as she makes the transition, defensively, in 1997

re Zora and Winnie Mandela: "A person's work is her only signature; we forget this at our peril" (59). Walker writes that Zora was rescued later by the attention to her work, suggesting that what someone produces or the discipline they practice is the most important thing, the thing that lasts; that is her signature, emblematic, standing in for her identity. Standing in, signing for her identity. A person's work is the thing that makes them who they are; not the way they treat others? It has strange implications for Walker, though it makes sense that Mandela's case would flow from this. But I think I don't see how Zora didn't for instance, be or get served by the rebelliousness she had sown; not that I'm saying this is ok, but her work, her actions, include her work, are part of her signature.

What am I saying? I might take a bath.