Online Reporter
THE death of Wicknell Chivayo has brought into sharp focus a side of his life that deserves to be remembered with respect.
His philanthropy and his willingness to use his resources to support people, musicians, sporting institutions and community initiatives was something we had never seen before.
And, it’s something we might not see again. Whatever debates may have surrounded his business career or public profile, it would be unfair to overlook the generosity he displayed towards many Zimbabweans during his lifetime. Chivayo became one of the most visible philanthropists in Zimbabwe, particularly through the manner in which he supported individuals and organisations that he believed had potential. His interventions often attracted enormous public attention, but behind the publicity was a willingness to put money into people and causes that mattered to him.
The creative arts sector was among the major beneficiaries of his generosity. Zimbabwean musicians, who frequently struggle to finance recordings, shows, travel and other aspects of their careers, received significant support from him.
His willingness to assist established artists as well as those trying to build their careers demonstrated an understanding that the entertainment industry can contribute significantly to the country’s economy and cultural identity. His support for musicians also helped highlight an important issue: artists need more than applause.
They need investment.
For years, Zimbabwe’s creative sector has complained about limited financial backing and inadequate infrastructure.
Chivayo’s interventions showed what can happen when individuals with financial means decide to invest directly in talent. His relationship with football was equally significant.
Zimbabwean football has enormous public support but continues to face financial difficulties at almost every level. Chivayo’s sponsorships and financial interventions provided welcome assistance to clubs, players and football-related initiatives.
At a time when football administrators regularly struggle to secure adequate resources, private individuals who put their money behind the game can make a meaningful difference.
He loved Highlanders, the country’s oldest football club and the team announced, on the very day he died, that he has poured more than US$2 million, into its coffers, in the past two years. Where Bosso would be, if Chivaya had not decided to sink his millions, into the club, we can only wonder. But perhaps the most important lesson from Chivayo’s philanthropy is that giving can take many forms.
Philanthropy is not only about constructing buildings or donating to large institutions.
It can also mean helping an individual realise a dream, supporting a struggling artist, assisting a sporting organisation or responding when someone needs financial help.
Chivayo’s approach was often highly visible and, at times, extravagant.
Yet visibility should not automatically diminish the value of giving.
What matters ultimately is whether the assistance made a difference in people’s lives. His generosity should therefore encourage a broader culture of giving among Zimbabweans who have the means to assist others. Zimbabwe has many wealthy citizens and successful businesspeople who can contribute to society in meaningful ways.
As we mourn Chivayo, his philanthropic contribution should form an important part of his legacy.
His willingness to spend his wealth supporting musicians, football and other causes showed that success can be used to lift others.
The best tribute to that legacy would be for more people with resources to follow the principle behind his giving: that those who have more can, and should, help create opportunities for those who have less.
In remembering Wicknell Chivayo, Zimbabwe should therefore remember not only the controversies and headlines, but also the people and institutions he chose to support.
His philanthropy left an imprint, and that contribution deserves recognition.
