“Whitewashing History:
Flawed Exhibition on Forced Removals”
The Voorgelegen Museum in Dorp Street, Stellenbosch, recently opened an exhibition focused on the forced removals in Die Vlakte and other areas within the town. The exhibition, intended to shed light on the historical injustices faced by the displaced communities, features storytelling, a map of Die Vlakte, and various installations. However, several critical issues have emerged, raising concerns about the exhibition’s ability to accurately and comprehensively represent the history and impact of the forced removals.
The storytelling aspect of the exhibition, which is primarily delivered through video clips, has been a significant point of contention. While the videos feature individuals from the affected communities, the content presented focuses more on the harmonious relationships between colored people and their white neighbors rather than the trauma and injustice of the forced removals. Interviews with the individuals in the videos reveal that the snippets shown are only a small part of their broader narratives, which included detailed accounts of the forced removals. This selective editing diminishes the gravity of the historical events and shifts the focus away from the central theme of the exhibition.
The map of Die Vlakte, another critical component of the exhibition, fails to accurately represent the entire area. Instead of depicting the full extent of Die Vlakte, the map includes only a few streets, while prominently featuring the predominantly white areas of the town. This incomplete and biased representation skews the historical narrative, giving undue prominence to white neighborhoods and undermining the significance of Die Vlakte. The lack of comprehensive mapping minimises the visibility and impact of the forced removals on the colored communities, thereby failing to provide an accurate historical context.
Furthermore, the quotes displayed on the walls of the exhibition space are another source of concern. Rather than directly addressing the issue of forced removals, these quotes focus on
The inclusion of unrelated topics in the exhibition significantly undermines its intended focus and dilutes its overall impact. By diverting attention away from the core narrative, these irrelevant elements not only detract from the exhibition’s purpose but also diminish the opportunity to fully honor the lived experiences of the displaced communities. Furthermore, the absence of poignant and relevant quotations that capture the pain, resistance, and resilience of those who suffered under apartheid creates a void in the storytelling. Without these powerful voices, the exhibition fails to convey the depth of injustice endured and the courageous efforts of those who fought against their displacement. This oversight weakens the emotional and historical resonance of the exhibit, missing the chance to authentically connect with and do justice to the memories of the individuals and families whose lives were irrevocably altered. It is essential that the narrative remains centered on the stories of struggle and perseverance to truly honor the legacy of those affected by apartheid’s forced removals.
A glaring omission in the exhibition is the complete absence of Cloetesville, the neighborhood where most of the displaced people were forcibly removed to. While the streets of the areas where white residents lived are meticulously mapped and fully represented, Cloetesville—the destination for the uprooted—remains a blank spot. This isn’t just an oversight; it’s symbolic of the erasure and neglect that has long defined the treatment of Coloured communities under apartheid and, disturbingly, still continues today. The blankness is an indictment, a reflection of how the lives, histories, and struggles of those relocated to Cloetesville have been deemed unworthy of recognition or memory.
To send people to a blank spot is to consign them to invisibility, reinforcing the apartheid-era narrative that some lives and spaces matter while others don’t. Cloetesville’s omission sends a violent message: the suffering, displacement, and ongoing struggles of those forced into this neighborhood are irrelevant. This stark contrast between the fully mapped white areas and the void where Cloetesville should be exposes a deep injustice—the continued denial of the existence and significance of the displaced communities. Even in a space meant to remember and honor those affected by forced removals, this erasure perpetuates the apartheid logic of who is visible, and who is forgotten.
In conclusion, the exhibition at the Stellenbosch Museum, despite its aim to highlight the forced removals, falls short in several critical areas. The selective storytelling, incomplete map representation, and irrelevant quotations collectively contribute to a skewed and inadequate portrayal of this painful chapter in South African history. This misrepresentation can be seen as yet another attempt by white individuals to whitewash the history of oppression, racism, and suffering experienced by people under the apartheid regime. The exhibition, rather than serving as a platform for truth and reconciliation, ultimately fails to do justice to the memories and experiences of those who lived through the forced removals in Stellenbosch.