TV is the Devil, the Devil is on TV: Wild Religion and Wild Media in South Africa

Abstract

In keeping with trends in the academy and the rapidly increasing presence, power, and persuasion of digital and electronic media on the African continent and in the global economy, the study of religion and the media in South Africa has become a flourishing field of intellectual inquiry. The expanse of the field in terms of approaches, both methodological and theoretical, demonstrates the multiple and complex interactions between religion and the media in a diverse range of societies and settings. In light of its recent history of apartheid and transition into democracy in the middle 1990s, when paradigmatic constitutional and political changes took place in which the relationship between religion and the media was reconstituted, the South African context, in particular, is ripe for exploring media technology and practices in relation to the political economy of the sacred. This essay pays tribute to David Chidester by testing the possibilities of his theory of 'wild religion' against two vignettes of wild media in South Africa. The first, characterized as TV is the devil explores the apartheid government's pre-emptive religiously saturated ban on television. The second example, described as the devil is on TV assesses viewers' responses to the television program, Lucifer. I argue that when read with Chidester's theorization of the 'wild ambivalence of the sacred', these examples evoke the hitherto under-explored wild character of both religion and the media.

Broadcasting change: An aerial overview of South African television debates in an age of constant transition

“…People around the world watched the first human steps on the moon on their television sets. Significantly, the South African public felt short-changed by the government for not being able to witness this extraordinary event along with the rest of the world (Scharnick-Udemans, 2018;Nixon, 1994Nixon, , 1999. This made television a campaign issue, with the opposition promising to legalise its use, and the government realised it would lose power unless it changed its rigid stance.…”

“…He describes this move as ‘the most drastic act of cultural protectionism in the history of the medium’ (Nixon, 1994: 120). Writing from a theological perspective, Lee-Shae Scharnick-Udemans (2018: 185) partly attributes the rejection of television to the government’s ‘deeply religious, Christian nationalist approach’. Her work also draws on Bernard Cros (1996) whose observations during the House of Assembly debates (1958-1969) found that ‘[…] television was considered an idol—a god located within the household, with the ability to hypnotise the viewer—thus transgressing the first of the 10 Commandments’ (Scharnick-Udemans, 2018: 185).…”

“…Writing from a theological perspective, Lee-Shae Scharnick-Udemans (2018: 185) partly attributes the rejection of television to the government’s ‘deeply religious, Christian nationalist approach’. Her work also draws on Bernard Cros (1996) whose observations during the House of Assembly debates (1958-1969) found that ‘[…] television was considered an idol—a god located within the household, with the ability to hypnotise the viewer—thus transgressing the first of the 10 Commandments’ (Scharnick-Udemans, 2018: 185). Scharnick-Udemans contends that the government sought to define television along a religious binary not as sacred, but as blasphemous—thus making religion and media technology intrinsically incompatible (2018: 188).…”

“…Many academics (Corrigan, 1974; Nixon, 1993; Orlik, 1970; Scharnick-Udemans, 2018; Richard West, 1978) turn to Hansard and print media (for instance, Rand Daily Mail and Cape Times ), to document television’s banning/unbanning in Parliament. The verbatim accounts of parliamentary discussions in Hansard reveal how vehemently parliamentarians such as the Minister of Post and Telegraphs, Albert Herzog, opposed television.…”

“…In Homeland Harlem and Hollywood , Nixon focuses on the linkages between nationalism and censorship (1994). Scharnick-Udemans (2018) builds on this perspective by connecting these two concepts to ‘Afrikaner nationalism as a political ideology’, which itself had a ‘complicated liaison with a particular Christian national ethic that was informed and legitimized by the Dutch Reformed Church’. Hayman and Tomaselli (1987, 1989a, 1989b) imply that television technology created an opportunity for the ruling party to mould national ideology by allowing people to habitually watch carefully curated programmes.…”