I really admire the job that Mark Gevisser has done, the quality of the writing particularly, the meticulous research done, over a period of 9 years at least, and the empathy he displays in analysing Mbeki’s background, education, experiences and growth, and how these inform Mbeki’s sometimes bewildering actions,lack of action and attitudes. It is a riveting read, and like Alison, I await the next instalment, probably a second edition of the book, bringing the journey up to date; clearly the current volume was put to bed to catch the Christmas book-buying period, and missed the Polokwane denouement.

Lavani Mathameni
Jim Nghalalume-Giyani

It is Gevisser’s apparent blind spots that I find telling; For it’s in his encounter with Mbeki’s wounds, both as an individual native and as a microcosm of the collective natives, that Gevisser draws his summations on, perhaps, Mbeki’s (un)fitness to govern.

Thabo Mbeki was shaped in all his being by the times of his belonging, and the depths of his wounds only betray the dimensions of the imperial brutality as it expresses itself upon each native’s character and psychology.

Perhaps Gevisser would have us believe that our attempts at collective self restoration as natives (Afrikan Renaissance) are mere ostentatious displays of a longed for parity with the imperialists, that the native only asserts himself in jealous comparison to his (Gevisser) fellow European descendents. It is to be made clear though that Gevisser fails to see that “…Black folk wealthy and poor in this country remain among the walking wounded, viral carriers of a historic truth that all the ducats in the world cannot reconcile”, as Greg Tate once wrote. What betrays his centre and location, whether in the imperialist tradition or resistance stream is his attempt at disconnecting our wounds from the assaulter; it is how he averts that connection of our wounds to his heritage of privilege that ought to be marveled at.