Introduction
Firstly, in this chapter I present the ethnography of Maria Mwengere Culture Center with specific focus on the Kavango Museum as an official space in which local „culture‟ in Kavango is officially produced and appropriated in the postcolonial context. In this context I pay particular attention to the management of the museum at the centre and the perceptions of culture officials of the capacity of the museum to produce and transmit local „culture‟ in the region. Secondly, I discuss and analyse the concept of the state commissioning the postcolonial „culture booklet‟ (which is presented during the culture festival to the judges and festival participants) and its content. During the circuit, regional and national festival rounds, officials who are responsible for culture programs nationwide encourage festival participants to produce and compile booklets in which they present their „culture‟ and „tradition‟ from their own perspective. Participants in various groups prepare their booklets, especially during the circuit and regional festival contexts, and material presented by the groups that qualify for the national level is officially compiled in a single master narrative.
In his exploration of nationalist discourse in Quebec of Canada, Handler (1988) concluded that fairs and festivals contain „modes of objectification‟. In this context elements of what is perceived to be „culture‟ are treated as indicators of identity. When such indicators are absent in what is represented or imagined as „culture‟, it becomes contested: as I show in chapter 8 with reference to the manner in which Kavango dances are represented at culture festivals in Kavango. In the following discussion I present incidents that I argue to be „modes of objectification‟ (to borrow from Handler). Specifically I am interested in what began as a colonial project to represent the inhabitants of Kavango as the „objectified other‟, in relation to other homelands through the fixed imagery of the Kavango Museum; to the postcolonial period in what is now officially termed a „culture booklet‟ at the Maria Mwengere Culture Centre231
as contemporary modes of the state‟s attempt to make post-apartheid nationhood. As I illustrate, unlike the museum the „culture booklet‟ that the Namibian state inherited from the colonial
231 The Maria Mwengere Culture Centre was initially known as the Maria Mwengere Culture Camp or Ekongoro. The name has since been changed, however local people continue to refer to it as Ekongoro.
dispensation has become an important means and resource through which it re-imagines colonial identities and by contrast emphasizes an ethnicized Namibian-ness. I argue that although the state is highly involved in the production of national identity through projects such as museums, heritage hunts and the construction of culture villages, it does not operate in isolation from the citizens. Heritage in contemporary Namibia is understood to be what „connects us‟ to the past (that went before the successive occupations by South Africa, Britain and Germany); by implication, it incorporates tangible and intangible cultural materials.
There is a museum with „Kavango artifacts‟ at Maria Mwengere Culture Center. However, the museum is not open to the public. Also at the centre, officials compile a booklet with historical information on the „cultures‟ of Kavango. Officially, the museum and the culture booklet are believed to store and preserve the „cultures‟ of Kavango people. The format, content and the changing nature of the culture booklet and the museum activities are central to my analysis in this chapter. What interested me most in the production of the state-sponsored culture festival was the ability and extent to which citizens (participants and public audiences) were involved in representing and interpreting „national culture from their perspective‟ while making the culture booklet. While participants in the context of the festival represented and interpreted their „culture‟ and „tradition‟ through songs and drama in the booklet, content in song and drama shows that at least to a certain extent participants presented their „culture‟ as evolving and not fixed as represented in the museum narrative.
The dance and melody is essentialised in concept, while song content is constructionist in approach. The content of the songs and drama is also of an advocacy nature. As I have observed, the focus of songs composed and sang by the cultural groups are context-driven. Thus the content of songs differed significantly from one area to another in the region, and in the national context. Consequently, songs are viewed as „messages‟ by festival participants and composers. When they compose and eventually present the songs through dance, the participating groups are keenly aware of what they would perform for which kind of audience and they can more or less anticipate the reaction to their representations. They know that through representation of song, dance or drama they create awareness, caution, advocate, praise and criticize through that particular medium. I argue that while „culture‟ and people in Kavango are imagined as fixed by the state in the context of museum representation, participants in the
festival not only view the „culture booklet‟ as an object in which local identity is asserted, but also a space for dialogue specifically directed at those who represent the state and the general audience.
Before I delve into the ethnographic details of the Maria Mwengere Culture Centre, it is important to acknowledge what has been said already with regard perceptions and production of national cultures in postcolonial Africa. Authors such as Flint (2006), Askew (2000), and Van Binsbergen (1994) have demonstrated how the state participates in what is perceived to be the production of national culture in postcolonial Africa. Such participation in the production of national culture is realized in the form of sponsorship of cultural troupes, organizing arts performances and competitions. While the above authors generally argue that such participation of the state in the activities entails the production of national culture, I want to single out Van Binsbergen (1994) who in his investigation of the Kazanga Festival in Central Western Zambia takes the argument further that such demonstrations should be seen as instances in which cultural reconstruction with emphasis in ethnicity radically transform local historical cultural forms towards a global idiom of performance, inequality and possibly the commodification or folklorisation of culture. Contrary to Van Binsbergen‟s argument on ethnicity as cultural mediation and social transformation, Flint‟s focus on the Kuomboka Festival in Western Zambia presents a different set of dynamics displaying inner ethnic contradictions and challenges in representation of the past history and heritage of the Lozi people. Although the above two festivals are locally organized by the traditional chiefs and people they have attracted the state‟s attention in the processes of culture „retrieval‟ (Sonyika, 1990:114) and this has since influenced such activities.
Askew (2002) through her documentation and analysis of specific dances organized under the auspices of the National Arts and Language Competitions in Tanzania shows how the state and public produce and display national culture. She recorded and explained the contexts of the various songs and dances of the groups she observed, also in different social spaces outside the orbit of the state, such as weddings. However, her analysis emphasizes the role and dynamics of state involvement in production of the dances and the music productions, rather than the public or audiences at the events she observed. Askew, unlike Van Binsbergen (1994) who brings out a nuanced analysis of ethnicity politics of Zambia and its possible role of consolidation of Nkoya
as an ethnic group in the Kazanga Festival, has mentioned how the dances assert ethnic identities in support of state nationalist projects (albeit in a limited manner), as well as identities against it. He has shown how the festival attendees influenced the making of the Kazanga Festival through their specific participation in the event. In the section below I discuss the perceptions of the state agencies on how it (the state) not only produces an imagined national culture for its citizens, but also how together with its citizens it participates in the assertion of ethnicity through the production of the culture booklet and other activities such as the museum at the centre.
On the search for „tradition‟ and „culture‟ in Namibia
Initially my focus below will be on the states pronunciations on the „preservation and promotion of tradition and culture‟ of its citizens through curation in museums (most of which were inherited from the colonial dispensation), the organization of cultural festivals and how they are conceived at the Maria Mwengere Culture Centre. (Culture Policy:GRN, 2001) Like most postcolonial states in Africa, during the 1990s in the first five-year term of Namibian independence the government embarked on a national awareness campaign to preserve and promote tradition and culture. Through the medium of television the state-funded Namibian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) aired „traditional‟ weddings, dances and food in culture magazines such as Tutaleni232, Boma Namibia, Kalanami and currently, Culture Paradise. Tutaleni is an informative magazine programme: it airs popular culture, food, health issues and music, live on television. Boma Namibia (the predecessor of Kalanami and current Culture Paradise) has since been discontinued and replaced with Culture Paradise. Culture Paradise like its predecessor showcases the various Namibian „cultures‟. During the 2008 Annual National Culture Festival in Kavango the production team of Culture Paradise was there to record the proceedings. When I asked the producer why they recorded the event she told me that the corporation was doing it in order to show, entertain and teach Namibians about their „cultures‟. She remarked:
„It is important for people to know who the Kavango or the Ovambo are. And this we can make possible when we record such activities and ask elders to explain certain things such as clothing,
232 Tutaleni means “Let us see”.
utensils and rituals233‟In our conversation with the producer234 of the Culture Paradise Kandali Nangolo, she said that they follow culture festivals country-wide in order to collect material for the programme. According to the official schedule it is aired on Thursdays at 10 in the morning, and again that evening. On this programme, images recorded during the culture festival are shown followed by a commentary that sounds somewhat essentialised.
On radio, the broadcaster has dedicated three hours on its daily schedule to programmes such as Namibian Hour, Culture Connect and Learn a Namibian Language, which are all said to “feature aspects of Namibian cultures with the aim of promoting the national ideal of unity in diversity and thus the ultimate object of building a „One Namibia, One Nation‟235”. On the radio
programmes, the producers invite people who they deem knowledgeable on „traditional‟ subjects such as birth, burial and wedding rituals; and interview them live. During these discussions local „culture‟ is mostly presented as fixed. These programs though, do not give a platform to the audience to call in and participate in the discussion. The above intentions of the national broadcaster are evidently similar to those expressed in the national culture policy which came out in 2001- as discussed in chapters four and five.
The above quote by Nangolo, an employee of the national broadcaster, can be understood in the context in which cultural characteristics supposedly mark the distinctive „differences‟ of population groups in Namibia. (Akuupa, 2010:103) Her assertions implies that „traditional culture‟ as recorded at the festival is essential and fixed. The search and promotion of Namibian „tradition‟ and „culture‟ by the state is not only limited to radio and television programmes, it is implemented through directorates in the Ministry of Youth, National Service, Sport and Culture (MYNSC). The two directorates, namely those of Arts and National Heritage and Culture Programmes are responsible for matters related to art and heritage. As discussed elsewhere in the dissertation the directorates have established offices in the thirteen regions of the country that run centers such as the Maria Mwengere Culture Centre, which is the focus of this chapter.
233 Personal communication with Kandali Nangolo at the Annual National Culture Festival held in Kavango during 2008 December.
234 My fieldwork notes.
235 Namibia Broadcasting Corporation: National Radio Grid 2010 obtained from www.nbc.om.na 2011/08/11.
The Ministry of Youth, National Service, Sport and Culture (MYNSC) not only organizes culture festivals, it also supports financially and conceptually a project known as the Heritage Hunt implemented by the Museum Association of Namibia (MAN). MAN receives funding from the state so that it can run and facilitate museum projects country-wide. One of its widely- reported activities is the „heritage hunt‟ campaign to identify sites and graves that can be turned into national memorial monuments. In this project, MAN has successfully utilized history students to form clubs at high schools nationally and do research on heritage sites in respective regions through a competition known as SCAM-X (School and Museum Exhibition). SCAM-X provides a fund of N$2000 for the research project. As I have observed during my research in 2005 and 2007 students at Rundu Secondary led by a history teacher chose a topic that they considered historically significant in the region. The students did research interviews in town or nearby villages. After they had researched their topic, they prepared an exhibition for the national SCAM-X gathering. An exhibition usually consisted of presentations from thirteen regions of the country of which the best was chosen. From this annual event the best exhibitors had the opportunity to participate in the annual spring school organized by the Robben Island Museum in Cape Town, South Africa.
In Kavango the history club under the mentorship of Kletus Likuwa a history teacher then at Rundu Senior Secondary School was selected to participate during 2007: their exhibition was about „cultural‟ and memorial sites and unknown graves of SWAPO fighters in the region. The group took pictures of unmarked Swapo fighters resting places in the area of Mbukushu in eastern Kavango. These graves were not officially known, but pointed out by local people in the area. The group also took pictures of early colonial landmarks, like the official house-cum-office of native commissioner Harold Eedes.
In a different context regional governments have also, at times, encouraged people to embark on a „heritage hunt‟ of for sites to be included in the government gazette and marketed for human development. I suggest this should read „cultural tourism”, which has become a favoured economic activity of the national state. Its potential to generate income for the communities has been recognized by the state, which as a result has included such initiatives in its media marketing campaigns. As the governor of the Kavango region said in his speech at the Kavango Regional Culture Office:
„Finally, ladies and gentleman I would like to use the opportunity to call upon the Directorate of National Heritage and Culture Programs to identify important heritage and cultural sites in Kavango particularly and Namibia in general for the fulfillment of the culture policy. Culture and heritage should be regarded as an important aspect in human development; we want to see a nation that is proud of its culture, a nation that has identity and promotes its culture236‟.
The call by the regional governor of Kavango shows how heritage hunting at the regional context is emphasized for the purpose of enhancing a regional ethnic identity, which I have referred to earlier as Kavango-ness. The narrative shows how the national state has embarked on a well devised national project of cultural awareness through strategic projects at schools, exhibitions, festivals, radio and television broadcasts etc. However, as I have observed throughout my fieldwork, such official pronouncements on how to preserve „culture‟ and „tradition‟ are appropriated variously in all thirteen political regions. It depends on those who officiate during the festivals, judging from the content of speeches237.
I turn my focus on Kavango Museum at Maria Mwengere Culture Centre in the following section.
Kavango Museum
The existence of Kavango Museum is known and remembered by local people in Rundu, but it was never opened to the public. Actually, many people I have spoken to have not even bothered to find out where the museum is situated although they may have heard that it is at Ekongoro. My observation during my stay at Maria Mwengere Culture Centre was that the museum was not regarded as the best tool to promote and perhaps brand local „cultures‟ like „traditional‟ dances and stories performed at the culture festivals. Although it was mentioned in official meetings I attended prior to the opening of the museum, no proper attention was afforded to it. Instead of preparing a vigorous campaign to have the local museum renovated and eventually opened to the public and tourists, the local culture office in Rundu seemed to focus its energy on „traditional‟
236 Speech by John Thighuru the Regional Governor of Kavango Region, delivered during the Kavango Regional Culture Festival held at Maria Mwengere Culture Centre in Rundu during 13 September 2008.
237 See my discussion in chapters 7 and 8.
dances and the collecting of oral stories that could be used by groups preparing „culture booklets‟ and composing songs for the culture festival. Below I discuss my stay and interactions with the officials at Maria Mwengere Culture Centre in order to show how in its quest to „preserve and promote‟ the Kavango „cultures‟ as per culture policy of the state, the local office in Kavango region privileged „traditional‟ dances devised for and performed at the festival, over the museum. Research for historical information on the migration and origin of people in Kavango and rituals was encouraged instead, because the collected information formed centre stage for the „culture booklet‟ as I explain in the chapter.
When I arrived at the Maria Mwengere Culture Centre, senior culture officer Thomas Shapi had been away on official business but upon his return he sanctioned a staff meeting immediately. I was invited to be part of the meeting. He likes to address people in English, the official language, and rarely speaks Rukwangali or any other local language in the office. As a former teacher, he always wears a suit and hardly ever would you find him without a tie to complement it. Shapi‟s office is arranged in a manner that displays elevation and authority. He chaired the meeting from his desk while we sat around the table joining his from the front. Before he introduced the meeting agenda, he introduced me to the colleagues officially. Shapi outlined the projects at the centre in the following manner:
Shapi: „Mr. Akuupa, we have a lot of things going at our centre. We have a project of collecting stories about our traditional rituals in the community. It has been quiet for some time now, because we are very busy with other things such as the festivals and meetings. We are doing research so that we can assist our groups in the festival with information for their presentations. We also have a museum that has never opened to date. We need someone to assist the official responsible for the museum. I do not know what is happening with those senior people in the ministry, because they keep on