University of life as portrayed in the South African films Jerusalema (2009) and Tsotsi (2005).

Poverty and lack of opportunity are aspects of township life that  deny some black youths in South Africa the opportunity to access formal or tertiary education. The youth often acquire their informal education in the streets or ‘the University of Life’ as it is sometimes known. Others have defined University of Life as a “school of hard knocks” to signify to structural violence as theorist Johan Galtung coined the term in 1979 when he realised there was a strong tie between poverty,  history and crime. Those who enroll in the University of Life are youths whose dreams seem to have been discouraged by being born in bondage of hardship and suffering. I seek to introduce the concept of University Life as portrayed in South African gangster films  Jerusalema (d/Ralph Ziman, 2009) and Tsotsi (d/ Gavin Hood, 2005). I will explore how the themes of structural violence (namely poverty, single –parent homes, alcoholism, illness, sex, crime, lack of education and drug abuse) are related to ‘life choices’ in these two films, with reference to my own personal experience and other South African films and series.

Defining the term ‘School of the Hard  Knocks:’

Briefly, ‘School of the Hard Knocks’ stems from observing the perpetual cycle of poverty as one of the situations that can be linked to structural violence. In this case I am referring to the cycle of poverty due to history of a certain race group under western imperialism and colonialism. Author, Edward O’niel (2009: 118) captures this very well by saying, “the fact that poor people around the world have shorter and harder lives is not secondary to chance alone, or the perceived “ character flaws” of any race group; it is the direct result of human design, a phenomenon called, “structural violence”.

 In Jerusalema, we are presented with South Africa in 2007. The voice over of Lucky Kunene briefs us about the current problems face by South Africa in the post Mandela hype: we are informed about the failed dream of Nelson Mandela.  Under the Democratic regime, we are told that the Black Economic Empowered has been a flawed system aimed at redressing past imbalances of this country. He informs us that that is the new South Africa a Neo liberal policy adopted by Mandela has come at a great cost for those drowning in the cycle of poverty.  Lucky lets us of how disappointed people are about the unfulfilled promises, which have cost the future of so many black male and female bodies that are trapped in the perpetual fate of hard life. Tsotsi, Hijack Stories (d/Oliver Schmitz, 2000), iNamba Namba (d/Donavan Marsh, 2014), Four Corners (d/ Ian Garbriel, 2013),and others are some of the local films that have touched on this theme.

The cycle of poverty:

Johan Galtung (1969) and later Edward O’niel (2009) have argued that the cycle of poverty and what it breeds has a lot to do with the structure of society and history. Tsotsi comments on how the system breeds young black men and women who are frustrated and trapped in the cycle of poverty. Tsotsi (Presley Chweneyagae) is born into the misfortune era of HIV and AIDS. His mother is bedridden, his father seems to be battling with a drinking problem, he then ends up in the streets, sleeping under bridges of Alexander township because even though his father is present (unlike, many homes who are single headed women with fathers who excuse themselves from the situation) he is presented as not caring about his son. He is then brought up in the streets and graduates at the University of Life for blue-collar crimes.

Tsotsi is a victim of social, psychological and financial sufferings caused by the history and trauma he has inherited as a black young man living in slums. Lucky Kunene (Rapulana Sephiemo) in Jerusalema is also a victim of structural violence. As a lower class black man, he does not have freedom or power to change his circumstances even after the end of apartheid. He informs us that he had dreams he wanted to achieve through getting tertiary education. He complains about his daily struggle, selling sweets in train carriages to working class black commuters. He lives in a four roomed house with his mother and four brothers and sisters. There is no father figure in the house and so the streets father him.

 Single-parent homes:

I first heard the term absent father when my brother used it to demonstrate hardships he has encountered by being born and raised in the township in the absence of anyone that looks like a father figure. He went on to express how the limitation of space or the issue of landless easily leads to a state of overcrowding in townships and ultimately alienating people from resources they need to uplift their lives. He explained how closely linked poverty and crime are, especially when one has responsibilities and friends around. Others have employed this concept as well, especially those who have had to struggle financially because of circumstances they have found themselves in mainly due to history and the conditions they are born and raised in.  Moreover, ‘University of Life’ can also speak to the hardships encountered by many especially those trapped in a cycle of racial, social as well as economical inequalities because of history.

The Gangster persona:

The creation of how a gangster looks like. Lucky is presented as a gangster. He is black, coming from a township with no father figure and a strong mother who is struggling financially and bases happiness in the church. He tells us in the voice over that he is inspired by two notable people; Al Copane and Karl Marx. He explains how clean they both justified with the logic behind theft and private property. The difference between the two was that Karl Marx went through university, while Alfonso Copane graduated from the University of Life. Tsosti whose birth name was David Madondo is another look of how a tsotsi looks likes as presented by contemporary South African films by white filmmakers. In Mapunstula (d/ Oliver Shmitz, 1992), one could also draw this occurring theme of tsotsis living with their mothers who are also as equally oppressed by the system. Panic (Thomas Mogotlane) lives at the backyard of her mother’ house and the father is not mentioned throughout.

There is a level of relevancy to this, especially when one analyses how South Africa’s pandemic of HIV and AIDS cannot be divorced from poverty as also expressed in Tsotsi. Tsotsi is born into the misfortune era of HIV and AIDS. His mother is bedridden, his father seems to be battling with a drinking problem, he then ends up in the streets, sleeping under bridges of Alexander township because even though his father is present (unlike, many homes who are single headed women with fathers who excuse themselves from the situation) he is presented as not caring about his son. He is then brought up in the streets and graduates at the University of Life for blue-collar crimes. O’niel has also observed that according to patterns of behavior due to socio-political and economic factors in most countries defined as being ‘third world’ HIV and AIDS are linked to poverty (Oniel, 2009:116). Tsotsi as an adaptation from Athol Fugard’s novel by the same name, has advanced Athol’s imagination set in the 1960s to a more recent and relevant South Africa whereby the black majority of South Africans is dying of the pandemic of HIV and AIDS.  Author  Lindiwe Dovey (2010: 115) see it as a commercial and an ideological decision that the filmmaker (influenced by the politics of marketing and distribution). Offering an alternative view on Hood’s decision to intensify the original story with that of a health crisis, authors Ian Rijsdik and Adam Haupt (2007: 37) say, “the ghostly, menacing agents of the apartheid government have been replaced by HIV/Aids”.

Structural violence should be traced back to the conception of Christianity and Capitalism because of how these system has resulted in the inequalities of the world. Because of a failed decolonisation and Debt Crisis, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have resulted many countries considered as ‘third to be further trapped in the cycle of poverty and turn to Christianity for salvattion. It could be reason too, that Hood was sticking to the pattern of films made in the contemporary South Africa where reconciliation, Christianity and HIV and AIDS are amongst the frequently told stories.

Christian Promised land as an alternative to Gangsterism:

Referencing the Jerusalem of the bible, the film title signifies the Promised Land. Common theme with the people of the University of Life is the occurring gangsters who turn to God. Tsotsi seems be willing to give up his life when he finally goes to apologize to his friend, who he beat badly, he then goes to church (which the film uses to symbolize forgiveness or claration of sins) and then he returns the child he mistook along with the car he and intended on stealing. Lucky on the other hand, finds redemption in taking an early retirement and taking a life time holiday to Durban, the place he informs us, he always wanted to live in the Suburbs. The same theme of Christianity, Neo liberalism and its contradictions as well as the Land Act of 1913 are referenced throughout the film.

The soundtracks played throughout the film are from various well known Kwaito artists such as Ishmael and Zola whom have released songs talking about Jerusalema. Additionally, in one of the scene, The Zionists church, (as also seen in Tsotsi) is seen chanting to Jerusalema, the Promised Land. Nevertheless, this can also be understood as holding the current government accountable for what it promised. This can also be expanded to Mandela’s promise when he was released  in the 1990s, assuring black people that the land, which was taken by force from them, is restored. This is further justified when Lucky mentions the unequal distribution of wealth in the current South Africa and the failures of the current government to interrogate the Land Act of 1913 as results of unclear redistribution plan controlled by neoliberal policies which Mandela as the president at the time signed for, further perpetrating the gap between the rich and the poor. This is the case when there are a large number of people living in slums. It is of note that as failures to redress the imbalances of the past, land remains in the hands of the white minority. People living in slums are one notable fact that poor people are prone to.

Townships, slums or lockasies

The creation of lokasies (popularly known as Kasi) or slums in its nature were to shelter labour which would work on the industrialization of the area, mainly by multi national corporations (O’niel, 2009: 120). This is the same case in both films, when Sandton overlooks the overcrowded Alexandra township. Also the two towers of Soweto look over the rich Basona and West gate surburbs of Johannesburg. Townships in South Africa were built as ‘shelter’ for the ‘non-whites’ people who were forcefully removed from their lands in which the Group Areas Act of 1950 reserved for those that viewed themselves as white and approved as so. Lucky makes it out of the kasi to try a living in Johannesburg. He is introduced another spatial condition whereby the flats of Hilbrow and Yoeville, Johannesburg are occupied by people who also come from the school of hard knocks, mostly are immigrants and foreigners trying to make a living in Johannesburg. The flats are overcrowded and dirty. In the film, the issue of land distribution is touched, however, Schimtz does not attempt any explanation for the violence faced in most South African townships. No mention of policies like the Glen Grey act or the Bantu Stan act or the Reconstruction Development Plan (RDP) which are some of the policies in the history of South African Public administration that have contributed in the perpetual cycle of violence and poverty bred by townships and lack of space.

Formal education versus Life Skills:

The gangsters or alumni’s of the University of Life as presented in the film, are young male dropout from the ‘lokasies’, who opt for criminal activities as a pathway to formally develop themselves. We assume Tsotsi did not go to a formal western school because he is not familiar with the language of English and its prerequisites. This is evident when the character of Fela (Zola 7-Bonginkosi Dlamini) asks his what the word decency means. Tsotsi loses his temper when he comes to realisation that Zola is humiliating him by challenging him with something he is not familiar with. Zola spells it for him and then schools him about what respect means. Unlike, Tsotsi who has no high school education (and it is not clear if he went to school at all), Lucky stays in school  to only drop out in matric, which he tries to finish through correspondence for a while, to only give up on it later. Through these two films, we are shown differences between street education as opposed to formal western bias formal education.

Tsotsi and Lucky both grow up and mature in the streets. They are boys who have to grown up before it is their time so that they can provide for themselves as well as for those that surrounds them because University of Life is more communal than individualistic. Both films force us to emphathise with the protagonists, especially in Tsotsi were we are shown the mentor or inspiration from which Tsosti crafted his persona.

Another occurring feature with scholars from the University of Life as seen in these two films is that Tsotsis learn driving on their duty. Tsotsi steals a car that he cannot drive. He discovers that inside it sleeps a child who belongs to the woman he hijacked the car in, at the nearest suburb Sandton looking over the overcrowded shacks and RDP houses of Alexandra township. On the other hand, Lucky learns driving as a young high school. The black men who works for a corporation is hijacked by the two, they want the barkie he was delivering with.  Ironically, he becomes the one to teach him how to drive a car. The man even cites making love to a woman to learning how to drive a car. He mentions how gentleness is a skill to learn.

Sex working business is one of the disciplines familiar enrolled by some, especially gay men as well as women (white, African, Asian, Coloured, mixed intersectional peoples of different shades of black). Upon joining the University of Life in the heart of Jozi, Lucky is exposed to women who throw themselves at him, selling sex. We later see how the Nigerian tycoon is presented in the film when we see him shouting at a naked women brushing his back while plays poker with other men, puffing cigars. He orders her to ‘make something useful of herself’, by that he suggest the woman should go make him money because they are ‘his’ prostitutes. This disciple of prostitution is represented in the similar codes and iconography in the film, Salaam Bombay (d/Mira Nair, 1992), uCarmen eKhayelitsha (d/ Martin Dornford-May, 2005)  and others which shall not be mentioned because of the word limit of this presentation.