Text in English / Abstracts in English, Afrikaans and isiZulu / The present study deploys Ngugi wa Thiongo’s (2009) decolonial concepts of dismembering and re-membering to critically explore J. M Coetzee’s selected fiction. In my reading of the novels Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe and Disgrace, I relate concepts of dismembering and re-membering to decoloniality. In the rendition of Ngugi, dismembering refers to the displacement and dispossession of the colonised, and their mental colonisation through cultural imperialism. Re-membering becomes the decolonial effort to undo physical and psychological dismembering. In the same way in which, since the Berlin Conference of 1884/5, Africa was divided, mapped and colonised, the cultures and histories of Africans were dismembered and dominated. Concerns for the land are expressed in the mapping and the confiscation of land which is depicted in the native’s desert dwellings in Waiting for the Barbarians, Cruso’s clearing of the land in Foe and Petrus’s taking over of Lucy’s farm in Disgrace. Furthermore, Coetzee’s use of language is one important narrative strategy that is explored to ascertain how Coetzee negates or speaks for, of and about the colonised through the narrator focaliser. This study reveals the reflexive nature of the selected novels and seeks answers to the question of why Coetzee tends to make his “black” characters voiceless and rootless (and sometimes nameless)? Is Coetzee suggesting that they have been silenced by history, by colonialism, or is he suggesting that he, the author, has no right to speak on their behalf? In the mode of writing and story-telling, is Coetzee suggesting the impossibility of the coloniser to speak for the colonised or, in speaking of them, does he give the servant characters a voice and can this voice be theirs, or can it be considered reliable? Is Coetzee presenting the power of passivity as a means of resistance and re-membering? This study, from a decolonial perspective, engages with the complex way Coetzee handles voice and the question of the agency of the colonised. / Hierdie studie benut Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o (2009) se dekoloniale begrippe van verdeling en herindeling in ʼn kritiese beskouing van J. M. Coetzee se geselekteerde fiksie. In my vertolking van die romans Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe en Disgrace, bring ek die begrippe van verdeling en herindeling in verband met dekolonialisme. In Ngũgĩ se vertolking verwys verdeling na die verplasing en onteiening van die gekoloniseerdes, en hul geestelike kolonisering deur kulturele imperialisme. Herindeling word die dekoloniale poging om fisiese en sielkundige herindeling ongedaan te maak. Op dieselfde manier wat Afrika verdeel, gekarteer en gekoloniseer is sedert die Berlynse Konferensie van 1884/5, is Afrikane se kulture en geskiedenisse verdeel en gedomineer. Kommer oor die grond word te kenne gegee in die kartering en konfiskering van grond – soos uitgebeeld in die boorling se woestynverblyf in Waiting for the Barbarians, Cruso se opruiming van die grond in Foe en Petrus se oorname van Lucy se plaas in Disgrace. Verder is Coetzee se taalgebruik ʼn belangrike verhalende strategie wat bestudeer word om vas te stel hoe Coetzee die gekoloniseerde ontken of vir, van en oor die gekoloniseerde praat deur middel van die verteller/fokaliseerder. Hierdie studie openbaar die refleksiewe aard van die geselekteerde romans en soek vir antwoorde op die vraag van waarom Coetzee geneig is om sy “swart” karakters stemloos en wortelloos (en soms, naamloos) te maak. Suggereer Coetzee dat hulle deur die geskiedenis, deur kolonialisme, stilgemaak is – of suggereer hy dat hy, die outeur, nie die reg het om namens hulle te praat nie? Wil Coetzee deur sy manier van skryf en vertelling, aan die hand doen dat dit onmoontlik is dat die koloniseerder vir die gekoloniseerde kan praat; of, wanneer hy van hulle praat, gee hy aan die dienaarkarakters ʼn stem en kan dit hulle stem wees, of kan dit as betroubaar beskou word? Hou Coetzee die kraag van passiwiteit voor as ʼn vorm van weerstand en herindeling? Hierdie studie ondersoek, vanuit ʼn dekoloniale perspektief, die komplekse wyse waarop Coetzee stem en die vraag van die tussenkoms van die gekoloniseerde hanteer. / Ucwaningo lwamanje luchitha imiqondo ka-Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o (2009) yokuqothula nokujoyina kabusha ukungabuswa ngelinye izwe ekuhloliseni ngokucophelela ukuqamba okukhethiwe kukaJ.M. Coetzee. Ekufundeni kwami amanoveli i-Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe and Disgrace, ngichaza imiqondo yokuqothula futhi ukujoyina kabusha ekungabusweni ngelinye izwe. Ekuhumusheni kuka-Ngũgĩ, ukuqothula kubhekisela ekufudukeni nasekuthunjweni kwalabo ababuswa ngelinye izwe, kanye nengqondo yabo ekubusweni ngelinye izwe ngokusebenzisa imiphakathi yamasiko. Ukujoyina kabusha kuba wumzamo wokungabuswa ngelinye izwe ukulungisa ukuqothula kokukhubazeka ngokomzimba nangokwengqondo. Ngendlela efanayo lapho i-Afrika ihlukaniswe ngakhona, ihlelwe ibalazwe futhi ibuzwa ngelinye izwe kusukela kwiNgqungquthela yaseBerlin ka 1884/5, amasiko kanye nemilando yabantu base-Afrika yaqothulwa futhi yabuswa. Ukukhathazeka kwezwe kuboniswa ebalazweni nasekuthunjweni komhlaba - njengoba kuboniswe ezindaweni zokuhlala zasogwadule ku- Waiting for the Barbarians, ku-Cruso ukuhlanzwa komhlaba-enovelini i-Foe nakuPetrus ukuthatha ipulazi likaLucy enovelini i-Disgrace. Ngaphezu kwalokho, ukusetshenziswa kolimi lukaCoetzee kuyisisindo esisodwa esibalulekile sokulandisa esihlolisiswayo ukuze kuqinisekiswe ukuthi uCozezee uphikisa kanjani noma ukhuluma kanjani, futhi mayelana nababuswa ngelinye izwe ngokusebenzisa umlandisi. Lolu cwaningo lwembula uhlobo oluthile lokucabanga lwamanoveli akhethiwe futhi lufuna izimpendulo embuzweni wokuthi kungani uCoetzee ejwayele ukwenza "abalingisi" bakhe abamnyama bengabonakali futhi bangenasisekelo (futhi ngezinye izikhathi abangenalo igama). Ingabe uCoetzee uphakamisa ukuthi baye bathuliswa ngumlando, ngukubuswa ngelinye izwe, noma ingabe uphakamisa ukuthi yena, umbhali, akanalo ilungelo lokukhuluma egameni labo? Ngendlela yokubhala nokuxoxa ngezindaba, ingabe uCoetzee uphakamisa ukuthi akunakwenzeka ukuba obusa elinye izwe akhulumele ababuswayo kulelo zwe noma, uma ekhuluma ngabo, uyabanika abalingiswa abayinceku izwi futhi leli zwi lingaba ngelabo, noma lingathathwa njengelethembekile? Ingabe uCoetzee uveza amandla okungahambisani njengendlela yokumelana nokujoyina kabusha? Lolu cwaningo, kusukela embonweni wokungabuswa ngelinye izwe, luhambisana nendlela eyinkimbinkimbi uCoetzee alawula izwi kanye nombuzo wokumela ababuswayo. / English Studies / M.A. (Theory of Literature: (English Studies))

The central argument of my study is that, among other matters, in his works, J.M. Coetzee could be said to demonstrate that the known Self is an embodied being and is not autonomous. With regard to the latter contention, Coetzee intimates that any two Subjects are implicated in each other’s subjectivities in a reciprocal process that involves what Derek Attridge has called “irruptions of otherness” (2005: xii) into the Subject’s subjectivity. These irruptions, which happen during the encounter, lead to a double loss of autonomy for each Subject and this phenomenon renders the relationship between Subjects non-dichotomus or non-binaric. In other words, the Subject does not produce the contents of his or her consciousness in a sui generis and ex nihilo fashion, and his or her ontological indebtedness to the Other constitutes his or her first loss of autonomy. As for those Others that do possess consciousness, the Subject is implicated in their consciousness and this constitutes the Subject’s second loss of autonomy. These losses counter the near solipsistic Nagelian neo-Cartesianism and paves the way for imagining both intra- and inter-species “intersubjectivity”. It is my view that this double loss of autonomy accounts for the sympathetic and empathetic imagination that we encounter in Coetzee’s fiction. Following Coetzee’s intimations of intersubjectivity through irruptions of otherness, what I see as my contribution to studies on this author’s work through this study is the link I have established between the physicalist strain within the philosophy of mind (whose central thesis is that consciousness is an embodied phenomenon) and a modified Kantian “metaphysics”, especially Immanuel Kant’s conception of concepts as comprising form and content. I have deployed this conception in demonstrating the Subject’s ontological indebtedness to external sources of the content part of consciousness. And, through the Husserlian concept of intentionality, and Kant’s (1929: 27) observation that we cannot have appearances without something that appears, I have linked the Subject to the sources of his or her content and thereby also demonstrated that the Subject is not eternally separated or alienated from those sources. Instead, the Subject is not simply contiguous but coterminous and co-extensive, albeit in a mediated way, with the external sources of the content part of his or her consciousness. Thus, while accepting the thesis of the Other’s radical otherness, I modify the thesis of the Other’s radical exteriority. Ultimately, then, ontologically speaking, the Coetzeean project could be described as one of embodying and grounding the supposedly autonomous, solipsistic and freefloating/disembodied Cartesian Subject. This he does by alerting this Subject, first and foremost, to its embodiedness and, further to that, pointing out its ontological indebtedness to its Others and its implication in the Others’s consciousnesses and so prevent it from continuing with its imperialistic and ecological barbarities. However, ethically speaking, beyond the reciprocal ethics that arises from mutual ontological indebtedness and implication, it is the selflessness that characterises a cruciform logic that comes across as the epitome of Coetzeean ethics.

O escritor ganhador do Prêmio Nobel de Literatura John Maxwell Coetzee publicou Foe em 1987. Ao lermos esse romance, somos imediatamente levados à ilha de Robinson Crusoe - e, conseqüentemente, ao mundo ficcional de Daniel Defoe. O objetivo deste trabalho é tomar a leitura da obra Foe, de Coetzee, como um comentário sobre a estética de construção de um romance. Esta é uma dissertação argumentativa, dividida em três partes. O primeiro capítulo introduz o autor e contextualiza as discussões sobre a Escrita, a História e a Ficção. O segundo capítulo traz o suporte teórico, que consiste na apresentação das idéias de Linda Hutcheon sobre Historiografia e nas conceitualizações sobre Meta-ficção, de Patricia Waugh. Ambas conduzem à referência poética ao Anjo da História feita por Walter Benjamin. A terceira parte comenta o romance Foe e o insere no conjunto da obra de Coetzee, apontando elementos compartilhados com os outros romances do autor. Na conclusão, espero validar a tese proposta, de que Foe é realmente um romance auto-reflexivo que reflete as condições de produção de sua época. / Nobel prize winner John Maxwell Coetzee published Foe in 1987. When reading that novel, we are taken back to Robinson Crusoe’s island – and, consequently, to the world of Daniel Defoe’s fiction. The aim of this work is to undertake the reading of Coetzee’s Foe as a study on the aesthetics of novelmaking. This is an argumentative thesis, divided into three parts. Chapter one introduces the author and contextualizes the discussions on Writing, History and Fiction. Chapter two brings the theoretical background, that consists of the presentation of Linda Hutcheon’s ideas about Historiography and Patricia Waugh’s conceptualizations on Metafiction, both of them relating to Walter Benjamin’s poetic reference to the Angel of History. The third part submits an analysis of Foe, and connects this novel with the other works written by Coetzee. In the conclusion, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Foe is, ultimately, a self-reflexive novel that reflects the aesthetics of novel making of its own time.

O escritor ganhador do Prêmio Nobel de Literatura John Maxwell Coetzee publicou Foe em 1987. Ao lermos esse romance, somos imediatamente levados à ilha de Robinson Crusoe - e, conseqüentemente, ao mundo ficcional de Daniel Defoe. O objetivo deste trabalho é tomar a leitura da obra Foe, de Coetzee, como um comentário sobre a estética de construção de um romance. Esta é uma dissertação argumentativa, dividida em três partes. O primeiro capítulo introduz o autor e contextualiza as discussões sobre a Escrita, a História e a Ficção. O segundo capítulo traz o suporte teórico, que consiste na apresentação das idéias de Linda Hutcheon sobre Historiografia e nas conceitualizações sobre Meta-ficção, de Patricia Waugh. Ambas conduzem à referência poética ao Anjo da História feita por Walter Benjamin. A terceira parte comenta o romance Foe e o insere no conjunto da obra de Coetzee, apontando elementos compartilhados com os outros romances do autor. Na conclusão, espero validar a tese proposta, de que Foe é realmente um romance auto-reflexivo que reflete as condições de produção de sua época. / Nobel prize winner John Maxwell Coetzee published Foe in 1987. When reading that novel, we are taken back to Robinson Crusoe’s island – and, consequently, to the world of Daniel Defoe’s fiction. The aim of this work is to undertake the reading of Coetzee’s Foe as a study on the aesthetics of novelmaking. This is an argumentative thesis, divided into three parts. Chapter one introduces the author and contextualizes the discussions on Writing, History and Fiction. Chapter two brings the theoretical background, that consists of the presentation of Linda Hutcheon’s ideas about Historiography and Patricia Waugh’s conceptualizations on Metafiction, both of them relating to Walter Benjamin’s poetic reference to the Angel of History. The third part submits an analysis of Foe, and connects this novel with the other works written by Coetzee. In the conclusion, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Foe is, ultimately, a self-reflexive novel that reflects the aesthetics of novel making of its own time.

O escritor ganhador do Prêmio Nobel de Literatura John Maxwell Coetzee publicou Foe em 1987. Ao lermos esse romance, somos imediatamente levados à ilha de Robinson Crusoe - e, conseqüentemente, ao mundo ficcional de Daniel Defoe. O objetivo deste trabalho é tomar a leitura da obra Foe, de Coetzee, como um comentário sobre a estética de construção de um romance. Esta é uma dissertação argumentativa, dividida em três partes. O primeiro capítulo introduz o autor e contextualiza as discussões sobre a Escrita, a História e a Ficção. O segundo capítulo traz o suporte teórico, que consiste na apresentação das idéias de Linda Hutcheon sobre Historiografia e nas conceitualizações sobre Meta-ficção, de Patricia Waugh. Ambas conduzem à referência poética ao Anjo da História feita por Walter Benjamin. A terceira parte comenta o romance Foe e o insere no conjunto da obra de Coetzee, apontando elementos compartilhados com os outros romances do autor. Na conclusão, espero validar a tese proposta, de que Foe é realmente um romance auto-reflexivo que reflete as condições de produção de sua época. / Nobel prize winner John Maxwell Coetzee published Foe in 1987. When reading that novel, we are taken back to Robinson Crusoe’s island – and, consequently, to the world of Daniel Defoe’s fiction. The aim of this work is to undertake the reading of Coetzee’s Foe as a study on the aesthetics of novelmaking. This is an argumentative thesis, divided into three parts. Chapter one introduces the author and contextualizes the discussions on Writing, History and Fiction. Chapter two brings the theoretical background, that consists of the presentation of Linda Hutcheon’s ideas about Historiography and Patricia Waugh’s conceptualizations on Metafiction, both of them relating to Walter Benjamin’s poetic reference to the Angel of History. The third part submits an analysis of Foe, and connects this novel with the other works written by Coetzee. In the conclusion, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Foe is, ultimately, a self-reflexive novel that reflects the aesthetics of novel making of its own time.

M.A. (English) / In the following dissertation, the literary representation of the farm in Schreiner's The Story of an African Farm (18%3), Smith's The Beadle (1926), and Coetzee's In the Heart of the Country (1976) will be examined under two main categories. The first is the treatment of the farm landscape, or the specifically '* South African version of the pastoral myth. The second, and interrelated category, is the stereotypic vision that originated around the inhabitants of the South African farm. In both categories the focus will fallon the stereotypes of both land and inhabitants that existed at the time that Schreiner and Smith wrote, and the ways in which these stereotypes were used, modified, or expanded by these two authors. In the final chapter I shall examine Coetzee' s ironic use of these stereotypes, especially those that were created around the farm landscape during the nineteenth century.

Thesis (MA (English))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis interrogates the relationship between body, subjectivity and space in three antipastoral novels. The texts which I will be discussing, Karel Schoeman’s This Life, Anne Landsman’s The Devil’s Chimney and J.M. Coetzee’s In the Heart of the Country, all foreground the female protagonist’s relationship to a specifically South African landscape in a colonial time-frame. The inter-relatedness between the body, subjectivity and space is explored in order to show that there is a shifting interaction between these registers in the novels. Arising from this interaction, the importance of perspective as a way of being in the world is foregrounded. The approach adopted in this study is based on the assumption that our experience depends upon how we make meaning of the world through our bodies as we encounter people, places and objects. The lived, embodied experience is always a subjective experience. The conceptual framework is derived broadly from psychoanalysis and phenomenology. My primary concern in this study is how marginal subject positions are explored in the space of the South African farm, which, traditionally, is an ideologically fraught locus of Afrikaner patriarchy and oppression. The novels are narrated by distinctive female voices, each speaking differently, but all having the effect of undermining and exposing the hegemony of the patriarchal farm space. In all three novels the question of genre is involved as forming the space of the text itself. The novels speak to the tradition of the plaasroman and the pastoral and, in doing so, open up a conversation with the past. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In hierdie tesis word die verhouding tussen die liggaam, subjektiwiteit en ruimte ondersoek in drie romans wat teen die pastorale literêre tradisie spreek. Die betrokke romans is This Life deur Karel Schoeman, The Devil’s Chimney deur Anne Landsman en In the Heart of the Country deur J.M. Coetzee. Die romans speel af in ‘n koloniale tydperk waar die vroulike protagonis se verhouding met die Suid-Afrikaanse landskap op die voorgrond gestel word. Die verwantskap tussen die liggaam, subjektiwiteit en ruimte word ondersoek om die interaksie tussen hierdie drie konsepte ten toon te stel. Wat vanuit hierdie interaksie voortspruit is die ontologiese rol wat perspektief speel as wyse om met die wêreld te verkeer. Hierdie studie benader die romans vanuit die siening dat die mens se ervaring afhang van hoe hy/sy die wêreld verstaan deur die interaksie tussen die liggaam en ander mense, ruimtes en objekte. Die beliggaamde ervaring is dus ‘n subjektiewe ervaring. Die konsepsuele raamwerk van hierdie ondersoek is afgelei van psigoanalise en fenomenologie. Die kern van hierdie studie is om te ondersoek hoe die posisie van die randfiguur in die ruimte van die Suid-Afrikaanse plaas ten toon gestel word. Die plaas is tradisioneel ‘n ideologiese bestrede ruimte van Afrikaner patriargie en onderdrukking. Die romans word verhaal deur drie kenmerkende en verskillende vroulike stemme wat dien om die hegemonie van die patriargale opset op die plase te ondermyn en ontbloot. Die vraagstuk van genre is in al drie romans betrokke aangesien genre die ruimte van die teks self uitmaak. Die romans spreek teen die tradisie van die plaasroman en die pastorale roman en tree sodoende in gesprek met die verlede.

Thesis (MA (English))--University of Stellenbosch, 2008. / The notion that the post-colonial text stands in direct opposition to the canonical European text, and thus acts as a kind of counter-discourse, is generally accepted within post-colonial theory. In fact, this concept is so fashionable that Salman Rushdie’s assertion that ‘the Empire writes back to the Centre’ has been adopted as a maxim within the field of post-colonial studies, simultaneously a mission statement and a summative description of the entire field. In its role as a ‘response’ to a dominant European literary tradition, the post-colonial text is often regarded as resorting to a strategy of subversion through inversion, in essence, telling the ‘other side of the story’. The post-colonial text, then, seeks to address the ways in which the western literary tradition has marginalised, misrepresented and silenced its others by providing a platform for these dissenting voices. While such a view rightly points to the post-colonial text’s concern with alterity and oppression, it also points to the agonistic nature of the genre. That is, within post-colonial theory, the literature of Empire does not emerge as autonomous and self-determining, but is restricted to the role of counter-discourse, forever placed in direct opposition (or in response) to a unified dominant social order. Post-colonial theory’s continued classification of the literature of Empire as a reaction to a normative, dominant discourse against which all others must be weighed and found wanting serves to strengthen the binary order which polarises centre and periphery. This study is concerned with ‘rewritten’ post-colonial texts, such as J.M. Coetzee’s Foe, Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea, Marina Warner’s Indigo, or, Mapping the Waters and Aimé Césaire’s A Tempest, and suggests that these revised texts exceed such narrow definition. Although often characterised by a concern with ‘political’ issues, the revised text surpasses the romantic notion of ‘speaking back’ by pointing to a more complex entanglement between post-colonial and canonical, self and other. These texts signal the collapse of binary order and the emergence of a new literary landscape in which there can be no dialogue between the clearly demarcated sites of Empire and Centre, but rather a global conversation that exceeds geographical location. It would seem as if the dependent texts in question resist offering mere pluralistic subversions of the logic of their pretexts. The desire to challenge the assumptions of a Eurocentric literary tradition is overshadowed by a distinct sense of disquiet or unease with the matrix text. This sense of unease is read as a response to an exaggerated iterability within the original text, which in turn stems from the matrix text’s inability to negotiate its own aporia. The aim of this study, then, is not to uncover the ways in which the post-colonial rewrite challenges the assumptions of its literary pretext, but rather to establish how certain elements of instability and subversion already present within the colonial pretext allows for such a return.

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