Skip to main content

Ma se geel bak


Wanneer iemand baie na aan jou doodgaan, begin mens probleme met taal ontwikkel. Praat jy in die hede van daardie persoon, of skakel jy oor na die verlede tyd? Sê ek byvoorbeeld my ma het ‘n geel bak gehad? Die bak is nog hier in die huis, maar my ma is nie. Wie bepaal die tydsgebruik, die besitter of die besitting? Toe my ma nog geleef het was dit haar bak. Niemand het dit bevraagteken of die feit betwis nie. My ma het dus ‘n geel bak gehad. Maar wanneer ek nou van die bak praat, hoe maak ek dan? Na haar dood het die bak op geen stadium van eienaar verwissel nie. Die breekware staan nog net so in die kaste. Ek sou daarom kon sê my ma het ‘n geel bak. Sou iemand egter meer van die bak by haar wou weet, aangesien my taalgebruik baie vatbaar vir so ‘n onskuldige versoek kon wees, waarheen verwys ek hulle?

Nou systap ek die probleem waarvoor ek nie ‘n bevredigende oplossing het nie deur te praat van Ma se bak.

Ma het ‘n pragtige blompot gehad. Albei in die verlede tyd. ‘n Grote wat sy vir haar 21ste verjaardag by die mense van haar werk gekry het. Dit was vir haar baie kosbaar en die simbool van mooi herinneringe. Daar waar dit op die klavier in die sitkamer van ons huis in die dorp gestaan het.

Een oggend - ek onthou dit só goed; ek was seker so vier, vyf - het ek met ‘n tennisbal in die huis rondgespeel en nie regtig op Ma se vermanings ag geslaan nie. In die sitkamer het ek dit rondgegooi en die volgende oomblik tref dit die blompot wat van die klavier af kantel en in skerwe op die vloer beland. Ek het my flou geskrik en dadelik vreeslik sleg gevoel oor dit wat gebeur het.

Ma het die kabaal gehoor en die sitkamer ingekom. Ek het gesê ek is vreeslik jammer. Ma het niks gesê nie, net verslae by die skerwe gehurk en dit begin optel. Toe na my gekyk en gesê, “Dis nie die ergste nie. Dis wêreldsgoed.” Wat dit presies beteken sou ek eers later leer, maar ek het geweet sy probeer my troos en dit het my net nog slegter laat voel oor dit wat ek gedoen het.

Ek het myself daardie oggend voorgeneem dat ek nooit weer iets wat vir haar baie kosbaar is, sal breek of beskadig nie. Ek het die bewaker van haar geel bak geword. Die porseleinbak met die deksel wat sy as trougeskenk van oom Barry, die Italianer wat saam met Pa gewerk het, gekry het. Help ek om skottelgoed te was of af te droog, hanteer ek daardie bak met die grootste sorg en versigtigheid.

Ek was al groot, byna volwasse, toe ek Ma eendag terloops vertel het van my voorneme daardie oggend en hoe belangrik dit vir my is dat ek oom Barry se bak nie sal breek nie. Sy het lekker gelag en gesê dit sal darem nou regtig nie die einde van die wêreld wees nie en buitendien, dis wêreldsgoed.

Met die ouer word het ek die waarheid van haar woorde al meer self leer ken en ervaar. Haar siekte, aftakeling en pyn het die feit onderstreep dat daar baie groter dinge in ‘n mens se lewe kan breek as ‘n jongmeisie se verjaardaggeskenk.

Tog wonder ek na haar dood dikwels, waarom werk ek steeds so ontsettend versigtig met Ma se geel bak?

George 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Whistle while you work

Drawing by Ron Leishman When last did you whistle while working? When last did you hear someone else whistle while working? Somehow it bothers me that whistling has become an almost absent element in our work. The sound of a person whistling a tune while busy somewhere in the house or out in the workshop conveys something of an underlying happiness, satisfaction and contentment. An enjoyment of the work itself. The tune need not be flawless. Applying more air than sound won’t lead to disqualification, as long as the intention is there. Whistling can even be replaced by singing in all that I’ve said up to now. The same principles apply. The absence of any of these two activities bothers me because it says something about us doing the work and the type of work that we do. Can it be that our type of labour in this 21 st century is not conducive to either whistling or singing? What type of work is that then – draining, stressful, pressured? Or are our conclusions ...

Lessons in Sunbirdish (1)

I have no way of proving that God exists. For a long, long time I believed because I didn't think I had a choice. If it is a choice between heaven and hell, you do what it takes to secure your celestial seat. Somehow I never stopped to consider why I so strongly believed in a heaven and hell, but wasn't nearly as sure that there's a God holding the keys to them. Then the sunbirds came. Slowly but surely I am being taught the dialect I need to converse with God. Or rather, to follow on what seems to be a trail that God leaves me. Being just up ahead and beckoning me all the while, it's not a chase after or a search for God, but rather a joint venture with God scouting and reporting back when my spirit runs low on this journey through life. In  A Rare Find  and  Bird on my window sill  I touched on synchronicity. I have come to believe that consciously living our moments, awakens us to the fact that there are more things in this life than meet the eyeball. Things t...

A likely Hero: Jara Cimrman

As Matilda has already indicated, one of the most difficult things to do after you’ve visited a country is to return and convey something of what you’ve experienced. How do you show a city’s many faces, introduce its inhabitants? How do you tell of the effects a history has on people and of a stance towards life that can actually not be translated into words? In the case of Prague, it is very helpful to have someone like Jara Cimrman. ~ ~ v ~ ~ Petrin Hill, on the left bank of the river Vltava running through Prague, is in many ways a site worth visiting. Climbing the 299 steps of the Petrin Tower, inspired by the Eiffel Tower, gives you one of the most beautiful views of the city. But by going down into its basement, you enter into the psyche of the Czech people. Here, quite unobtrusively, is the museum for the “ Genius, who has not become famous ”. Matilda and I almost stumbled onto it by chance and as we went through the exhibition, our amazement over this brilliant ...