Racism at the beach: Why a recent slur struck a national nerve in South Africa

When Penny Sparrow left a racist Facebook message aimed at black New Year's Day beach revelers, the overwhelming national response was based on South Africa's peculiar relationship with a central symbol of inequality.

REUTERS/Rogan Ward
Beach goers celebrate New Year's Day at the ocean in Durban, South Africa, January 1, 2016.

Only 20 miles separated the farm outside of Cape Town where Jerome September grew up in the 1980s and the nearby resort-studded coastline. 

The psychological distance, however, could well have been measured in light years. For one thing, the best beaches – whose powdery white sands and turquoise waves graced international travel magazines – were reserved for white people. Mr. September’s family was black. And even visits to the segregated beaches where they were allowed took months of planning ​by his parents – a farm laborer and a domestic worker – to save for transportation and arrange for a day off from work.

Yet for September, that isn't the part of the experience that has stayed with him. 

“What I remember most clearly about those days is that being at the beach felt like a great equalizer,” he says. “We were all standing in awe of the same ocean, sharing the same sand, and the reminders that my family was poor, that we were second class, sort of fell away.”

Indeed, 22 years after the end of apartheid, the public beaches here remain both an outsized symbol of nagging inequality – a luxury reserved for those rich in time and money – and a quiet way of transcending it, a place where the otherwise rigid social order of life in one of the world’s most unequal countries can, momentarily, come unhinged.

So when a white South African realtor named Penny Sparrow posted an outraged Facebook message earlier this week saying that blacks' presence on a Durban beach poisoned her New Year’s Day experience, and calling them “monkeys”, it quickly touched a raw nerve.  Within days, the post had gone viral, Ms. Sparrow had gone into hiding, and the ruling party had announced it would pursue a law prohibiting “the glorification of apartheid,” modeled on European prohibitions on denying the Holocaust.

"In the context of our painful past, racial bigotry and apartheid must be considered serious human rights violations that must be punishable by imprisonment,” the chief whip of the ruling African National Congress said in a statement. 

But if Sparrow’s statements were baldly racist, they were hardly singular, and many say the groundswell of anger they set off was at least in part due to the symbolic importance of the experience. 

“The psychic space that beaches occupy for both black and white South Africans is one of privilege,” says Sisonke Msimang, a social commentator and writer. “Beaches have always been coveted spaces in part because of the kind of luxury and escape and leisure time they symbolize. That’s why Penny Sparrow’s comments are so important – she’s questioning people’s right to access not just a public space, but a particularly privileged one.”   

Under apartheid, nearly all of the most central and desirable beaches ​were ​reserved for whites. Well into the 1980s, protesters who staged multiracial sit-ins on white beaches were driven away by teargas and snarling police dogs, and in 1987, President P.W. Botha ordered Allan Hendrickse, a mixed race member of his cabinet, to issue a humiliating public apology after he took a short swim on a “whites only” beach in the city of Port Elizabeth. 

Although beaches formally desegregated in 1990, access often remains informally restricted by the legacies of apartheid urban​ planning, which continue to confine many African, Indian, and coloured (mixed-race) South Africans to the fringes of coastal cities, far from the waterfront.

Still, on one day each year – New Year’s Day – even the country’s most elite public beaches briefly transform, their legions of surfers and sun-tanning tourists replaced by tens of thousands of revelers from nearby townships and farming communities. Many, like September’s family, choose to visit then because it is the only time of year they can both shoulder the costs and muster a day off. 

Even today, September says, memories of those New Year’s trips are among the happiest he has of a childhood punctuated by “daily reminders that I was considered subhuman.” Although he now works as an administrator at a university hundreds of miles from the coast, on the rare occasions when he visits the beach he says the feeling is the same as it always was. 

“I find it healing and reflective and humbling to be there, just this tiny thing against this mighty ocean,” he says. “It’s a great equalizer in that we’re all these tiny little people. The ocean doesn’t care whether you’re black or white or rich or poor.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Racism at the beach: Why a recent slur struck a national nerve in South Africa
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2016/0108/Racism-at-the-beach-Why-a-recent-slur-struck-a-national-nerve-in-South-Africa
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe