Opinion
ECAS: Something Is Wrong With African Studies
Published
1 year agoon
Something is wrong with African studies, and there is a need to highlight and address this wrong. There is a need to begin this conversation. I have been attending African studies conferences to see if I could change or rethink this impression. But the idea persists. Something strikes me as missing or mistaken in African studies as we know it today. The situation seems not to be significantly changing. I was at this year’s European Conference on African Studies(ECAS) held in Cologne Germany from May 31 to June 3. The Global South Studies Center (University of Cologne) and the IARA, Institute for Anthropological Research on Africa, University of Leuven organized the event.
I co-organized a panel on transhumanism and Africa with Chogwu Abdul of the Kogi State University in Nigeria and Prof Stefan Sorgner of the Cabot University in Rome. My presentation focused on “Emerging Technologies, Leap Frog Development, and African Futures”. The conference brought together many scholars, researchers, and policymakers. For four days, we met, discussed, and exchanged ideas on issues of African importance. In addition to participating in a panel session, I attended a few other sessions and interacted with African and non-African attendees in between the sessions.
With the theme, “African Futures”, I had high hopes, and expectations. I have always wanted to attend an African studies conference that is forward-looking. I have longed to participate in an event that radically departs from this single‐storic version that is often the case.
Presentations at African studies seminars, especially in the field of witchcraft tend to valourize the past; they are seldom futuristic and portray modernity as negatively disruptive and destabilizing of ‘premodern’ socio political equilibrium. I have always wondered how scholars came about and have continued to make sense of this analytical trajectory.
I was glad to participate in an academic event on Africa that thematically tried to envision African future(s) and possibilities. I looked forward to attending this conference in Cologne, an event that I thought could depart from the African Studies conference as I knew it. So I came to the conference poised to listen to inspiring, and intellectually stimulating exchanges. I enjoy listening to well articulated cutting edge ideas, no matter the discipline, as long as they are well explained. And where else could one go to in search of such ideas about Africa but an African studies conference?
Too often, discourses on Africa are characteristically bland, and mired in stereotypes, conflations and generalizations. I can recall an incident that happened many years ago. I travelled with a German colleague for some field work. While in Ghana, he told me that going by what he read about witchcraft in Africa, he expected, on arrival, to see witchcraft everywhere! I laughed hilariously. Africa is presented and painted as a ossified, hopeless, one-dimensional and unchanging object of analysis, or better entertainment. Presentations on and about Africa are mainly exotic. In many ways, they resonate with some primitive, childish, and backward thinking couched in conceptual euphemisms. Even as an African, I am often at a loss, and unable to connect with some of these explanations. I struggle to decipher, understand, relate to, or appreciate what many Africanists frame and explain as African at conferences and seminars. It is as if they make them up or they were not there! On many occasions I have asked: Which Africa is this person talking about? What is African about this issue? What is African about what scholars explain as African?
Ideas such as ‘modern’, ‘science’, ‘technology’, ‘philosophy’, development, and ‘progress’ are explained to mean different things. It is as if the only way to explain Africa or anything African is by valorizing Africa’s largely made up past, exoticizing African life situation and romanticizing its supposed ancients and primitives. I attended sessions where anthropologists struggled to explain ‘African technologies’ and other than ‘Western’ ways to purify water, control erosions, or secure communities. Some of the explanations were mentally tasking to listen to. They sounded absurd, bland, and uninspiring, (I guess) even to the persons making the presentations.
But as usual, participants put up this serious face, as if the presenters were making sense or outlining important and never‐heard‐before points and insights. They applauded, nodded or gazed in ways that could easily be mistaken to be a demonstration, yes, an acknowledgment of rare ingenuity. On many occasions, whites or non-Africans avoided saying anything overtly critical of Africa, probably in order not to be accused of racism or neocolonialism whilst African scholars analytically bent back over to present their data as ‘Africans’, and try to fit into this paradigm of studying and explaining Africa. They try to play this positionality game of speaking with some academic distance, while attached, or speaking as an outsider while an insider.
So I traveled to Cologne to see if things have changed. I went to hear groundbreaking presentations, talks, insights, and thoughtful propositions about Africa and its futures. I came to the event to engage in debates and a clash of ideas that could occasion a rethink and a re-imagine of Africa going forward. I went from session to session to see if I could stumble on some presentation or activity that could lift my spirit and stimulate my mind. But it was largely the same old story.
Nothing testified to this experience better than what I saw on the penultimate day of the event. I came out of the registration hall and saw this young man, I guess, a traditional priest, sitting on the ground and entertaining mainly white European conference participants. I said, ahhh there they go. He was making some gestures and incantations, invoking the African gods and spirits in Europe. He was twisting his body as if he was convulsing, apparently conducting some rituals with clay pots, calabash, red cloths and other ‘sacred’ objects. I took a glance at the scene and left. But I kept wondering since then. Why this display and not others? Why were there no displays on science, technology, and African futures? I mean, science and technology as we know it. Why were there no exhibitions on emerging technologies, on cutting-edge science, solar energy, heart surgeries, robotics, space expeditions? Why were there no computer or IT shows? Will these accessories not be a part of African futures?
Instead we were treated to ‘voodoo’ religious display, that many Africans could not relate to. Look I am not against a display of African traditional religion and beliefs. Such a demonstration was in order. But I have issues with this ‘traditionalist’ impression of Africa that is a staple of African studies in the west.
For all that I know, that scene was not a surprise. It fitted into the fixed image of Africa in Europe, and the west. Yes, that scene epitomized what is, was, and has been wrong with African studies, and African studies conferences. That display typified the persistent western stereotypic impression of African pasts, presents, and futures. It encapsulated what was wrong with African studies that African scholars should interrogate, challenge and disrupt.
Dr. Igwe holds a doctoral degree in religious studies from the Bayreuth International Graduate School of African Studies, University of Bayreuth, Germany.
You may like
-
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
-
In ‘Katsina Declaration’, Civil Service Commissions Move To Reposition For Better Public Service
-
Olaopa Speaks As Civil Service Commissions Hold Conference In Katsina
-
Witchcraft Accusations And Critical Thinking: Combating Harmful Effects Of Dogma And Superstitions In Africa
-
What Is African Ancestral Studies?
-
Galamsey Versus Ghana
By Leo Igwe
The Advocacy for Alleged Witches (AfAW) is concerned over the reported arrest of two men accused of being ‘witchdoctors’ in Zambia. The arrest underscores the potency of witchcraft fears and the connection between occult anxieties and the country’s politics. These individuals were accused of trying to bewitch the Zambian president, Hakainde Hichilema. The police claimed that they had charms. They planned to use the charms to harm the president. The report says the two persons have been charged under Zambia’s Witchcraft Act. The Act criminalizes “possession of charms”, “professing knowledge of witchcraft”, and “cruelty to wild animals”. The police found the two with assorted charms, including a live chameleon.
This development is utterly embarrassing and shows that the Zambian government is slowly losing its focus and bearing.The country has many socio-economic challenges. Suspicion of bewitchment or possession of charms should be the least of its worries at this time. There should be no place for witchcraft and possession of charms in modern politics because there is no evidence for these beliefs and practices. Zambian authorities should not weaponize the Witchcraft Act or use it to justify this incident. Zambian law does not recognize witchcraft. Zambia’s Witchcraft Act criminalizes naming or imputing witchcraft. It prohibits accusing or threatening to accuse any person of being a witch or a wizard. In this case, it is the police who are breaking the law.
Otherwise, how did they know the two individuals were ‘witchdoctors’? Did these persons identify as witch doctors? If not, the police are liable because they named and imputed witchcraft and have to prove that these individuals have witch-doctoring powers. The police claimed to have charged these individuals for possessing “assorted charms”, including a chameleon. Really?
The police in Zambia have questions to answer: What are charms? How did they know that what was in their possession were charms, not pets? Is a chameleon a form of charm? What makes possession of a chameleon possession of a charm? When and how does a chameleon become a charm? The police need to answer these questions and more before one takes them seriously.
Again, did the individuals describe what was in possession as ‘charms’? If they did, does confessing or designating something as a charm make it a charm? And if they did not, the police are liable because they need to prove how those possessions translated into charms.
In addition, the police claimed that the duo wanted to bewitch the president. What does that mean? How did they know? Are the police not contravening a provision under the Witchcraft Act by professing knowledge of witchcraft? Can one harm another person using a chameleon? They claimed that the two persons wanted to use the charms in their possession, including the chameleon to harm the president. How did they know that? What is the evidence for that?
The Advocacy for Alleged Witches calls for an end to this state-sponsored witch hunt. There is no evidence of harm through witchcraft or charms. The Zambian government should desist from witchcraft- related infractions and violations including arbitrary arrest, and detention of innocent citizens. These allegations are baseless and absurd. The arrest was politically motivated. This development demonstrates that Zambian authorities are out of sync with their duty and obligation to uphold the rule of law and protect accused persons.
Zambian authorities need to act in compliance with the 2021 UN resolution, which urged states to take measures to combat abuses linked to witchcraft beliefs and ritual attacks. End witchcraft allegations in Zambia. End witch hunts in Africa now!
Dr Igwe directs the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.
By Tony Afejuku
The other burning issue, apart from Farotimi and Babalola’s, which I wish to take a look at – and which I am taking a look at now – relates to what is happening in our capital territory. What is this burning issue – which our human rightists and civil society organisations and personages are surprisingly and un-satisfactorily not inclined to focus attention on and examine as they should? I may be wrong, but it surely seems to me that this issue, this burning issue, which is of more importance than Farotimi and Babalola’s – which has been given undue adulation – is deliberately being neglected and depreciated by proclaimers and heroes and heroines of human rights, justice, equity and equality of rights in your country my country our country. Why, why, why and why, why, why? Anyone who has any iota of patriotic sensibility, feeling and judgment well watered and buttressed by a very great influence upon his or her critical judgment will keep on asking the question I am asking.
Mr. Nyesom Wike, as almost everybody who can read and write a little knows, is the current minister of your, my and our Federal Capital Territory. His post or office is akin to that of a governor of a state. As the immediate past governor of Rivers State who was drafted, after his two terms there expired, to continue in the FCT as its new minister-governor or governor-minister under the auspices of a party he is not a true member of, Mr. Wike cannot but be seen as a lucky man. He is in every possible and impossible way. Minister-Governor Wike is a lucky man and a very fortunate one indeed. No former governor of Rivers State (or of any Nigerian state), as far as I know, has achieved what the famed political rouser of rabbles has achieved in one short gubernatorial life-time, and at a relatively young and fertile age. His dual achievement with and in two different political parties at this delicate point of Nigerian politics indicates to our politicians and us all that there is always time for a reminder that there are ready-made high rewards for arch-angels of betrayals. And Mr. Wike may go down in Rivers and Nigerian history as both an arch-angel and an emperor of betrayal of us all if we attempt to indicate what I have defined here as his dual achievement.
We can roughly divide, briefly, Wike’s political development into two periods. During the first, excluding his lower political positions before he became the governor of Rivers State, he quickly adapted his style to that of an emperor who became a rabble-rouser of rabble-rousers whose gubernatorial efficiency moved from stiffness to stiffness. He did not at any time feel that he needed suppleness to govern Rivers State. “Let the heavens fall if they must fall!” We are not there yet in this attempted analysis of the stiff-hearted and stiff-minded one. True? But he is already demonstrating this characteristic in Abuja. False? Judge and give the answer yourself.
Even after he left Rivers State a short while ago as governor, he is still trying to control happenings there to the political discomfiture of his hand-picked successor, his erstwhile “boy” and “son” – with whom he has fallen out. As the minister-governor or governor-minister of the FCT, Wike is occupied with the other taste of the emperor-juggernaut formulator – doing the work of two key political masters in one room and desk of political jugglery. Since his appearance in the FCT, minister-governor or governor-minister Wike has allegedly attempted to recover or transform for Abuja what is not traditionally or socially Abuja’s, for example, the city’s social idiom and landscape and terrain as well as its environs. In doing this he sometimes over-steps his bounds and mark of human/inhuman decency/indecency and psychological understanding of human nature, if you follow well what I am saying; he has so far become at best not really better than a typical pedestrian Nigerian lawyer and officer of political power: in his explorations so far in the Federal Capital Territory we have come to the realization, as T. S. Eliot would say, that “it is so often true that only by going too far can we find out how far we can go.” But one has to be a very negatively obstinate and self-serving emperor and a thorough-bred arch-angel of betrayal of the people and masses to justify such perilous and perfidious expeditions and adventures.
Last week, I saw on Arise Television “The Morning Show” Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, the dutiful widow of the late Nigerian supreme patriot and soldier, Colonel Ogbebor (of Benin stock) battling, so to say, to wrest the legacy of her late husband from the tight grip of the adventurous FCT minister-governor who has registered his name and signature in the hearts and consciousness of the people as the depriver of their possessions. The three anchors of “The Morning Show” were in their respective ways splendid in their structures of remarks and questions to Chief (Mrs.) Rita Lori-Ogbebor whom I have had occasions in times past to call patriotically Rita A-K 47 on account of her natural right to fire her beautiful tongue at any person, usually an enemy, of just actions. When she made the case she made to protect the estate of Paulosa Nigeria Limited, her late husband’s aforesaid legacy in the FCT, she was in her natural territory, habitat and element where even at age eighty-four, she never ever loses her stability – although she unusually restrained herself in the Arise Television appearance. Dr. Reuben Abati, Rufai Oseni, and Ayo Mairo-Ese clearly explored seriously but delightfully the mind of the mother-hen of Warri – my other coinage and appellation I gave her in my poetry. Her “The Morning Show” appearance enabled me to see the poignant cry de profundis of the FCT inhabitants whose property and residences in different guises have been demolished. She did not say anything that was out of joint. She spoke and came out as a mother, protector and symbol of the people who have suffered – and are suffering – from the state of affliction and anguish Wike’s demolitions have placed – and are placing – the people.
Ojy Okpe in her delicious and delectable “What is Trending” slot on the same show, showed without exaggeration but with further elaboration what people in and outside Abuja/FCT think of the mighty Wike’s demolitions, a burning issue that the Senate has asked “Let Heaven Fall” minister-governor Wike to halt as the committee the Senate set up on the issue starts its work. Of course, we cannot but assume that Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, Mrs. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan as well as Mrs. Ireti Kingigbe, the senator representing the FCT in the Senate and other patriotic senators diligently did what they did on the floor of the Senate when the burning issue was tabled for debate with the gracious understanding and authorization of the Senate President.
I need to state further that the “The Morning Show” anchors did well and extremely so by giving the minister-governor the opportunity to air his anti-Paulosa story. His senior special assistant on public communication and social media, Mr. Olalere Olayinka, stood in for him. After he gave the reasons for the clamp-down, his responses to the questions the anchors put to him followed the usual pattern of denials by artificial men in power – denials that they always use to intimidate and betray the people. In fact, Mr. Olayinka’s ploy to ride easily over our dear Rufai Oseni, a wholesome representative of the deprived, that the chap (or is it guy?) and his boss always employ their colloquial speeches and remarks to dishonor, failed. Yes, the ploy failed woefully. In stanza after stanza of the exchanges between Mr. Olayinka and the Arise anchors, he deteriorated – and his deterioration was hall-marked when he unwittingly revealed that the Paulosa land had been acquired by his minister-governor’s close cohort, an act that was nothing short of gross abuse of power and authority.
Because the Senate is already using its authority, power and privilege to resolve the burning issue, hopefully, in a way that the late Colonel Ogbebor’s legacy and family will not be subjected to any kind of degradation, I will utter no more words for now. I trust, however, that the liberties the Senate is taking – or has taken – are for the sake of order to favour the down-trodden.
As for the minister-governor, the PDP emperor at large, here is an immortal quote from Marcus Aurelius, the magnificent and authentic Roman Emperor and philosopher (A.D. 121-180): “If it is not right, do not do it; if it is not true, do not say it.” You lose nothing by giving us a slice of your humanity by your right acts and correct words. Everything changes and passes. Be humane as a human being.
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.
By Leo Igwe
Recently, I facilitated a critical thinking workshop at the Bay Wreath Schools in Lagos. The theme was critical thinking and teacher development. As the theme stated, the workshop was on teaching, about teaching, and for teachers. It highlighted the pedagogical value of critical and reflective inquiry. The workshop exposed teachers to critical mental habits and skills. It emphasized how critical thinking would enhance expertise in the learning and delivery of subjects in classrooms.
I used the opportunity to discuss questionstorm as a method of teaching and learning. Questionstorm is a way that I operationalized critical thinking for primary and elementary schools. Questionstorm is the ability to interrogate all objects and materials. It is a habit of questioning ideas and experiences in all areas of human endeavor. Simply put, questionstorm is a question-driven inquiry. Children are naturally curious. They thirst for knowledge and understanding. Unfortunately, the school system kills children’s curiosity and dampens their interrogative appetite. The school system places much emphasis on rote learning and memorization. It makes the generation of answers not questions or problems the test of knowledge, and the determinant of intelligence. Teaching is largely a drudgery, a monotonous exercise, and a process of depositing knowledge on passive recipients, the students. Teaching entails dumping information on learners whose duty is to cram and reproduce during tests or examinations.
This teaching praxis has been criticized and blamed for the poor performance of students post-school (college and university) and their inability to think independently, creatively, and innovatively. Other teaching methods have tried to address these gaps and limitations. There have been suggestions to make teaching and instruction more active, and more student/learner/child-centered. One such method is the Montessori method. The Montessori method discourages grades and tests as ways of measuring achievement or determining intelligence and excellence. It emphasizes hands-on learning and the development of real-world skills. While the Montessori method stresses the practical approach to learning it says very little about the authoritarian teacher-to-student approach that is the mainstay of teaching and learning in classrooms. Teaching follows a pattern that leaves students and learners in the margins and unable to question and contribute to the learning process. Teachers present what is to be learned such as a text, and then generate questions that students respond or address to demonstrate knowledge of what has been taught. The student’s or learner’s main job is to answer questions, to look for or find answers or solutions. The teacher’s work is to get students to look for, and provide answers, and reproduce what they have been taught or told. But students are answer-depots. Students are not memory banks or reserves. They are active minds and thinking agents.
With questionstorm as a teaching method, the mode of instruction would change. Teaching becomes a cooperative endeavor that actively involves teachers and students. What is taught in the classroom is a collaborative note, not the teacher’s note, not a handout to students. Teachers present or generate texts or objects for learning, in response to intense questioning of the object or material by students, teachers provide information as required for that subject, topic, level, and time frame. No two instances of teaching – of the same topic or subject- are or should be the same because the input of students and teachers is not predetermined.
This is because of an overlooked principle in teaching and learning, that I call the “uncertainty principle”.
The uncertainty principle underlies questionstorm because knowledge is not fixed. Learning is a fluid process. All that is to be learned is uncertain, it is unknown and never determined. No teacher can say beforehand what is to be taught or learned because no one knows exactly the questions and answers or replies that would arise when a topic is presented or taught in a particular class. A topic or learning material elicits unique responses and exchanges that both teachers and students cannot exactly know or predict a priori, before the fact.
Teaching is a shared task and responsibility. Class notes are fluid materials. They are not texts cast on educational stones and delivered by teachers to students to copy, cut, and paste as is often the case. Class notes are not written or produced by teachers for students but by teachers with students. Teachers’ notes are incomplete and insufficient. They account only for a part, not a whole of the learning process and material. Students’ input completes and complements the teaching material and learning process. Thus every class note is unique because it is a product of a specific collaborative endeavor, a product of particular teaching and learning agents and circumstances that cannot be repeated or replicated.
Thus, as a teaching method, questionstorm is set to facilitate teacher development and improve the quality of instruction in schools. Questionstorm will help realize a paradigm shift in education and learning. I hope educators, teachers, and school managers will embrace this method of teaching and learning.
Dr Igwe directs the Critical Thinking Social Empowerment Foundation.
Inline image
NEW TIMES CULTURE
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
Tinubu Congratulates Civil Service Commission Chair Olaopa As He Turns 65
Top Stories
-
Latest News13 hours ago
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
-
Opinion2 days ago
Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)
-
Metro3 days ago
AfAW Decries Court Acquittal Of Suspected Murderer Of Alleged Witch In Enugu
-
Latest News4 days ago
Why We Set Up Kojola Dry Port – Abiodun
-
Opinion3 days ago
Questionstorm As A Method Of Teaching