I have a new essay with the Boston Review, about suffering, compassion and foreign journalism (and other narratives) of Africa. I hope you'll read it. But here's a cribsheet:
- Being the object of compassion is not the same thing as being the subject of a story.
-
A lot, but not all of this, is our fault. Or, as Daniel Solomon put it on Twitter, "a non-patronizing POV on
#Africa requires media consumers to patronize good narratives." - We've been telling the same story since we first got to Africa. Don't you think things have probably changed since then? Shouldn't our stories?
And also:
- In the 20th century -- the twentieth century-- New Yorkers thought it was cool to put a Congolese man on display in the Bronx Zoo's Monkey House. #wtf
- The paradoxical consequences of the "rape frame" for stories from DR-Congo
- Why Jeff Gettleman writes what he does.
- Plus more. (Bullet points are the writer's trailer.)
I hope you'll read it. I'll be thrilled if you argue with me (but only if you read the thing first). And if all this #narrativefail analysis gets you down, come back tomorrow for my roundup of work by foreign journalists I've loved, and what I loved about it. And bring your own favorites, too.
I am a freelance journalist and multimedia producer who covers human rights, Africa and foreign affairs. [
Jina, Hongera. It was an excellent piece. Precisely the balanced response to the Laura Seay rant and all the Kony2012 hot air. Very nicely said, especially the part about the imagination, and getting Sontag in there. How did this discussion run and run for so long without name-checking her? Thank you for raising the conversation to an intelligent level. Looking and seeing are very different things, as V.S.Naipaul said long ago.
May I quote the last paragraph of my recent book which I sincerely hope you might read, and about which I'd be pleased to hear your feedback..:
"The only limit to our understanding is our own imagination; the unfamiliar corners of the map are too easily populated by demons."
- Radio Congo: Signals of Hope from Africa's Deadliest War (yes, gently nudging the edge of the paradigm) out now on Amazon.co.uk and elsewhere.
Thanks, Ben. Any way to get ahold of your book in the States, besides ordering from Amazon? (pesky pounds. if y'all had done that Euro thing, I would buy *three* copies...)
Hi, well you can order it from foyles.co.uk too, although you'd still be charged in pounds...
Or you can wait til it comes out in February in the US.
Or, if you want to review it let me know where and I'll get the publicist to send you a free one!
B
There we go! It comes out in the US in February. Readers, mark the calendar.
I guess that twisting the story to put more emphasis on 'white' victims with whom the reader is expected to empathises might be justified if that *does* lead to the abolition of slavery. But it can be a slippery slope from there. All that story telling about Zimbabwe through the eyes of suffering white farmers didn't achieve very much.
I did note, however, that after a realist description of the problem your proposed solution was more idealist. I can't help but think that just as social norms in developing countries take time to evolve so the social norms that define how African issues are treated in Western journalism (I'm sure this problem is not limited to America) will take time to change and there is only a limited amount that can be done in the meantime (writing essays such as yours is probably as good a way to help as any), for journalists need to work now, and for that they need to write stuff editors will publish now.
Ultimately the reality of Africa will change so much that these lazy stereotypes will quite simply hold no water. For the present, however, whilst the journalistic smoke may lend greater weight to the fires than they may deserve in relation to other issues, those fires remain very real, and until that fact changes probably the journalism will not change very much either.
See http://bottomupthinking.wordpress.com/...al-determinism/ for some similar thoughts I had a couple of years ago.
Actually, I don't think the solution is idealistic. I think it's simple: Pitch different stories. Journalists in the field have huge influence over what gets published, because we (choose to) write it. I'm as familiar as the next guy with needing to make a buck to eat, but I think it's not that hard to do a little bit better every time -- and a little bit better every time can mean a faster change than you describe.
Go for it, then. Like in the Shawshank Redemption you will have to chip away day after day, and it may seem lonely work, but never forget that through chipping away is often the only way to break down the wall; a wall which may not even come down in your life time. Living up to ones ideals with such single-mindedness in a society that works otherwise is tough. I wish you luck!
I agree, and thank you for the energetic support!