{"id":{"repo_id":"cape-town","oai_identifier":"oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/12744"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cape-town/oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/12744","repository":{"repo_id":"cape-town","name":"University of Cape Town","base_url":"https://open.uct.ac.za/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Positioning the Cape : a spatial engraving of a shifting frontier","abstract":"In June this year I read an article entitled Eve's footprints safe in museum (Cape Times 24.6.98). The footprints had just been removed from the shore of the Langebaan lagoon. The footprints, imprinted in stone, have been dated to 117 000 years. The media use of the name Eve is an example of how theoretical possibility can become popular fact. The prints became exposed when the stone happened to crack and slide off along the strata that held the prints. Exposed to the elements and to a public who want to have their photograph taken standing where Eve once stood, the soft sandstone which held such a transient impression began to deteriorate rapidly. An article earlier in the year reported on the debate around the future of the prints. The geologist David Roberts, who discovered the prints, wanted them removed as soon as possible while Dr. Janette Deacon from the National Monuments Council was reported to have said, \"We should rather see it preserved at the site as moving it would destroy a lot of its meaning. A museum display could never recreate the atmosphere of that scene\" (Cape Times 14.1.98).","abstract_html":"In June this year I read an article entitled Eve's footprints safe in museum (Cape Times 24.6.98). The footprints had just been removed from the shore of the Langebaan lagoon. The footprints, imprinted in stone, have been dated to 117 000 years. The media use of the name Eve is an example of how theoretical possibility can become popular fact. The prints became exposed when the stone happened to crack and slide off along the strata that held the prints. Exposed to the elements and to a public who want to have their photograph taken standing where Eve once stood, the soft sandstone which held such a transient impression began to deteriorate rapidly. An article earlier in the year reported on the debate around the future of the prints. The geologist David Roberts, who discovered the prints, wanted them removed as soon as possible while Dr. Janette Deacon from the National Monuments Council was reported to have said, "We should rather see it preserved at the site as moving it would destroy a lot of its meaning. A museum display could never recreate the atmosphere of that scene" (Cape Times 14.1.98).","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Bull, Katherine Gay"],"institution":"Michaelis School of Fine Art","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Skotnes, Pippa","Payne, Malcolm"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1998,"date_issued":"1998","date_published":"1998","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:30Z","subjects":[],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11427/12744","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Skotnes, Pippa","Payne, Malcolm"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Bull, Katherine Gay"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2015-05-06T07:16:38Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2015-05-06T07:16:38Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1998"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["Michaelis School of Fine Art"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cape Town"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Master Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["MFA"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/12744"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Bibliography: leaves. 114-117."]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In June this year I read an article entitled Eve's footprints safe in museum (Cape Times 24.6.98). The footprints had just been removed from the shore of the Langebaan lagoon. The footprints, imprinted in stone, have been dated to 117 000 years. The media use of the name Eve is an example of how theoretical possibility can become popular fact. The prints became exposed when the stone happened to crack and slide off along the strata that held the prints. Exposed to the elements and to a public who want to have their photograph taken standing where Eve once stood, the soft sandstone which held such a transient impression began to deteriorate rapidly. An article earlier in the year reported on the debate around the future of the prints. The geologist David Roberts, who discovered the prints, wanted them removed as soon as possible while Dr. Janette Deacon from the National Monuments Council was reported to have said, \"We should rather see it preserved at the site as moving it would destroy a lot of its meaning. A museum display could never recreate the atmosphere of that scene\" (Cape Times 14.1.98)."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Positioning the Cape : a spatial engraving of a shifting frontier"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Skotnes, Pippa","Payne, Malcolm"],"dc:creator":["Bull, Katherine Gay"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2015-05-06T07:16:38Z"],"dc:date.available":["2015-05-06T07:16:38Z"],"dc:date.issued":["1998"],"dc:description":["Bibliography: leaves. 114-117."],"dc:description.abstract":["In June this year I read an article entitled Eve's footprints safe in museum (Cape Times 24.6.98). The footprints had just been removed from the shore of the Langebaan lagoon. The footprints, imprinted in stone, have been dated to 117 000 years. The media use of the name Eve is an example of how theoretical possibility can become popular fact. The prints became exposed when the stone happened to crack and slide off along the strata that held the prints. Exposed to the elements and to a public who want to have their photograph taken standing where Eve once stood, the soft sandstone which held such a transient impression began to deteriorate rapidly. An article earlier in the year reported on the debate around the future of the prints. The geologist David Roberts, who discovered the prints, wanted them removed as soon as possible while Dr. Janette Deacon from the National Monuments Council was reported to have said, \"We should rather see it preserved at the site as moving it would destroy a lot of its meaning. A museum display could never recreate the atmosphere of that scene\" (Cape Times 14.1.98)."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/12744"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher.department":["Michaelis School of Fine Art"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cape Town"],"dc:title":["Positioning the Cape : a spatial engraving of a shifting frontier"],"dc:type":["Master Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["MFA"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:30Z"}