It has been a long time that I have had to read a book in order to talk about it. In the past, I have had to write book reviews rather than be a speaker at the launch of a book. The dilemma is whether you attempt a short book review or talk about the subject of a book or about the author. My remarks will however be a mix of all three.
I must however admit that I am a voracious reader of biographies of political figures, and such biographies are my favourite reading. I am currently reading Fidel Castro`s latest and very comprehensive biography.
I must also admit that it is a bit difficult to read a biography that covers some of the events and developments that you have been part of. Reading the book has also been a kind of both a political and emotional journey, especially about some of the events covered by the book since the 1990s and more especially since around 2000. However one does not have to be neutral in approaching any subject, anyway I do not believe that any person is neutral on political issues, especially on the subject of this book. What is important is to declare your biases upfront, as Jeremy does it well in his Preface.
The proliferation of political biographies in the recent period has contributed greatly to public knowledge of the liberation struggle and some of our key leaders. A subtheme of many of these biographies that I have a particular interest in is that of the challenges facing (former) liberation movements in power, the relationship between party and state, the relationship between the movement in power and the citizens, as well as the sometimes contradictory challenges of former liberation movements having to relate to the population as both citizens as well as some being part of its mass base.
It is for this reason that the South African story - the history of the liberation struggle as well as the past 14 years of our democracy - must primarily be told by South Africans themselves.
For this reason we must congratulate Jeremy Gordin for his honest attempt to tell part of this story through the life of the President of the ANC, Mr Jacob Zuma. Since 2002, Mr Zuma has graduated from being a political leader to a social phenomenon. The investigation against him changed the course of history, evoked raw emotion and triggered public sentiment either in support or against him.
Therefore trying to tell this story is not an easy matter at all. Jeremy Gordin says in his Preface that he likes Zuma `a great deal`. Just like attempting such a project, for a journalist to admit that he `likes` Zuma is an extremely brave thing to do. In truth many South African journalists, especially most editors do not like Jacob Zuma. One main source of this dislike, some of it bordering on personal hatred, can be directly traced to that infamous `off the record` briefing, which set in motion what will perhaps go down in history - especially in the history of South African journalism - as the worst public mauling of an individual. And most journalists do not even make the slightest attempt to hide or disguise their dislike. It is this dislike that has often led many journalists to get the Zuma story wrong. In the run up to the ANC`s Polokwane Conference, they substituted their analytical abilities for their dislike for Zuma, and completely misread the mood of the ANC membership and delegates to that Conference.
Jeremy Gordin sums it up appropriately, and he may not be aware that he was also making a telling commentary about his own colleagues in the media, when he cites Alan Paton`s Cry the Beloved Country:
"In the deserted harbor there is yet water that laps against the quays. In the dark and silent forest there is a leaf that falls. Behind the polished paneling the white ant eats away the wood. Nothing is ever quiet, except for fools"
But the above is not the only reason they so often get the Zuma story wrong. No one needs to like their subject to get it right. It is when they try to change the facts to suit their own views and to sway public sentiment against the ANC President that they get it wrong.
It is a tragedy that South African journalists have done such a shoddy job in telling the Zuma story as this has been a fascinating story to tell. As Jeremy says in his final chapter, "In short, Zuma is continually setting our national agenda on its head, continually showing us our own ugly visages".
It is also tragic that some have tried to define Jacob Zuma by the past five years of his life. In fact, it is precisely because the other 61 years of his life have been so clearly defined in the minds of the masses of our people that they support him with such unfailing loyalty. Jeremy`s book is an important contribution towards telling the journey travelled by Jacob Zuma. It is also perhaps his simplicity, his rural origins with no formal education, that gets the chattering classes all knotted up about Jacob Zuma, the very qualities that endears him to millions of the workers and the poor of our country.
There is much about Jacob Zuma which remains untold. While Jeremy has given us a substantial overview of the ANC President`s life, there is a lot yet to tell. His years on Robben Island, his time in exile, the peace process in KZN can all comprise books on their own. In fact every one of us who have encountered Jacob Zuma has a story to tell about him.
For me when I first met JZ in 1990, I honestly thought that his laughter was fake and pretension, and may perhaps be confirming his name Gedleyihlekisa. It was only after months that I realized that it is a genuine laugh, coming from deep down his heart.
I have also come to understand JZ as someone who bears no grudges, and accept debate and different views, even to his own, without bursting out or even labelling those who hold contrary views. I myself have in the past had differences with Cde Zuma. I recall we were on the different sides of the debate on how to deal with the counter-revolutionary violence of the IFP and the apartheid regime in KwaZulu-Natal in the 1990s. I was amongst those who were extremely suspicious and uncomfortable about what we saw as Zuma`s overemphasis on talks with the IFP at the expense of self-defence for our communities. But it was due to those robust debates that we all came to understand that it was not an `either or` issue, but the question of an appropriate balance between the two.
Again in the mid 1990s, the regional executive committee of the ANC in the Natal Midlands was divided around Sifiso Nkabinde, after we had been reliably informed in the early 1990s that Nkabinde was working for apartheid`s notorious special branch. Zuma called us into a number of meetings to try and resolve our differences. I remember telling him rather angrily (at the time I was already a member of the ANC NEC) why was he forcing a discussion on Nkabinde instead of ensuring that he is expelled as some of us were arguing. It was much later, after the expulsion of Nkabinde, in a quiet engagement with him that he told us that it was important to try and forge unity for a while, as we could not afford a serious division inside the ANC when faced with intense violence from the IFP. Indeed this was an important tactical consideration that played an important role in bringing about peace in the KZN province.
Contrary to condescending characterization of the ANC President, the latest being that by author Heidi Holland, referring to him as an `ideological barbarian`, Zuma is an `organic intellectual`, made of the struggle, through a heroic contribution to the liberation and reconstruction of our country.
I may not agree with some arguments or conclusions that Jeremy makes in his book, and some I would have written differently, but this should not distract from the importance of this book in contributing towards opening up a more informed debate about who Jacob Zuma is.
From 2009, a new chapter of this remarkable story will begin. How well we tell that story is a challenge for us all.