ON THE NEW SOMALI STUDIES : A RESPONSE TO SAFFERZ

[Che -Guevara]

ON THE NEW SOMALI STUDIES : A RESPONSE

April 18, 2015

By Yusuf Serunkuma

 

If one is not Somali, writing a critique of #CadaanStudies under the present circumstances feels like choosing to end one’s academic engagement with Somalia. It feels a bit nervous and weird! Let me state from the beginning that this is no attempt to defend Dr Markus Hoehne’s uncalculated remarks. They do not concern the scope of this response. My interest is in retracing the epistemological and historical roots of this rather popular hashtag – theorised in Safia Aidid’s essay, “The New Somali Studies”[in The New Inquiry, April 14, 2015]. There is a saving grace for me though; I am black, not white. Unless we will have another hashtag, #MadowStudies! #CadaanStudies seems to suggest three things: First, that it is only the self can be objective [about the self]; second, that colonialism was white, and if this is granted, whiteness then becomes the timeless symbolism of colonialist scholarship. Third, the critique of #CadaanStudies seems to also suggest that proper and objective representation must involve direct and self-participation!

 

Guji the link

 

http://www.wardheernews.com/new-somali-studies-response/

[Safferz]

He actually shopped this piece around to a number of more academic sites who refused to publish it because he fundamentally misreads postcolonial studies as well as the argument I'm making. But in order to 'reply' to me, he has to make me say things I haven't said.

 

The comments in the comment section are great. I think this one nails it:

 

Yusuf Serunkuma's essay is a very insincere piece of writing. It also deliberately misunderstands the issues at stake in Cadaan Studies and in Safia Aidid's essay in the New Inquiry. Whiteness in Aidid's essay is referring to a system of power that could also be framed as Eurocentric, but where a history of racialization stands at its centre. Aidid is less concerned with individual prejudice. Serunkuma's essay also contradicts itself when it tries to discount Aidid's efforts by claiming that the problem of Somali Studies is the problem of African Studies more generally. If this is true, what stops someone from specifying how whiteness works specifically within Somali Studies? Moreover, Aidid's essay is not an attempt to racially profile anyone, rather, Aidid's project simply calls for a genealogy of power within Somali Studies. In no way is Aidid trying to call for more objective studies. Within African Studies she follows a research methodology best developed by Mudimbe in his book, The Invention of Africa. The point is to self-reflexively critique the ways power shapes knowledge production. This is the opposite of a call for more objectivity, but at the same time it is not a slip into endless relativism. Systems of power exist, part of the scholarly legacy of thinkers such as Said or Chatterjee is to show why questioning these systems are a legitimate part of inquiry into all aspects of Area Studies.

 

All that said, I'm not Markus and I don't believe in singular narratives. The point is to open up critical space for multiple critical perspectives, even ones that misunderstood #CadaanStudies and my essay, and I think we've done that.

[Che -Guevara]

I didn't read the comments but from get-go, his argument seemed personal. It was hardly an objective criticism. It looks like you have ruffled a few feathers.

 

I chuckle a bit when I hear someone say 'I am not [insert];...

[Safferz]

<cite>

@Che -Guevara

said:</cite>

I didn't read the comments but from get-go, his argument seemed personal. It was hardly an objective criticism. It looks like you have ruffled a few feathers.

 

I chuckle a bit when I hear someone say 'I am not [insert];...

 

He seems to have had a difficult time with Somalis as a Ugandan doing research there, and thinks his experience is analysis. That, combined with misreading my argument, leads to this.