Durham Anthropology Journal
Volume 16(1) 2009: 81-85. Copyright © 2009. Erica Borgstrom
ISSN 1742-2930
Conference Review
Reflections on the International Conference on African Culture and Development (ICACD) 2008 – What culture?
Erica Borgstrom
Durham University
http://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology.journal/vol16/iss1/borgstrom.pdf
When I first read the title of this conference, two phrases popped out and instantly seized me: “African culture” and “development”. Yes, I thought; finally a conference addressing two of my key research interests,
and better yet, joining them together in a constructive manner. As if to put a cherry on top, the conference
was to be held in Ghana, a place I had been dreaming about visiting for years and which is also conveniently
the geographical location for my research interests in spirit child infanticide. I toyed with the idea of attending for months until I finally caved in February, booking myself a flight to Accra – the conference was a
great excuse to experience a place I had read much about and to hear first-hand how Africans feel about culture and development.
I planned my journey to allow myself two weeks of travelling around Ghana before the conference – to see
‘Africa’, to provide context for what I was to hear at the conference. To make it more exciting (and tiring) I
did a whirlwind tour of the country – starting in Accra, up to Tamale, Bolgatanga, Navrongo, Paga...many
places in between...down to Asankrangwa, over to Cape Coast, and finally up to Kumasi where the conference was to be held. I wasn’t very good at playing ‘tourist’ and didn’t want to – I spent many afternoons
meeting with health officials, development agents, and ‘local people’. I felt I learnt more from our conversations than I had in months of reading (but unfortunately my copious and meticulous notes were stolen). Once
finally at the conference and hearing the papers, I was glad to have ‘seen Africa’, albeit briefly, since the
words I heard fell into perspective and I could better understand Africans’ frustrations and ambitions.
Yet, I cannot claim to have fully comprehended it all. Papers on the conflict in Kenya, microcredit in Ethiopia, and the use of arts in community development I could only appreciate from a theoretical point-of-view.
Nonetheless, having had the chance to brush against ‘African culture’ in Africa, I felt like less of fraud sitting
in the conference room. And others felt this too – “you may be White but now you’re truly African at heart”,
David one of the conference organisers said to me. At the same time, however, I sensed this deep, underlying
racial tension that made me more aware of my race than the “obruni” (White person) calls had.
I would not have guessed from the ICACD website or opening ceremony that colonisation continues to
plague the minds of these individuals, and how I, too, as a White person, would feel immediately responsible
DAJ 16/1
81
Borgstrom 2009
Durham Anthropology Journal
Volume 16(1) 2009: 81-85. Copyright © 2009. Erica Borgstrom
ISSN 1742-2930
for governmental policies out of my control. Not that there was a blaring White/Black1 divide, but “our family”2 was strained. I may have interpreted this incorrectly, but I developed the impression that the ‘Blacks’
were suffering from their “double consciousness” whilst the ‘Whites’ endured their continuous endeavour to
be politically correct. This was manifested in the Blacks’ unease in articulating their desires but acknowledging that many of these originated in Western minds, whilst the Whites carefully avoided stepping on their
Black colleagues’ toes. Although both groups were touting self-determination, the effect was as if they were
placing each other on pedestals. For me this was best exemplified when the Ghanaian conference organisers
insisted that Tony Duke (Australian-American) be a moderator for two of the three days. This echoed what I
heard during my travels beforehand – “we always think the White man can offer something better, even if we
can do it ourselves”. I wonder, how ingrained is this sentiment, and what effect is it having on African culture and development? Is this something that can be addressed by anthropology? Can it alone, and with anthropology, affect policy?
Another incident struck me just as much – how some of the ‘African’ delegates outwardly appeared more
‘African’ on the day of their presentations. Let me elaborate: almost all delegates 3, regardless of cultural
background, were dressed in Western-styled clothing during the conference. Then, I noticed, on the day they
were due to present, some of the African delegates wore ‘traditional’ clothing; the musicians did this as well.
My anthropological antennae bounced up – what does this change in dress signify and how is it being utilised? Being aware of selected literature on multiple identities (c.f.Narayan, 1988; Dower and Williams,
2002), I tried to analyse this behaviour. Perhaps it was to reassure the audience (and themselves) of their African identity and support for (traditional) African culture. Through their clothing individuals could ‘perform’ and ‘embody’ their cultural identity. This explanation could be particularly pertinent to the AfricanAmerican presenter, who without the language, accent, or traditional scars could become ‘African’ through
the combination of her colour and clothes. Yet, this could be an over-interpretation of the situation. Conceivably these were the clothes the various delegates brought with them and the ‘change in dress’ was a mere
coincidence. Yet, for personal reasons perhaps, I’d like to believe it has more significance, illustrating a (subtle?) manipulation in identity, providing a preview into the phenomenon of personal presentation. I’ll admit
to having “multiple identities” (not in the fashion of a MI5 spy, however) and alternating between them depending on the situation; I won’t admit to this always being a conscious action. Identifying this shift in iden-
1
I use the terms White and Black since these were the terms used by conference delegates. Moreover, the
‘White’ group contained ‘White Africans’ and thus Western/African would not be a suitable divide. Similarly, there were no Asian, Latin American, or other ‘mass cultural group’ present.
2 As
the conference co-ordinators frequently referred to the delegates.
3
There were a few individuals who always wore ‘traditional’, traditional-style, or traditionally-inspired
dress.
DAJ 16/1
82
Borgstrom 2009
Durham Anthropology Journal
Volume 16(1) 2009: 81-85. Copyright © 2009. Erica Borgstrom
ISSN 1742-2930
tity in others at a moment of simultaneous power and vulnerability was intriguing; however, I cannot answer
why and to what effect.
Such occasions made me wonder about what African culture is and what it could be. We often talk about
‘Africa’ as a whole, despite knowing it is a diverse place (c.f. Gugler, 2003). The conference illustrated precisely how complex the idea of ‘Africa’ is whilst physically demonstrating how competing agendas affect
this notion. The premise of ICACD is to be an ‘African Cultural advocate’ to influence policy, placing culture on the broader African development agenda. For its inaugural meeting, ICACD attracted an array of individuals with varying backgrounds and aspirations. Their differing agendas soon became apparent in presentations and discussions. Primarily, this resulted in the (often confusing) multiple and differing use of the
word ‘culture’, consequently affecting their attitudes towards an implementation of ‘culture’ in ‘development’. Essentially, there were two stances and they did not follow a West-African divide in their image of
‘African culture’; however, as will be outlined below, they both arise from Western notions of what ‘African
culture’ is and should be.
The first image of ‘African culture’ provided and supported by the conference organisers was along the lines
of culture as performance, focusing on ‘the arts’. Not only was this a limited interpretation of culture, but it
promoted the idea of culture as an endeavour to attract tourism, and thus, the arts as a means to increase economic development. Presentations employing this form of ‘culture’ were more conservative in their views
about culture and were more willing to support (Western) stereotypes of what is ‘African’. For example,
dance troupes should be trained in a whole host of dances from various ethnic groups regardless of the ethnic
identity of the dancer, reducing cultural diversity into a generic, easily reproduced act. Moreover, dances
should be performed at festivals for ‘curious travellers’, thus reinforcing Western images of ‘African culture’
as limited to exotic dancers, scantily clad, prancing around to tribal drums – a display the conference delegates were welcomed with at the conference opening.
On the other hand, other delegates viewed ‘African culture’ as something deeper and linked more to identity
and livelihood rather than being limited to the performing arts. This ‘culture’ was felt, however, to have been
stripped away by colonialism and to be continuingly challenged by (Western-led) development. This activist
stance perceives ‘culture’ as something tangible that requires reclaiming; the idea is that without cultural
freedom the ‘African’ cannot be free (Morakinyo at ICACD, 2008). Whilst still affected by Western influence, this approach to ‘African culture’ as an image of resistance recognises the imperative need to embrace
the dynamic nature of culture; however, it lacks the ability to fully recognise the potential for diversity 4.
Both positions speak of an ‘African culture’ despite recognising the local foci of both meanings of culture.
By employing different interpretations to ‘culture’ and neglecting the importance of diversity, delegates
spoke across each other. Unable to create any effective policy changes, the conference accumulated a mix of
4
For example, in certain presentations this understanding of ‘African culture’ excludes the possibility of
‘White Africans’. Moreover, it is similarly plagued by within-Africa xenophobia.
DAJ 16/1
83
Borgstrom 2009
Durham Anthropology Journal
Volume 16(1) 2009: 81-85. Copyright © 2009. Erica Borgstrom
ISSN 1742-2930
ideas on how to approach the combination of culture and development, delegates ‘hand-picking’ advice that
best suited their agendas. Failing to re-imagine Africa, to act rather than react (to the West), the images fostered by the conference are stuck in the double consciousness of ‘African mind’ – the inability to see themselves outside of Western ‘terms and conditions’ (Chachage at ICACD, 2008). Through time and continuing
dialogue, however, there is a possibility of these images being reformed; nevertheless ICACD left me with
conflicting ideas about African culture and its role in development.
I would like to end with a comment about the attitude towards punctuality and timing at the conference.
Even with the minute-by-minute agenda, the schedule commenced over an hour late. Most of the Western
delegates where bewildered and amused; several of the African delegates felt ashamed. The lax nature of the
programme epitomised for them what is wrong with African culture in a development context – it is inefficient and ignorant of its need to conform to Western standards. What was more fascinating was the manner
in which during the course of the week the Western delegates began to embrace ‘African time’ as the Ghanaian conference organisers tried to measure up to ‘obruni’ time keeping. Essentially, the inability to start sessions on time promptly became accepted, not necessarily leading to the failure of the conference by definitely hindering the full potential of ICACD. Is this what happens in development programmes – Westerners
‘accepting’ African “ineffectiveness” as an aspect of their culture?
As with most situations, ICACD has left me with more questions than answers. It has caused me to approach
African culture and development from angles I had never previously thought of, making me more concerned
about the paradoxes of the current state of African life. I am left wondering about the ‘double consciousness’
and how this is manifested in everyday life and development policy. Overtime, I hope future meetings of
ICACD are more successful in their discussions, building on what was presented this year and refining (or
defining) their interpretations of culture and development. Once there is a common understanding about
these, it will be easier to discuss how they can become more effectively intertwined. But for now, I am left
asking: “what culture?”.
Bibliography
Chachage, Chambi. 2008. Engendering Sustainable Development Through Struggles for Cultural Liberty.
International Conference on African Culture and Development. Kumasi, Ghana. 21-26 April 2008.
Dower, Nigel and John Williams (eds.). 2002. Global Citizenship: A Critical Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Gulger, Josef. 2003. African Film: Re-Imagining a Continent. Oxford: James Lurry Ltd.
Morakinyo, Olusegun. 2008. Coloniality and the Conservation of African Heritage: The Challenges of African Cultural Heritage Conservation within the Ambit of Coloniality. International Conference on African
Culture and Development. Kumasi, Ghana. 21-26 April 2008.
DAJ 16/1
84
Borgstrom 2009
Durham Anthropology Journal
Volume 16(1) 2009: 81-85. Copyright © 2009. Erica Borgstrom
ISSN 1742-2930
Narayan, K. 1988. “How native is a ‘native’ anthropologist.” In Thapan, M. (ed.). Anthropological Journeys:
reflections on fieldwork. Pp. 163 – 187. New Delhi: Vedams Books.
DAJ 16/1
85
Borgstrom 2009