While some people contend that the book was not "political enough," many members of the ruling party, the African National Congress, felt the book portrayed South Africa in too pessimistic a light. Disgrace was written after 1995, when the new constitution of South Africa was passed. While it brought equal rights, it was by no means a complete saving grace. Violence increased dramatically. The number of carjackings saw vast increases, and many farmers either emigrated or gave up farming for fear of violence against them. The murder rate even doubled, and rape could be considered commonplace.
(A quick history of Apartheid, explanation of farming's role in it)
So while people may criticize Coetzee for the way he wrote the book, it sounds like a very plausible story which could accurately depict the political movement.
I've read about the huge increase in violent activity after the end of apartheid before and while there's no doubt that it was terrible, the timing does beg one question: was it warranted? After years of discrimination and prejudice, violent retribution was all but to be expected. I'm not arguing in favor of car jackings or beatings or whatever all in the name of revenge, I'm only saying that it's possible to see where the motivations of the black population of South Africa came from.
ReplyDelete