Info

Kalamu ya Salaam's information blog

Posts tagged neogriot

Choose another tag?

 

March 23, 2016

March 23, 2016

 

 

 

A Tribe Called

Quest’s Phife Dawg

Dead at 45

 

Malik Taylor’s distinct voice and
nimble flow helped anchor
landmark hip-hop albums

 

By 

 

phife 01

Malik Taylor, the rapper known as Phife Dawg whose nimble, clever rhymes helped launch A Tribe Called Quest to both commercial and critical success, died Tuesday at the age of 45 from complications resulting from diabetes. Rolling Stone has confirmed the rapper’s death.

Taylor had had health issues for years, undergoing a kidney transplant in 2008 to deal with a longtime battle with diabetes. “It’s really a sickness,” Taylor said in Beats, Rhymes & Life, Michael Rapaport’s candid 2011 documentary on the group. “Like straight-up drugs. I’m just addicted to sugar.”

“Malik was our loving husband, father, brother and friend,” his family said in a statement. “We love him dearly. How he impacted all our lives will never be forgotten. His love for music and sports was only surpassed by his love of God and family.”

“Family, my heart is shattered at the loss of my beautiful son,” Taylor’s mom Cheryl Boyce-Taylor wrote on Facebook. “Thank you for your love and good wishes. Malik made me so proud, and he was a good and humble son. What holds me is that he brought joy through his music and sports, and that he lived a magical life. He is with his beloved grandmother and his twin brother Mikal today. God bless you Malik Boyce Taylor. Please send prayers to my daughter-in-law Deisha.”

Taylor appeared on all five of the group’s studio albums, most notably 1991’s The Low End Theory and 1993’s Midnight Marauders, acting as the high-pitched, gruff vocal counterpoint to Q-Tip’s smooth, mellow flow. The group broke up and reunited multiple times since the release of their last album, 1998’s the Love Movement. As documented in Beats, Rhymes & Life, the group would sporadically reunite for live shows, but stopped short at recording new material.

Health problems deterred Taylor from recording much solo material, though the rapper released his only solo album Ventilation: Da LP in 2000. Speaking to Rolling Stone last November, Taylor was tentatively optimistic about both his health and future recording plans.  

“I am in a good spot, but I have my good days and I have my bad days,” he said at the time. “But I’m more or less in a good spot, so I can’t really complain.” In the same interview, Taylor revealed plans to release the J Dilla-produced “Nutshell,” the first single off a planned EP titled Give Thanks. The rapper released a video preview of the song, though a full version has yet to be released. Prior to his death, Taylor had also been at work on Muttymorphosis, his new LP that would have functioned as “basically my life story” that he hoped to have released later this year.

Taylor was born November 20th, 1970 in the Jamaica area of Queens, NY. Living in the same area as Q-Tip, he would meet his future groupmate at the age of 2, with the duo attending the same school and playing little league baseball together. “We were best friends,” Q-Tip said in Beats, Rhymes & Life.

As recounted in the film, the rapper would visit his grandmother, a strict Seventh-day Adventist, on weekends and sneak in episodes of Soul Train for his early musical education. “When it came to block parties and hip-hop, once I saw them grab the mics and getting busy, I risked my livelihood getting kicked out of the house and everything just to be a part of it,” Taylor said in the film.

At the age of 19, Taylor contributed verses to four songs on A Tribe Called Quest’s 1990 debut album People’s Instinctive Travels and the Paths of Rhythm, including an iconic verse on the group’s third single, “Can I Kick It?” Despite the song’s enduring appeal, Taylor himself was not happy with his contribution. “It’s hard for me to get into ‘Can I Kick It?’ … for the simple fact that I hated my voice back then,” he told Rolling Stone. “It was high-pitched and [speaks in high-pitched voice] ‘Mr. Dinkins’ and I couldn’t stand it. It’s hard to listen to that album because of my voice. It’s almost like, thank God I was only on four records.”

Taylor and fellow Tribe member Jarobi had planned to start their own group, but the two would join Q-Tip and producer Ali Shaheed Muhammad officially on 1991’s Low End Theory. Buoyed by exuberant songs like “Buggin’ Out,” “Check the Rhime” and “Scenario,” Low End Theory‘s landmark fusion of hip-hop and jazz remains a benchmark for the genre, influencing countless rappers and producers and providing the blueprint for a strain of rap as indebted to Grover Washington, Jr. and Ron Carter as James Brown. “He brought the street to A Tribe Called Quest,” said the group’s former manager Chris Lighty in Beats, Rhymes & Life. “If Q-Tip was esoteric and on Pluto, Phife would bring them back to the moon so that it was in the realm of human understanding.”

The album would eventually earn a spot on Rolling Stone‘s 500 Greatest Albums of All Time, with hip-hop fans flocking to the vocal interplay between Tip and Phife. “I like the fact that we bounce off of each other like yin and yang, nice and smooth, you know?” Phife told Rolling Stone last year.

Midnight Marauders would appear two years later, equalling its predecessor in lyrical dexterity and organic, layered production. The album would spawn hits like “Award Tour” and “Electric Relaxation” and is often ranked as one of the best hip-hop albums of all-time.

Taylor moved to Atlanta from New York following the release of Marauders, a shift he claimed exacerbated the infighting that had been increasing in the group. Two more albums would follow — 1996’s Dilla-co-produced Beats, Rhymes & Life and 1998’s The Love Movement — though neither achieved the same success as previous efforts.

Following the group’s dissolution, Taylor continued to battle diabetes, reuniting with the group for live shows, in part, to help defray medical costs. “Even though I knew I had [diabetes], I was in denial,” Taylor said in the documentary. “I had to have my sugar. You have to accept it. If you don’t accept it, it’s going to kick your ass.”

Last November, the group reissued People’s Instinctive as the first of a massive reissue campaign. A Tribe Called Quest’s Tonight Show performance of “Can I Kick It?” — their first televised performance in 15 years — would end up being the group’s last.

 

>via: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/a-tribe-called-quests-phife-dawg-dead-at-45-20160323

____________________

lynnee denise 02
I mean wow, what does it feel like to create music while
facing a chronic and debilitating disease? I appreciate
the funky diabetic’s haunting approach to edutainment
here, the honesty and vulnerability in his praise to Dilla
and their shared struggles with the body. Phife wanted
us to talk about “How to Eat to Live,” let’s consider the
number of folks who leave us too soon and the food
deserts they often find their communities in. Change
one thing about your diet today out of respect.
—DJ Lynnée Denise
 
Music video by Phife performing Dear Dilla.
© 2014 Smokin’ Needles Records

 

>via: https://www.facebook.com/djlynneedenise?fref=nf&pnref=story 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

photo by Alex Lear

photo by Alex Lear

 

GHOSTS

 

i have the smile of my great-grandmother seeing the end of slavery

& you have the hairline of an uncle/an aunt

who never pressed nor otherwise chemically altered their hair

 

only fools don’t intimately know ghosts,

the dna of humanity, leaping like porpoises slick out of the sea

and back into our walks, our mannerisms, the way we giggle

when nervous, blush when aroused, or spit fire words

in sputtering ocher anger facing back the cannibalism of capitalism

 

ghosts are

just spirits fluttering angel breaths thru our corpuscles

the wing hum of hummingbirds motivating us to sound

snatches of remembered songs, lyrics formerly unheard

in this lifetime, psychicly transmuted across eras,

mali melodies maintained, aural treasures from our undying befores

 

face east young people, face east

imagine each line in your hand an ancestor

how well do you know the thoroughness of yesterday,

the arching influence of the previous century, the retrograde

of rationality, so slow compared to the velocity

of history smashing into the protons of personality

 

imagine, your voice is the texture of sun yat sen singing

a freedom song, your social erectness the reincarnate posture

of sitting bull standing barefoot his clear eyes kissing dark earth,

imagine, your breath the aroma of emiliano zapata biting the bullet

of revolution and spitting fire on the butts of robber barons

and dark-faced overseers who are the psychological sons

of simon legree in their twisted brutality towards their own people,

the definance of your unsurrendering war stance could be ghana’s

yaa asantewa hurling up the west coast facing down british bullets

confident that the religion of resistance will always outlive

the technology of repression, you could be the heroics of history,

a phantasmagoria of sacred strugglers vivifying the surge

of timeless protoplasm which careens through your veins

and gives substance to the willfulness of your animated engagement

with the omnivorous enemies of the planet earth

 

ghosts are

sacred illuminations coloring our stratagems and meditations,

they are the realization of sanity, the moment we truly understand

just how wicked the west actually is, the translucent

lights on the front porches of our spirits beckoning, guiding our

soft footsteps on the path, heading back homeward bound

dancing into the social circle of our collective selves

 

ghosts remind us

each individual is more than one, a communal hope chest

of ancient dreams actualized in the present

 

i believe in ghosts, i do

because i would be soulless matter otherwise

i would be some french rationalist trying to intellectually manufacture

& market the focus of life as the ego of thought, would be

some compassionless corporate ceo with spiritual arthritis

uninformed by the blessings of sharing, while pretending

that material possessions elevate morality as if you are what you own

rather than are what you do/be in relation to others and the world

 

ghosts

do not like vaults and crypts, nor fences and forts

real ghosts prefer sensitive personalities and wild open spaces,

every time we inhale a leaf shakes,

a tree or a weed offers us breath

give thanks to the grass for our daily inhalations

 

i am not a mystic

but i know there are ghosts

in the fecund topsoil which progress

callously covers with concrete,

i understand the reality that dust and dirt are airborne bones

pulverized by time into tiny particles

 

a rose by any other name is still the collected essence

of our forebearers grown through the life cycle into a fragrant state

of petal soft beauty on a bud whose shape is nature’s re-creation

of the vaginal portal, whose redness is an honoring

of feminine life force and the blood value of matriarchy

 

if you do not believe in ghosts

where do you think your spirit will be

when the corporeal temple of your familiar

crumbles into seemingly insignificant pebbles of peat, or

when your temporal sanctuary dehydrates

once disconnected from the moisturizing of life’s cosmic juice,

when the way station of your flesh altar no longer receives offerings

& when you revert to what you were before your human being

was conceived and made flesh via the union of your parents,

won’t you be a ghost then?

 

there are literally millions of lives in your little finger

 

the karma of colonialism will not be undone

not unless and until the ghosts that reside

in the hosts of color worldwide can find a culture

which resonates daily contentment,

 

there will be no end to the wandering search for the promised land

unless and until ghosts can live

inside the wholeness of beating hearts synchronized

in embracement, respecting the healing touch

of every manifestation of life no matter how small, obscure,

or ostensibly insignificant,

 

no calming the tempest,

no mediation of the disruption of our heritage

not unless and until ghosts can emigrate

into a peace filled community of souls such as we

ought to be, vessels of awareness, responsible in our openness

to offer wholesome residences for the motion flow

of history seeking future,

 

there will always be a wailing issuing out our mouths

unless and until ghosts can live and

comfortably reside, live, and rest inside, rest

in peace, rest in us

 

ghosts

 

peace

 

ghosts

 

rest

 

ghosts

 

in

 

ghosts

 

peace

 

ghosts

 

rest

 

ghosts

 

in

 

ghosts

 

us

 

 —kalamu ya salaam

 

______________________ 

Kalamu ya Salaam – vocals

Stephan Richter – bass clarinet

Wolfi Schlick – tenor & reeds

Frank Bruckner – guitar

Roland HH Biswurm – drums

 

Recorded: May 31, 1998 – Munich, Germany

 

 

 

 

 

 

11 March, 2016

11 March, 2016

 

 

 

 

Land and the roots

of African-American

poverty

African-American family at the Hermitage, Savannah, Georgia in 1907. Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress

African-American family at the Hermitage, Savannah, Georgia in 1907. Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress

Shortly after emancipation in 1865, African Americans began fighting for the rights to the lands they had long worked – cultivated by their hands, fed by their sweat, and stained by their blood. Yet while the government stifled freedmen’s demands for ‘40 acres and a mule’ as just compensation for generations of unpaid, brutalised slave labour, they simultaneously granted free land to whites.

Indeed, when the failure of land distribution among blacks during the Reconstruction is judged within the context of the Homestead Acts, the reality of the situation is laid bare. The problem was never the radical nature of land reform. The problem was racism.

When judged comparatively with other nations’ emancipatory histories, the Reconstruction experience in the United States is unique. While African Americans were the only freed slaves to be granted political rights so soon after emancipation, those rights were limited for a people without capital or job prospects. Land would have served as the primary source for reparations.

President Abraham Lincoln signed the original Homestead Act into law during the second year of the Civil War. Between 1868 and 1934, it granted 246 million acres of western land – an area close to the land mass of both California and Texas – to individual Americans, virtually for free. To receive 160 acres of government land, claimants had to complete a three-part process: first, file an application. Second, improve the land for five years. Third, file for the deed of ownership.

Because of the date of the Act’s passage, few people from the South initially received any benefit from it. Yet given that it effectively remained in place until 1934, well over 1.5 million white families – both American-born and immigrant – eventually profited from it. And, although the process was rife with fraud, as many homesteaders sold their plots to corporations, the original claimants pocketed the income from land sales, establishing a basis of wealth and capital. By the end of the Act, more than 270 million acres of western land had been transferred to individuals, almost all of whom were white. Nearly 10 per cent of all the land in the entire US was given to homesteaders for little more than a filing fee.

Enacted in 1866 shortly after the end of the Civil War, the Southern Homestead Act (SHA) was supposed to function much like the original Act. During the first year of the SHA, unoccupied southern land was offered exclusively to African Americans and loyal whites, but after 1867 even landless former Confederates applied.

Although the SHA ostensibly offered a solution to several pressing Reconstruction-era issues, in reality, a large percentage of the land offered was un-farmable, being either heavily wooded or covered with swamps. Furthermore, it was hard to administratively arrange homesteading, as many southern states had only one land office. Depending on where the office was located, it could take several weeks to simply make the trip, meaning the bureaucratic duties cost far more than the filing fees for the actual land.

Furthermore, the recently emancipated owned no cash and had no experience in dealing with the government, rendering the process even more difficult. But perhaps the biggest hurdle for freedpeople involved the year-long labour contracts they had been cajoled or forced into signing shortly after slavery was outlawed. Leaving a job before the end date of a contract frequently resulted in virtual re-enslavement on a chain gang. Indeed, blacks had been locked into these contracts until the very date (1 January 1867) that they stopped receiving special homesteading benefits.

By the end of the SHA 10 years later, nearly 28,000 individuals had been awarded land. Combined with the claimants of the original Homestead Act, then, more than 1.6 million white families – both native-born and immigrant – succeeded in becoming landowners during the next several decades. Conversely, only 4,000 to 5,500 African-American claimants ever received final land patents from the SHA.

The Homestead Acts were unquestionably the most extensive, radical, redistributive governmental policy in US history. The number of adult descendants of the original Homestead Act recipients living in the year 2000 was estimated to be around 46 million people, about a quarter of the US adult population. If that many white Americans can trace their legacy of wealth and property ownership to a single entitlement programme, then the perpetuation of black poverty must also be linked to national policy. Indeed, the Homestead Acts excluded African Americans not in letter, but in practice – a template that the government would propagate for the next century and a half.

With the advent of emancipation, therefore, blacks became the only race in the US ever to start out, as an entire people, with close to zero capital. Having nothing else upon which to build or generate wealth, the majority of freedmen had little real chance of breaking the cycles of poverty created by slavery, and perpetuated by federal policy. The stain of slavery, it seems, is much more widespread and lasting than many Americans have admitted. Yet it is the legacy of the Reconstruction – particularly the failure of land redistribution – that so closely coupled poverty and race in the US.

 

+++++++++++
Keri Leigh Merritt is a historian and independent scholar. Her research focuses on race and class in US history. Her first book, Masterless Men: Poor Whites, Slavery, and Capitalism in the Deep South, will be published by Cambridge University Press next year.

 

>via: https://aeon.co/opinions/land-and-the-roots-of-african-american-poverty?utm_source=Aeon+Newsletter&utm_campaign=8c418a7960-Weekly_Newsletter_11_March_20163_11_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_411a82e59d-8c418a7960-68598981

 

 

 

 

DECEMBER 7, 2015 ISSUE

DECEMBER 7, 2015 ISSUE

 

 

 

The Refugee

Dilemma

What do we owe those we take in?

 

BY 

 

Nelson Kargbo was a child soldier given asylum in America. But after he got in trouble Immigration decided to send him back. /  CREDIT ILLUSTRATION BY KEITH NEGLEY

Nelson Kargbo was a child soldier given asylum in America. But after he got in trouble Immigration decided to send him back. /
CREDIT ILLUSTRATION BY KEITH NEGLEY

Nelson Kargbo was eleven years old when rebel soldiers attacked his village, Kamalo, in northern Sierra Leone. He was playing soccer on a dirt field at the edge of the village. When he saw houses on fire, he and his best friend, Foday, ran toward the jungle, following Foday’s mother and dozens of other people. They walked until late at night, when they came across a cluster of abandoned mud houses. Foday’s mother, who used to cook for the boys after their soccer games, told them to sleep under a grove of mango trees. “Tomorrow, we’ll keep walking,” she said. “We’ll make it to the city.”

The country’s civil war, which had begun five years earlier, in 1991, had seemed remote to Kargbo. He’d considered it only when he overheard his adoptive father, Lennard, a pastor who had assumed custody of him when his parents died, talking about it with members of his congregation. Kargbo was the youngest child in the family—he had seven brothers and sisters, who were all the biological children of the pastor—and he was accustomed to being ignored. He was reserved and nearly invisible, except when he played soccer. He hoped to play for the national team.

At 3 A.M., he and the others were woken by soldiers from the Revolutionary United Front, an army that was fighting to overthrow the government. They carried trussed goats and bundles of food looted from Kargbo’s village. The R.U.F. commander, a man in his early twenties called General Mosquito, told the boys and men to line up. Their mothers, wives, and daughters waited in another line. Mosquito asked the boy at the front of the line, who was Kargbo’s classmate, if he wanted to join the rebels or return to his mother, and the boy said that he wanted to go home. Without saying a word, a soldier put a gun to the boy’s head and killed him. When it was Kargbo’s turn, he said that he wanted to join the rebels. Foday said the same thing.

The soldiers then addressed the women, asking all but the elderly if they were ready to join. The first three women consented to be soldiers or “bush wives,” cooking, cleaning, and having sex with the rebels. A young soldier approached Foday’s mother, groped her breasts, and asked if she was a rebel now, too, but she pushed the man off her. The soldier shot her in the head, and said that he was setting an example. Foday fell to the ground crying. “Man up!” a soldier said, pulling him to his feet. “Stop whining like a little girl.”

Kargbo, Foday, and the other recruits walked for two days, until they reached the rebels’ base, an encampment of huts with pickup trucks parked nearby. The boys were given food, beer, cigarettes, and “brown brown,” a mixture of cocaine and gunpowder that was injected into their forearms. Kargbo’s adoptive father was a follower of the Methodist minister John Wesley, who viewed alcohol as poison. Kargbo felt that he had sinned by permitting alcohol and drugs into his body, but they made him aggressive and fearless, especially when the deputy commander, called Rambo, taught him how to operate an AK-47. He and the other boys practiced shooting at targets, as tapes featuring Tupac, Biggie Smalls, and Lucky Dube played from a boom box.

The commanders renamed Kargbo Fula Boy, because he was skinny and short, like children of the Fula tribe. (He is actually Temne, the country’s largest ethnic group.) After a month of training, Kargbo began helping to loot villages. He and the other soldiers approached towns at night, wearing bulky coats that hid the weapons slung on their backs. The boys entered first, to draw gunfire, so that older soldiers would know where to shoot. Kargbo was often so high that he would shoot an entire magazine of bullets, oblivious of whom he might be killing. The rebels had trained him to feel that he was superior to civilians. He told me, “They were just like chickens to me.”

Kargbo never understood the reasons for the war. The rebel leaders didn’t discuss politics, except to refer to their enemies as “bastards.” Kargbo saw the attacks as merely a way to procure what the soldiers called “rations”: stolen goods that they handed over to Mosquito. Kargbo came to respect Mosquito, who rarely spoke, which was Kargbo’s natural tendency, too. Before battles, Mosquito motivated the soldiers by playing the Tupac song “Me Against the World.” Kargbo, who slept with his AK-47, found solace in the lyrics: “witnessing killings / leaving dead bodies in abandoned buildings / can’t reach the children cause they’re illing / addicted to killing and the appeal from the cap peeling / without feeling.” Kargbo knew the story of Tupac’s life—he was murdered the same year that Kargbo was abducted—and viewed him as an idol who understood the inevitability of everyday violence, and the trauma of being both victim and perpetrator. Kargbo and Foday stole Tupac T-shirts from villages that they looted and wore them when they went into battle. “We were hyped from the brown brown, pumped up, ready to go,” he told me. “At the time, I was into it—I was so into it.”

When Kargbo and Foday were alone on night duty, guarding the camp, they spoke about their home, but stuck to quotidian details. Kargbo was afraid to mention Foday’s mother. He had seen what happened to boys who showed their feelings. “I used to be an emotional person,” he told me. “I used to cry.” At night, he was given marijuana and whiskey, which helped him fall asleep. He never tried to escape, because those who did had their arms chopped off with machetes. He figured that he would stop being a soldier when he died, a possibility about which he felt ambivalent.

In 1998, after Kargbo had been with the rebels for nearly three years, he contracted malaria. On the way to a village on the border of Sierra Leone and Guinea, where the older soldiers said that there would be cows to steal, Kargbo was too sick to aim his gun from the back of the pickup truck. When the rebels passed close to Kamalo, Kargbo’s village, Mosquito stopped the truck and told Kargbo to get out. Kargbo wasn’t sure if Mosquito was being cruel to him, since he’d become useless as a fighter, or merciful. He was left at a roundabout without weapons or food.

Later that day, a member of his father’s congregation recognized him and took him back to Kamalo. His family, like many residents, had fled the afternoon that he was abducted, and were now living in a refugee camp in Conakry, Guinea. When they learned that Kargbo was alive, they sent money for the trip to the camp. On his way, Kargbo travelled first to Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone, where he saw graffiti of Tupac lyrics and imagery, much of it scrawled by an R.U.F. splinter faction, the West Side Boys, whose name referred to Tupac’s allegiance to rappers on the West Coast.

In Guinea, Lennard Kargbo was dismayed by his adoptive son’s newfound irreverence. “He had been such a good boy,” Lennard told me. “I didn’t know what had happened to him. He became a bad example.” Kargbo went through withdrawal from the drugs and became unhinged, yelling and swearing at people. Rather than playing soccer with the other kids in his compound, he stayed inside, watching Guinean music videos on a small television.

Kargbo spoke of his experiences only in generalities. “It was too painful for him,” his oldest brother, Eli, said. “When I’d ask him about his abduction, he would say, ‘Well, brother, you know there’s not so much that I can explain.’ ” Eli thought that Kargbo’s silence was a “survival skill, but he kept surviving that way. I think he still thought that if he talked about how he felt something bad would happen to him.”

The family had applied for refugee status in the United States, and a year after they arrived at the camp the application was accepted. They left for Minnesota, where there are roughly a hundred thousand refugees, many attracted by the state’s social services and high rate of immigrant employment. Kargbo had imagined that all the young men in America would exude Tupac’s style and confidence. He told me that the other kids in the refugee camp assured him that “now it will be a good, easy life—you’ll become whatever you want to become.”

The first political refugees to settle in Minnesota came from Southeast Asia. In the late seventies and the eighties, they fled from conflicts in Vietnam and Cambodia and Laos, many having witnessed the murder of relatives and the destruction of their communities. Doctors observed that many Southeast Asians complained of stomach aches, dizziness, fatigue, shortness of breath, and pains in their joints that didn’t correspond to physical injuries. Jerome Kroll, the chief psychiatrist of the Refugee Mental Health Program at the Community-University Health Care Center, in Minneapolis, said that the refugees often expressed their emotional distress in somatic terms, locating their suffering in their bodies, not in their minds. They were taking extraordinary amounts of Tylenol and Advil. The concept of post-traumatic stress disorder struck them as irrelevant, a Western invention. When Kroll asked them what was wrong, they touched their chests, their abdomens, their knees, their shoulders.

Kroll said that the African refugees were often brought to the clinic by family members, because the patients didn’t think that there was anything wrong with their minds. But they had begun to run into the street in the middle of the night, or pace naked around their houses. Many of these patients acknowledged that they’d experienced violence in their native countries but denied that there were emotional repercussions. When Kroll asked what had happened when militias invaded their neighborhoods, they would often respond, “Nothing much.” Upon further questioning, they would reveal that family members had been shot in front of them. To complain was to suggest that they expected life to be anything but hard. Taking psychiatric medications meant announcing to their communities that they were crazy and damaged, a stigma that would contaminate their families. Kroll began minimizing his use of medical terms. He told patients that their symptoms were a “normal response to an abnormal situation.”

When Kargbo arrived in Minnesota, he was fifteen years old, and he dealt with trauma the same way that he had with the rebels: he avoided reminders of what he had lost. He was stoic and taciturn. All he wanted to do was play soccer. His high school, in St. Paul, seemed to him almost fanciful—there was free food and books, and the teachers never whipped students who were late or failed tests—yet he was unable to sit still in the classroom. In Kamalo, where the students spent the afternoons helping the teachers grow cassava leaves, to support the school, he had reached only the fifth grade. The first novel he had ever read was assigned to him by his ninth-grade English teacher. The sentences were too complex and he was uninterested in the characters, many of whom were preoccupied with choosing which rich man to marry. It was the first time that Kargbo had ever been surrounded by white people, and he thought that they had “a bad vibe about black people.” Students made fun of his accent, and he would sometimes respond by grabbing or pushing them. His first American friend smoked pot all the time. “That right there got me,” he told me.

His brother Eli worried that Kargbo was assimilating the worst part of American culture. “Nelson used to be a very sweet and quiet boy, but he had clicked with the bad guys in the war, and he was still attracted to the bad guys, the troublemakers,” he said. “He couldn’t get out of fighting mode and become a normal person again.”

Like many former child soldiers, Kargbo felt that his family saw him as irreparably damaged. His parents yelled at him when he broke his ten-o’clock curfew, sneaking in through the basement window. “I just tried to rehabilitate myself by doing what my friends were doing, smoking weed and drinking,” Kargbo said. When the war entered his mind, he smoked more and tried to fall asleep. Sometimes he tried to convince himself that he had never killed anyone—that his bullets could have missed all their targets. At other moments, he guessed that he had killed between ten and a hundred people.

Kargbo’s nightmares shook him so deeply that, after waking up from one, he would get out of bed and start his day, even if it was 3 A.M., so as not to risk a return to his unconscious. It never occurred to him to see a doctor. He had hated visiting people in the hospital near Kamalo, which smelled like infected flesh, and he associated doctors with that stench. When he had a fever, he ate pepper soup.

When Kargbo was in the eleventh grade, his parents told him that he could no longer live at home if he continued to smoke and drink. He moved out, slept on friends’ couches, and eventually dropped out of high school. He began working at a Burger King. Within a few months, he started hearing a deep, adult voice that insulted him in Krio, the language he spoke growing up. The voice told him, “You are good for nothing,” and “You are a piece of shit”—the same things that Mosquito and the other commanders used to say when Kargbo didn’t follow their orders. Once, while he was in a friend’s car, the voice commanded him to get out. He opened the door and jumped from the moving vehicle, bruising his shoulders when he tumbled onto the road.

Not long after they began dating, Hemmingson became pregnant. They named their daughter Destanee. Kargbo was excited to be a father, but Hemmingson felt that “his head was up in the clouds and he wasn’t in reality.” Tupac was his model of how to be an accomplished black man in America, and he spent hours listening to “All Eyez on Me.” Hemmingson said that her parents often belittled his prospects for success. “My family was never O.K. with me dating a black man,” she said.

Kargbo continued to smoke marijuana and drink heavily. He was arrested for a series of misdemeanors, serving no more than a few days in jail for each crime: disorderly conduct, being a public nuisance, fleeing a peace officer, shoplifting, and possession of burglary tools—he’d acted as a lookout, according to the police, while a friend tried to break into a store.

In 2006, when he was twenty-one, he was arrested for “terroristic threats,” a crime that in Minnesota encompasses behavior committed “with purpose to terrorize another or to cause evacuation of a building . . . or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience.” The boyfriend of Hemmingson’s cousin had called Kargbo a nigger in front of Destanee. The two men began wrestling, and Kargbo, who weighed a hundred and twenty-two pounds, found himself in a choke hold, pinned to the ground. “My cousin’s boyfriend kept saying, ‘Oh, you want to be a man?’ ” Hemmingson said. As soon as Kargbo was released, he ran to his car and grabbed a crowbar and a hammer. “Back away from me,” he said, throwing the hammer on the ground. The police were called, and he was taken to jail, where he tried to hang himself with a torn blanket. He pleaded guilty (through an Alford plea, he maintained that he was innocent) and entered a work-release program for low-risk offenders. Hemmingson, who broke up with him a year later, told me, “He tried to brush off his experiences from the war and start over, but whenever there was a possible threat he was still trying to make a point that he’s not scared of people, no matter how big they are.”

When Kargbo describes his life in America, it falls into two halves: before and after the Fords. At twenty-three, he fell in love with Marquette Ford, one of the few black people who lived in his neighborhood, and eventually moved into her mother’s home in Woodbury, a suburb of St. Paul. “His group of friends were horrible, and I took him right out of that house where he was living and introduced him to a different type of family,” Marquette told me. He dropped the rapping dream and took a job at a company that manufactured banners and signs. Marquette’s mother, Renee, a customer-service representative at the Minnesota Department of Health, sensed that Kargbo was looking for a family. She found him “respectful and shy and a hard worker,” she said. Having raised her children in white, suburban neighborhoods, she related to Kargbo’s sense of alienation. “I know how it feels to have your black ass smack in the middle of all these Caucasians,” she told me. She was especially impressed by Kargbo’s devotion to her daughter, who, she explained fondly, had the “worst attitude.”

Marquette and Kargbo had three children in four years and moved into a house across the street from Renee. Most people from his village had large families, and it felt natural and comforting to do the same. He stopped socializing, unless his friends came to his house, where he was always watching the children. He worked night shifts, taking care of them during the day. “He chose to be Mr. Mom,” Renee said. “He did the cooking, because Marquette doesn’t cook, and he did the cleaning, because Marquette doesn’t like to clean.” Destanee visited on the weekends, and Kargbo took all four children to the library and taught the older ones to play soccer.

In August, 2013, when Kargbo was twenty-eight and his younger son was a year old, Marquette stayed out past the children’s bedtime without telling him where she was. When Kargbo called her cell phone, it was answered by a man he didn’t know. When she returned home, they got into a physical fight. Marquette’s friend, who dropped her off, called the police and Kargbo was arrested for misdemeanor domestic assault. He spent six days in jail, waiting for his bond to be set. He didn’t understand why it was taking so long. On August 29th, a corrections officer told him, “ICE put a hold on you.” Kargbo replied, “Who’s ICE?”

It had been seven years since Kargbo was arrested for terroristic threats, and during that time Immigration and Customs Enforcement had expanded its system for screening foreign nationals held in jail, accelerating their deportation by more than a hundred per cent. The Obama Administration has removed more than two million people from the country—more than any other President. Kargbo had escaped notice on his previous arrest, but this time his name drew a “hit.” ICE had determined that he could be deported, because his record showed convictions for shoplifting, possession of burglary tools, and terroristic threats. These offenses were classified as crimes of moral turpitude, an amorphous category that includes dozens of crimes, from perjury to prostitution. Moral turpitude has been defined by the courts as behavior that is “inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality.”

Kargbo was transferred to Carver County Jail, one of several Minnesota institutions that have a contract with ICE. He wasn’t given the opportunity to post bail. The passage of two laws in 1996, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, allowed the government to detain non-citizens without a bond hearing and to deport them for a number of violations, including moral turpitude. The laws restricted judges’ discretion to consider the ties that immigrants, including refugees here legally, had formed in the country, and the hardship that deportation would impose on their families. The bills were drafted after the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings, during a wave of fear about crime and terrorism, and President Clinton signed the first one with misgivings. He said that the law “makes a number of major, ill-advised changes in our immigration laws,” warning that its “provisions eliminate most remedial relief for long-term legal residents.” In the next ten years, the deportation of legal permanent residents left some hundred thousand American children without a parent.

Kargbo was so ashamed and confused by the idea of being deported—he didn’t realize that it was possible, since he had a green card—that he never called home to explain what had happened. Renee expected that he would be out of jail within a day or two, and that, she said, “he’d sit on my couch and we’d pick each other up and dust each other off.”

In Sierra Leone, it is often said that female child soldiers grow up to be prostitutes, having lost their sexual purity, and that male soldiers dominate the okada industry, a motorbike taxi service, one of the cheapest forms of transportation. Theresa Betancourt, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, said that many of the okada drivers are dismissed as crazy and dangerous. Betancourt has been following war-exposed youth in Sierra Leone and has found that child soldiers endured new forms of trauma once the violence ended. Some returned to communities that performed cleansing and atonement ceremonies, but others were blamed for their brutal deeds, and continued to do drugs. The latter group often became hostile, aggressive, and anxious; their inability to reënter their community as equals, she said, could serve as a reminder of their unresolved guilt and remorse.

In response to the Syrian-refugee crisis, the Obama Administration has promised to increase the number of refugees it resettles, from seventy thousand a year to a hundred thousand. The Department of State gives preference to the most vulnerable refugees, who have been tortured or persecuted at home. Their traumas will inevitably follow them here. Studies show that migration, especially when coupled with discrimination, elevates people’s risk of psychosis. An analysis of more than four million medical records in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that immigrants from East Africa and Southeast Asia were nearly twice as likely to develop psychosis as the general population was.

Within the immigration system, the link among crime, mental illness, and trauma is largely ignored. Heidi Altman, the legal director of the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition, in Washington, D.C., told me, “In recent years, we’ve seen this trend of people who survived the big civil wars of the nineties—Sudan, Liberia, Sierra Leone—come to the U.S. as refugees, and now, many years later, are struggling with the traumas they endured.” Immigration detention, she said, is even less suited for the mentally ill than are jails and prisons, which have become the default provider for Americans who need psychiatric care. “In the criminal justice system, at least there is some acknowledgment that jails are functioning as de-facto psychiatric facilities,” she said. “But that conversation isn’t even happening on the immigration side.”

Until 2011, the immigration system had no guidelines for dealing with people who were mentally impaired or incompetent, and they routinely appeared in court without lawyers. In the past few years, in response to a class-action suit, California, Arizona, and Washington, along with some cities, have begun providing government-appointed counsel for the mentally incompetent. But in most parts of the country these people must either find a lawyer on their own or, like eighty-four per cent of detained migrants, represent themselves. Immigration law is notoriously complex; to understand it, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has written, “Morsels of comprehension must be pried from mollusks of jargon.”

A few weeks after Kargbo’s arrest, at his first hearing, in a courthouse in Bloomington, Minnesota, he heard a voice telling him to give up, because he wasn’t going to win his case, no matter how hard he tried. He was so distraught that he told the judge he wanted to return to Sierra Leone. At the next hearing, the judge said, “I’m going to have to order you removed back to Sierra Leone. . . . You told me you had no fears of returning back to—”

“I was just mad, sir,” Kargbo interrupted. “That was my daughter’s birthday, and everything was emotional.” He wore an orange jumpsuit, and his wrists and ankles were shackled. “I was confused—I didn’t even know what was going on,” he told the judge later. “My mind wasn’t thinking straight.”

The judge scheduled another hearing in two weeks, to give Kargbo time to compile evidence: because the classification of his crimes made him automatically deportable, the only way he could stay in the country was to prove that he would be threatened or tortured in Sierra Leone. The government’s lawyer argued that Kargbo’s concerns about persecution were outdated. Kargbo couldn’t refute the government’s position, because he had no access to the Internet and was unable to do research from jail. He tried to obtain pro-bono representation, to no avail. When Kargbo learned that he’d have to represent himself, he began to cry.

At the next hearing, in November, a different judge told him, “O.K., sir, I’ve ordered you deported.”

“I wish to appeal this one, Your Honor,” Kargbo said. “I’m not going to Sierra Leone. You can either send me to Liberia or somewhere else.” He had never been to Liberia and knew no one there, but it was the first country that came to mind. He told the judge that he didn’t think he could survive for two months in Sierra Leone. “This is my life, Your Honor,” he said. “I’ve got kids in America.”

“He’s playing with my life right here,” Kargbo went on, referring to the government’s lawyer. “He’s playing with my kids’ lives.”

Kargbo wrote an appeal, modelling it on that of his cellmate, a young man from Sudan who was also fighting deportation. “Till this day I’m still having nightmares,” Kargbo wrote. “I was just a kid; the responder never mean to hurt nobody, but his life was on the line one way if the responder doesn’t do what the leader he was going to get kill.” Referring to himself in the third person, Kargbo explained that he had no family in Sierra Leone and was afraid of the country’s leadership. “If the Sierra Leone government get a whole of him who is going to let his family know?” he wrote.

Kargbo worried that his younger son, Ka’marion, who was learning to walk when he was arrested, would forget who his father was. On the phone, Kargbo told Ka’marion that he loved and missed him, but he wasn’t sure if his voice had triggered his son’s memory. “I just hope his older sister shows him my picture,” Kargbo said. His oldest child, Destanee, didn’t understand why he’d been gone for so long and begged him to come home. “So what are you doing?” she wrote him in a letter. “I really miss playing with you.”

Marquette, who was now responsible for her three children, lost her job, at a Goodwill store, because she couldn’t afford a babysitter. “Nelson was there for them more than I was,” she told me when I visited her at her new, subsidized house, which she hadn’t had time to furnish. “They listened to him more,” she said, sitting cross-legged on the living-room floor. “My voice wasn’t strong enough, or I just never followed through.” Marquette has an intimate way of talking about her flaws; she sits close to people, casually touching them, sharing her anxieties in a confessional tone.

When I met Kargbo for the first time, in jail, he talked about his experiences as if he hadn’t been present for them. If I confused events in his life and asked him a question that was fundamentally wrong, he let the facts stand uncorrected. He seemed to become stiffer the closer the conversation came toward the subject of himself. The idea that he had a “story” to tell appeared to strike him as unseemly, as if the details could reactivate the past—an attitude that hurt him during his legal proceedings. He answered the judges’ questions with as few words as possible, the register of his voice barely changing. The numbness with which he described traumatic experiences made him appear as if he were bored by the memories.

Even when his nightmares woke Marquette in the middle of the night, because he was thrashing around in bed, he wouldn’t recount his dreams. Marquette knew that he didn’t like to discuss the war, but she didn’t know why. “I think it’s something with a secret society?” she told me. “I don’t even get it, but in the war I think they said he’s not supposed to tell anybody what happened.”

The only person Kargbo had felt comfortable opening up to was Renee. Kargbo called her routinely from jail and assured her, “I’ll be O.K., Mom.” She didn’t believe him. “He isn’t O.K., because I know his fears,” she said.

The staff at the jail initially wrote that they found Kargbo “pleasant,” “sociable,” and “personable.” But a few days after the judge ordered him deported Kargbo heard voices in Krio that told him, “You don’t deserve to live here,” and “You’re not capable—you’re not worth it.” He covered his ears. He worried that other inmates would think he was crazy if they saw him responding to the voices, so he walked away in order to conduct his conversations in private. It occurred to him that he looked like the Craze Men, as they were called, whom he used to see in his village, gesticulating and talking to themselves. Kids threw rocks at them and beat them with sticks. Some were chained to trees by their families, so that they wouldn’t run away or cause trouble. In his cell, Kargbo told the voices, “Leave me alone, leave me alone,” and then prayed to God to help. When that didn’t work, he imagined that the best way to quiet the voices was to bust his head open. He repeatedly banged his head against the wall.

Two weeks later, guards found him lying on the concrete floor, singing loudly. When asked what he was doing, he explained that he was singing to the floor. “I can’t take this,” he told a nurse. He said that he was overwhelmed by the idea of returning to Sierra Leone and was “hearing voices telling me to hurt myself as the only out.” A nurse evaluated him and gave him a handful of diagnoses: post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. He was prescribed two antipsychotic drugs, a mood stabilizer, and pills to prevent him from having nightmares. The nurse wrote, “He says he tends to get in a fight if he is stressed out. This has been happening since he has been in high school.”

After a month in solitary confinement, Kargbo was placed in protective custody, in Sherburne County Jail, the state’s largest facility for immigrant detainees. He was dressed in a “suicide jacket,” which restricted his movement, and he wasn’t allowed to leave his cell except to shower and to exercise, for an hour each day. Kargbo said that there were four other “mental people” on the unit with him, and a man who had been arrested for murder. He and other ICE detainees were given the same treatment as criminal inmates.

In February, after Kargbo had spent half a year in detention, a nurse found him hiding under his bed. He had hallucinated that his cell was being attacked by a three-headed demon with a tail. The nurse described him as extremely withdrawn, but noted, “He has four children and the thought of them gives him hope to carry on.”

By the spring of 2014, Kargbo was contemplating telling the judge to send him to Sierra Leone. He figured that he would return to his village and live on the streets. “I’ll probably be homeless,” he told me, “but at least I can call my kids and talk to them whenever I want.” Although the Board of Immigration Appeals had granted Kargbo’s appeal, agreeing that his status as a child soldier had not been sufficiently considered, he had to wait in jail for three months before his case would be heard again. When I asked him how he would prepare for the hearings, he seemed confused. “How would I prepare?” he said. “I just wake up in the morning and see what they’re going to say.”

The immigration-court system has a backlog of nearly half a million deportation cases, even though hearings tend to be brisk. One immigration judge compared the situation to “holding death-penalty cases in traffic court.” Although it costs more than a hundred and twenty dollars a day to house a detainee, the Department of Homeland Security places little priority on alternatives to detention, an approach encouraged by the agency’s funding. To compel the Obama Administration to enforce immigration laws, Congress introduced an amendment to the 2010 budget mandating that the D.H.S. fill a quota of more than thirty-three thousand beds each day—thirteen thousand more than it had on an average day the previous year. A similar requirement has been included in each subsequent budget, making the D.H.S. the only U.S. law-enforcement agency that must detain a certain number of people. In 2013, John Morton, then the director of ICE, told the House Judiciary Committee, “We do our very best not to have empty beds,” explaining that “obviously, if Congress appropriates us money, we need to make sure that we are spending it on what it was appropriated for.”

Kargbo had been in jail for nine months when he learned that Linus Chan, a lawyer with the University of Minnesota’s Detainee Rights Clinic, was willing to take his case. One of the judges presiding over the case had expressed concern about Kargbo’s mental health and asked the government’s lawyer to check if there were any available attorneys who would work for free. When Chan met Kargbo, he found him dejected and lifeless. He had stopped hearing voices since he began taking the antipsychotics, but he had a blank gaze and spoke in a monotone; he had also gained sixty pounds. The drugs had altered the way his body metabolized glucose, which eventually led to diabetes.

Kroll wasn’t certain that Kargbo had schizophrenia; he displayed paranoia, but his suspicions seemed natural, considering that he was incarcerated with violent strangers. Kroll, who recommended that Kargbo’s medications be reduced, said that it was impossible to disentangle the schizophrenia process from his experiences in the war, his childhood drug use, and the trauma of his indefinite detention. Refugees often resist psychiatric drugs, maintaining that their distress is a social consequence of war, not a pathology. When Kroll gives presentations to staff at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services about the mental-health needs of refugees, he shows a slide that says, “Citizenship is better than Prozac.”

At Kargbo’s next hearing, in June, 2014, he said he was afraid that he would be chained and beaten in Sierra Leone, where psychosis is commonly treated as a curse. When he described his memories of the treatment of Craze Men in his village, he began sentences without finishing them; his syntax was fractured, his tone flat. When the judge asked him what his voices said to him, he responded, “That’s why I was fighting myself. It said, you know what I mean: let me just hurt myself. I don’t deserve to live at this time.”

The judge again ordered him deported, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision seven months later. Whenever Kargbo heard the guards’ footsteps at unexpected times, he grew anxious. “I was just waiting for them to knock on my door and say, ‘Pack up,’ ” he said. Although Ebola was widespread in Sierra Leone, people were still being sent back.

In April, 2015, nine months after the deportation order, Kargbo was put into a van and driven to Idaho. After a few nights in jail, he was sent by bus to Nebraska, where he boarded a chartered flight along with men from Sierra Leone, Jamaica, and Mexico. Their limbs were shackled throughout the flight. The plane stopped in Louisiana, to pick up more detainees, then landed in Pennsylvania. Kargbo and several other men from Sierra Leone were confined in the York County Prison, where they all had appointments with officials from the Sierra Leonean consulate, which had to issue travel documents for them. The detainees tried to cheer each other up. Kargbo said that one man told everyone, “They’re not deporting us—we’re not going anywhere!”

On the second day of interviews, Kargbo was called into a conference room by two men in suits, who asked him if he wanted to live in Sierra Leone. He told them he was afraid of returning to the country—he hadn’t spoken to anyone there since he was fourteen—and that he couldn’t live apart from his four children. Kargbo recalled, “They were giving me some looks, like ‘You’re a bad kid.’ ”

Kargbo was returned to jail in Minnesota, where he continued to wait. A month later, a colleague of Chan’s from the University of Minnesota, Katherine Evans, filed a habeas petition, asserting that Kargbo’s detention for nearly two years without a bond hearing was a violation of due process. The government had kept Kargbo incarcerated without ever determining if he was a flight risk or a danger to his community—a predicament common to tens of thousands of detainees each year. In 2003, the Supreme Court held that legal permanent residents could be detained without a bond hearing for an unspecified “brief period.”

The Board of Immigration Appeals sent the case back to court for a review, in response to a last-ditch motion to reopen it. At a hearing in July, Kargbo’s lawyers argued that deportation would lead to conditions resembling torture—a claim that has been made in recent years by mentally ill immigrants fighting deportation to Haiti, Liberia, Somalia, Ghana, Sudan, and Jamaica, among other countries. Kargbo’s lawyers drew from a 2014 case concerning a bipolar man, Tumaini Temu, who had been arrested in Washington, D.C. He had previously been hospitalized in Tanzania after walking into traffic and trying to prevent car accidents with his hands. Hospital orderlies beat him with clubs and leather straps, bound his hands with rope for up to eight hours a day, and referred to him as mwenda wazimu, a Swahili term that means “demon-possessed.” Because psychiatric medications in Tanzania are scarce, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that bipolar Tanzanians qualified as a persecuted social group, writing that “Mr. Temu’s membership in his proposed group is not something he has the power to change.” His deportation was cancelled.

Kargbo’s lawyers argued that the Craze Men were treated like Tanzania’s mwenda wazimu. Patients who were admitted to the country’s only psychiatric hospital, known as Kissy Mental, in Freetown—a dilapidated structure that was destroyed by rebels in the civil war and only partly reconstructed—were chained to their beds. A 2013 Human Rights Commission report found that some nurses assigned to Kissy Mental refused to go to work, because of the stigma associated with the hospital.

Ayana Jordan, a psychiatry fellow at Yale who studies mental health in Sierra Leone, told the judge that if Kargbo were deported he would likely have another psychotic episode. “He’d be highly stigmatized, seen as abnormal, feared, shunned, chased out of town,” she said. Jordan said that during her visits to Sierra Leone people told her that mental illness could be “caught” when a cool breeze entered the room while someone was sleeping, through witchcraft and bad dreams, and by bathing at the wrong hour. In her visits to the Kono District, a region devastated by the war, she discovered that many former child soldiers were relegated to an area known as the Bronx, a derelict open-air ghetto, where they continued to use brown brown. People told her, “If you want to see the Craze Men, go to the Bronx.”

The country’s only psychiatrist, Edward Nahim, who recently retired, wrote a letter to Kargbo’s judge explaining, “We must use chains to restrain patients to their beds so they cannot escape.” He said that many patients at Kissy Mental went untreated, owing to shortages in medication, and when released they “roam around the streets aimlessly, though they are not welcomed there. Other people laugh at them, tease them, beat them up, and throw stones at them.”

At the end of the hearing, the judge found that the conditions for the mentally ill in Sierra Leone violated the United Nations Convention Against Torture, and deferred Kargbo’s removal. But she placed him in a kind of legal limbo, ordering him expelled from the United States. The government had to find another country that would take him. Kargbo was sent back to jail.

A few weeks later, according to Kargbo, his deportation officer asked him where his refugee papers had been processed. When he said that he’d been in a refugee camp in Guinea, the deportation officer told him that he would look into sending him there.

Kargbo’s lawyers filed another habeas petition, arguing that his ongoing detention had come to seem punitive, since it was improbable that he would be deported anywhere. On October 2nd, two months after the hearing, a magistrate judge recommended that the petition be granted, noting that there was no evidence that the D.H.S. had made any attempts to find a new country that would accept Kargbo.

A week later, a guard woke Kargbo at 6:30 A.M. He had fifteen minutes to get dressed, pack, and leave the jail. He put on the same jeans and T-shirt he’d worn when he was arrested. He’d lost some weight, after his medications had been reduced, but his clothes were still too tight. His Liberian cellmate, who was fighting his deportation without a lawyer, congratulated him and went back to sleep.

Kargbo’s lawyer, Katherine Evans, drove him to Renee’s house. He waited at the front door with a paper bag containing all the belongings he’d accumulated in the past twenty-six months: his legal papers, a Bible that he’d received in a Bible-studies class, and some songs he had written on notebook paper about his love for Marquette. Now she had a new boyfriend, and had decided that the relationship was over, but Kargbo still hoped, he said, that “we can patch things up.”

Renee screamed when she saw Kargbo at the door. “Coming, coming, coming!” she said, as she ran down the stairs from the second floor. Kargbo pushed open the door, and they held each other, jumping up and down and then rocking back and forth. She touched his dreadlocks, which had grown to his chin, and his cheeks and then rubbed his stomach. “Ah! He’s got a gut,” she said, clapping. “Oh, my God, he is so chunky!” Her forty-sixth birthday was in two days, and she told him that she expected him to cook rice and chicken, his best dish. “Best birthday present ever,” she said.

Renee drove Kargbo to his children’s day-care center
and hid him behind her, so that the children would be
surprised. Renee assumed that Trinity, a wiry, buoyant
seven-year-old, would make a scene—she used to sob
after phone calls with Kargbo—but she told her younger
brothers, impassively, “That’s Dad.” Kargbo’s older
son, Cay’vion, who had just turned five, wrapped his
arms around Kargbo’s neck and shouted, “Uncle!”

“Uncle?” Kargbo asked.

Cay’vion quickly corrected himself. For the rest of the day, whenever his brother or sister did anything that could be perceived as disturbing Kargbo, he shouted, “Leave my dad alone.”

Kargbo moved into Renee’s house, sleeping on an inflatable mattress in the living room, under a tapestry of John F. Kennedy. Renee wished she had a basement so that Kargbo could live there permanently; then the children could sleep over every night. She preferred that Kargbo live in her house. “Only because then he won’t feel alone,” Renee said. “I don’t want him to ever feel like his family’s not here.”

Within days, Renee realized that Kargbo wasn’t acting the way that she remembered. She kept asking him to cook his rice-and-chicken dish. “I don’t even think Nellie remembers the damn rice!” she told me, three weeks after he’d returned home. We were sitting on a large brown couch in the living room, Renee at one end and Kargbo at the other, his body tilted away from us. “Every time I mention the rice, he has a puzzled look on his face. It’s like his mind is blank.”

Kargbo had spent the past hour calling different pharmacies to try to refill his diabetes medication. He had only one pill left. Because he had lost his status as a refugee, he was no longer eligible for Medicaid, and he didn’t know how he would pay for his medications. He wanted to return to his job at the signage company, but he had to wait at least three months to get a work permit, since his green card had been revoked. The misdemeanor domestic-assault charge was looming, too. Marquette had asked that the charge be dropped more than a year before, but now that Kargbo was out of detention the criminal process would begin. If he is convicted of a new crime, the deportation process could start again.

Kargbo sat hunched forward, his elbow on one knee, looking at the black screen of his phone. He was waiting to hear back from a community clinic about free samples of his medication. Renee spoke about Kargbo as if he weren’t there. “He’s a lot quieter now,” she told me. “He can’t hear you when you talk. I’ll be like, ‘Son! I’ve been talking to you for the last five minutes.’ ”

Kargbo admitted that he wasn’t used to stimulation. He said that, in jail, if he wasn’t playing spades or reading the Bible, “I just had to just walk around like a crazy man.”

“Our relationship is totally different,” Renee went on. “It’s like, What happened to my Nellie? We just used to be goofballs. We used to talk to each other about everything.”

“It’s like you said,” Kargbo told her, still looking down at his phone. “I changed a little bit, and I’m trying to get back into the groove.” 

 

+++++++++++
Rachel Aviv joined The New Yorker as a staff writer in 2013. She has written about criminal justice, psychiatry, education, foster care, and homelessness, among other subjects. In 2010, she received a Rona Jaffe Foundation Writers’ Award. Her writing on mental health was awarded a Rosalynn Carter Fellowship, an Erikson Institute Prize for Excellence in Mental Health Media, and an American Psychoanalytic Association Award for Excellence in Journalism. Her writing is collected in “The Best American Nonrequired Reading 2010” and “The Best American Science Writing 2012.” She has taught courses in narrative medicine at Columbia University Medical Center, the City College of New York, and at Mount Sinai School of Medicine.

>via: http://www.newyorker.com/contributors/rachel-aviv 

 

2016

2016

 

 

 

Recovering and

Back-Translating

Richard Wright’s

Lost 1955

Asian-African

Lecture,

“The Artist and

His Problems”

 

 

by Brian Russell Roberts & Keith Foulcher

richard wright 01

On May 2, 1955, the famous African American author
Richard Wright gave a lecture at the Balai Budaja
(Cultural Affairs Center) in Jakarta, Indonesia. Delivered
in English, the lecture was translated into Indonesian
and later published in an Indonesian newspaper, where
it has remained forgotten for the past six decades. In
2016, marking the sixtieth anniversary of Wright’s 1956
Asian-African travelogue, The Color Curtain: A Report
on the Bandung Conference
, this lecture will find its first
English-language publication, appearing in our new
book, Indonesian Notebook: A Sourcebook on Richard
Wright and the Bandung Conference
 (Duke University
Press, March 2016). 

Wright wearing a traditional Indonesian batik shirt at the Bandung Conference, seated with fellow African American reporter Ethel Payne. Film still from “Konperensi Asia Afrika” (1955), produced by Indonesia’s government-owned film company, Perusahaan Film Negara. Courtesy of Arsip Nasional Republik Indonesia.

Wright wearing a traditional Indonesian batik shirt at the Bandung Conference, seated with fellow African American reporter Ethel Payne. Film still from “Konperensi Asia Afrika” (1955), produced by Indonesia’s government-owned film company, Perusahaan Film Negara. Courtesy of Arsip Nasional Republik Indonesia.

Richard Wright and Indonesia

The year 2015 marked the sixtieth anniversary of the 1955 Asian-African Conference, a gathering of representatives from twenty-nine newly independent Asian and African countries. Often called the Bandung Conference because it was held in the Indonesian city of Bandung, this gathering has been regarded as a key forerunner of the Non-Aligned Movement and a foundational moment in postcolonial history. Major international leaders spoke at the conference from April 18 to 24, including Zhou Enlai of China, Carlos Romulo of the Philippines, Soekarno of Indonesia, Nehru of India, and Nasser of Egypt. Over four hundred reporters attended, describing everything from the delegates’ speeches to Bandung street scenes.

One of the most internationally famous of those reporters was Richard Wright. Highly acclaimed for his 1940 novel Native Son and his 1945 memoir Black Boy, Wright had moved to Paris in 1947, seeking to escape continuing and intolerable racial discrimination; it was here, self-exiled in Paris in December 1954, that he read the announcement of a conference in Bandung, poised to address international “racialism and colonialism.” According to his memory of this occasion as relayed in The Color Curtain, Wright was immediately struck by the similarities between his own life experiences—especially his experience of race, class, and religion—and those of the Bandung Conference participants. Sensing his excitement, Wright’s wife, Ellen Poplar, said, “If you feel that way, you have to go.” The Color Curtain was the outcome of his Indonesian travels, and during the six decades since its publication this book has emerged as a major source of information and perspective on the conference and its significance.

And yet, as deservedly important as Wright’s English-language discussions of the conference have become, admirers and scholars of Wright have known almost nothing about the Indonesian-language archive surrounding Wright’s three-week Indonesian sojourn, from April 12 through May 5. In an attempt to fill this gap, we spent the year of the Bandung Conference’s sixtieth anniversary putting the finishing touches to a book that has been some seven years in the making. Titled Indonesian Notebook: A Sourcebook on Richard Wright and the Bandung Conference, it offers translations of dozens of Indonesian-language documents discussing Wright’s activities in Indonesia, ranging from newspaper articles to book reviews and interviews. Indonesian Notebookprovides substantive introductions to these translated materials, almost all of which have, until now, remained absent from the extensive published documentation of Wright’s life. His biographers have produced at least nine substantial biographies, and his bibliographers have sought to list all items (published and unpublished) written by Wright, along with all items written about him. Additionally, speaking to the extraordinary thoroughness of research on Wright’s life and writings, recent years have seen the publication of The Richard Wright Encyclopedia (2008) and Richard Wright: A Documented Chronology, 1908–1960 (2013), which gives a date-by-date, cradle-to-grave outline of Wright’s life.

Wright with participants in the Konfrontasi Study Club, 1955. Pictured here, left to right: Richard Wright, Siti Nuraini, Fedja (daughter of Siti Nuraini and Asrul Sani), and Sitor Situmorang (arm only). Photographer unknown. Courtesy of the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.

Wright with participants in the Konfrontasi Study Club, 1955. Pictured here, left to right: Richard Wright, Siti Nuraini, Fedja (daughter of Siti Nuraini and Asrul Sani), and Sitor Situmorang (arm only). Photographer unknown. Courtesy of the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.

Given this high level of documentation, we were surprised to be able to find new information on Wright’s lecturing activities in Indonesia. In the Indonesian daily press, we found two newspaper articles quoting from a brief talk Wright gave at the home of Jakarta’s mayor. Also in the daily press, we found a photograph of Wright being introduced to a group of students who had gathered to hear him talk. Elsewhere, we found the published text of a lecture titled “American Negro Writing,” which Wright delivered to a meeting of a study club associated with an Indonesian cultural affairs journal of the day. “American Negro Writing” is the first known English-language publication of Wright’s oft-cited lecture “The Literature of the Negro in the United States,” which was originally published in French in 1948 and which re-appeared in English in 1957, in his lecture collection White Man, Listen!. Its first English publication, in an Indonesian journal in 1955, was accompanied by an Indonesian-language synopsis and commentary, which we have included in our collection of translated documents. 

On the Trail of Wright’s Forgotten Lecture

But perhaps our most surprising and significant find was still another lecture, one that has remained almost unknown within the exceptionally thorough arena of Wright scholarship. In the daily press, we had read a brief mention of a lecture Wright gave on May 2 for PEN Club Indonesia and Indonesia’s Council for Deliberations on National Culture (BMKN). In looking for information on this lecture, we searched through every relevant Indonesian periodical we could find, including the newspaper Indonesia Raya, whose editor-in-chief was Mochtar Lubis, Wright’s host during his three-week stay in Indonesia. No new information surfaced, however, until our friend and colleague Paul Tickell came to our aid in November 2011. Generously devoting some of his own research time in Jakarta to looking through the Indonesian National Library’s holdings of Indonesia Raya over a longer time frame than we ourselves had so far managed to do, Paul quickly came upon an Indonesian translation of Wright’s PEN Club/BMKN lecture, published in Indonesia Rayaon May 22, 1955, two and a half weeks after Wright left Indonesia. Titled “Seniman dan Masalaahnja,” the text of the lecture appeared to be incomplete, but no further installment was to be found. Brian’s subsequent searches in the same library in May 2013 failed to uncover any more of its content, either elsewhere in the May 22 issue of Indonesia Raya or in later issues.

A year after Brian’s follow-up research in Jakarta, we received additional help from an unexpected quarter. Already involving trans-Pacific research collaboration between the United States, Australia, and Indonesia, our network took on a connection with Japan, when Wright scholar Toru Kiuchi helped us locate a typewritten draft of some lecture notes held among the Richard Wright Papers in Yale University’s Beinecke Library. Wright left these notes untitled, but the Beinecke has the typescript filed under the heading “[On Writers and their Art].” This document has remained virtually unreferenced by scholars, and when it has been cited, it has been misunderstood as a lecture Wright gave in Bandung, or the transcript of an interview with Wright in the same city. When we compared it with the Indonesian text published in Indonesia Raya, it was clear that these notes were a longer version of the same text, the basis of the English-language lecture Wright delivered in Jakarta on May 2, 1955. 

After the Wright Estate kindly granted permission for us to include a version of this lecture in Indonesian Notebook, we set about comparing the two versions and thinking about the problems involved in back-translating the Indonesian-language version into English. In what ways should our back-translation be accountable to the lecture’s Indonesian version, which had been its only previous publication? And in terms of Wright’s English-language lecture notes, should we consider these to constitute “the original” lecture? On one hand, if we were attempting to provide readers with access to how Wright’s Indonesian audience would have understood the lecture, leaning on the Indonesian translation would be important. But if we were attempting to provide readers with a representation of what Wright intended to say, perhaps it would be best to prioritize the version of the lecture contained in his typewritten notes? How might we go about producing a translation that reflected both Wright’s draft for the lecture and the text that was presented to an Indonesian audience and published in a major Indonesian newspaper?

As we continued comparing the two documents, we found ourselves in a situation that upended any sense that we were dealing with a paired “original” and “translation.” This was a situation that seemed, literally, to instantiate Jorge Luis Borges’s often-quoted observation, “The original is unfaithful to the translation.” It had been clear from the outset that Wright’s English-language notes contained several passages that were not included in the Indonesian translation, but as we began our own translation work, we also realized that the lecture’s Indonesian version contained a smaller number of phrases and passages, such as a reference to Wright’s recent travel in Africa, that were absent in the English-language notes. Although the two versions often corresponded to each other on a sentence-by-sentence basis (if not a word-for-word basis), we were nonetheless dealing with discrepancies that we could not ignore. The translation process, always so much more than simply the conversion of words and sentences from one language to another, required us to consider scenarios that might have produced these differences. We hypothesized that we were dealing with a case in which the Indonesian version had been translated from a now-absent source text, a document that was a revision, or later version, of the English-language notes. This now-absent revision, we surmised, would have remained in Indonesia with an Indonesia Raya editor while the English-language notes that we now had access to would have returned with Wright to Paris, eventually finding their way into the Wright collection at Yale’s Beinecke Library.

Exterior of the Balai Budaja in 2013, venue of Wright’s 2 May 1955 lecture “The Artist and His Problems.” Photograph by Brian Russell Roberts, May 2013.

Exterior of the Balai Budaja in 2013, venue of Wright’s 2 May 1955 lecture “The Artist and His Problems.” Photograph by Brian Russell Roberts, May 2013.

Having alighted on this explanation as our working solution, we set about making decisions on how to balance the English notes and the Indonesia Rayapublication to produce a reconstituted version of the lecture in English. At the same time, however, we continued thinking about the problems involved in the cultural translation of the lecture, from its 1950s Indonesian context to the sphere of an international audience, sixty years later, accustomed to living in what Japanese novelist Minae Mizumura has described as “the age of English.” To make the transition from the local context to a general contemporary readership in English, we felt we needed to understand more about the circumstances that had generated our two source texts. We tried to imagine the setting in which Wright delivered his lecture in Jakarta. How many people might have been present? Who were they, and what were their backgrounds? What might they have understood of Wright’s lecture when it was spoken in English and when it found print in Indonesian? In approaching these issues of cultural translation, we were aided by a conversation Brian had arranged in Jakarta in 2013 with Ajip Rosidi, a senior Indonesian author and cultural figure who attended Wright’s PEN Club/BMKN lecture in 1955 as a seventeen-year-old aspiring writer. Ajip recalled that during the mid-1950s, a lecture at the Balai Budaja would have been attended by about thirty people, and he believed that on this occasion, everyone in the audience shook Wright’s hand at the event’s conclusion. He further recalled having invited Wright to come and stay with him at his simple home, with its earthen floors and woven bamboo walls, because he believed Americans should see how ordinary Indonesians were living in Jakarta. When asked what he remembered of the lecture itself, Ajip recalled that he could not follow all of it because it was delivered in English. However, thinking back across nearly six decades, he believed that Mochtar Lubis translated it into Indonesian so non-English-speakers could understand. 

Interior of the Balai Budaja, where about thirty members of PEN Club Indonesia and the BMKN gathered to hear Wright’s 2 May 1955 lecture. Photograph by Brian Russell Roberts, May 2013.

Interior of the Balai Budaja, where about thirty members of PEN Club Indonesia and the BMKN gathered to hear Wright’s 2 May 1955 lecture. Photograph by Brian Russell Roberts, May 2013.

Ajip’s commentary furthered our efforts in cultural translation because his recollection seemed consistent with our working assumption regarding a now-lost source text for the lecture’s translation in Indonesia Raya. It made the hypothetical scenario seem considerably more vivid in our minds: At some point between the conclusion of the Bandung Conference on April 24 and Wright’s May 2 lecture in Jakarta, Wright typed up some lecture notes and showed them to Mochtar. Based on Mochtar’s knowledge of audience interest and understanding, and, importantly, the lecture’s potential for translation into fluent and easily understood Indonesian, Mochtar may then have suggested that Wright make some revisions. As Mochtar knew, the English-speakers in Wright’s Indonesian audience would have spoken English as a second, or more likely third or fourth language (after their own regional language, the Indonesian national language, and—among the older generation—Dutch), and some in the audience would have spoken little or no English. Under these circumstances, it is likely that Mochtar suggested that it would be best if he himself provided a running Indonesian translation of the lecture as Wright gave it. Based on such a suggestion, Wright may have prepared a revised set of notes to hand over to Mochtar for translation ahead of time. This scenario would explain some of the differences between the two versions of Wright’s lecture, because the sections of Wright’s notes that are elided from the version published in Indonesia Raya, as well as the smaller number of additions to Wright’s notes in the Indonesian version, are consistent with an adaptation of Wright’s lecture to make it more easily digested, and perhaps more palatable, to a gathering of Indonesian writers, artists, and intellectuals in mid-1950s Jakarta. This adaptation itself—whether performed by Wright, Mochtar, or someone else—might be viewed as the cultural translation that preceded Indonesia Raya’s English-to-Indonesian translation.

A Reconstituted Asian-African Lecture

In preparing our English-language version of the lecture for inclusion in Indonesian Notebook, our main aim was to give readers access to the way Wright’s Indonesian audience would have understood him in 1955. Hence, we began by making a back-translation, relying on Indonesia Raya’s Indonesian-language version as we brought the lecture back into English. Yet we were also mindful of Wright’s own diction, and we carefully compared our back-translation to Wright’s notes, working to integrate the notes’ English words and phrases whenever this was consistent with our understanding of the lecture’s meaning as it was documented in Indonesia Raya. As an aid to Wright scholars and individuals interested in the translation process, we used explanatory notes to discuss where and how the two versions depart from each other in significant ways. Finally, wherever the Indonesia Raya version of the lecture did not include material contained in Wright’s typescript notes, we reinserted the elided material and marked it with italics. In reinserting this material from Wright’s unrevised notes, we hoped the translation would preserve a sense of Wright’s own voice, consistent with his statement on preparing to publish his 1957 collection White Man, Listen!: “In these pages . . . I’ve deliberately preserved the spoken tone.” 

Choosing a title for our English version of the lecture presented some dilemmas. As mentioned earlier, the Beinecke designates Wright’s untitled lecture notes as “[On Writers and their Art].” But this title does not convey the lecture’s Indonesian title, “Seniman dan Masalaahnja,” which, due to the gender neutrality of third-person pronouns in Indonesian, can be literally translated as “The Artist and Her/His Problems.” Although as translators in the twenty-first century it would have been our preference to shift the title’s translation to “Artists and Their Problems,” we felt the title should be accountable to Wright’s typescript (where, consistent with standard 1950s English usage, the idealized artist is singular and always a “he”). As a result, in our translation, the literal “The Artist and Her/His Problems” becomes simply “The Artist and His Problems.” As for our decision to keep the slightly awkward word problems rather than rely on the Beinecke’s more elegant word art, this is neither unintended translationese nor an intentional effort at what Lawrence Venuti has called “foreignizing translation.” Rather, it is a reflection of the fact that Indonesia Raya’s Indonesian translation of Wright’s introductory remarks includes the phrase seniman, dan masaalah²nja, a near-verbatim echo of the Indonesian title (the superscript 2 was a convention indicating plurality in written Indonesian at this time). The direct equivalence between the Indonesian masaalah and the English problem suggests that Wright used the term problems when he addressed his audience in English.

This reconstituted document, a version of which was delivered during Wright’s trip to Indonesia for the Bandung Conference, may be described as an Asian-African lecture. Specifically geared toward an Indonesian audience whose country had just witnessed the excitement of the Asian-African Conference, the lecture describes the materiality of a writer’s experience in the contemporary Western world, as if to offer insight to Indonesians as they themselves grappled with the question of cultural production under the conditions of modernity. Along these lines, Wright addresses the modern writer’s lack of a defined audience, the rise of the novel as imbricated with the middle class, and the challenges involved in making a living while balancing the competing demands of aesthetic commitment and the commercial publishing industry. The lecture also offers remarks on the creative process that Indonesian modernists in Jakarta would have found particularly germane to their own discussions at the time, especially as they, like Wright, were concerned with where to look for artistic inspiration and the question of negotiating political and moral commitments in literary art. 

The lecture indicates that, in thinking through these issues, Wright was doing so in the context of his perceptions of Asia-Africa. In 1953 Wright had visited the Gold Coast, and now, in Indonesia, he had also been afforded a glimpse of postcolonial Asia. In “The Artist and His Problems,” we see him drawing on both these sets of experiences. For example, in discussing the problem of temporality as an element in art, Wright wades into the debates on a supposed “crisis” in Indonesian literature that were then current in Jakarta, sharing his observations on the perception of time in the Gold Coast and its relation to the development of the novel in non-Western contexts. Elsewhere, in discussing politics’ relation to art, Wright cites Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai’s commentary on atheism during his Bandung Conference speech. Also on the problem of politics and art, Wright discusses national leaders’ decisions to modernize by means of force, an observation no doubt partially inspired by his intersection with Asian-African leaders in Bandung, and which presages his remarks, later included in his four-lecture collection White Man, Listen!, on the “quasi-dictatorial methods” that Soekarno, Nehru, Nasser, and Kwame Nkrumah may use “to hasten the process of social evolution and to establish order in their lands.” Indeed, given its themes, we would frame “The Artist and His Problems” as a lost fifth lecture from the era of White Man, Listen!, permitting new insight into Wright’s developing views on Asian-African affinities and East-West tensions. 

In 1955, this Asian-African lecture found translation into Indonesian because it was given by a famous writer of the English-speaking world. Six decades later, it might be argued, the lecture has been back-translated into English because Wright is still a famous writer of the English-speaking world. But the lecture, translated into Indonesian and back-translated into English, points toward a much more extensive Asian-African archive produced by writers who have not written in English. Beyond simply reconstituting Wright’s lost Asian-African lecture, Indonesian Notebook offers English translations of writings by many Indonesian modernists who also grappled with the question of a world without empire. These modernists of postcolonial Indonesia respected Wright but were sometimes puzzled by his representations of Indonesia and of themselves. And their writings, which in Indonesian Notebook take up the questions of race and colonialism that Wright was considering during his trip to Southeast Asia, showcase one facet of the rich diversity of thought and political stances held among postcolonial intellectuals of the mid-twentieth century. In this way, the book reaches out beyond its core concerns with Richard Wright and the Bandung Conference to point toward the vast, non-English, Asian-African archive that is of such crucial importance to the writing of postcolonial history. 

This essay reflects on research that will appear in Indonesian Notebook, out from Duke University Press in March 2016.

 

+++++++++++
Brian Russell Roberts is Associate Professor of English at Brigham Young University (Provo, Utah), specializing in American literature and transnational American Studies. A Fulbright Senior Scholar at Universitas Sebelas Maret in Solo, Indonesia, from January to June 2015, he is author of Artistic Ambassadors: Literary and International Representation of the New Negro Era (University of Virginia Press, 2013), and editor (with Michelle Ann Stephens) of Archipelagic American Studies: Decontinentalizing the Study of American Culture (forthcoming from Duke University Press). With Keith Foulcher, he has published other material related to Indonesian Notebook in PMLA.
Keith Foulcher is an honorary associate of the Department of Indonesian Studies at the University of Sydney. Prior to his retirement in 2006 he taught Indonesian language and literature at the University of Sydney, and previously held positions at other Australian universities. His major research interests and publications are in the field of modern Indonesian literature and cultural history, especially of the late colonial and early independence periods, and is co-editor (with Tony Day) of Clearing a Space: Postcolonial Readings of Modern Indonesian Literature (KITLV Press, 2002). His frequent translations from Indonesian include literary works published by the Lontar Foundation, Jakarta, as well as articles and chapters for academic books and journals published in Australia, Singapore, the United States, and the Netherlands.

 

>via: http://www.asymptotejournal.com/criticism/richard-wright-the-artist-and-his-problems-brian-russell-roberts-keith-foulcher/

 

 

 

 

 

dinaw 04

Dinaw Mengestu:

W.E.B. Du Bois Lecture

Dinaw Mengestu, MacArthur Fellow, acclaimed novelist, and Professor of English, Brooklyn College

An Ethiopian-American novelist who has garnered widespread critical acclaim for his intimate depictions of the immigrant experience in America, Dinaw Mengestu was named a “20 under 40” writer by The New Yorker and received the National Book Award Foundation’s “5 under 35” Award for his debut novel, The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears. This novel tells the story of Sepha Stephanos, who fled the Ethiopian Revolution and immigrated to the United States where he owns a failing grocery store and struggles with feelings of isolation and nostalgia.

Mengestu was the recipient of the 2006 fellowship in fiction from the New York Foundation for the Arts, the 2008 Lannan Literary Fellowship, and received the 2012 MacArthur Foundation Genius Award. Dinaw Mengestu is the author of three novels, The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears, How to Read the Air, and All Our Names. His latest novel, All Our Names, is an unforgettable love story about a searing affair between an American woman and an African man in 1970s.
Mengestu currently teaches at Georgetown University and Brooklyn College. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and Columbia University’s MFA program in fiction. His fiction and journalism have been widely published.

Bio:  
The author of three novels, a graduate of Georgetown University and Columbia University’s MFA program in fiction, and recipient of numerous awards, Dinaw Mengestu was named a “20 under 40” writer by The New Yorker and received the National Book Award Foundation’s “5 under 35” Award for his debut novel, The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears. Mengestu was the recipient of the 2006 fellowship in fiction from the New York Foundation for the Arts and received the 2012 MacArthur Foundation Genius Award.

Sponsored by the Africana Studies Department and co-sponsored by the Dresher Center for the Humanities; the English Department; the Music Department; the History Department; the Modern Languages, Linguistics, and Intercultural Communication Department; the Global Studies Department; the Office of the Dean of the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences; the Division of Undergraduate Academic Affairs; and the Office of Undergraduate Education.

____________________

15.09.2014

15.09.2014

 

 

 

Dinaw Mengestu:

‘Immigrant is a

very political term’

By Jane Paulick, Berlin

 

Award-winning Ethiopian-American novelist Dinaw Mengestu just published his third book in Germany.
He talks to DW about what’s wrong with the label
“immigrant fiction” and the lessons to be learned from
Ferguson.

dinaw 01

DW: Your newest book, “All Our Names,” is the last novel in a trilogy that began with “The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears” and “How To Read The Air.” How are these three books related?

Dinaw Mengestu: They are very closely related, not necessarily because the characters or the settings are the same, but because the ideas are similar and revolve around dislocation. What is it like to lose the things that you value most in your life, your family, your country, your friends? What happens to the person who has lost those things; how do they rebuild themselves?

We often think that the immigrant story is unique to people who have left their homes. But for me it has increasingly become a story of people who have lost something essential to who they are and have to reinvent themselves and decide who they are in the wake of that loss. How do they find someone to love again? How do they find another home? How is this tied to the experience of violence? How does it reshape our sense of identity and how do we come to terms with it?

“All Our Names” takes place in the 1970s and juxtaposes the voices of Helen, a social worker in the Midwest, and Isaac, a witness to the violent revolution in Uganda. It turns out they are not that different.

For all the differences in skin color and gender, they have a lot in common. The larger ideas of the novel have to do with the way our histories mirror one another. For example, how the post-colonial era in Africa and the post-civil rights era in America grew out of two similar forms of liberation movements, which, although I wouldn’t say they were crushed, were disturbed by the events that followed.

Your fiction tends to get described as an exploration of the immigrant experience. You’re skeptical about this description. What don’t you like about it?

Partly that it’s simplistic. But also, the idea of an “immigrant” is a very political term. It doesn’t exist as a real definition of a certain body of people. When I lived in France for years I was called an expatriate, not an immigrant, and had I written a novel it would have been called an “expat” novel, not an “immigrant” novel.

As a writer, what you’re writing from is not the act of immigration itself but its emotional consequences, and those consequences form a core that is much more universal than merely the experiences of people who have left their homes and gone to another country. My work begins with a sense of loss, but not with having lost a country per se.

You’re part of the “Africa39” project, which showcases African writers. Given that you left Ethiopia as a child and grew up American, are you comfortable being labelled an African writer?

Yes, so long as it’s not the only thing I am being referred to. The idea that you can only claim one space for yourself seems a little bit shortsighted, especially given the consequences of the diaspora: How we often live in more than one place these days, and the fact that very few of us have a singular identity.

Mengestu was born in the city of Addis Ababa (pictured) in Ethiopia but his family left Ethiopia during the war when he was two years old and immigrated to the US

Mengestu was born in the city of Addis Ababa (pictured) in Ethiopia but his family left Ethiopia during the war when he was two years old and immigrated to the US

Africa is definitely one of my identities; all of my books have a foot in Africa, and I consider myself still deeply attached to Ethiopia, my home country. So yes, I’m comfortable with this label, and although I might have left the country when I was young, I have chosen to keep it central to my work and my imagination. 

Do you feel there’s resistance to the idea of multiple identities?

People like easy storylines. It’s an easier pitch when there’s only one category to put you in. When people ask you where you’re from, they don’t want to hear four different places, they want to hear one. Plus sometimes there’s resistance from people who want you to choose a side; claim allegiance to one type of narrative, one type of flag, one type of concern. That’s fine, they can have those frustrations, but I don’t have to share them.

In your book, Helen lives in an average Midwest town much like Ferguson, Missouri, which just saw weeks of protests following the fatal shooting by a policeman of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager. Does what happened in Ferguson chime with you?

Completely. What we saw in Ferguson is the frustration of feeling invisible in your own cities, which is why oftentimes violence becomes a response. You are part of a city, a country, a state, yet at the same time you feel absolutely powerless and victimized by that state.

When my new book came out, people said, oh, the kind of racism that happens in the novel would never happen today, and I thought, well that’s just crazy, only someone who has never experienced it would say that. Just ask anyone in Ferguson. It might not play out in the same way, someone might not be served their food in a diner on a plastic plate because of the color of their skin, as happens in the book, but they would certainly be discriminated against in other ways.

It doesn’t mean that it’s less powerful because it’s not so overt. Those small gestures are indicative of the greater issues. Problems to do with power and stereotyping, all those underlying issues that reemerge with something like Ferguson, they haven’t died out just because we’ve managed to eliminate small acts of discrimination.

Some have said that Ferguson shows there is a need for a second civil rights movement. What don you think about that?

The civil rights movement was able to create some very powerful legislation that to some degree addressed the discrimination of the Jim Crow era. But what we’re now left with is probably more to do with social-economic justice. There needs to be investment in our cities again, in our public schools, in minority communities that have been historically disenfranchised for generations and generations, because of not being able to accumulate wealth and instead being trapped in cycles of poverty. Legislative problems have been addressed but not economic problems. To address those you need smart social policy or advocacy. Not another law.

Would you describe yourself as a political writer?

Yes, I would. Without wanting to generalize, among many American writers there tends to be a sort of resistance to the idea of being a political writer because it sounds as though it means you’re arguing for a certain type of politics, for one political spectrum. But in fact the idea of a political writer is just one who is engaged, which is an idea that writers have historically always embraced. We are there to bear witness. Camus said the writer is a freelancer, he doesn’t take sides but watches both carefully. I think that’s valid.

 

>via: http://www.dw.com/en/dinaw-mengestu-immigrant-is-a-very-political-term/a-17921813

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

January 15, 2016

January 15, 2016

 

 

MARIANNE

FASSLER’S

RESORT 15

COLLECTION

SHOT BY

PAUL SAMUELS

 

By Erin White, AFROPUNK contributor

 

 

african art 01

Check out fashion designer Marianne Fassler‘s gorgeous editorial, Hauwa Dauda, shot by photographer Paul Samuels, for Fassler’s 2015 Resort collection. The collection was created to speak to a wide-range of women, whether they have bold fashion sensibilities or prefer something understated but non-conventional. Like a lot of her work, Fassler takes cues and inspiration from the diversity of contemporary South Africa, where she is based. “The RESORT15 collection is a continuum of influence, but with freshness in its approach.

“The collection underlines comfort, exoticism, relaxation and the brand’s unapologetic approach to maximalism and represents the self-assured Fassler women,” says Lezanne Viviers, Creative Director.

african art 02 african art 03 african art 04 african art 05 african art 06 african art 07 african art 08 african art 09 african art 10

Credits: Photography by Paul Samuels
Creative Direction by Rich Mnisi and Ben Eagle
MUA by Marilyn du Preez
Model: Hauwa Dauda @ ICE JHB 
Assistant: Siphesihle Zondo
All clothing by MARIANNEFASSLER. Resort15

 

>via: http://www.afropunk.com/profiles/blogs/editorial-marianne-fassler-s-resort-15-collection-shot-by-paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

writivism

2016 Writivism Short Story Prize

 Guidelines

  1. The Writivism Short Story Prize is an annual award for emerging African writers administered by the Center for African Cultural Excellence (CACE). 
  2. Entrants must be unpublished writers, resident in an African country. One is deemed published if they have a book of their own. 
  3. Any questions of eligibility shall be resolved by the CACE administration and their decision is final. 
  4. Entries must be submitted online, by emailing them to info@writivism.com as attachments (not in the body email), clearly labeled in the subject: 2016 Writivism Short Story Prize Submission from January 30 until March 31, 2016. The writer must include in the body of the email, other information about him/her, as country of residence, age, legal name and pen name (where applicable) and telephone contact. 
  5. Only one entry per writer may be submitted for the Writivism Short Story Prize. The story must be original and previously unpublished in any form except on the writer’s personal blog. 
  6. All entries must be in English or French, and 2,500 – 3,500 words long. 
  7. Entries should be attached in Microsoft Word or Rich Text formats, with the title of the story as the file name. The first page of the story should include the name of the story and the number of words. 
  8. The entry must be typed in Times New Roman 12 point font and 1.5 line spacing. No mention should be made on the identity of the writer in the entry. 
  9. Entrants agree as a condition of entry that CACE may publicize the fact that a story has been entered, longlisted or shortlisted for the Prize. The shortlisted writers and winners of the competition will be expected to participate in readings, The Writivism Festival and events at selected schools. 
  10. Entrants agree as a condition of entry that CACE may translate their stories to English/French and publish the story in either language in the annual anthology. 
  11. Worldwide copyright of each story remains with the writer. CACE will have the unrestricted right to publish and translate the long-listed stories in an anthology and for promotional purposes. 
  12. The 2016 prize judging panel comprises Tsitsi Dangarembga (Chair), Richard Ali Mutu, Sumayya Lee, Okwiri Oduor and Mamadou Diallo.

 

>via: http://writivism.org/2016/01/30/2016-writivism-short-story-prize-guidelines/

 

 

CfP: Asixoxe – Let’s Talk!

SOAS Conference on

African Philosophy

28-29 April 2016, London

Deadline 1 April 2016

 

Call for Papers
Asixoxe – Let’s Talk!
SOAS Conference on African Philosophy
28th-29th April 2016
Russell Square Campus, SOAS, University of London 
soas_720x220

The annual Asixoxe – Let’s Talk! African Philosophy
conference has, since its establishment in 2014, been
a steady source of highly original research in the domain
of African Philosophy. Asixoxe is an expression in the
southern African languages Ndebele and Zulu. It means
“let’s talk!” Bearing this title the conference places emphasis
on the spoken word, togetherness and friendship as the
social basis of our scholarly engagement with African
Philosophy. At the same time, through the succession of
two click sounds, the word asixoxe iconically represents
the way human speech adds a specific rhythm to time and
to thought.

This year’s conference is organized jointly by SOAS and
the University of Bayreuth: the two-day event at SOAS
will be followed by a day’s workshop hosted by the
Department of Literatures in African Languages of the
University of Bayreuth. The SOAS conference will take
place in the SOAS Russell Square campus, opening at 9:00
on 28th April and closing at 18:00 on 29th April 2016.

We invite papers on the specific focus of this year’s Asixoxe, which is Philosophy and Area Studies; however, we also welcome papers on other topics related to African philosophy. The question of the relationship of African Philosophy to Area Studies translates into fundamentally different methods of approaching African thought, namely identitarian approaches as opposed to comparative ones. Since its inception in the middle of the 20th century, African Philosophy has been riddled with issues of identity. The discipline has predominantly been constructed and understood within an identitarian paradigm: African Philosophy is seen as the ultimate expression of a distinct African (or otherwise defined local, e.g. Akan, Bantu, etc.) identity and defined in opposition to an “other”, almost always “Western philosophy”, itself understood as an essentialized, monolithic body of thought characterized by certain key qualities. Most typically, these distinctions copy the binaries known from other forms of essentialized difference (e.g. gender): emotive, intuitive, collective, counter-rationalistic is opposed to critical, analytical, logic, rational. A major part of the debate on African Philosophy stays within the limits of reinforcing or questioning these binaries, or arguing for a grey zone between both extremes.

The researchers in African Philosophy at SOAS and at
Bayreuth have for many years now discussed the relevance
of the identitarian perspective for African Philosophy and
explored the potential of a comparative approach: bringing
African Philosophy into a productive dialogue with the
Western tradition, a dialogue which leaves no party
unchanged and which challenges equally African
philosophical ideas and European ones. Rebecca Stacey’s
(SOAS) seminal paper identifies two alternatives to an
Area Studies approach: namely “Comparative Philosophy”
and “Global/World Philosophy”, the former striving to
bring two or more philosophical traditions into a balanced
communication and the latter aiming at an inclusion of
multiple local philosophical traditions under a globally
constructed unitarian philosophical discipline.
 


The conference envisages to develop this reflection further.
The debate on African Philosophy epitomizes the dilemmas
related to Area Studies when the concept is applied to
disciplines which have to deal with ways of meaning-making
which depend on the conceptualizations by the people or
discourses which are studied. These disciplines cannot treat
who and what they study as “objects” but must develop a
fundamentally ethical approach to these, based on mutual
respect as well as the willingness of the researcher to see
and challenge his/her position of power. Ultimately, this
reflection addresses the question: is Area Studies a viable
concept for such discourse-based disciplines, or does it
inevitably involve the violent imposition of Western
standards upon a region?
 

Asixoxe is open to all those who are passionate about
philosophy and about Africa, including university students
at all levels of their academic development. Indeed, the
conference aspires to foster the synergy of fresh scholarly
minds and ripe expertise in creating a platform for their
exchanges and thus nurturing the growth of the discipline
of African Philosophy. The conference has already
produced significant contributions to the field. Selected
papers from the first run in 2014 are being published as a
special issue of the Journal of African Cultural Studiesand
the 2015 papers are currently being edited for publication
in a volume in 2017.
We cordially invite you to participate in the event. Please
confirm your participation and submit the titles of your
papers by 1st April 2016 to asixoxe@soas.ac.uk. SOAS
students do not have to submit abstracts of their papers,
but participants who are not current students of SOAS are
asked to send abstracts of 100-200 words. Each speaker
will be given 20 minutes for the presentation, with
subsequent 10 minutes for questions and discussion.
We envisage a subsequent publication of selected papers
from the conference. There is no registration fee for
presenters and other participants.

 

>via: http://africainwords.com/2016/02/24/cfp-asixoxe-lets-talk-soas-conference-on-african-philosophy-28-29-april-2016-london-deadline-1-april-2016/

 

 

 

 

arch and bruce brown

Competition Guidelines

The 2016 playwriting competition will be open to submissions from March 1 through May 31, 2016. All manuscripts must be electronically submitted and received by midnight on May 31. (No hard copies sent by postal mail will be accepted.)

Only full-length works (dramas, comedies, musicals, screenplays) will be considered. One entry per author, please. Scripts must be original and in English. All must concern lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or genderqueer life and be based on, or directly inspired by, a historical person, culture, work of art, or event.

There is no entry fee. Prizes are as follows: First Prize, $3,000; Second Prize, $1,500; Honorable Mentions, $500. Prizewinners will be announced before the end of the year.

To be eligible for the Foundation’s 2016 competition:

  • Your script must involve lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or genderqueer characters and/or themes.
  • Your script must portray a historical period or incident. The past must be central, not incidental, to the work. (For more information on the meaning of “historical,” go to the “What Is Historical?” page.)
  • You must submit a brief statement, no longer than one page, describing how the script fulfills these requirements. This statement should explain the time period and historical issues involved.
  • If your work has been produced in any form (workshop, staged reading, or full production), your submission must also include a synopsis of the work’s production history. Works that have never been produced are welcome.

If these conditions of eligibility are not met, your submission will not be read.

When submitting:

  • Manuscripts should be in standard play or screenplay format, using a 12-point or larger font, and saved as a .doc, .docx, or PDF.
  • The first page must include the title and your name, as well as your own email address, mailing address, and phone number. Even if you are represented by an agent, please provide your personal contact information.
  • Page numbers should appear on every manuscript page.
  • In the case of musicals, audio segments should be sent separately as MP3 files and limited to a total of 10 minutes. We will request more if necessary.

Email submissions to: jwillis@aabbfoundation.org

 

>via: http://aabbfoundation.org/comp-guidelines