This is brilliant! I am at a stage in life where many ‘dots of scattered knowledge’ are gradually coming together. This piece is bringing some illumination and I will join this ride . Thank you!
Absolutely fascinating! Alongside this, should it interest you to write it, I'd love to see your take on Studwell's recent interview with Tyler Cowen, in which Cowen sets himself up as a pessimist with regard to Africa's sustainable growth outlook, and Studwell defends an optimist position.
The first two questions on Nigeria and Botswana,and the population density hypothesis were particularly revealing. Studwell answered that they are both "outliers" (laughs).
I do not quite know what to make of this. Are these introductory chapters brilliant sense, or are they somewhat condescending and insulting to us as Africans?
There is something uncomfortable about someone with no actual lived experience of Africa thinking they know best how Africa can fix itself because they have deeply immersed themselves in the standard “discourse” on Africa.
Incidentally, before I stumbled across your review/critique today of the first two chapters of Joe Studwell’s How Africa Works, I happened to come across this post by Miriam Ferreira on Instagram, which I would suggest you both listen to:
If Chapters 1 and 2 are going to set the tone for the rest of the book, then I must say I may have no choice but to agree wholly with Miriam Ferreira’s argument.
Studwell’s framing, at least from these opening chapters, strikes me as coming straight out of that familiar Eurocentric and rather condescending discourse about Africa: the outsider who has studied Africa extensively and, on that basis, presumes to understand what is wrong with the continent and how Africans ought to fix it.
Perhaps the subsequent chapters will change my mind, but based on the opening two, I remain deeply sceptical.
There was nothing Eurocentric or condescending in the book. The main shortcoming was that it was essentially two books. Studwell had a fixed analytical framework which he'd adopted from his work on Asia. He then proceeded to "force fit" Africa into that framework - despite the opening part of the acknowledging that the conditions and setting were not the same.
I wouldnt accuse Studwell of Orientalism or whatever the African version is. He put in an incredible amount of work into the book and a lot of the shortcomings really are from the source material and what he had to work with. It's not his fault that there has been no Japan or Flying Goose in Africa (even if I think he was unnecessarily harsh on Botswana)
This is brilliant! I am at a stage in life where many ‘dots of scattered knowledge’ are gradually coming together. This piece is bringing some illumination and I will join this ride . Thank you!
Absolutely fascinating! Alongside this, should it interest you to write it, I'd love to see your take on Studwell's recent interview with Tyler Cowen, in which Cowen sets himself up as a pessimist with regard to Africa's sustainable growth outlook, and Studwell defends an optimist position.
https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/joe-studwell/
Thank you! Yes, I did listen to the podcast. I thought it was interesting but seemed to peter out towards the end (leading Tyler to switch to Asia).
The first two questions on Nigeria and Botswana,and the population density hypothesis were particularly revealing. Studwell answered that they are both "outliers" (laughs).
This is really amazing and easy read.
Thanks to you both.
Beautiful.
First time reading such piece here. I enjoyed it
A really insightful read. Opened my eyes to see a perspective less considered when we the conversation of development and corruption comes up.
Looking forward to reading through as you share more on this
Dear Gents — Tobi & Feyi,
I do not quite know what to make of this. Are these introductory chapters brilliant sense, or are they somewhat condescending and insulting to us as Africans?
There is something uncomfortable about someone with no actual lived experience of Africa thinking they know best how Africa can fix itself because they have deeply immersed themselves in the standard “discourse” on Africa.
Incidentally, before I stumbled across your review/critique today of the first two chapters of Joe Studwell’s How Africa Works, I happened to come across this post by Miriam Ferreira on Instagram, which I would suggest you both listen to:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/Dbz37ftgrMY/?igsh=MTV5OGt1NDR2ZWxpdQ==
If Chapters 1 and 2 are going to set the tone for the rest of the book, then I must say I may have no choice but to agree wholly with Miriam Ferreira’s argument.
Studwell’s framing, at least from these opening chapters, strikes me as coming straight out of that familiar Eurocentric and rather condescending discourse about Africa: the outsider who has studied Africa extensively and, on that basis, presumes to understand what is wrong with the continent and how Africans ought to fix it.
Perhaps the subsequent chapters will change my mind, but based on the opening two, I remain deeply sceptical.
There was nothing Eurocentric or condescending in the book. The main shortcoming was that it was essentially two books. Studwell had a fixed analytical framework which he'd adopted from his work on Asia. He then proceeded to "force fit" Africa into that framework - despite the opening part of the acknowledging that the conditions and setting were not the same.
I wouldnt accuse Studwell of Orientalism or whatever the African version is. He put in an incredible amount of work into the book and a lot of the shortcomings really are from the source material and what he had to work with. It's not his fault that there has been no Japan or Flying Goose in Africa (even if I think he was unnecessarily harsh on Botswana)
I think the notion supported in chapter 1 are contributing factor and not the main cause but we're simply used as a justifiable excuse.
Chapter 2 has a more understandable nuance which I agree with to said extent.
Enjoy reading the first two chapters.
Insightful