And the reigning Queen of Africa is...(drumroll please)

January 5, 2007

Angelina Jolie!

That's right! According to an article in the January 8th edition of Newsweek, Angelina Jolie is the "Reigning African Queen."

In an article about Oprah Winfrey's new school for girls in South Africa, the authoring journalist, Allison Samuels, lists the names of celebrities who were set to attend the grand opening of the school, and she says, (exact quote):

"Julia Roberts, John Travolta, Stevie Wonder, Nelson Mandela, and the reigning African Queen herself-Angelina Jolie-are expected to attend the grand opening this week."

I obviously have been kept out of the loop. I had not received the memo that named this white American woman as the reigning Queen over the whole continent of Africa because she adopted an African baby. I had not been told that, instead of naming a woman like Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf (the first female president of Liberia), Winnie Mandela (one of the mothers of the anti-apartheid movement), or Wangari Maathai (the first African woman to receive the Nobel Peace Prize and first East African woman to receive a Ph.D), Angelina Jolie had been given the crown. No one told me that Queen Neferteri, Queen Nefertiti, or Queen Nzingha had been replaced with the likes of a white American celebrity.

No. Nobody told me of these recent developments, but I cannot say that I am at all surprised. Never mind the fact Queen Amina of Zaria expanded the domain of Azaria to it's largest size ever or created, in the 15th century, the city wall fortifications that are still prominent in Hausa culture today. Forget the fact that Candace, the Empress of Ethiopia, stopped Alexander the Great from conquering her land and that Ethiopia still, to this day, is the only African country that has never been colonized. It makes no difference that Yaa Asantewa of the Gold Coast fought the British invaders in 1896 when the Ashanti kings seemed too cowardly to do so. Nehanda, the "Great Mother of Zimbabwe" deserves no title for her valiant battles against the British in the 1890s. Queen Kahina's 700 A.D. fights against Arab invaders in an attempt to keep "Africa for Africans" are of little significance. Makeda, the Queen of Sheba, is no match for Jolie even though her beauty was so great that even the great King Solomon of the Bible was enamored by her beauty and produced a son with her who was the first in the line of the great Ethiopian emperors.

Since these ancient women of great significance don't deserve the title, I suppose it is even more preposterous of me to even suggest that the title "Queen of Africa" should go to one of the billions of African women who give their all, on a daily basis, to aid and assist the continent, even after all the pain and strife that Jolie's ancestors inflicted upon it. Surely the woman who works at an AIDS clinic in Kenya is not worthy of the title. The strong-willed woman who chooses to publish anti-government literature in Zimbabwe, even with the threat of death looming over her, is not a worthy candidate. The woman who opens offices in London to assist her sisters when they have migrated from their homelands to a foreign country should not even be considered. None of the billions of women whose ancestors were kidnapped from Africa's shores, and have been forced to live their lives in exile, come to mind. No. None of these women will do. Not even Oprah Winfrey, who was the reason for the article and who gave over 40 million dollars of her own money to open the school.

They lack a certain paleness of skin. A certain fineness of hair. A certain aquilinity of the nose. A certain superiority of ancestry.

Angelina Jolie, on the other hand, is obviously the rightful recipient of the title. She does, after all, have an Oscar and several Golden Globes. She is, after all, the child of a Hollywood star. She did procure one of the millions of underprivileged children in Africa and totes her around like the latest bag from Balenciaga. We shouldn't forget all of her forays into the refugee camps in Sudan where she was always, and rather conveniently, followed by a host of photographers as she looked down in pity upon the people. It would be irresponsible for us to forget that she starred in a movie called "Beyond Borders" as a devoted, and wealthy, foreign aid worker. In addition to all of the above, if she had not written that open letter to USA Today about Darfur, none of us would even be aware of that crisis.

So of course the title goes to Jolie. She has spent part of the last couple of years "helping" Africans, and looking perfectly European while doing it!

However, as we again enter the realm of reality, it should be clear to see that the journalist's words, although simple and probably unnoticed by many, are just the latest offense that Africa, and all of her people (especially her women) have suffered at the hands of the Europeans. These words, while awfully offensive, are not the problem, but the symptom. This sort of arrogance and praise for all things white is simply the result of Eurocentrism. It is a result that is no less disgusting than the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, the Scramble for Africa, or the raping of a whole continent and its people. It is no less disgusting than the fact that the "leader of the free world" referred to Africa as a country or that it is often referenced in a manner that would suggest that it is a state, not a continent big enough to hold all of Europe, the United States (including Alaska) and China within its borders. It is a result no more surprising than the portrayals of the great Egyptians as white, and native Africans as one-step up from primates.

It is harmful because it seeks to, whether consciously or subconsciously, posit Europeans as the owners, leaders, and rightful rulers of a continent they had no right stepping into in the first place. It sneakily helps perpetuate the belief that Africans, and those of Africa's Diaspora, are not fit to have control over what is rightfully theirs. It is harmful because it implies, and feeds into notions of, superiority and inferiority. It assists in the re-telling of the history, the maiming of the present, and the assault on the future of Africa.

Even though it is small, it is unsettling. And what is even more disturbing is that a Black woman wrote it. An alumni of a historically Black university (Clark Atlanta) and a member of the National Association of Black Journalists. Perhaps her words were meant to be snarky or sarcastic, but in the hands of the average reader, who probably wouldn't even take the time to find out the background of Ms. Samuels, they are harmful and irresponsible. Perhaps Ms. Samuels is simply another victim of the European assault on Africa. Perhaps she has totally bought into the assumed superiority of the white woman.

Although I do not know the appropriate protocol for behavior when encountering royalty, I suppose I should curtsy if I am ever in the presence of Jolie.

On second thought, perhaps I'll keep my head upright like the many true Queens of the Motherland.