Paper short abstract:

Twenty years after South Africa became a democracy, two documentary films were made to celebrate the event. The films, Miracle Rising South Africa (2013) and 1994 Bloody Miracle (2014), offer two very different perspectives of when the transition played out peacefully 'in the eyes of the world'.

Paper long abstract:

This presentation sets out to interrogate how repackaging history, using testimonies and archival material as employed in two selected documentary films, poses issues of subjectively positioned points of view. Bill Nichols (2013) argues that evidence, narrative and ethics - the essentials for a documentary - are impacted upon when facts become evidence. This only happens once the facts has been positioned in an interpretative frame that suits the point of view of the constructor; in this case, the documentary filmmaker and his or her commissioning editor.

In 1994 after years of apartheid rule, South Africa became a democracy and all citizens could vote to elect a president for the country. Twenty years later two documentary films were made to celebrate the event. However, the films, Miracle Rising South Africa (2013) and 1994 Bloody Miracle (2014), offer two very different perspectives of was considered a 'miracle' when Nelson Mandela was elected as president of the new Rainbow Nation and 'in the eyes of the world, the transition played out peacefully.

While Miracle Rising South Africa (2013) focuses on how the role players managed to avoid a civil war and constructs a glossy representation of the birth of the Rainbow Nation, the second film reveals the attempts by right-wingers and the state's security apparatus to create mayhem in the country by supporting both Inkatha and the ANC (the two strongest political parties at the time), kidnap Nelson Mandela and other ANC leaders and to take over the country in a military coup.