How we cite our quotes: (Book.Chapter.Paragraph)
Quote #7
Now these men [who profit off the gold mine shares] will spend the eighty shillings, and make more work for other people, so that the country will be richer for the eighty shillings. And many of them give generously to the boys' clubs and girls' clubs, and the social centres, and the hospitals. It is wrong to say, as they do in remote places like Bloemfontein and Grahamstown and Beaufort West, that Johannesburg thinks only of money. (2.23.12)
The idea that the white men who make huge profits off the gold mines will also spend that money in the local community, and will donate some of that money to charities in the area, sounds a lot like American-style trickle-down economics to us. People who believe in trickle-down economics think that it's good to have fabulously wealthy people around because they are the ones who spend money to keep businesses alive.
The only problem is, there is no way to guarantee (a) how far down the money will trickle, and (b) whether the money will be trickling down to the places where it is most needed. So, if a few people are getting rich off this new gold mine in Odendaalsrust, what about the miners who are actually digging the gold? Are they making a living wage?
Quote #8
For the voice has magic in it, and it has threatening in it, and it is as though Africa itself were in it. A lion growls in it, and thunder echoes in it over black mountains.
Dubula and Tomlinson listen to it, with contempt, and with envy. For here is a voice to move thousands, with no brain behind it to tell it what to say, with no courage to say it if it knew. (2.26.2-3)
Why might a voice that speaks "as though Africa itself were in it" be potentially dangerous to Alan Paton's particular message of brotherly love between the black and white communities in this book? Why does Paton appear to be so critical of John Kumalo and his message of wage equality for black workers? What do you think of John Kumalo's ethics as a character? Do you think that he is a good politician?
Quote #9
It was a thing the white man had done, knocked these chiefs down, and put them up again, to hold the pieces together. But the white men had taken most of the pieces away. And some chiefs sat with arrogant and blood-shot eyes, rulers of pitiful kingdoms that had no meaning at all. They were not all like that; there were some who had tried to help their people, and who had sent their sons to schools. And the Government had tried to help them too. But they were feeding an old man with milk, and pretending that he would one day grow into a boy. (3.31.3)
The chief we meet in Cry, the Beloved Country only achieves one thing: he goes to the magistrate (a local official) with Kumalo's proposal for new farming education, and the magistrate talks to Jarvis about Ndotsheni's agriculture. When the chief goes with Jarvis and the magistrate to mark out land for the new dam, he puts one of the little flag markers in the wrong place, because he doesn't know what he is doing. This chief is no leader; he is a classic figurehead. So what does Paton think the purpose of these chiefs could be now that "the tribe" has been broken? What are some of the pros and cons of keeping at least the form of the old tribal system alive, even if these chiefs have very little real power?