Comparing Sources

The works of Palmer, Gordon, and Reviere each explore different components of Africana studies and African diasporic thought. They analyze and critique the methodologies that researchers have used and continue to use while portraying black existence.

Given the variation of content in these three articles, it makes sense that they used different quantities of sources as well as different types of sources. Palmer used over ninety different sources to construct a timeline of black experiences and mentalities in order to unravel the current state of the field of Black Studies. Beginning in the 17^th century, Palmer inserts various quotes from a plethora of scholars and historians to express the mentalities and ideologies present during this time period, ranging from Walker’s comparison of white slaveholders to Egyptians to Asante’s explanation of Afrocentricity and it’s consequential impact on scholarly thinking and teaching today. Palmer’s use of sources was plentiful, yet very sporadic due to the sequential structure of his writing. In my opinion, the multitude of historical details and asides that he used from his sources was very distracting. I found it very difficult for myself as a reader to connect the points he was making on the attitudes of black scholars and on the specific reasons why they focused on writing themselves into a Eurocentric history: a history in which they were hidden and incorrectly portrayed.

While Palmer used primary sources like newspapers and publications from the likes of W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, Gordon sparsely yet fluently made use of single-authored monographs: scholarly writings on very specific topics. Of the three readings, I believe that Gordon used his sources the most effectively. These sources served as the backbone to his argument: the questioning of the methods employed when creating and analyzing Africana intellectual work. He focused on the humanity of a subject matter like African Diasporic Studies and used the theories of scholars like Du Bois and Fanon as supportive elements to his argument. By using a smaller yet more selective pool of specialized sources, Gordon effectively communicated presumed errors in Africana thought and the field of African Diasporic Studies. He called into question concepts like black humanity, the black experience, oppression, and the rural-urban divide. By reinforcing his arguments and findings with selected scholarly theories, Gordon was able to expand upon and support his clear-cut claims. For example, Gordon opens his piece by referring to Fanon’s claimed that method is “for botanists and mathematicians;”[1] it can solely be used appropriately when dealing with nonhuman realities. Another example of his appropriate use of monographs is his reference to Du Bois’ warning that black existence could be buttressed by white existence; while white people were being recognized, black people were being overshadowed by the problems that they faced.

In contrast to Palmer and Gordon, Reviere uses a multitude of journal articles as well as briefly mentioned online sources to “solicit the views and critiques of [other] African scholars worldwide.”[2] I believe that Reviere’s use of sources was very understandable yet lacked the variety of scholarly detail that Gordon’s piece had. This is due to Reviere’s sole focus on Afrocentrism and five canons for an Afrocentric research methodology based on Molefi Asante’s principles. For this reason, Reviere mainly referred to Asante’s texts and didn’t provide any other depth by means of other scholarly sources. Many of Reviere’s other sources were not necessarily expanded upon; they were centered on psychological concepts, like the relationship between race and IQ. The same goes for her unnamed online sources in which she attempted to gain community validation for the Afrocentric model. The only sources that were continuously explained and used effectively were those of Asante, used by Reviere to provide background for her study.

General vs. Substantive References

A general reference is a factual account, like dictionaries, thesauruses, and encyclopedias. General references are intended to provide specific information on a certain topic. On the other hand, substantive references are typically reliable accounts of news or history events meant for the education of the general public.[3] These types of references are meant to inform two different types of audiences. General references are intended to educate audiences that are unfamiliar a certain topic, while substantive references are geared toward informing a possibly familiarized audience on aspects of a certain subject matter.

[1] Gordon, Africana Thought and African Diasporic Studies. 33 (CP).

[2] Reviere, Toward an Afrocentric Research Methodology. 51 (CP).

[3] http://guides.library.cornell.edu/c.php?g=120442&p=785634