The state of Africa, a history of fifty years of independence was published
in 2005. Although this work is very informative, it is also overwhelming. It is
packed with detail about the process of independence in Africa, and discusses
the politics of all the regions in Africa. But it is a very broad theme. And
unfortunately, because of its very wide theme, it fails in some respects. For
the less critical reader, with no previous knowledge of African history ‘The
state of Africa’ is a great place to start. Yet it remains overwhelming to me.
One wish you could remember all the details, the names, dates, places.
Therefore, I conclude, maybe this work is a good reference book. It is not the
kind of book that I will still be thinking too much about next week. I will put
in on display to remember, and if I hear the name ‘Mobutu’ of ‘Kenyatta’ or
‘Nkrumah’ I can ‘have a look what Meredith had to say’.
To me the most outstanding quality of the book is this: it gives readers insights into neo-colonialism. And this in my mind is important. I often hear people say, oh but we are not interested in African history, because it’s all the same. It’s like, there were whites and peace and prosperity, and then the whites left and the blacks took control and it was total chaos and destruction.
It is sad that so many South Africans feel this way, stereotyping their own history. The truth is that African history is rich in diversity. It is much more diverse than Meredith’s book can ever hope to illustrate. The focus in this book is of course more on the tragedies, which is important, because there were many, and the reasons were complex. But we see many times that the French and Americans supported dictators. It is good that these things are recorded. Leaders like Jimmy Carter, Chirac and many others were involved in keeping some of the worst dictators in power.
But I miss many things in this book. I miss details on the Cold War and also the economic landscape of Africa. There is lots of focus on pure politics, but it stays more or less with that. There were also a few success stories in Africa that needed more attention Mr. Meredith! According to the rock star Bob Geldof ‘You cannot even begin to understand contemporary African politics if you have not read this fascinating book’. Is it perhaps because your own name is mentioned twice in the book Bob? And why is Bono not mentioned? And why do I differ on that statement? Why do I know of so many other books that will give you far greater perspective on contemporary African history than this one?
And why are there no footnotes in the text? Maybe this is the single biggest reason why this work cannot compare to many others on this subject in my mind. But all in all, this is not a bad book.
To me the most outstanding quality of the book is this: it gives readers insights into neo-colonialism. And this in my mind is important. I often hear people say, oh but we are not interested in African history, because it’s all the same. It’s like, there were whites and peace and prosperity, and then the whites left and the blacks took control and it was total chaos and destruction.
It is sad that so many South Africans feel this way, stereotyping their own history. The truth is that African history is rich in diversity. It is much more diverse than Meredith’s book can ever hope to illustrate. The focus in this book is of course more on the tragedies, which is important, because there were many, and the reasons were complex. But we see many times that the French and Americans supported dictators. It is good that these things are recorded. Leaders like Jimmy Carter, Chirac and many others were involved in keeping some of the worst dictators in power.
But I miss many things in this book. I miss details on the Cold War and also the economic landscape of Africa. There is lots of focus on pure politics, but it stays more or less with that. There were also a few success stories in Africa that needed more attention Mr. Meredith! According to the rock star Bob Geldof ‘You cannot even begin to understand contemporary African politics if you have not read this fascinating book’. Is it perhaps because your own name is mentioned twice in the book Bob? And why is Bono not mentioned? And why do I differ on that statement? Why do I know of so many other books that will give you far greater perspective on contemporary African history than this one?
And why are there no footnotes in the text? Maybe this is the single biggest reason why this work cannot compare to many others on this subject in my mind. But all in all, this is not a bad book.
No comments:
Post a Comment