Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Socially responsible writing has been a feature of South African literature for many years. Under apartheid, many novels dealt with apartheid, as it was one of the main features of our social landscape. The end of apartheid did not however bring about the end of a need for socially responsible writing. South Africa is still faced with many problems, one of which is reconciliation. This thesis investigates whether reconciliation may have become a new theme in South African novels, and whether these novels could playa role in assisting the process of reconciliation in the country. For this purpose, three South African works are analysed, namely Country of My Skull by Antjie Krog, Smell of Apples by Mark Behr and Disgrace by J .M. Coetzee. The introduction attempts to explain the psychological discourse surrounding reconciliation, especially Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and parallels that may exists. The main body presents detailed readings of the three works, with the focus being on the presentation of reconciliation in the works, and the role that the individual works could play in assisting the reader in coming to terms with his or her feelings of guilt. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Vir baie jare was apartheid die onderwerp van baie Suid Afrikaanse skrywers aangesien dit die mees problematiese element van Suid Afrikaanse samelewing was. Die einde van apartheid het egter nie die einde van alle probleme beteken nie. Een van die belangrike probleme is versoening. Hierdie tesis ondersoek die moontlikheid dat versoening die nuwe tema in Suid Afrikaanse letterkunde geword het en ofhierdie werke 'n bydrae kan lewer tot werklike versoening. Vir hierdie doel word drie werke behandel, naamlik Country of My Skull deur Antjie Krog, Smell of Apples deur Mark Behr en Disgrace deur J .M. Coetzee. Die inleiding poog om die sielkundige diskoers om versoening te verduidelik, veral rondom posttraumatiese stres, en die ooreenkomste wat mag voorkom. Die hoofdeel van die tesis bestaan uit 'n diepgaande bespreking van die drie werke, met die fokus op versoening in die werk, maar ook die rol wat die werke kan speel om die leser deur sy ofhaar skuld gevoelens te help.

This thesis provides a detailed consideration of the family in Shakespeare’s canon and the engagement therewith in three South African novels: Hill of Fools (1976) by R. L. Peteni, My Son’s Story (1990) by Nadine Gordimer, and Disgrace (1999) by J. M. Coetzee. The study is divided into an introduction, three chapters each addressing one of the South African novels and its relationship with a Shakespeare text or texts, and a conclusion. The introductory chapter provides an analysis of the two strands of criticism in which the thesis is situated – studies of the family in Shakespeare and studies of appropriations of Shakespeare – and discusses the ways in which these two strands may be combined through a detailed discussion of the presence of power dynamics in the relationship between parent and child in all of the texts considered. The three chapters each contextualise the South African text and provide detailed discussions of the family dynamics within the relevant texts, with particular reference to questions of authority and autonomy. The focus in each chapter is determined by the nature of the intertextual relationship between the South African novel and the Shakespearean text being discussed. Thus, the first chapter, “The Dissolution of Familial Structures in Hill of Fools” considers power dynamics in the family as an inherent part of the Romeo and Juliet genre, of which William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is but a part. Similarly, the impact of a socio-political identity, and the secrecy it necessitates, is the focus of the second chapter, “Fathers, Sons and Legacy in My Son’s Story” as is the role of Shakespeare and literature within South Africa. These concerns are connected to the novel’s use of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, King Lear, and Hamlet. In the third chapter, “Reclaiming Agency through the Daughter in Disgrace and The Tempest”, I expand on Laurence Wright’s argument that Disgrace is an engagement with The Tempest and consider ways in which the altered power dynamic between father and daughter results in the reconciliation of the father figure with society. The thesis thus addresses the tension between parental bonds and parental bondage

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / In three of J. M. Coetzee’s recent novels, Disgrace (1999), Elizabeth Costello (2003), and Slow Man (2005), the South African author explores notions of authorship and challenges the possibilities of the sympathetic imagination. The notion of the sympathetic imagination has roots in Romanticism, and it connotes inhabiting another in order to understand or interpret. Romantic poet John Keats described the poet as “continually in for [sic] and filling some other body” (Letter to Richard Woodhouse), and Coetzee addresses the notion of the sympathetic imagination in his work. There are two facets of the sympathetic imagination: that which governs social relations and that which authors and creative minds attempt to claim as a driving force behind their work. It is important not to conflate the two separate facets of the sympathetic imagination. The social facet encourages good citizenship and allows humankind to behave in humane ways. It counters one’s private desire for mastery and balances self-interest with self-sacrifice; the sympathetic imagination helps others attain their goals and places others’ needs alongside one’s own selfishness. A sympathetic imagination is an essential quality in society, yet it will always yield only partial success. It cannot achieve complete success because truly inhabiting and embodying another living person is simply impossible, but in fiction, Coetzee explores the possibilities and limits of the sympathetic imagination at the level of language and metaphor. The other facet of the sympathetic imagination is often claimed by authors, poets, and artists to allow them to inhabit the subjects of their creativity. Coetzee tests the limits of authorial claims that writing is accomplished by applying a sympathetic imagination. In doing so, he creates metaphysical frames in which his own author-characters interact with other characters to reveal that some characters resist being written. In these metaphysical frames of fiction, Coetzee suggests that an author’s sympathetic imagination will never have total success; he sets forth a notion of partial success that helps address what is gained when the sympathetic imagination runs up against limits. My argument is that the authors and characters in these three novels attempt acts of sympathetic imagination and recurrently encounter limits. Coetzee questions perceived notions of authorship and the possibilities of the sympathetic imagination without offering alternatives. He critiques common notions of authorship and character writing but offers no real solutions.