Publications
Partners
By maintaining a sense of superiority, hidden by a whole lexicon of terms and references only Wilgenhoffers are let into, the residence has remained almost untouchable throughout its history, writes Louis van der Riet.
Dear Wilhelm Verwoerd,
Your invitational open letter has left me, your fellow Wilgenhoffer and, in many respects, the inheritor of the tradition you passed down, introspective and emboldened.
By taking up the role of elder, acknowledging not only your implication as an ouman van die plek [old man of the place], but offering your journey of no longer wanting to be a papegaai [parrot], you offer us an alternative to the majority of responses by Wilgenhoffers.
Your letter has made me reflect on the formation potential of residences and how, in the case of Wilgenhof, demonstrations of power and domination that are cloaked in mystery and protected by sophisticated deception were used as rites of passage.
I was always made to understand that Wilgenhof is at the centre, not merely geographically within Stellenbosch, but in a very subversive way, of power; that it has always ruled not merely Stellenbosch, but South Africa.
READ | OPEN LETTER FROM AN OLD BOY TO WILGENHOFFERS: To be or not to be a white papegaai
As HB Thom, former rector of Stellenbosch University and chairperson of the Afrikaner Broederbond, stated years ago and is often still quoted in Wilgenhof newsletters: "As Wilgenhof nie reg is nie, dan is Stellenbosch nie reg nie, en as Stellenbosch nie reg is nie, dan is Suid-Afrika nie reg nie. [If Wilgenhof is not right, then Stellenbosch is not right, and if Stellenbosch is not right, then South Africa is not right.]"
This culture has almost subversively conditioned many to believe that truth cannot be found outside of Wilgenhof. It has cultivated unaccountable leadership, where the idea of exercising power in a way that retains an element of mystery, even superiority, goes unchecked.
While it has been respected for housing and forming many influential leaders, it has done so with an air of untouchability, a set-apartness that so many, including myself, have found very alluring.
Perfect climate for gaslighting
However, this reputation of being out-of-reach and the ethos of unaccountability that it creates is the perfect climate for gaslighting.
In this sense, your letter has also left me aware of the self-doubt that I inherited from Wilgenhof, and that has [made] me question my own judgement and intuition for years. I was particularly confronted by feelings of shame that I now recognise played a significant part in the formation practices that I was exposed to in Wilgenhof.
These feelings of shame are a reminder of my and many others' longing for real change while not feeling worthy of the transformation.
Practices such as speaking of women in objectifying ways and using hazing as a form of discipline enforced a dominant culture of masculinity that made me question whether I could measure up. It also centred a history of white dominance and power through its many recognitions of oumanne [old men] who embodied the values of superiority and mastery.
Not only does your self-reflection encourage me to think about how I became more white in Wilgenhof, but also how the open showers and bathroom doors closed the door of my own understanding of my sexuality.
I was a first year in Wilgenhof in 2008, the year of the Reitz incident at the University of the Free State. It was also the second year that the late Professor Russel Botman served as rector, whom I had the privilege of working with while serving as vice-chairperson of the Student Representative Council (SRC) after my four years at Wilgenhof.
I believe these factors, among others, made it a heightened time of self-reflection on our values and therefore the forms of coercion into a particular type of white, heteronormative masculinity that were more implicit than explicit during my time.
By the time I served on the Wilgenhof house committee in 2010/11, we had leaned into the value of critical thinking to the extent that I, as a theology student and house committee member responsible for community interaction and spirituality (the "GG", which stood for Gemeenskap and Geestelik [Community and Spirituality]), led a decision to no longer make Christian devotions a compulsory part of the lunchtime agenda every week.
Perhaps we had started to see the loss of upholding the ethnoreligious belief and belonging system that you speak of, which managed to persist a generation later.
A catalyst
Perhaps the recent uncovering of secret rooms and practices at Wilgenhof can again be a catalyst for sense-making, for the healing of wounds, and for the restoration of trust and integrity in the rich legacy of Wilgenhof.
Despite elements of critical thought, there remained a level of mystery as to how Wilgenhof truly functioned. Such a lack of transparency does create a certain bond among insiders, for better and for worse, such as when that level of deception is exposed to have been too unaccountable and, therefore, not integrous or truly transformative for anyone excluded from its membership.
Perhaps this is why Hool 88 and the closed archive, in effect "training rooms for deception", have been able to remain a secret to the "skewe wêreld" (a Wilgenhof reference to life outside of the residence). By maintaining a sense of superiority, hidden by a whole lexicon of terms and references only Wilgenhoffers are let into, it has remained almost untouchable throughout its history.
I realise today that it was during my time after Wilgenhof, while researching the life and witness of Oom Beyers Naudé and serving on the SRC, when I had the privilege of working alongside Botman and many other gifted leaders, that my imagination of the home-for-all that you speak of truly started to develop. I wish it could have happened while in Wilgenhof.
I am still proud to be associated with Wilgenhof, but I remain curious about what it would look like for others in the Wilgenhof Alumni Association to not merely rely on the findings of Stellenbosch University but to also take up the role of not being a papagaai by maintaining this way of leading by deception.
I hope we do not allow anyone to make the current student leaders, or anyone for that matter, the scapegoats for generations of abuse of power. I also hope we do not succumb to the fear of the loss of power.
Perhaps this letter is merely a long-winded way of agreeing with your suggestion to listen more, react less, and take up the opportunity now presented to enter a value-based, self-reflective, historically aware way of being.
– Dr Louis van der Riet is an ordained minister in the Dutch Reformed Church. He was at Wilgenhof from 2008 to 2011 and served on the Wilgenhof house committee. He was also vice-chair of the Stellenbosch University SRC.
