Live Performances

Popular musicians were able to earn money outside of the confines of their labels and the SABC through live performances. The most successful toured extensively throughout the country, often to other countries, particularly South Africa’s neighbours. Live concerts were a way of speaking directly to the people, circulating the intended messages of political songs that had been altered to beat censors or censored outright, and ultimately mobilising listeners in the struggle. In this way musicians’ live performances were as important, perhaps even more so, than recorded albums or radio play (Schumann, 2008:27). In the live setting their

music acquired another set of meanings through the process of popular participation. In the words of Ansell, “What the censors barred, the people created” (Ansell, 2004:199-200). According to Blondie Makhene,

Bands used to politicise people, in a way. Not aggressively, like ‘viva Mandela!’ – just singing a song that has a strong statement. It was more live than anything else, though the recorded ones came in now and again... Repression was strong but musicians never stopped conscientising through music (Makhene, 2009:interview).

Besides original compositions, cover versions of international songs were also popular, and assumed new meaning under the context of apartheid. Examples include the American civil rights anthem popularised by Pete Seeger, ‘We Shall Overcome’, Brook Benton’s ‘Oh Lord, Why Lord’ and The Brotherhood of Man’s ‘United We Stand” – all songs that call for unity and hope in the face of oppression, a message that black South Africans could relate to (Makhene, 2009:interview). That South African artists incorporated these songs into their live performances underlines the similarities in the struggle against racial oppression in the USA and in South Africa, as well as the musical ties between the two countries, and more generally the power of music in inspiring and mobilising social change all over the world.

Making use of a thriving live and festival circuit, as well as opportunities in neighbouring countries, musicians were hugely powerful within the unenfranchised and disenfranchised black community while most political leaders were languishing in jail or exile. While still restricted under apartheid laws, musicians enjoyed far more freedom of movement than other black people. This was because their work necessitated touring. Whereas ordinary black South Africans’ movement was effectively restricted to between the places where they lived and worked, whether in urban areas or homelands, successful black musicians performed all over the country, some in neighbouring countries or even further afield. Wealthier musicians often could afford their own cars. Musicians in general were thus far more mobile than the rest of the black population. According to Pat Shange,

Musicians were acting like politicians sometimes – because it was easier to move from point A to point B as a musician than as a politician (Shange, 2009:interview).

In this way, musicians – and civil society in general - assumed the role of politicians in the absence of a formal political society that forms a bridge between society and the state, and with most black political leaders imprisoned, exiled or underground.

Besides touring and festivals, permanent venues also offered musicians a platform to concientise and proselytise music listeners to join the struggle against apartheid. In the early to mid-1980s, disco nightclubs became increasingly popular with black people wanting to escape the injustices of society, as well as for record labels to market, and even for comrades to meet (Madalane, 2012: 72,94). During the second half of the 1980s, several new venues emerged, especially in major city centres, where audiences could socialise and enjoy music that would not be carried by the SABC, at established venues or by major labels. The venues “offered a home to the new pop and jazz and – through a range of legal dodges or outright law-breaking – to mixed bands and audiences” (Ansell, 2004:206,209-210). These clubs included Jameson’s, Kippies, Bela Napoli, Plum Crazy, The Roxy and Midnight Star in Johannesburg, as well as The Rainbow in Durban, Scratch in Cape Town and many others (Schumann, 2008:34; Ansell, 2004:209-210; Drewett, 2003a:105). Some of these venues, such as Jameson’s, possessed a special “Kruger” liquor license, issued in the previous century by the president of the Transvaal Republic, Paul Kruger, which enabled them to bypass modern laws concerning liquor sales and segregation (Ansell, 2004: 211). Other venues were able to apply for “international” status – special permission from government to cater for patrons of various races. Others simply broke the rules.

The Pelican nightclub in Orlando, Soweto, was another important live venue for musicians49_{. Coplan calls it a “besieged outpost of township musical and political}

creativity”. He argues that “unlicensed” music clubs such as the Pelican played a major part in keeping professional black urban music alive during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Lucky Michaels, the owner of the Pelican, at times had to pay off

49

Established by Lucky Michaels in 1971, the Pelican was a popular nightclub offering cabaret, jazz and popular music shows. During the 1970s and 80s it was a meeting place for those opposed to the apartheid regime, as well as a training ground for top musicians and producers.

the police to not raid the venue or stop shows. Open mic nights and occasional screenings of local films allowed for political subject matter to be discussed, while the venue also hosted more formal political meetings (Coplan, 1985:305).

Musicians also made use of alternative venues such as university campuses, church halls and civic centres (Ansell, 2004:193). Festivals were staged regularly and drew large audiences. As discussed in chapter two, some of these were organised by large corporations and were thus sanctioned by government. However, many others were not. For example, the landmark Concert in the Park at Ellis Park in central Johannesburg in 1985 drew a mixed audience of over 100 000 to enjoy music by South Africa’s biggest black, white and coloured musicians. The musicians, along with the engineers and technical crew and those in charge of the venue itself, had all offered their services for free after being approached by producer Hilton Rosenthal and Issy Kirsch, who ran the independent radio station 702. The stated aim of the concert and the accompanying album was to raise funds not for a political cause but for Operation Hunger, a local charity (Durbach, 2010).

The growing popularity of live performances was utilised by musicians to deliver political messages in their music, straight to the people and free from direct government interference via the SABC. It serves as a good example of musicians’ effectiveness as both a medium of political communication and an agent of political socialisation. That many such events were mixed in terms of the races of both performers and audiences reflects the growing demand of listeners for music by artists of different backgrounds from their own, and the ability of musicians to cross over to a wider, non-racial audience. Live events with multiracial audiences or artists of different races would have exposed listeners of all races to the music of the “other”, helping to break down the prejudices and stereotypes engrained on them by apartheid and the SABC in particular. In doing so, they would have helped to erode the government’s control over the music industry, particularly regarding public gatherings, and thus challenge the ideology of separate development upon which apartheid was based.