Believe me, I understand the strong negative reaction I received when I criticized the use of the term "Afro-Guyanese" to classify certain Guyanese. I have had my own very emotional, lengthy struggle with identification terms. And if you are a Guyanese who is content, comfortable with the identification term "Afro-Guyanese," then I applaud your contentment. All I ask is that you respect my discontent with the term. It is a prickly subject. But, I trust that there are enough of us interested in this subject who can have a conversation that does not dissolve into ugly name-calling.
I don't know when Guyanese actually started using "Afro" as an identification term. I do know when I lived there (from 1967-1986) it was not a term I was familiar with. I also do know from amongst whom the term originated, and it was not in Guyana. So to say "Afro-Guyanese" is a Guyanese thing at the very least needs explanation (for me anyway). And then to throw on top of that statement the idea that to change from saying "Afro-Guyanese" to "African-Guyanese" would mean "follow-patterning" Americans...well, some of you see the comic-irony I'm sure.
This brings me to my first reason for rejecting the term.
The popular use of the term “Afro-Something" most likely preceded the popularity of the hairstyle. (Guyanese were rather late in using the term to identify people of African descent. But I am not saying that the use of the term in Guyana or elsewhere was derived from the hairstyle.) What happened as we have seen so often in the amazing evolution of words is that the word "Afro" became associated with the hairstyle and eventually overshadowed the hyphenated identification term. As a result (as I said previously), these days most people of African descent prefer an identification (group name) that is more clearly associated with the continent, and not the hairstyle. "Afro" can no longer be recognized as simply an abbreviation (hyphenated or else) of Africa or African.
I happen to agree with the sentiment that if you continue to change the name identification of your group based on the rather fickle evolution of the way we perceive words, then it would appear (to me) to be counter-productive to any positive goals the group may be seeking.
But, even if some Guyanese think they are resisting such fickle-ness by holding on to the term "Afro," here's a question I'd like to have answered (it's long; bear with me): Where in Guyana would a person of African descent be required to identify him or herself as such? In school? In the workplace? On television? In the newspapers? In the hospital? On the sports field? In a club? In the rumshop? In the funeral parlor? In somebody's home? At the police station? At the hair salon? At the corner lime? When the bandits stick you up? When you go to buy flour to make roti? At the voting station? Tell me where please?
Aaah, the voting station! Guyana's historical and contemporary ethnic-based politics may be culpable here. My puerile theory is that the 28 years of PNC rule in Guyana did much to cause some Guyanese of Indian descent to seek belonging elsewhere. To claim belonging-ness to India rather than Guyana made perfect sense at a time when to be called Indian in Guyana was pejorative. Now the tables of providence have been turned. And I guess it makes sense for some Guyanese of African descent (who feel--and are--marginalized) to claim belonging-ness elsewhere. It's sad though that they and some others who claim belonging-ness to Africa appear (either because they are unsure or greedy) to claim the entire continent.
The term "African-Guyanese" says so much, and ultimely too little to be of real identification consequence. Two recent commenters on this blog explored some of the complexities of a hyphenated identification in Guyana:
First Commenter:
The Guyanese people who insist on classifying themselves as Indo and Afro don't know how stupid they sound. If they are trying to identify themselves with the country of their ancestors, the "Afro" Guyanese should find out whatever part of Africa they came from and put that country in front of Guyanese, or the "Indo" Guyanese should be called "Asian" Guyanese. You can't qualify some by a country and others by a continent; and what about those whose ancestors came from Pakistan, Portugal, China, etc.? What do they call the mixed races? The native Guyanese?. . . Plain ole "Guyanese" not good enough for you?
Second commenter:
I never refer to myself as Afro-Guyanese. It is downright derogatory and demeaning indeed. I don't understand why they just can't be satisfied with saying "Guyanese". They think that they are classifying us by our race, but since when does the term "Afro" signify one's race? They even go so far as to shorten it sometimes to say "she/he is an "Afro"! Of course, they (and I am really not too sure who I am referring to as "they" ) are doing a copycat of the Americans long, abandoned usage of the word. People can't seem to refer to each other anymore without mentioning their race, by whatever is their preferred descriptive word. For whatever it is worth, whenever I am forced to refer to someone's race, I use the words Indian, Black, Chinese, etc. That also does not seem appropriate, because everyone else is described in relation to their geographic origin, but we are described by our colour. In that regard, therefore, it may be more appropriate to say African, but somehow that does not seem to sit well with me either. Frankly, when I think of myself, the most important thing to me is my gender and not so much race. One can debate these issues "until thy kingdom come."
My first post on this blog was on my discontent with the term "Afro-Guyanese." But I have lived long enough outside of Guyana to accept several versions of a hyphenated identity, so I realize that my wish to be identified without (or beyond) ethnicity even in Guyana, may be just that: wishful thinking.
I continue to hope that is not the case. What about you?
