind sê: “I have adapted so well that I can actually be friends with anyone” (142). “I have so many friends who are from different races and different cultures” (143). Sy het aan haar bruin vriend gesê: “‘You are going to come to my wedding’ … I know that I will get a husband that is as comfortable with different racial friends as I am” (143).

Die agste paartjie word beskryf as “both good friends and committed partners” (145). Die man is bruin en sy vriendin is blank. Albei is Rooms-Katoliek. “Growing up among coloureds, your parents also came to think that it was more natural to stay within the same race” (147). Hy het ‘n oorwegend blanke hoërskool bygewoon. “Going to grade 7 was a whole new experience for me, almost like starting school again, because the mentality of everyone and the level at which they did things was not so much to say better, but different” (147). Op die kampus “I would feel a little uncomfortable if we were surrounded by a lot of whites … Bloemfontein is definitely, I think, the hardest place to have an interracial relationship … I showed my mom pictures [of my girlfriend] … and she was fine with it … My dad was very happy because [she] was my first girlfriend … I think they were just happy that I was in a relationship … It was something new because most of my family are in relationships with coloured people. What makes the youth, or our generation, feel more comfortable are the experiences in the school environment, because it is more diverse … more interracial relationships are going to happen when people spend time together, not noticing the differences as much as before” (149). Sy blanke vriendin kom uit “a very open-minded family” (150). Haar ma se agtergrond is Italiaans en Pools terwyl haar pa ‘n Nederlander is. “When I was twelve we adopted … a little coloured boy” (151). Jansen noem hulle ‘n “open and inclusive family” (181). Sy was in ‘n oorwegend blanke privaatskool, wat ook internasionale skoliere gehad het. “At the age of twelve it was compulsory to learn Zulu until Grade 9” (151). “We have never really looked at race in my [parents’] house … They didn’t really notice colour and didn’t really react to colour … you are a person and that is what matters” (152). “Being a multiracial couple was nothing we have ever clicked about until someone actually pointed it out” (154). “My mom said: ‘We are really happy for you’” (155). “I am a people’s person, I love people” (153). “We love each other and we are happy. We do find it’s more the older, Afrikaans people who have more judgement … In my opinion, a white and a coloured would be more looked at than a black and a coloured, because it’s more that whole non-white and white thing … We have been dating for almost fifteen months, and we have already discussed how we are going to get married one day” (156). “I think it has just been so natural between the two of us” (157).

Die negende paartjie is ‘n bruin Afrikaanse vrou en ‘n blanke Engelse vrou. Hulle is “best friends” (161). Die bruin student het Afrikaanse skole bygewoon en sê: “Most of my friends are white girls” (160). “I study in English. I am in the English class. It was my choice because my world is not going to be Afrikaans forever … It is the universal language, so I chose English. My parents support me” (160). “My parents are very liberal in a sense. My mom and dad raised me to never look at someone based on their race” (161). Haar blanke vriendin “sees life as I do. I went home with her and I liked it … [She] is friends with everyone regardless of what they look like … [She] will count as my friend forever. She is someone that I would want my kids to know or to have as a godmother” (161). Die blanke vriendin sê: “I had friends of all races and there were sleepovers at our home with black and white kids. My parents are also committed to equality. My mom definitely sees a person for who they are, not what they look like. Dad has his moments where he is a little more racist” (153). Sy het nog nie haar vriendin se ouerhuis besoek nie. Dit gaan hier klaarblyklik om vriendskap en nie om interrassige seksuele verkeer nie..

Die tiende paartjie is ‘n bruin homoseksuele Afrikaanssprekende man en ‘n blanke heteroseksuele Afrikaanse vrou. Jansen skryf: “I discovered an exceptional friendship of a gay black man and white Afrikaans woman who defied every stereotype of togetherness on or off this Free State campus. The interview was conducted in Afrikaans … and translated into English” (165). Die man sê hy het op skool die Afrikaanse klasse saam met ander bruin skoliere bygewoon. “My mom’s coloured and my dad is black, and no one in our family has white friends who they are so close to … The first time my parents met [my girlfriend], it wasn’t uncomfortable at all …; My mom asks, my dad asks, ‘Is this the woman you are going to marry, my child?’ And then I would say, ‘No. It’s just someone who is very close to me’ … [She] is not my only white friend, I have many others. For me, it’s only human. I like people. That’s all” (167). “I would never want to end my friendship with [this girlfriend]. For me it is for now and forever. The binding factor is love and trust … this really comes with trust. Trust, comfortability, and love for each other” (169). Maar dan noem hy: “I’m doing Honours and she’s not with me … I now struggle because I want to try and get someone in [her] place” (169). “I think she can carry on without me. She can, but I am now more dependent on her than she was on me when we met. At that time, [she] was more dependent on me because she needed more support, but now I completely need it from her” (170). Sy vriendin sê dat haar vriend “very quickly becomes negative … This is where I could encourage him … I had to study throughout the night. We mostly studied through the night together. We sometimes studied at his residence, but mostly at my flat because it’s too noisy for me at his residence … sexually he feels that he doesn’t fit in anywhere … though [he] is a social butterfly and has ten million friends, he would never tell anyone about my past or anything like that” (171). Haar ouers is albei dood. “I was eighteen when they died” (172). “My mom … taught me from a very young age that there is no difference between you and a black person. When I was small, my mom said their cookies were just left in the oven a little longer. Jesus just forgot them in the oven a little longer. This is why they’re a bit darker” (171). Jansen was lank in daardie oond. “In our street, my two black friends lived opposite us and my mom allowed them to sleep over at our house and allowed me to go and sleep over at their place … So perhaps because I grew up in this way I am drawn to and sometimes feel more comfortable with other race groups than with members of my own race group … If I could take [my boyfriend] home, I think my mom would definitely have accepted it … I could see my dad was not crazy about the idea … He didn’t really know how to deal with black people” (172). Sy was in ‘n Afrikaanse hoërskool. Sy is die moeder van ‘n kind oor wie geen besonderhede verskaf word nie, behalwe dat Jansen verwys na “a baby born out of wedlock” (200). Dit is hierdie feit wat van deurslaggewende belang is om hierdie vriendskap te verstaan. Sy sê: “I can honestly say in my university classes the white students would never share notes with me. Never. Because I’m an outsider, totally. I don’t talk to them at all because I don’t have time for friends” (172-173). Haar vriend “was responsible for getting the notes … I would never have obtained my degree without [my friend] because sometimes I couldn’t be here and sometimes I felt I simply couldn’t do it any more” (173). Dit is duidelik dat sy as ‘n enkelouer nie al die klasse kon bywoon nie. Sy het haar vriend nodig gehad om die klasaantekeninge te bekom. Hulle het mekaar ook in hulle studies aangemoedig. Hy en sy “perhaps serve as benefits to each other” (174). Sy sê: “People sometimes get the wrong idea about us” (172). “People would stare, assuming we were lovers because we were sitting and eating together … In class, we shared notes, but later the students accepted it and realised there was nothing sexual between us” (173). Jansen noem dit ‘n “very close friendship” (200).

Jansen begin sy gevolgtrekkings oor die onderhoude met die volgende stelling: “There are no longer any legal barriers to interracial love or marriage, and no physical barriers to racial integration in the classrooms and residences of formerly white universities” (176). Die ironie is dat hierdie opset, wat vir Jansen hemels is, nie aan die tradisioneel swart universiteite geld nie. Soos in die geval van die tradisioneel blanke skole is dit die tradisioneel blanke universiteite wat veelrassig geword het. Tradisioneel swart skole en universiteite is steeds oorweldigend swart sodat rasvermenging kwalik daar kan voorkom. Oor die tien paartjies in sy gevallestudie skryf Jansen: “Though they were born and raised after the end of apartheid, the close friends and lovers have lived in the shadow of harassment and hatred … The first thing these post-apartheid couples discovered was that when you cross the line separating black and white in South Africa, there will be blood [!]. In other words, there is a price to pay among friends, family, peers and even complete strangers. We know that while intraracial relationships proceed relatively smoothly, interracial relationships, whether as friends or lovers, bring the wrath of society down on the heads of courageous couples” (176). “Even though the laws regulating racial association have been lifted, the social practices that allocate racial place and privilege still operate with painful consequences for those who bear the brunt of an unrehabilitated society” (197).

Vanwaar hierdie weersin in (intieme) interrassige verhoudings? “It comes across as a general position that is held, an anti-black stance” (177). Soos gebruiklik is Jansen hier pro-swart en anti-blank. In die onderhoude is dit duidelik dat nie-wittes (veral Indiërs en swartes en nie soseer bruines nie) ook besware teen (intieme) interrassige verhoudings het. “Black people react with the same racial essentialism to which they had been subjected by white racism” (187). Dan volg hierdie skandalige aantyging: By nie-wittes is daar glo “a sense of once again being devalued [!] by white standards” (187). Jansen erken dat die Indiër “the fiercest father reaction among the couples studied” geopenbaar het (178). Jansen skryf dan hierdie Indiër se houding – “very Indian” (179) – ewe gemoedelik toe aan “traditional Indian norms” (178). Maar Jansen openbaar nooit sodanige verdraagsaamheid jeens tradisionele blanke norme nie, veral nie jeens Afrikanerwaardes nie. Hierdie verskil in taksering blyk duidelik wanneer hy later skryf van “racist white or traditional Indian family units” (204).

Let op hoe Jansen blankes, sekerlik spesifiek Afrikaners, se gal werk: “Culture often functions as the more respectable code word for race … Race is too crude a reference in everyday South African talk … ‘Our cultures are different,’ I would often hear white students say … It is as if the word culture itself justifies separateness” (180). Weer eens word blankes vir kritiek uitgesonder. “To date [a black person] … should not be a problem, in a normal society … But this is South Africa with its looming past hanging over race relations” (180). Jansen versuim egter om bv Indië, met sy tradisionele kaste-stelsel, as ‘n abnormale samelewing te brandmerk.

Jansen, ironies a swartmag-aanhanger, stu voort met sy anti-blanke vertolking en sy ignorering van die weerstand teen intieme interrassige verhoudings wat daar by baie nie-wittes aangetref word. “Consistent research elsewhere, signalling on the part of black parents (compared with whites) is more positive [ie upward mobility?], if somewhat guarded, when it comes to interracial intimacies. In none of the cases were there any early signs of negative messaging when it came to relations with white people. This makes sense, of course, historically, the obsession of colonial and apartheid [ie white] governments was with protecting the so-called [!] purity of the white race. Racial insulation was not an obsession of black people” (182).

Hoekom is Jansen so fanaties ten gunste van rasgeïntegreerde skole en universiteite? “Children who attended white or overwhelmingly white schools will struggle much more with racial integration in universities and in society than those whose schools were more integrated. And those from segregated schools will find it much more difficult to enter into interracial love and friendships than those who had such experiences before they started university” (184). “When opportunities for learning and living together are lost to white and black students through the experiences of segregated high schools, they bring an uninterrupted and bitter knowledge onto the university campus” (187). Jansen kom met hierdie onbedoelde kompliment vir Afrikaners vorendag: In die geval van “white Afrikaans-speaking youth … the tendency is strongest to remain loyal to language, culture and ethnic group” (185). “The more intimate the scenarios became, the lower the comfort levels among some groups of students” (187).

Samevattend skryf Jansen: “White-coloured friendships and intimacies still are more common than white-African liaisons, and that black African men in relationships with white women remain an exception” (196). Daar is klaarblyklik “differential assimilation … skin tone matters in interracial dating preferences. The student couples would find that hierarchies of race still matter in South African society. For many in the coloured community, marrying white is a movement of upward status … Black African, as under apartheid, is lowest on the social hierarchy of racial preference in the ordering of South African society” (196-197). “Racial stigma and stereotype outlasts racial laws and policies … differential value … places whites at the upper end of the preference scale and Africans at the lowest end. In this sense, apartheid did its work well” (205). Maar dit is ook die geval in samelewings wat nooit onderhewig aan apartheid was nie.

Jansen keer terug na sy allerhande soorte kennis (soos uiteengesit in sy 2009-boek, Praag 24 Maart). “Scripted knowledge is the knowledge acquired by human beings about how to behave in particular situations. The social situation, in this context, is the interracial encounter in public spaces. The reacting parties are working off their scripted knowledge about how to respond to black and white couples who break the unwritten rules about racial intimacy. Their reaction is not spontaneous; it is acquired from years of direct and indirect learning about what are acceptable relationships, and what are not” (202-203). Jansen is hier weer besig om sy oortuiging te probeer regverdig dat rasse-integrasie natuurlik en rasse-segregasie onnatuurlik is. Grondliggend is daar die dogma dat daar nie so iets soos ras is nie, dat ons almal dieselfde oerhistoriese oorsprong het, asof dit kon verhoed dat oor millennia grondige verskille in bv kultuur ontwikkel het.

Jansen beweer “this book … offers … a conceptual approach that privileges understanding over judgement and empathy over criticism” (220). Ek het egter probeer aantoon dat daar ‘n buitensporige neiging tot veroordeling van en kritiek op Afrikaners in die boek is. Uit sy perspektief skryf Jansen oor die tien paartjies: “These human actors still reach out over racial, ethnic and class divides in order to make more perfect relationships after apartheid” (220). Maar Jansen skryf ook: “At the time of writing (at the end of 2016), all but two relationships have ended” (210). Al wat nog bymekaar is, is die vyfde (die twee getroudes) en die tweede (van brood-in-die-oond faam) paartjie. Laasgenoemde twee “continue to thrive” (210), maar Jansen meld nie of hulle getrou het nie. Die laaste sin van Jansen se hoofstuk oor sy gevolgtrekkings klink gevolglik onoortuigend: “What these courageous young people demonstrate in a still-divided and dangerous society is the possibility of what can happen when institutions (the home, the school, the university and more) are themselves transformed to make living, learning and even loving together a reality despite the ever-present past” (210-211).

In hierdie studie is Jansen se siening van homself “the university’s leader-manager [who] turns into the scholar-researcher” (218). Jansen het as rektor hierdie studie onderneem en tien studentepaartjies aan video-onderhoude onderwerp, waarvan hy die teks saam met hulle foto’s, asook hulle name, vanne, studierigtings en heelwat inligting oor hulle gesinsagtergronde, in hierdie boek gepubliseer het. Ek bevraagteken die etiese verantwoordbaarheid van die publikasie van hierdie navorsing in hierdie boekvorm. Hierdie twintig studente was jonk en onervare en daar is heel moontlik sommige van hulle en hulle ouers wat ongelukkig is oor die manier waarop Jansen hulle jeugdige verhoudings permanent geboekstaaf en wêreldkundig gemaak het. Dit is om hierdie rede dat ek, anders as Jansen, nie een van hulle by die naam genoem het nie.