The New Somali Studies - By Safia Aidid

[thefuturenow]

I rarely agree with Dr. K but he is right.

 

This trend of scholarship is no scholarship. It is a reactive motion that underscores the power imbalance and highlights a latent inferiority complex in the author.

 

It operates in many fields. Women studies, Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, African (American) Studies, etc. There are scholars in these fields that get away with a lifetime of reactive writings. The feminist claims women studies before her reek of the "patriarchal" delineation of the world. The Arab goes that these white men have the "orientalist" gaze and don't really understand us. And when the "cadaan" scholar armed with his prejudices reaches the conclusion that the African is savage, this type of scholarship yells out "no, the African is not savage. You cadaan people think they're savage because you're racist and privileged."

 

In other words, the cadaan actually went and observed the people whom he called savages. He may be misinformed and reach conclusions that are fueled by prejudice. But so too would the African if he studied Europeans.

 

Yet, this type of scholarship does not encourage the African to correct these prejudices with an actual counter-study. Instead, it tells the African that he--because of his sheer Africanness--knows better. That he is more privileged to speak on the topic because he is the subject of study.

 

The insidious aim of those who encourage this type of study is a slow unraveling of actual scholarship which culminates in a form of censhorship. That is why we see the subject resort to a form of name-calling and label certain studies as products of the "colonial gaze" or "racist" or "misogynist." The subtle aim is to discourage debate and dismiss certain efforts as motivated by sheer prejudice. It is to reserve a certain area for study for a specific group because they are part of that studied group.

 

I do not disagree with its utility as a preface to an academic work. But it cannot be scholarship by itself. It is lazy. It is territorial. And it is perpetuated by personal attacks. But most importantly, it is a way for the inferior, the subject of a prejudicial study to express his rage.

 

All the while the master smiles. Because when history is read, it will say--"the African is a savage because of x, y, z." And African's response will be "that scholar is racist because he said x, y, z and it doesn't apply to me."

 

The proper response should be--"the African is not x, y, z, rather he is a, b, c."

 

 

 

[Miyir]

<cite>

@thefuturenow

said:</cite>

I rarely agree with Dr. K but he is right.

 

This trend of scholarship is no scholarship. It is a reactive motion that underscores the power imbalance and highlights a latent inferiority complex in the author. blah blah

 

 

lol another “me too”argument.

 

recap:

 

they lied/misrepresented in their involvement and links to Somalis and Somali scholars/students,institutions, all Saffers did was call out this mashruuc at the beginning? what happened next? cadaanstudies Hypocrisy and attitudes Exposed. got problem with that? feminism lol

[thefuturenow]

^ You would do better if you did not instinctively support sentiments because they appeal to one of your inherited/adopted identities. You were blessed with a brain. Think. See, you're looking at two sides of the same coin.

[Tallaabo]

<cite>

@thefuturenow

said:</cite>

I rarely agree with Dr. K but he is right.

 

This trend of scholarship is no scholarship. It is a reactive motion that underscores the power imbalance and highlights a latent inferiority complex in the author.

 

It operates in many fields. Women studies, Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, African (American) Studies, etc. There are scholars in these fields that get away with a lifetime of reactive writings. The feminist claims women studies before her reek of the "patriarchal" delineation of the world. The Arab goes that these white men have the "orientalist" gaze and don't really understand us. And when the "cadaan" scholar armed with his prejudices reaches the conclusion that the African is savage, this type of scholarship yells out "no, the African is not savage. You cadaan people think they're savage because you're racist and privileged."

 

In other words, the cadaan actually went and observed the people whom he called savages. He may be misinformed and reach conclusions that are fueled by prejudice. But so too would the African if he studied Europeans.

 

Yet, this type of scholarship does not encourage the African to correct these prejudices with an actual counter-study. Instead, it tells the African that he--because of his sheer Africanness--knows better. That he is more privileged to speak on the topic because he is the subject of study.

 

The insidious aim of those who encourage this type of study is a slow unraveling of actual scholarship which culminates in a form of censhorship. That is why we see the subject resort to a form of name-calling and label certain studies as products of the "colonial gaze" or "racist" or "misogynist." The subtle aim is to discourage debate and dismiss certain efforts as motivated by sheer prejudice. It is to reserve a certain area for study for a specific group because they are part of that studied group.

 

I do not disagree with its utility as a preface to an academic work. But it cannot be scholarship by itself. It is lazy. It is territorial. And it is perpetuated by personal attacks. But most importantly, it is a way for the inferior, the subject of a prejudicial study to express his rage.

 

All the while the master smiles. Because when history is read, it will say--"the African is a savage because of x, y, z." And African's response will be "that scholar is racist because he said x, y, z and it doesn't apply to me."

 

The proper response should be--"the African is not x, y, z, rather he is a, b, c."

That is a brilliant analysis. I was initially very critical of Safrez's twitter campaign but then I kept reading her articles and somehow I was lead to believe that maybe Western anthropologists don't value Somali contribution to the study of our culture and society. I am still learning.

[Alpha Blondy]

i really liked this particular post of Safia Aidid. the way the article was written was very informative, aimed at non-academic folks, like Alpha, unlike some of her previous materials which was very inaccessible. i particularly enjoyed the way she pinpointed Richard Burton's innate arrogant caadaan mindset. brilliant.

 

Safia aka Safferz,

 

you need to make your materials more accessible, please. by the way i'm your biggest fan, i hope we can meet again and be friends. i feel like you need a seasoned manager, who could potentially guide you in conquering the world. 2016! here we go y'all.

[Safferz]

<cite>

@thefuturenow

said:</cite>

Yet, this type of scholarship does not encourage the African to correct these prejudices with an actual counter-study. Instead, it tells the African that he--because of his sheer Africanness--knows better. That he is more privileged to speak on the topic because he is the subject of study.

 

The insidious aim of those who encourage this type of study is a slow unraveling of actual scholarship which culminates in a form of censhorship. That is why we see the subject resort to a form of name-calling and label certain studies as products of the "colonial gaze" or "racist" or "misogynist." The subtle aim is to discourage debate and dismiss certain efforts as motivated by sheer prejudice. It is to reserve a certain area for study for a specific group because they are part of that studied group.

 

I do not disagree with its utility as a preface to an academic work. But it cannot be scholarship by itself. It is lazy. It is territorial. And it is perpetuated by personal attacks. But most importantly, it is a way for the inferior, the subject of a prejudicial study to express his rage.

 

All the while the master smiles. Because when history is read, it will say--"the African is a savage because of x, y, z." And African's response will be "that scholar is racist because he said x, y, z and it doesn't apply to me."

 

The proper response should be--"the African is not x, y, z, rather he is a, b, c."

 

I don't think you read the article, because I'm not sure how else you'd essentialize and reduce my argument to this or suggest that we are not doing research. Everyone here on SOL knows that I spend months in Ethiopia doing fieldwork and archival research, and that I return each year for research while I work on my dissertation. I am not sure where your suggestion that I/we are not also academically productive is coming from. Furthermore, theory, critique and deconstruction are critical aspects of academic work -- they shape and reshape the paradigms within which scholarship is then produced. We have to analyze and critique the politics of knowledge at the same time that we produce, the two are inextricably linked.

 

Nowhere have I said that non-Somalis should vacate the field of Somali Studies or that Somali Studies is reserved for Somalis. What I'm trying to do is highlight the systems of power embedded in the production of knowledge ABOUT Somalis and the Somali region, which also operates to marginalize the Somali within knowledge production and position and sustain the Western researcher as expert. This is about systems, not individual researchers. My article traces this history of power and gestures towards the futures and possibilities for a new Somali Studies. The space to do this work is now there. This is a major ontological and epistemological intervention for Somali Studies, and these conversations fit within a larger intellectual intervention made by postcolonial studies (Edward Said, Subaltern Studies, etc).

 

You guys can dismiss me if you'd like, misread my arguments as Somali essentialism and "nac nac iyo hadal," that's fine. I know it's not, and major academics around the world have recognized it too. The fact is that I had a specific goal in this - to make an intellectual intervention in Somali Studies as an academic field as an academic who does work in this field - and I have done that and will continue to do that theoretical work in tandem with my historical research. Harvard has even insisted that it be the place to host conferences to theorize this new Somali Studies, and I have other projects underway.

[Miyir]

<cite>

@Tallaabo

said:</cite>

That is a brilliant analysis. I was initially very critical of Safrez's twitter campaign but then I kept reading her articles and somehow I was lead to believe that maybe Western anthropologists don't value Somali contribution to the study of our culture and society. I am still learning.

 

lol flip flopper

[Miyir]

Saffers

 

they attack you personally, it means they have no valid argument.

[Tallaabo]

<cite>

@Miyir

said:</cite>

lol flip flopper

Well this debate is not like that long running Somali favourite 'my clan is better than your clan' nonsense where one is expected to stick to his/her clan's line till judgement day. It is about a topic I am not very familiar with and is being brought to us by an expert in the field. So unlike you I do have respect for the intellectual capacity of all the SOLers debating here and have appreciation for their well written contribution. Keeping my mind open to ideas from all sides does not mean I do not support our sister Saffrez and her intellectual and career development. I ask Almighty Allah to open all the doors of success for her.

[Tallaabo]

<cite>

@Safferz

said:</cite>

Harvard has even insisted that it be the place to host conferences to theorize this new Somali Studies, and I have other projects underway.

This must be a job offer from Harvard Safferz. I am I right?

[Safferz]

<cite>

@Tallaabo

said:</cite>

This must be a job offer from Harvard Safferz. I am I right?

 

No, not at all! Just the interest, funding and support/institutional commitment to bring this discussion to Harvard. It would be bringing everyone interested in developing this theoretical intervention and new line of inquiry/future directions for scholarship in one place, and following it up with a published collection of the essays they present there. The professors here have all been following closely and have been incredibly supportive.

[Tallaabo]

<cite>

@Safferz

said:</cite>

No, not at all! Just the interest, funding and support/institutional commitment to bring this discussion to Harvard. It would be bringing everyone interested in developing this theoretical intervention and new line of inquiry/future directions for scholarship in one place, and following it up with a published collection of the essays they present there. The professors here have all been following closely and have been incredibly supportive.

That is a good news for the study of our culture, language, history, and society if Harvard with its deep pockets is willing to fund reserch in Somali studies. This could indeed be a positive outcome of your campaign however controversial it might be.