Mikey's Train and Springbok vs. Protea Redux

Here are a couple of stories that will connect back to earlier blogs.

So, Where's the Train to Mikey's Fontain (see November 10)
So, when I came back to work from our weekend at Mikey's Fontein, I of course told everybody about our trip. One of my colleagues at UCT, Janice, said: "But how did you get back? Did you take the train? I've been wanting to go to Mikey's Fontein for an overnight, but when I call to get information from the train, they tell me there's no return train until Tuesday. How did you get back?"

Well, I told her all about the train trip, and the daily service that connects Johannesburg and Cape Town, stopping in Mikey's. Seemed pretty basic to me. But Janice insisted that when she's called to get information about the train, they tell her she has to come back on Tuesday.

So, I said I'd call Ross, the man who organized the weekend, and get all the scoop. And, I'd even have Ross give her a call with the details. So, I called Ross. Now mind you, Ross is a "fontein" of information on travel in South Africa. He is our #1 trip advisor, knows all the cool spots, and has yet to let us down. He's also world's #1 braai-meister! So I call Ross, and he says: "That's funny, because I also had trouble finding out about the train back from Mikey's Fontein. Whenever I called the train company, they would tell me that the only return train is on Tuesday. And then I would call the hotel in Mikey's, and they would say that there's a train every day. So, I finally called back the train folks, and told them that the folks at Mikey's say that there is a train returning to Cape Town every day at 10:00 am. And they say, 'Oh yeah. There is a train every day at 10:00 am. But that is the third class train.' "

So check this out. When you call up the state-run train agency, and you ask in a nice pleasan "white" voice, you are told "no train." Why? Because the assumption is that you wouldn't be interested in the third class train. The assumption is that third class train is only for blacks. Wait a minute, didn't apartheid end 14 years ago? Isn't this now a new multicultural democracy? Yes, but even though formal rules change, cultural norms and accents, are much more slow to change. So, is there a train to Mikey's Fontain? That depends...

Springbok vs. Protea Decision, Finally (See October 10)
Well, after six weeks of nearly non-stop debate, the South African Rugby Association announced yesterday that they had reached a compromise with the national sports federation. As you might recall, the rugby team was the only national team that didn't adopt the post-apartheid emblem, "The Protea." Rather, they held on to the apartheid-era symbol "The Springbok." For many white-South Africans, the Springbok is a huge symbol of national pride, as the Springboks have won two World Cup Championships, and are the current champions. Well, for black-South Africans, the "Bok" represents white oppression, and the latent (sometimes blatant) racism that exists in the sport.

So, over the past weeks the debate has raged in the papers and in the bars. Proteas or Springboks? Even Archbishop Desmond Tutu weighed in. The conversation was made even more complicated by the fact that Mandela wore the Springbok jersey at the celebration for their first world cup win in 1995 -one year after democracy! So, many people have interpreted this as Mandela giving his tacit approval to keep the Bok alive in the name of national unity.

Things got even more inense when one white South African rugby star, whose parents had been active in the anti-apartheid movement, said that he wanted to "vomit on the Springbok jersey." Needless to say, he was not included on the team that is now touring England

So, the final verdict is a compromise, which is surely not going to please anyone. The decision was to move the Springbok from the left to the right side of the jersey, and to make the Protea the dominant symbol. However, the name Springbok will still be able to be used for marketing and team spirit purposes

Here's how it was reported in the New Zealand Herald, a current Rugby powerhouse:

"The century-old Springbok emblem of South African rugby that has been a source of pride to some and alienation to others is to be displaced by the country's national flower. South African Rugby Union bosses told sports minister Makhenkesi Stofile today that they would comply with incoming legislation obliging national teams to wear the King Protea emblem on the left side of the jersey. Stofile said the Springbok symbol won't be axed completely, although its size and position on the jersey are still to be finalised. "The minister also advised us that the commercial emblem of national sporting federations - in rugby's case, the Springbok - can be utilised as federations deem fit, so long as that use does not compromise the national emblem," SARU president Oregan Hoskins said in a statement. Hoskins will convene a special meeting December 1 to determine the details on the new emblem, which is already used in other sports."

Surely, more to come on this one.

Blog ya later.
Seth./.