Only two units left at "The Curzon"

,

Bedrooms 

REFNo: 

Love it or hate it, the Voortrekker Monument is here to stay. In the way of all monuments around the world, it is built to last and built to inspire awe. It was not built to be pretty (and it isn't), it was built to make a powerful statement; whether that statement is political or cultural is still largely a matter of perception. The monument was designed by architect Gerard Moerdijk, the son of a Netherlands teacher and the first South African to be an Associate of the Royal Institute of British Architects – a rather ironic fact given that the monument, while clearly a shrine to pro-Afrikaner proclivities, is strongly informed by anti-British sentiment. The idea to build a monument in honour of the Voortrekkers was mooted as early as 1888 but became a reality in 1931 with the creation of the Sentrale Volksmonumentekomitee (Central National Monuments Committee). Building began in 1937 with a hiatus from 1939-1940 due to the Second World War, after which construction took a further nine years. The monument was opened on 16 December 1949. Control of the monument resided with the Transvaal Administration up until 1993, when it was donated to a Section 21 company, now known as the Voortrekker Monument and Nature Reserve. General Gert Opperman, ('General is used as a name these days, not a title!'), is its chief executive officer, who also runs a heritage foundation and research trust as separate entities. Opperman retired from the armed forces in 1996 and has been running businesses since then. He says the timing of the completion of the monument means it is seen by some as an apartheid monument. 'Overcoming that perception has been a major challenge. Actually, it's a struggle monument. It celebrates liberation from an oppressor, which everyone can identify with, and commemorates the Great Trek and the Battle of Blood River, which are events imprinted in the mindset of Afrikaner people. In that sense it is an icon to Afrikaner nationalism, not in a political sense but in a cultural sense. It should certainly not be seen as any kind of icon to apartheid.' However, perception being reality, the fact that many people felt the monument alienating and uninviting saw its decline in condition and visitor numbers reach an all-time low in 1999. Opperman was brought in as the company's first CEO in 2000. Since his appointment he has increased the operational budget from R2-million to R8-million; increased the staff complement from 28 to 87; lowered the average age of staff from nearly 60 to 43; ensured that the monument offers guided tours in all the official languages (and he will do them in Spanish when required); installed lifts for the disabled; upgraded all facilities from the ablution blocks to the kiosk; and at a cost of R4.6-million, had the 67 250m3 building waterproofed. Currently the monument gets nearly 200 000 visitors a year; with South Africans showing their usual apathy at visiting their own heritage sites, 86 per cent of them are foreign. 'But local school children love it,' says Opperman. 'Sometimes we have hundreds of them here at a time, all from traditionally black schools.' The monument was built in honour of events that predated apartheid by some time; younger visitors, for whom apartheid is already a recent history, often understand that better than the Old Guard. When Opperman took over the monument he stuck to three business pillars: sound management from logistics and personnel through to finance; excellent service levels; and aggressive marketing to improve the monument's image and legitimacy. 'We needed to make it more attractive to tour operators as well as schools and academic institutions. It's also vital that the government does not see us as politically archaic or unfriendly. We need to be seen as part of the new South Africa and not as some right-wing faction.' In fact, the only group which has ever overtly taken umbrage with the monument is the white right wing. In 2002 Opperman invited Nelson Mandela to the monument. 'We knew he would come,' says Opperman. 'And I had to ensure that the event would be conducted in a totally dignified and hospitable way. Also I had to guarantee his safety and not back down due to threats.' When asked about threats Opperman confirms he got many, all of them from the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB). Concerned, I ask what he did. Opperman simply smiles and offers an unimpressed shrug. Note to right wing: threatening a military man is an entirely redundant gesture. 'I feel Mr Mandela's visit did a great deal to legitimise our relationship with government. We still receive a government subsidy and fall under the SA Heritage Resource Agency and heritage legislation.' Through its heritage foundation, Opperman is also collecting Afrikaner artefacts from around the country. Not for political reasons but a desire to ensure history is preserved. 'Neglecting history or selectively remembering it does an injustice to the country as a whole. In the future when all the political dust has settled, someone will be looking for these heritage resources and they'll be gone, unless people look for and care for them now.' A new heritage centre is also planned for the monument site which will be a permanent exhibition 'concentrating on the evolution of the Afrikaner'. Says Opperman: 'The Voortrekker Monument celebrates a time over 150 years ago. After visiting it, the locals or tourists understandably visit the Apartheid Museum and Hector Pieterson Museum. There is nothing to reflect what the Afrikaner community did during the intervening time. The centre will not be political but a socio-cultural centre with a comprehensive archive and library. We want historical accuracy, not a political spin.' VOORTREKKER FACTS & FIGURES The Voortrekker Monument stands 41m high with its square floor plan measuring 40.5m by 40.5m. Its Hall of Heroes (ground level) is 25m by 25m. Its lower level Cenotaph Hall is 34.5m by 34.5m. There is more than 18-million kg of concrete in the monument's foundations. The historical frieze in the Hall of Heroes, which depicts scenes from the Great Trek, comprises 27 panels carved from Italian marble and is the largest existing marble frieze in the world. It weighs 180 metric tons. MIXED VOICES Jackie Grobler, senior lecturer in history at the University of Pretoria and author of several books on African political history as well Discover the Voortrekker Monument, says that architecturally the monument is unique. 'The usual custom was to build either in the Greek or 19th century European style under a strong German influence, but the Voortrekker Monument is quite different to anything else in the country.' The architect Gerard Moerdijk, whose grandson Grobler knows well, was influenced by the Völkerschlachtdenkmal in Leipzig (The Battle of Nation's Monument, which is 11 times bigger than the Voortrekker Monument!), but only up to a point. Of the Voortrekker Monument, Grobler says: 'It's not really beautiful, but I think once you get used to it, it grows on you! Its size alone is very impressive and it was designed to convey feelings of strength. But inside, I find it really pleasing, although it's somewhat stark. 'I take my very cosmopolitan students there every year and they're hugely impressed, regardless of their colour or background. And my visiting foreign colleagues, from Asia to Uruguay, all find it immensely impressive.' Grobler is also insistent on it not being an apartheid monument. 'I don't see it as a political monument at all but it was exploited and hijacked by the right wing who tried to use it as a venue for their struggle. It's not meant to be against anybody, except possibly the British, but rather to commemorate the endurance and stamina of a group of people who were not, in a world context, very unique. Lots of people have moved into undeveloped land with no facilities.' One thing that does bother Grobler is the panel in the marble frieze that depicts the murder of Dingane. 'I don't like that scene at all; it strikes me as a sort of vengeance. And he's portrayed in other places so I think they should have left it out. But it's the only thing that makes me a bit uncomfortable, however, almost all monuments around the world are considered controversial in some way.' Melinda Silverman teaches South African architectural history at Wits University. Her aesthetic response to the monument goes like this: 'Its hideousness is its charm!' In terms of its politics, she is equally clear: 'It is almost impossible to separate politics from its design. The entire design was intended as a political statement, from its position on the skyline to its harnessing natural phenomenon, sunlight, to fall on a certain point on a certain day.' (On the 16 December each year, at 12 noon, a ray of sunlight hits the tomb in the Cenotaph Hall.) However, Silverman is also clear on it not being an apartheid monument. 'It was very much about constructing an Afrikaner identity which may have some later resonance with apartheid. However, now it needs to be seen as a monument to Afrikaner nationalism. We have to acknowledge all aspects of our history and we don't want to be revisionist. The events depicted at the monument reflect a really important moment in our history, whether seen as good or bad.'

Add A Comment

Please type in the sequence of letters and numbers