Educational Media Reviews Online

In 1966 Hendrik Verwoerd, Prime Minister of South Africa and father of the apartheid system, was stabbed to death on the floor of the South African Parliament. The assassin was Dimitri Tsafendas, a mixed race man from Mozambique. A Question of Madness describes the assassination and the events that surrounded it, and explores the character of both Verwoerd and Tsafendas. More importantly, it exposes the deep wounds that apartheid inflicted on South Africa. Wounds that are still unhealed in much of the country today!

Because of his mixed heritage, Whites shunned Tsafendas in his native Mozambique. This left him with persistent feelings of inferiority and a burning desire to leave his homeland. He traveled the world searching for a place where he could fit in, and finally settled in South Africa. His treatment there would lead him to assassinate Verwoerd, a man he saw as one of the architects of the racism that had plagued him his entire life.

The film is made up almost entirely of interviews with witnesses of the events described. Chief among these is Tsafendas himself. Those interviewed range the political spectrum from left to right, and include the supporters and detractors of both Tsafendas and Verwoerd. A hot topic of debate is Tsafendas' mental stability at the time of the assassination. At his trial the court found him to be insane, or as the South Africans would put it, a "Furiousus." Many disagree with that verdict. The overall theme of the discussions, however, is the impact of apartheid on South African society, both yesterday and today. At several points those interviewed describe how apartheid affected their lives and the country as a whole. Their descriptions are often radically different, and illustrate the racial chasm that still divides South Africa.

The pace of the film is good, and it draws in the viewer. Picture quality is also good. However, the sound quality of each segment varies considerably. Voiceovers (made up mostly of readings from trial transcripts) are often drowned out by background music. The segments where Tsafendas is interviewed are hard to follow, because of the extremely labored and nasal way in which he speaks. The makers of the film assume that viewers are knowledgeable in both South African politics and slang, and those who are not may find the film hard to understand.

This film is best suited for graduate or undergraduate students of either African affairs or African history, and for libraries where these areas of study are in great demand. It may be of secondary interest to those studying sociology and political science, but only libraries with extensive collections in these areas would want to consider it.

Recommended.