maasai new clothes a develop mentalist modernity and its exclusions

8/8/2019 Maasai New Clothes a Develop Mentalist Modernity and Its Exclusions

1/32


2/32

The Maasai's New Clothes:A Developmentalist Modernityand Its ExclusionsLeanderSchneider

"Operation Dress-Up, "a late 1960s campaign initiated by theTanzanian state to induce the Maasai to abandon their tradi-tional mode of dress, opens a window on a specific articula-tion in its historical context of "development." The analysisdraws on articles, letters to the editor, and politicians' state-ments printed in the Tanzanian press to portray how sectionsof Tanzanian society thought about the Maasai, development,tradition, modernity, and the nation. The article shows how,under the banner of "development,"cast as value-neutral andnonpartisan, Operation Dress- Up pursued what must alwaysbe a particular and therefore partisan vision of "modernman. "Special attention is paid to how the discourses throughwhich the campaign was articulated rendered disagreementwith its goals hard to imagine, and even harder to recognizeas legitimate.

People tell me, "The Masai arecompletely happy."I tell them,"It's not a question of whether they are happy. That's a philo-sophical question. I'm not trying to make them happy!" But... there is a difference between clean water and dirty water.My problem is to get that woman clean water. My problemis to get her a healthy child. Happy! I'm not involving myselfin that. . . . The Masai know that these things are possible-milk for children, clean water, good houses: these things areobjective, desirable, necessary.(JuliusNyerere, President of Tanzania, quoted in Smith 1981:12)


3/32

IntroductionThis article examines a peculiar development campaign, referred to asOperationDress-Up,throughwhich the postcolonial Tanzanianstate soughtto induce Tanzanian Maasai to wear "modern"attire. The campaign wasparadoxical nsofar as it defined a problem,andsought to impose a solution,where many of its intended beneficiaries saw neither; they thus had to becoerced,"fortheir own benefit."This paradoxcannot be explained(away)byreferenceto some ulterior interest the promotersof the campaignmighthavehad. It must be understood as arisingfrom how the projectof developing theMaasai was imagined, and the context, constraints, and structures withinwhich this imagining took shape. This imagination, and how it producedtroublingeffects, therefore merit close attention.Although discourse-theoreticalcritiquesof development(e.g.,Escobar1995;Rahnema and Bawtree 1997;Sachs 1992)share this focus on develop-ment's imagination andframes of understanding,they have been criticizedfor paying insufficient attention to the always specific articulations andeffects of development discourse in favor of too generalizinga depiction of"the" discourse of development and its generic, and generically negative,effects (Cooper 1997; Ferguson 1999). This article's detailed examinationof a particulararticulation of development in its historical context and themechanics that produced he problematiceffects observedstrives for a richerportrait.Development is thus contemplated as an undertakingthat, whileparticipatingin broaderdiscourses andpractices,needs to be understoodinits specificity.The first section sets out what the casting of OperationDress-Up asa development campaign entailed. That development is often glossed asa technocratic intervention concerned with the promotion of universallysharedgoals-splendidly illustrated by Nyerere's ruminations above-hasbeen observedbefore (e.g.,by Ferguson 1994).This developmental postureof technocracy and harmoniousness notwithstanding, Operation Dress-Up was highly contentious. This was because of dimensions that did notconform with the campaign'simage of technocratic neutrality, concernedonly with Nyerere's "objective, desirable, necessary" things. Indeed, thecampaign vividly illustrates that development in 1960s and 1970s Tan-zania was a particularist-in the sense of being culturally partisan-andconflictual project.From these preliminary observations, I develop three main points.First, the posture of a technocratically neutral development campaignhadimportanteffects. For the campaign'spromulgatorsandsupporters, t madedisagreement and contention with the campaign's goals unthinkable, orat least un-thought-of, and it emboldened them, while delegitimizing andsilencing resisting "beneficiaries"andother critics of the campaign, at leastin national public discourse.Second,Ihighlight a remarkableaspect of the discoursesthroughwhichOperationDress-Upwas articulated:he casting of "traditional"Maasaias the

03~-

0

paI

z

a

0

H-I

m


4/32

noncontemporaneous "other," n what I call developmentalisttemporality.'The result of this castingwas that the campaignwas imbued with what onemight indeed call aneschatological horizon,which critically underpinned hesense of urgency, necessity, andlegitimacy among its supporters.Third, I ask about the political stakes, connected to postcolonialnation-building, n this struggleover dress.I examine the paradoxicalpoliticsof a campaign that, on the one hand,was portrayedas staunchly anticolonialandanti-imperialist,but on the otherhand,seemed to take some of its basiccues from apparentlyquite "Western"conceptions of what modernity does,and does not, look like.Before launching into this discussion, it should be pointed out whatthis article does not aim to accomplish. Work done by anthropologistsandhistorians has documented the heterogeneity of the ways by which Maasaihave creatively engaged-sometimes to embrace, sometimes to reject-thestructures, problems,andopportunitieswith which the century-longeffortsto develop or "civilize" them have confronted them (e.g., Bruner 2001;Galaty 2002; Hodgson 2001; Swantz 1995; Waller 1993). This literaturereveals much heterogeneity within "the" Maasaicommunity, and it showsthat, in the game of development andmodernity,Maasai have neither beenpassive pawns, nor merely "rejectionists."The focus of the present article,however, is on the world of Tanzaniandevelopersand modernizers,and onhow Maasaiappear n it. Given this focus, "the" Maasaimay appearas rei-fied group, not by virtue of what this study makes them out to be, but byvirtue of how they were cast in Operation Dress-Up. The focus is preciselyon analyzing "waysof 'seeing Maasai',not 'beingMaasai"'(Hodgson2001:6),and on what this reveals about development and the politics of modernityin postcolonial Tanzania.

Developing Maasai:Operation Dress-Up and the Imperatives of Modern AttireA rich literature critically examines development projects directed at Tan-zanian Maasai (e.g., Anderson and Broch-Due 1999; Hodgson 1999a, 2000,2001; Jacobs 1980; Parkipuny 1979; Rigby 1969b; Spear and Waller 1993).It shows that key conceptions about Maasai that have often persisted fromearly colonial into postcolonial times have contributed to a general lackof lasting results that could be judgedas positive by or for Maasai.So mis-guided and so much a mismatch with Maasai aspirationshave been manyattempts at developingthem that it seems to many Maasai "that 'progress'was to be equatedwith poverty and, thus, immaturityratherthan wealth andrespectability"(Waller1993:246;see also Talle 1999:123).Over time, economically focused development initiatives have beenespecially marredby a deep disregard or the requirements, in terms of geo-graphical flexibility, of pastoral livestock keeping (see Hodgson 2000; and,with particularreferenceto Tanzanianvillagization, Hodgson 1999a, 1999c,

-I

0

p;

wz0

a

Im

z0


5/32

2001; Parkipuny 1979;Saibull 1974). Neglect of small livestock, agriculturalproduction, and the role of women has also been detrimental (Hodgson1999a, 1999c).Although some administratorsdevelopedan appreciationforMaasai's "greatskill as stock-breedersat a time when it was fashionable todisparagepastoralistslike the Maasaias obsolete relics of an earlierphaseinhuman history" (Tidrick1980:25),such exceptions seem to have had littleimpact on the overall design of development initiatives. Neither does thecreative, varied,and in some cases enthusiastic and successful engagementby Maasai of the structures and opportunities that it imposed and offeredalter the general impression that "development"has producedfew positivematerial results for Maasai (Andersonand Broch-Due 1999; Arhem 1984;Galaty 2002; Hodgson 2000, 2001; Ndagala 1974;Waller1993).How "Maasaiculture" figuredin these processes changedover time.Maasai interactions with colonial discursive, administrative, and materialmatrices organizedaround "ethnicity" have tended to affix Maasaiidentityto the image of the male herder and warrior(Hodgson2001). In the earlytwentieth century,this image evoked a certain appreciationamongcolonialadministrators,who deemedMaasai inferior n "civilization" to themselves,but still "nobler" hanmany other Africans.At that time, neighboringpeoplealso found it useful to assimilate to Maasai"identity" (see especially Waller1993). After World WarII, however, the colonial focus on the "preserva-tion" (fixing)of Maasai identity gave way, as the administration'sapproachswitched to targeting Maasai "cultural conservatism" as an obstacle toMaasai "development."This new position of Maasai in the hierarchyof cultures persisted aftercolonialism. After 1961,when Tanzania(Tanganyika) ainedindependence,cultural campaigning against Maasai "traditions" intensified, indicatinga different cultural economy than had existed perhaps thirty years before.Especially from the mid-1960s onward, many aspects of Maasai life werethus targeted."Traditional"Maasaihouses, forinstance, were singled out asan areain need of "development"and "progress" Parkipuny1979; Swantz1995:229-230; Talle 1999:106),although such campaigning often ignoredexcellent reasons for "traditional"designs (Arhem 1985:65;Rigby 1969a,1977; Saibull 1974).The "modernization" of Maasai diet was another areain which developers exhibited particularzeal, often inversely proportionateto the degreewith which "objective" reasons might have supportedsomeof their measures (Swantz 1995:233; for Kenya, see Knowles and Collett1989:454).2 Seen as a whole, such "development" nitiatives representa con-certedcampaignto shapeMaasai into "modern"subjectsof the postcolonialnation. Operation Dress-Up was part of this effort.OperationDress-Up:AHistorical ketchMy account of Operation Dress-Up, a campaign concerned with reformingMaasaiclothing andbodycare,focuses on how its supportersconceived of it,and how they justified it in public discourse. Forthis purpose, I draw heavily

-I0

0

z0

a

f

-Im


6/32

on newspaperreportingon the campaign.3My main source for politicians'statements, editorial comments, and letters to the editor is the TanzanianEnglish-languagedaily TheNationalist, but I also occasionally drawon theSwahili-languageUhuru, TheSunday-News,TheDaily News, andTheStan-dard.4The Nationalist and Uhuru were party-ownedand party-controlledand, next to the independent Standard andNgurumo, the majordailies. Inearly 1970, the government took over The Standardandthe weekly SundayNews. In April 1972, The Daily News emergedout of a mergerof The Stan-dard and The Nationalist. The government-controlledpapers,with theirtight integration into the partyapparatus,providea revealingwindow into"official"views, although,the space they, like the otherpapers,reservedforletters to the editoralso became a forum for often lively public discussions.Presscoverage, n both government-controlledandindependentpapers,thusgives an authentic pictureof various sides of contemporarydebates, insofar,at least, as these grabbed he attention of those parts of the public, literateand typically urban,who articulated their views in print.OperationDress-Up, in its early days also called the "MasaiProgressPlan," saw its birth in November 1967 (Nationalist, 17 Feb. 1970), when

government tatements .. described ertainaspectsofMasaicultureas "ancient,unhealthycustoms",and the Masaiwereordered o put on clothes, abandontribalrituals,and startdoing their share towards reachingTanzania'sgoals. TheMasaiwerewarned o "dress n somethingbetter thana dirtysheet ormeagreyardof cloth which exhibitsyourbuttocks",and a campaignwas begunto arrestMasaiwho ignoredsuchinjunctions.(Rigby1969b:49)

Little is known aboutthe originsof the campaignwhose pitch would periodi-cally sharpenandsoften duringa lifetime that extended into the mid-1970s.5It apparently originated in a ban on "the Masai mode of dress and the useof redochre"(Nationalist, 16 Feb. 1970),instituted by the ArushaRegionalCommissioner in concert with other politicians from the region, notablyincluding EdwardSokoine, Member of Parliament and prominent Maasaipolitician.6 The campaign aimed at making the Maasai abandon "theirhabit" of smearing their bodies with red ochre and getting them to put on"properdress,"which above all meant formen to weartrousers nstead of the"traditional" ubega, a kind of toga.The campaign employed a range of methods to get Maasai to adoptthe desired fashion. These variedfrom "persuasion" in effect, exhortationsby politicians) to a diverse set of more or less coercive sanctions. Top-level politicians seem to have been content with issuing repeated publicstatements and appeals. The Nationalist and other newspapers repeat-edly reported on public enunciations of the campaign'sgoals by ArushaRegionalCommissioner Mwakang'ata(e.g., Nationalist 10 Dec. 1968,whenMwakang'ata claimed to be acting on a direct mandate from Nyerere;

-Ipl;

0

0

A,

z0

Iz0m


7/32

17 Dec. 1968; 7 May 1969; 12 Nov. 1969; 7 March 1972)and Second Vice-President Kawawa (Nationalist and Uhuru, 16 July 1969; Uhuru, 17 July1969). In early 1968,Mwakang'atahad ochrepits sealed. TheNationalist of14 March 1968 reportedthat, because the Regional Commissioner did notlike to arrest offendersoutright, he had police officers take them to townfor an explanation of the policy and a reprimand.On 14 August 1971, TheNationalist reportedthat redochre tradershadbeen given a "last warning"by the MasailandArea Commissioner before offenderswould have "theirbusinesses confiscated andtheir licenses withdrawn."Alreadyin late 1968,pupils wearing the lubega were banned from schools (Nationalist, 17 Dec.1968).In 1970, Maasaiwho hadapplied red ochreto their bodieswerebarredfromparticipatingin "nationalfestivals" in Arusha(Ndagala 1992:51).Thegovernment also threatenedto deny "improperly"dressed Maasai medicalcare, and it sanctioned their being denied access to bars, restaurants,andpublic transport(Talle 1999:114, 116).Many details of the methods of enforcement were left to politicalauthority on the ground. According to a chief justice of Tanzania, wholabeled this and similar campaigns "vestigial exercises of chiefly power,"OperationDress-Uphad "absolutelyno legal standing" (quoted n Finucane1974:129).That there was thereforenot always a clear line regardingdesir-able methods of implementation is well illustrated by an exchange fromHandeni District. A 1968 letter fromthe HandeniAreaCommissionerurgesall divisional officials to take action in respect to "MaasaiGoing Naked":"It is imperative [lazima],I repeatagain,imperative that all Maasaiin yourdivisions be orderedthat they are not to be seen wandering about nakedbut that they should instead wearnormal clothes like other citizens."7TheAreaCommissioner'stone earnedhim a reprimand romthe TangaRegionalExecutive Secretary,who pointed out that, counter to an explicit directivefromTangaregionalheadquarters, he AreaCommissioner's letter had "leftthe door open to the use of force or coercion [nguvuau ulazimisha i] thathad been ruled out."8Some of these government-ordainedsanctions appearmerely to haveofficially condonedalready established practices:

My personalmemories from Tanzania-then Tanganyika-reach to the colonial time. Therewas a backbench n thepublicbuses, separatedwith a wall fromthe rest of the bus,forthe Maasai o travel n. Sincethey dresseddifferently-orratherdid not dresssufficiently o covertheirnakedness-andcarriedheirspearsandmacheteswith them[,] heywerecon-sidereda different"race"and thus anotherclass. Theirredochrebodieswere thought to smell[,]andtheir total appear-ance arousedaversion n the rest of the passengers. Swantz1995:227;orsimilarobservationsromthepostindependenceperiod,see Talle1999:114)

-Al-l

01

0

a

0-I

LI

m

m

n:>

-rm


8/32

Although some of its messages and methods were thus not new, OperationDress-Up did signify the transformation of unofficial discriminatory prac-tices into an official, programmatic,and national "development"campaign,which broughta broadset of pressuresto bear on Maasai "offenders."Development'sNeutralityNyerere's protestations that head this article of his and the state's value-neutrality and technocratism vis-a-vis the Maasai are a useful backdrop or adiscussion of the insertion of OperationDress-Upinto broaderdiscoursesofdevelopmentthat cast it as a technocraticanduniversallydesirableexercise.According to Nyerere's portrayal,developing the Maasai was a matter ofobjective issues, universally desirablegoals, andtechnocratically necessaryinterventions: the state engaged the Maasai through "development,"andthus not to ensure their "happiness"(recognizedas a subjectivematter),butto bringthem "clean water."Much in the same vein, The Nationalist's 6 April 1968 article "CattleRanching-Answer for Masailand" reported about the activities of theMasailandRangeDevelopment Commission, remarking hat "[d]evelopmentfor the Masai is much more than a change in dress or the absence ofochre," enumerating clean water, fat cattle, and education as other objec-tives of development. About a year later, Arusha Regional CommissionerMwakang'ata toured Mbulu District and found that "[w]ith the establish-ment of the MasailandManagement Commission [a big economic develop-ment project]the Masai were fast discardingtraditionalhabits and movingto modern civilization.... The campaignto inform the Masai and fit theminto modern society was coming ahead"(Nationalist, 18 Feb. 1969).Within this broadercasting, the argument that OperationDress-Upwas rooted in concerns about health, hygiene, and the eradication of pov-erty,is noteworthy.Numerous contributions to TheNationalist highlightedthe hygienic-and thus presumably objective-rationale behind the cam-paign. Maasaiwomen, for instance, were denied access to medical facilitiesbecause theirbead-jewelrywas deemedto be unhygienic (Nationalist, 14Feb.1968).Aroundthe same time, articles and letters to the editorcalled for the"reconstruction"of Maasai dress"inaccordancewith hygiene and progress"(Nationalist, 17 Feb. 1968), complained that Maasai smelled because theydidnot wash (Nationalist, 19 Feb.1968),and-hailing OperationDress-Up-demanded hat "theMasai must comply"because "[h]emust take part in theeradication of ignorance,disease andpoverty" (Nationalist, 26 Feb. 1968).A lack of hygiene of course immediately cried out for rectification.This perceived imperative is perhaps most strikingly illustrated by the fol-lowing letter to the editor, even though the writer suggests that the totaleradication of Maasaipractices may not be necessary after all: "[T]hey cancertainly continue to do their hair style with redochre but scientifically andhygienically" (Standard,16 Feb. 1968, quoted in Ivaska 1999:28).In seeking

-I

0; I

0

z0Ir-mz0


9/32

to eradicate,ratherthanmerely sanitize,9 "unhygienicand unscientific prac-tices," the propagators f OperationDress-Upwere less considerate than theletter-writer, but they too legitimated their intervention by casting Maasaipractices in opposition to hygiene, science, and reason.Numerous contributions in newspapers and public statements bypoliticians emphasizedthat this developmentcampaign-aimed at such uni-versally shared goals as hygiene and the eradicationof poverty-was for theMaasai'sown good, and indeedwelcomed by them. ReportedThe Nationalistof 12February1968:"PresidentNyererehas stronglycondemned advocationforleaving the Masai in their present stage of development andhas declaredthat the Government of Tanzania is committed 'to assist the Masai attain alevel of development equal to that of the rest of the people in the country."'EdwardSokoine, prominent Maasai Member of Parliament, underscoredthe President's statements a few days later,declaringthat "we decided to dowhat was beneficial to ourpeople and our coming generations.The changesproposedare to the advantageof the Masai" (Nationalist, 16 Feb. 1968).Aletter to the editor elaboratedon the government'sbenevolently paternalposition, and the Maasai'spresumed appreciation:

Iamconvinced hat when the authoritysteppedon the Masaicustoms,it neverreproachedhe Masai orhavingbeen main-taining them, neitherwas thereanyvindication n doing so,but what the authoritydid was that it obligedthe Masaitodiscard he old customsforthe benefit of themselves andforthe whole nation[,] realising that the Masai are our broth-ers in the nation and are an integralpart of the nation whoenjoyequallythe fruitsof the nation and aretreatedwith nopartiality. Nationalist,22 Feb.1968)

Given that the "Masai ProgressPlan" was thus impartial, in the interestof the Maasai, and based on good hygienic, scientific, objective reasons,it is not surprisingto find reports in the paperthat the Maasai's "DistrictCouncil Backs Changes" and passed a supportive resolution (Nationalist,14 March 1968). Similarly, in May 1969, Maasai elders were reported tohave "welcomed the old andthe new moves by the Government to developand educate them" (Nationalist, 7 May 1969).The press coverage gives animpression that agrees with The Nationalist's commentary of 9 February1968: the "question of complaints about shaving or wearing trousers hasnever at any time been raisedby the Masai as a problem towards which theyhave any bitterness."A pictureof developmentalist harmonythus defined Tanzanianpublicdiscourse surroundingthe campaign. Even a lone voice, Ole Parkipuny'scomment on the campaign,run underthe heading "The Masai: One Tribes-man's View on a Complex Problem" in The Sunday News of 25 February1968,10which was to some extent critical of the campaign, never questionedits goals ("Itoo would only be too glad to see the Masai change their dress"),

-A0

;z

00H

I

z00

H


10/32


11/32

There arealso storiesof Maasaiwho openlyhold theirnoses,even vomit, when they get close to people who wash withsoap. They find the smell of perfumed oap,in particularhebrandRexona,detestable. Talle1999:117)"A similar point can be made about theglossingof the targetingof Maasaidressas a move towarderadicatingpoverty.Whyenforcinga dress code would helperadicatepoverty is a majorunansweredquestion:would the Maasai'snewattire not have left them substantially as naked as the infamous emperor?But even the readingof Maasaidress as a sign of poverty appearserroneous,at least as long as by "poverty"one means the absence of material means.Such means were often available,and the Maasai's enthusiastic adoptionofnew blanket designs that appearedon the market in the 1970s shows thatthese would also be mobilized toward acquiringdesired consumer goods.That Maasai "appearance and way of life .. . conjure images and fantasiesof the 'poor"'(Talle 1999:115),despite their often ample wealth, indicatesthat the meaning of poverty is a more complex construct than an "objec-tive" measure of wealth. Consumption patterns and tastes with which thelabeler could not identify were a crucial part of what would be counted assignifying "poverty."It appearsthat "traditional" Maasai dress signified"poverty" to many non-Maasai because they could not imagine it to bedesirable: f one had the means to get out of the lubega, the reasoningmusthave run, one would certainly do so. That Maasai elders "voice an intensedislike of modern clothes, such as shorts and trousers"because "[t]heyfindthem impractical,uncomfortableandunaesthetic"(Talle1999:116-117)wasnot acknowledged, nor could "traditional"dress be recognized as a prefer-ence, being interpreted nstead as a sign of poverty anddestitution. (Astudyof the social and historical formation of such "traditional"tastes would befascinating, as would be to ask more probing questions about the processesthat made some Maasaiardentproponents, and others, such as the modern-izing MPSokoine, detractorsof such tastes. How such processes were forgedin the dialectical politics of "modernity"and "tradition,"also intersectingwith genderand generation,has been laid out by Ranger(1983). Hay (2004)presentsa fascinating case studyon the issue of dress in Kenya,andHodgson(2001) traces out the politics of (self)image-making n the interplay of theTanzanianstate and Maasai.Here, however, the focus will remain on howTanzaniandevelopersfailed to talk about tastes, as they subsumed the issueof Maasaidress underthe discourse of development.)Symbols fBackwardnessndan ImageofDevelopmentThe Maasai rejection of "modern"dress and bodycare indicates that thisdevelopment campaign, contrary to its self-image, was not founded on"objective,"value-neutralpracticality:instead, it was basedon a particularway of seeing and judging-a discourse in which Maasai were a symbol of"backwardness."Concepts such as "hygiene"and"poverty"were embedded

4)0-I

i0

0

-.

z0-Hi

I

m


12/32

within this universe of meaning; they did not "objectively"standoutside it.Despite the idiom of "development,"suggesting technocratic neutrality, inwhich OperationDress-Up was couched, this was a campaign for apartisanvisual-aesthetic order.The fact that the pressrepeatedlyused visual propsinits reporting on the campaign is thus by no means coincidental: the imageof the Maasai,and what it representedto modernelites in postindependenceTanzania,occupied center stage in the campaign.This image mattered enough for a picture of a young Maasaiwarriorcarryinga spear to be droppedfrom the 100-shilling note in early 1969,to be replacedwith a picture of two lions. The Nationalist of 13 March1969 commented on the occasion: "Time changes and man changes withit. The former Masai ... is gone[,]and the Masai is now fully partakinginthe development of Arusha." One could not invent a more telling illustra-tion of the salience of the image: dress "him" up and the "formerMasai isgone"-replaced by a new, development-minded incarnation.And dress up "he" did:on 16 July 1969, Uhuru reportedon a speechin Parliamentby Second Vice-PresidentKawawa, n which he againpromul-gated the campaign.The next day,a front-pagepiece with two photographsfollowed up this story.

SIKUDT MUM77I~ ~ . I w w~~~~~~~~~~~. - ; 7 7.51K~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*up NM*RPT Y A TUM--ENJE.vyeiWXtoueeluwwiw

37 .7..7. 7h 7777 7

_U~~~~~~~~~~Ni Ed sa _ DAR 15 SALkA A_ 1.WWVAgm Pmbe bW1 ft"".- _

7.., 7777 .77777 _7 L7 - ...

J t _3~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.77W77777 i7. ix.i7wi ye7. 7s ..3. 1 . . 7sd* i

4110"q.ft kW77777. Wik ,-*h.7777777 EU7 737777777777 p^5 77.t 7c s 7.77#-..7 ^ _77..I77.7 Ilhl 77K.7 7.777.777 747777s7771wiw1.777 r t. .77, s777777-7_- |

W7 Y. I7I.-7.7.7M ks -7.- 777777.77777777 s .77_

,At 114>SS" Y.$b Ijh-l bk. & _ .K.i lUL77 a.7777777 k*77 .. . i.- . - .;I.,,..7. .

W.W3. Wan Y* MAet Wa ^ uer\*Jr . Y!h.

Nd7.W77.77 f ae. 7777777777777 777~: 7,ttdi 7.777.i757T77777. S77 477 777 :777.77 7117-7 -77 .7777,7.77777.7 777.7. 77. a say. _u 7:.,A.7 _. _-4.7777734? kll R7t7 777 4 7

_. t_777.7 7777 77 777. - * 7577 77777.77R.77777777777-77t;77, 7 .. 777, 7777774

Mr.Kilasia: Before andAfte~~~~~~~'R.W"hot Vk

_ EwkXtisiZi v- mtup t:W* I #is t-. i wlf;;_UWd S*w- k1 e S*&qIF9E. Z .-TW. "Mf,., SioEeyy: *$aXg^!'*

! Ydm F. T iir uee,U0 Y$ |_o>|i 40.. . .. .. .. .. .Z AA Aa v - N .. .. .wstoLns sb>fs at ls*g 1s s ti.S, YOUL*l t _ * i - _ gF.-w tsou 16is Sbs aun1Z^9 NfAttIes i -wkylr1* -w_Y4WSe lli Iwadhi b~~~~~~~~WjtA. * r -.0k. . , - bw#o*+L

Mr. Kilasia: A Before and After Shot

0

zaC'0z


13/32

From when he was little until he came here yesterdayonMonday,Mr.Kilasiawouldalwayswearthe traditionalMaasairobes[mavazi ya kiasli ya Wamasai] that make themwanderaroundhalf-naked.Aftercomingto Dar es Salaamyesterdayandhearing he invitationgiven bythe SecondVice-PresidentMr. Kawawabeseechingthe Maasai o wear modernclothes,he went to buy for himselfa shirt, trousers,a belt anda tie. Inthe pictureMr.Kilasia left)canbe seenin lubega robesandonthe rightdressed n his new clothes. (Uhuru 17July 1969)

By sheddinghis old clothes, Mr.Kilasiahadshed the past, and he hadbegunto "embody"the developed modernity that Tanzanian elites imagined forhim (Allman 2004a; Burgess 2005; Comaroff and Comaroff 1992, 1997;Martin 1994).

Modern Times: Being in Developmentalist TemporalityTheMaasai's PastnessThe meaning of the Maasai's image to the promoters and supporters of thecampaign was a function of what one might call an "aesthetic economy,"a specific historical phenomenon, manifest in this form neither in earlycolonial nor in "indigenous"reactions to Maasai visual appearances Hodg-son 2001; Waller 1993: the fact that what had become, in the period underdiscussion, the liability of "traditional"Maasai looks can today again bean asset, furtherunderlined this economy's historical contingency).12 Here,however, the concern is not with a diachronic analysis of this economy'sgenesis, but with some centralcomponents of its architecture,its workings,and its political effects.As discussed above, discursively transposingaesthetic judgments ontothe terrainof value-neutral and technocratic developmentwas a key aspectof how this economy operated; ts deployment of a developmentalist tem-porality was another. It is useful here to pick up Nyerere's train of thoughtwhere we left it in the quote that heads this article:

It's1964foreverybodyn the world, ncluding the Masai,andthe pressurefor all to live in 1964, including the Masai, isfantastic.... In the twelfth century... this problemperhapswould not have been formidable.But today the standardofliving in the United Statesof America s part of Tanganyika.Sometimes I wish I couldput Tanganyika n anotherplanet.Then we could give it a hundredyearsto catch up. Butwecan't do that, we can't isolate ourselves. (Quoted n Smith1981:12)

-I

0

Pm

z0

I

mus


14/32

The question, forced by this passage, of the connection between the Tan-zanian leadership'svision of modernity and "Western"modernity will beinvestigated below. The present section examines how the campaign to"develop"the Maasai was inscribed into the binary modernity versus tra-dition, which underlies the pressureNyerere here feels to ensure that theMaasai live in the present.Maasai have for long been an icon of development'sand modernity'sother.Hinting at a long history of this othering, Rigbynotes: "Thevery lan-guageof developmentis imposedupon a people,who areassumed to occupya place, a time, a form separatefrom, and even antagonistic to, those of theplanners of 'progress"' 1969a:229).Hodgson emphasizes the persistence ofsuch thinking in postindependenceTanzania: "The African elite who tookpower embraced the modernist narrative with its agenda of progress.Forthem, the Maasai representedall they had tried to leave behind, and per-sisted as icons of the primitive, the savage, the past" (1999a:225).Maasaipastoralism was a particularlycentral building block in the foundation ofsuch contentions. To Tanzania'sdevelopers,it suggested that the Maasai'swas an obsolete way of life that stood againstthe currentof history. Swantzaptly summarizes the most pervasivereferents of this conception of Maasaias modernity'sother:

Pastoralistswere backward ndprimitivepeoplewhoresistedchangeand evadededucation.They pridedthemselves irra-tionallyon largeherdsof cattle[,] hus endangeringheir ownlivelihood in times of droughtor by having eroded heirpas-tures. Theirnomadicmodeof life, unhealthyhousebuilding-style, one-sideddiet, semi-nakednessand unwillingnesstosettle andcultivate bore evidenceto theirresistancetowardsall mannerof modernizationand to the necessityof bringingdevelopment o the pastoralists. 1995:228)

Such conceptions also structured public discourse surrounding Opera-tion Dress-Up. We have already encountered The Nationalist gloss on the"formerMasai's"disappearance rom the 100-shilling bill: it is an excellentexample of the essentialization of Maasai as defined by their "pastness."Similarly, numerous statements by politicians, letters to the editor, andregular contributions to The Nationalist cast the issue of Maasai modes ofdress in terms of modernity versus tradition,andpresentversus past. Sucha temporalizednotion of difference appears o dominate, subsume, anderaseall other forms of difference:all "traditions," ncluding those of the Maasai,were essentially alike, boundtogether by their common "pastness"(this,weknow, is not an uncommon move in modernizing discourses).'3Commentsa letter to the editor: "every tribe has or had its customs more or less likethose of the Masai. But since other tribeswere quick to see the modernizingtorch before them, they discarded them" (Nationalist, 22 Feb. 1968), and

0

znI

z


15/32

a letter to the editor of The Standard of 22 October 1968 makes the sameclaim: "At one time the Europeanswere also dressed as the Masais now"(quotedin Ivaska 1999:29).This temporalotheringof the Maasai s clearlyreflectedin the ubiquityof the tropes of the "museum" and "preservation" n the public discoursesurrounding OperationDress-Up. On 11 September 1968, The Nationalistreported that Nyerere had told a mass rally at Monduli that human beingscould not be preserved ike animals in a zoo. Member of Parliament Sokoinecould similarly "see no reasonwhy 'I should accept my people as museumpieces of an extinct people"' (Nationalist, 16 Feb. 1968).B. B.Mbakileki, ofthe University of Dar es Salaam,concurredin a letter to the editor,whichwarned against "turning any one section of our society into a museum oftraditional culture. Museums arenot made up of men" (Nationalist, 17 Feb.1968). And a reportfromKenyacarriedby TheNationalist on 10 November1970 conjures up a telling image:there is a profound-and surelyintended-symbolism to the reporton a "numberof young Masai" who "decidedto cutoff their red ochredaubedhair andsend it to the museum." Maasaipracticesthus hadno place in the contemporaryworld-except, of course, literally ina museum, the place where things rest outside the currentof time and life.It is not at all coincidental that there was, duringthis time of intenseconstruction on the edifice of the modernnation, a generalmove to banishand segregate from lived experience "traditions" that did not fit into animage of modernity. The "village museum" Makumbusho, at the peripheryof Dar es Salaam, conceived in the early 1970s, is a good example (Mbug-huni 1974;for examples from Kenya, see Bruner2001). Here can be found,physically taken out of everyday life, "traditional"housing designs, whichthe Tanzanianstate was actively combatingas outdated andto be overcome,not least through its grandproject of villagization (Schneider2003, 2004).The same logic underlies SecondVice-PresidentKawawaadvising "villagerswho moved into modernpermanent houses not to demolish all the 'misongehouses.' He said: 'Some of these houses must be preservedand kept as asort of museum for the benefit of future generations"'(Nationalist, 21 Mar.1969).The "museumization" of traditions,physically andrhetorically, wasan exercise in boundary creation-and a statement that such traditions hadno other place in modern life.The temporalizationof differencewe see at work in Operation Dress-Up ensued in a categoricaldenial that Maasaipracticeshad coeval contem-poraneity and legitimacy in today's world (see Fabian 1983). An editorialprovides an apt illustration of what can appropriatelybe called the eschato-logical expectation, directed at the Maasai,arising within developmentalisttemporality:

As we develop[,]we must partwith old ways andevolve newideas, therebycreatingnew values, and new men-men oftodayand tomorrowand not men of yesterdayand the daybefore.... Here n Tanzania,he Masai s a consciousrevolu-

-I0a

-I

m

znIm


16/32

tionary man of tomorrow.He has nothing to lose but exploi-tation and degradation.His inevitable victory is progress.(Nationalist, 10 Feb.1968)

Similarly,an administrator of the MasailandRanchingAssociation saw histask in these terms: "We aretryingto take the Masai from the Stone Age tothe Atomic Age" (Nationalist, 6 Apr. 1968).Even Parkipuny'ssympathetictake on the question of Maasai dress had to admit that Maasaiways wereways of the past, andwould therefore have to yield:

[TiheMasaiup to this moment, consider heir tribalculture obe comparable o anyone of the civilised societies.They arenot simply resistantto "civilising orces"as they are so oftencondemnedby those who utterly fail to understand hem.They are a strong-willedpeoplewho regard hemselves as anation,and who are fully dedicated o the perpetuationof aculturethey considermeaningful. t is only too sad that thiswill-powerhas builtupat the wrongpointandplace[,] .e.[,]atthe tribal evel and in a cultureonly seekingto survive n thewrongcentury. Sunday News, 25 Feb.1968)

Their essential pastness, then, already determined the future of Maasaipractices: they would have to give way, as Maasai left behind their state ofnoncontemporaneous contemporaneity.Koselleck's notion of "asymmetriccounterconcepts" is apropos here. The opposition of traditional Maasaiversus developed modern was constructed in a way that closely mirrorsKoselleck's portrayal of the counterconceptual construction of Heathenversus Christian:"Allthe existing peoples-Hellenes, ethnai, gentes, and soforth-who became definedin a Christianperspectiveas 'Heathens,'gentiles,orpagani, belong .. . to the past" (1985:176).As with the dynamicsin 1960sTanzania, this temporalization of difference carried critical implications:"Expressed emporally,the Heathen was 'not yet' a Christian.... Thus theeschatological horizon contained a processualmoment in the arrangementof the counterconceptswhich was capableof unleashing a greater dynamicthan that inhering in the ancient counterconcepts" (Koselleck 1985:182),"adynamic which negates the existing Other"(Koselleck 1985:165).Draw-ing on Fabian's (1983:2)classic examination of how anthropologymakesits object through the deployment of temporary concepts, we see here an"oppressiveuse of time" throughthe "denial of coevalness."PoliticalEffectsThe casting of "traditional"Maasai practices and dress as signs of seemingly"objective" problems (poverty,hygiene) and relics of "the past" had impor-tant political effects. At base, "developing"the Maasai involved an attemptto transform their "deviant" tastes (a thankless task, as an administrator

z

Iz

-.

m


17/32

of the MasailandRanchDevelopment Commission lamentedin TheNation-alist of 6 April 1968: "It is relatively easy to show the Masai how to makemoney, but it is not so easy to teach them to want money"). But to thepromoters and supportersof the campaign, the "modern,"urban Tanzani-ans who constituted the political leadershipand the public audible in thenational press, this was not a project that pitted their particular concep-tion of a modern (and thus good) life against another, which might havebeen equally valid. They alone were the bearers of modernity, an aspira-tion for which, by virtue of its association with "objective"goods (povertyalleviation, hygiene), of course had to be universally shared.The political effects of this discursive structuration may be illus-trated by juxtaposing Operation Dress-Up with OperationVijana (Opera-tion Youth),a similar campaign,which aimed at making another section ofTanzania'scitizenry, urbanyouth, comply with standards of proper dress.Both campaignscan be seen as partof the Tanzaniangovernment's attemptto foster socialist sobriety, self-discipline, and work ethics, also in therealm of a visual, "textilian" order(Burgess2002, 2005; Ivaska2003). Butnot all deviance from this projectwas constructed equal, and thus the twocampaignstook very differentshapes.Operation Dress-Up, subsumed under a discourse of developmentalvalue-neutrality and universally sharedaspirations,and structured by thedynamicized binary of tradition versus modernity, dealt an inferior handto any argumentthat would have attempted to defend Maasai "traditions."Cast as it was, legitimate disagreementwith the campaign appearedalmostunthinkable; as Bergerhas put it, "[riesistancesto development are almostby definition, the actions of ignorant or superstitious people, who do notproperlyunderstand heir own interests"(1974:180).This casting, combinedwith their spatially and socially peripheral position in Tanzaniansociety,conspired to produce an almost total silencing of actual Maasai disagree-ment with, and contestation of, the government's project in the publicdiscussion as it playedout in newspaper reporting,political statements, andcommentary.

This stands in sharp contrast with OperationVijana, initiated by theTANU YouthLeague (the sometimes militant branchof the single party) nearly October 1968. This campaign attempted to enforce a ban on "unbe-coming and decadent" fashions-such as miniskirts, tight trousers, andwigs-that were spreadingpredominantly among urbanyouth (Ivaska2002;on a similar campaignin revolutionary Zanzibar,see Burgess2002, 2005; onZambia, see TranbergHansen 2004). Unlike OperationDress-Up, however,OperationVijanacould be, and was, forcefully contested within, and notlargely without, national public discourse. This difference was at least inparta function of the differentdiscursive strategiesandinterpretative gridsavailable to the differentpartiesto these debates.They thereforepoint us tothe political effects of the discursive positioning of Maasai "traditions" inTanzaniannational discourses of development and modernity.

-I

I-A

0

m

q

m n

0I


18/32

Ivaska (2002), on whose account the following paragraphsdraw, sur-veys the 111letters to the editor related to OperationVijanaprintedin Octo-ber 1968 in Tanzania'sindependent daily The Standard and finds that thevast majority spoke out against the ban.'4With The Nationalist's coveragegenerally more supportive,"5here unfolded in the pages of the Tanzanianpressa spiritedpublic debateon the merits and demerits of OperationVijana.A central featurein this debate was the starkly divergentviews on the mean-ing of modernity and its connection to dress. Many of the mostly youngurban etter-writersexpressedtheir view that miniskirts connected them tobroad, cosmopolitan currentsof modern fashions andlifestyles. Membersofthe Youth Leagueand several editorials took a differentstance, and arguedthat such dress was the productof Westerndecadence,and thus contrarytoa Tanzanianconception of modernity as socialist and centered on the goalof national development. On this count, The Nationalist of 3 October1968,forinstance, referred o YouthLeagueactivists involved in OperationVijanaas the "shock troopersof socialist construction in Tanzania."This lively debate demonstrates that critical letter-writers were suc-cessful in publicly and directly contesting the government's vision of avisual modernity for Tanzanianyouth. Critics at least partially succeededin recruiting the concept of modernity in support of their visions. Con-tributions grappledwith a wide variety of questions, such as the limits ofindividual rights, the problemof defininga society's values, and the properscope of enforcement (Ivaska2002; and e.g., Nationalist, 11 Oct. 1968 and14 Oct. 1968).There were also discussions about the meaning of Tanzanianand Africanculturein postcolonial times (Ivaska2002;ande.g.,Nationalist,21 Oct. 1968,29 Oct. 1968,and 1Jan.1969).As in OperationDress-Up,sup-portersof OperationVijanaattempted to legitimate their case by referenceto objective criteria: but the argument that the wearing of miniskirts andtight trousers was "bothuncomfortable and unhygienic" was peripheral na debate in which much that was contestable was indeed contested.The fact that, by contrast, dissenting Maasai voices were ignoredandsilenced in the public discourse aboutOperationDress-Upwas partly a func-tion of a lack of access of the geographicallyand in other ways peripheralMaasai to the news media, but those who opposed OperationVijanawerenotjust advantagedbecause of their education and easier access: crucially,theycould contest the campaignon its own terms, staking their own, differentclaim on modernity. Perhapstheirs was a decadent, "nonsocialist" moder-nity, one that did not accord with the official notion of the new socialistTanzanianman, but these kinds of differences still had to be engagedwithon a more or less level playing field. Urbanyouths could not be ignoredasvoices from the past in a hierarchicallytemporalizeddiscourse: they werenot, already and on so many levels, defined as modernity's other. Theyinvoked a right to choose one's dressagainstOperationVijana-"The ques-tion of dress is a personal liberty. Everybodyhas the right to wear whateverhe thinks presentable"(letter to the editor of The Standard, 11 Oct. 1968,

A)~-t0-4

z

Iz0m


19/32

quoted in Ivaska 1999:33)-but the possibility that such a right could beinvoked against Operation Dress-Up was not entertained in public dis-course. As the chairmanof the University Students' AfricanRevolutionaryFrontdismissingly remarked:"[Foreigncritics of OperationDress-Up]talkof 'freedom of dress and individuality.' What they mean is that the Masaihas got not only the right to be nakedbut also the freedomnot to wash-tosmell" (Nationalist, 19 Feb. 1968).It similarly appearedconsistent for B. B.Mbakileki, of the University of Dar es Salaam, to invoke the discourse ofequality and respect for all people in supportof a campaignthat appeareddeeply disrespectfulof Maasai choices: "the issue of the Masai dress bearsvery much on our avowed goals of human equality (in any sense you takeit), human dignity and respect for all men" (Nationalist, 17 Feb. 1968).Along the same lines, a favorable comment on the Tanzanian campaign,attributed to the speakerof the Kenyan Parliament, cast the campaign asbeing in harmonywith ideals of equality and democracy:"the Masai mustbe developedand not be left as museum pieces. They are human beings andare fully entitled to development like any other tribe in Kenya.He declared:'The government must up-hold the principles of democracy at whatevercost"' (Nationalist, 2 Mar.19681.Such claims in the name of equality, human dignity, democracy, andthe rightsof man not only masked the exclusionarynature of the campaign,but also cast potential and actual criticism as necessarily illegitimate: indevelopmentalist times, "human rights" essentially became the right tobehave in modern ways. As relics of the "StoneAge," as "museum pieces,"Maasai were disqualifiedfromhaving a legitimate alternative vision of theirpresent-and their future.It is beyond the scope of this article to explore the broader implica-tions of this casting of rights, democracy,and equality,but what we see inOperationDress-Uphas echoes in the texture of the developmentaliststate'sauthoritarian endencies, in Tanzaniaand elsewhere. These tendencieswerepromptedandlegitimated by a political imagination in which the state wasthe bringerof the neutral and universalgoodof "development,"anda "back-ward"populationwas disqualifiedfromhavingvalidopinions on what shapesuch "progress" hould take andthroughwhat means it ought to be attained(Schneider2004, 2006). Although the encounter of the state and the Maasaimay thus be seen as aparticular nstance of this broaderphenomenon, it hasto be counted asanextreme case. An importantreasonforthis, I suggest, werethe campaign's mmediate, andindeedvisceral,underpinnings."Premodern"Maasai dress spoke to campaignsupporterswith especially self-evidentiaryurgency:this is Bourdieu's"visceral intolerance ('sick-making')of the tastesof others" (1984:56)throughwhich taste makes its distinction. Simply put,no one could argue with the naturalized categories and judgments in thedevelopers' aesthetic economy of "premodern" looks, "bad" smell, and"hygiene."In this context, Miller's comment on George Orwell's imagina-tion serves as a useful gloss on some of the roots of democratic deficits,exemplified by Operation Dress-Up, in postindependenceTanzania:

-IpO

p i)

0

Im

zm

0ImV)


20/32

There will alwaysbe classes, he [Orwell] eels, as long as agroup nsists on living in a way that will objectivelyoffendeven those sympatheticto it. Classlessness,socialist equal-ity, must dependon eliminatingthe condition of this kindofsocialdisgust.Classes heldin placeby disgustwill be imme-diatelyrestoredby disgustunlesspeople ike the Brookers recivilized and cleanedup.(1997:249)

Tanzanian Visions of Modernity: Revolutionary, Yet Derivative?The visceral underpinningsand discursive castings of OperationDress-Up,andthe political claims they mobilized,are well illustratedin the campaign's(re)presentationn afull-pagefeature,"Focuson the Maasai,"printedin TheNationalist on 26 February1968.16Again, a reference to "the eradicationof ignorance, disease and poverty" frames the Maasai's "modernization"in a discourse of technocratic and universal goals, and again the strongiconographicdimension of the modernity that Tanzanian "modern"elitesenvisioned for Maasai is palpable,putting the paperin a position to let, asthe writer puts it, these pictures of "progress" andof course its absence)"speak for themselves."

The Masai must be transformed nto a revolutionaryman oftomorrow.Thisprocesshasbegunto takeshapeascanbe seenin ourpicturesunderwhich speakforthemselves. The Masaimust progressandprogressquickly.He must look like these[pictured]NationalServiceyoungMasaiMoran.Hemust takepart n the eradication f ignorance,disease andpoverty.'7

A final issue fordiscussion forcedby these representations s that in certaincritical respects Tanzanianconceptions of what modernity had to look likeappeared o echo certainbasic suppositions of a distinctly "Western" mageof modernity.Despite Nyerere'sruminations aboutcatching up to the West(quotedabove), Tanzanianmodernization, "socialist" and "self-reliant"asit aimed to be, was not an indiscriminate embrace and wholesale imitationof the experienceof the West.Yet,a connection clearlyexisted, if in compli-cated, conflicted, and oftentimes quite paradoxicalways. Whatwas-whatcould be-the shapeof an "alternative"Tanzanianmodernity in postcolonialtimes?The tight intertwining of talk about development andmodernitywithdiscourses of revolutionary socialism andpostcolonial nation-buildingsug-gests a radical rejection of "the West" as a guiding image. Indeed, such arejection seems to be reflected in how the criticisms of OperationDress-Up,invariablyportrayedas coming from abroad,that were noticeable in publicdiscourse were addressed.The press andpoliticians vigorouslydefendedthecampaign against "some aggressivereaction from people across the border

p-00

aDmzmUl)

zm


21/32

.-THE NATIONARAI.T-^ zsNO.0e-ss! E4 O- N. T H E M ZBRM. ON= " tt->

s .d plKp of m-Wt{lv_ ft hx x syKl efero . . . _eustArdF sl o~, .m, d, MM4i CO t.:Ffouftiti.h i#6 # ddeil I& IAW -f sl-ht'l O s-wWr s

%fy bPit* oeewpk C.U Ib fit itf rS Al- 1' 'Lt a i 1i*eu t.. wgwiolsF x;. e "L 'sj.t,ol_

All . i_ ftt Imm C4l f&l ilsf r1 lows~;c*t _:_

7dy'i.A dft .u -P * t f u t ptSds2&Uv4ibe: Wwk.r _ a w [ c.bor,o > < -o

rJwh itxr oF : 4;,rdtf we

r_fB _ v _ dr:el?da~~~~q.A" .eC?A. hh,> h-Esgltj?r .shXu.s. . s w i_*_HwhatAl2--iS-4,. 5My g :f flttEii11r_-_ _ hfS CpfUS wWrI ....

xterixMit A... p- _ .......wwkft-ts b _ -

- .- J ......-.....O. " 'd ^ d

dog.. U_-.br \ Wh -/ d . tom mom ;-. i-4.. -t% t,2 StEft _. _tS, i l 4 .Y_

Wotb\ Wi mr1pb .+-. to .A:lft,jF ksuOsZ7.ftl . h**d - $N., s. 1" IV wk th. sv

-o tIs iSdEa ". -- ti-

w.W 1 . aodt. Tka f|_. 49 -4Jv?sibs w .#,W Tgan.y -" , " -j * i / , _

eS1 I&l!_lbt_ Uh" , :. 4 --t. a b" Dant "2

6I b_.; .d*,Ilk . .

-vkzwMaM-. - 'soi 'olToghw

"Fcu onteM si

p;-I.00I

zC'

m-4

Im

n


22/32

and as far afield as the United States and Germany" (Nationalist, 17 Feb.1970),andit is worth paying attention to how such argumentswere framed.A good examplewas aprotractedcross-border xchangebetween two KenyanMPs, Oloitiptip and Keen,and voices in the Tanzanianpress. In responsetostatements in which he had criticized OperationDress-Up, Oloitiptip wastold by a "Pressman'sCommentary"in The Nationalist of 9 February hat"people,particularlythe Masai, must postpone taking him seriously untilsuch time that he abandonshis western suits and takes to going to Parlia-ment and his Ministerial [Office] in the Masai traditional undress he sopiously advocates for others." His colleague, Keen,threatened to take up thechallenge:on 10February,The Nationalist reported hatKeen hadstated thatTanzaniawas "terrorizinghe Masai,"and that he was contemplatingattend-ing the next meeting of the East African Legislative Assembly at Arushadaubedin red ochre. Two weeks later, the full-page "Focus on the Masai"(reproduced bove) included mug-shots of the two Kenyanoffendersin their"typical bourgeoisie attire":"Whatthe two gentlemen have told the world,which is clearly nothing but reactionaryand representativeof colonialistinterests, boils down to this: that the Masai must be left as he is seen in ourpicture[,]... namely in his traditionaldress, complete with ochre, a spear,a simi [knife]and without progress."Luckily, "[t]herevolutionarypeople ofTanzaniahave dismissed the vituperation of the two gentlemen as hogwash"(Nationalist, 26 Feb. 1968).From the vantage point of Tanzania's postcolonial leadership andelites, criticism from abroadwas deeply suspect, reflecting a series of con-cerns not unique to Tanzania. Even nonpreservationist anthropologicalinterest in "nonmodern"ways of life was often "regardedas ephemeral tothe overwhelmingneed to bring aboutchange,or as an intellectual justifica-tion of the forces of colonialist oppressors[,]whose concern it was to keepremote andruralareas n a backwardandimpoverished state" (Harries-Jones1972:101). Such thinking was prominent in Tanzanian public discoursearoundOperation Dress-Up, where criticisms were generallyrepresentedasan "imperialist conspiracyto turn the Masaiagainst their own government"(Nationalist, 15 Mar.1968).Surmises a letter to the editor: "Thecause of thelocal reactionariesand the foreign capitalists is one: to exploit the Africanmasses" (Nationalist, 19 Feb.1968). Often, such "reactionary" gendaswereperceived to be a direct continuation of an earlier, colonial production ofbackwardness-and the exploitationconnected to it. A statementby Sokoineillustrates this thinking well:

Those hypocriteswho pretendto love the Masai but only ifthey [the Masai]arepreservedo satisfytheirtouristic desirescan no longer fool us. ... They are the people who placedAfrica underslavery. They partitionedour continent underdifferent colonial masters. They are the same people whoburnt the Masai bomas [homesteads], and]shot cattle andhuman beings to move them from their best grazing ands

AI0

zm

Ia

m

m


23/32

for their own occupation.It is they who wanted to delayourindependencebecause they alleged other tribes were savageand uneducated. Nationalist,16Feb.1968)Nyerere, too, objectedto the "preservationof traditions," which, as Sokoinerightly suggests, colonial regimesliked to enlist as a justificationfor continu-ing oppressiverule. A churchman recollects about the President'sthinking:"He had no sympathy for the way the British had romanticized the Masai,and he said that the Masai would have to develop, like everybody else.'They're going to have to fall in line"' (quoted in Smith 1981:58). Opera-tion Dress-Up, then, arose amid these historically specific political urgen-cies. "Backwardness"had in the past justified inaction, oppression, andexploitation-and not least for this reason it had to be overcome.The upshot, however, of this emancipatory undertaking-manifestin Operation Dress-Up as well as in other "modernizing" campaignsof thepostcolonialTanzanianstate, villagization beingthe most notable of them-was a demand for "backward"Maasai,or,as in the case ofvillagization, peas-ants, to "fall in line" (seeSchneider2004).Development, modernization,andprogress-pursued to overcome a colonial past of exploitation, paternalism,and domination-thus justified new forms of paternalismand coercion. AsFerguson(19991andCooper (1997)have persuasively argued,current enthu-siasm for abandoningthe projectof development, modernity, and progresshas deeply problematic consequences (see Nyerere'sconcern with all too realmaterial global inequalities), but the problematicpolitics that this projecthas often given rise to must at the same time not be ignored.A close look at Tanzanians'engagementwith colonial oppressorsandtheir neocolonial successors reveals paradoxes,and not just on the level ofthe concrete results of "fighting past oppression."It is indeed hard to avoidthe conclusion that at the foundation of the "revolutionary"project of mod-ernization lay ways of assessing what was to be counted as "modern" andwhat as "backward" hat postcolonial Tanzanianelites sharedwith the colo-nialists and Westernimperialists they so vehemently positioned themselvesagainst (Keesing 1994; Rowlands 1995). Nothing, of course, would seemfurtherfrom such a convergencethan the position expressed,forinstance, inthe letter to the editorof TheNationalist by the chairmanof the UniversityStudents'AfricanRevolutionary Front:

[T]heneurotic,decadent mperialistswant the maintenanceofthe statusquo becauseby looking at the nakedMasai .. theyare able to assuagethe caustic attacksof neurosis resultingfrom the general decadence of the capitalist society. . . . Theimperialistswant the Masai ogonakedbecause hey fearhimin militaryuniform.(Nationalist,19 Feb.1968)

Nyerere, too, distanced himself from the imperialist-touristgaze: "Mwalimu... pointed out that ideas of leaving the Masairemain in their present stage

P-)-40

I

m

0DUl)

zm

m


24/32

of development were of foreignerswho wished to see the Masai look funnyso that they could take their pictures" (Nationalist, 12 Feb. 1968).And yet: it seems to be precisely this gaze's way of readingthe worldthat providedthe judgmentalbasis for OperationDress-Up. Both the tour-ist/imperialist, who was accused of wantingto preserveMaasai"traditions,"and modernizing Tanzanians,who sought to overcome these "traditions,"saw a "backward"people, rightfully subjectto (condescending)curiosity or,as the case may be, coercive (and condescending)modernizationcampaigns.Contrary to what their pronouncements might lead one to believe, theTanzanianmodernizers'engagementwith the figuresof the tourist and theWesternimperialist thus appears o be highly ambivalent.The President'sexhortations directedat the Maasaioffer an illustrationof this double move, positioning oneself starkly against the Western gazewhile sharing,or at least catering to, its presuppositions:

Youmustreject n total to beequatedwith wildanimals[,Jndyou must discard he habit of wearingred ochre.Wepreservewild animalsfor the tourist ndustry,but thatcannotbe withhumanbeings.You must progressanddevelopasyourfellowcompatriots n the rest of the country. Nationalist, 11 Sept.1968)The criticalpoint is that it was not, in the main, Maasaiwho were doingtheequatingwhereof the Presidentspoke.In their basic conceptions, were Tanzanianvisions of modernity, asrevealed in OperationDress-Up, "derivative" visions (Chatterjee1993)?Itis uncomfortable to draw such a conclusion, especially given that Tanza-nian visions of socialist modernity seemed so deeply imbued with the urgeto avoid, as Nyerere put it, "slavishly copying others" (Nationalist, 2 Jan.1969). Certainly there was a strongappreciationof such Fanoniandangers,'8an explicit exposition of which can be found in a presidential speech thatasked teachers to "Create a New Tanzanian":

Examining he effects of ourcolonization,PresidentNyereresaid thatTanzanians ndcolonisedpeoplegenerallyhad beentoo influencedby the traditionsand ways of life of the NorthEuropeans nd the NorthAmericans.The first thing the colo-niser did was to destroythe people'sself-confidencen orderto facilitate his domination. He deridedeverythingAfricanand extolledeverythingcolonial. The African's raditionshecondemned as uncivilised, and he held out the Europeantraditions as the best and the civilised norm. As a result[,]manyof ourpeople imitatedthe way of life of the coloniser,indiscriminately.They couldnot think forthemselves. Theythought and believed in the superiority of the coloniser'sculture.(Nationalist 17 Aug. 1968)

-I

0;oc

wmzm

m

m


25/32

Despite such protestations,however,examination of the aesthetic economythat underlay OperationDress-Upleads to the conclusion that the "alterna-tive modernity,"in whose creation Nyerere led the Tanzanianstate, neverseemed too far removed from key elementary conceptions of modern lifeand modern looks, based in a Western, colonial, and perhaps missionaryiconographyof modernity.'9This essential ambiguity is well illustrated by a veritable obsessionwith "nakedness," he Maasai'sandothers',reflectedin public discourse(onmissionary concerns with Africannakedness, see Allman 2004b; ComaroffandComaroff1997;Hay 2004).Here is the issue laid out in supportof Opera-tion Vijana'ssanctions against "indecent" dress in a letter to the editor ofTheNationalist (ll Oct. 1968):

It is quiteo.k. for an American atherto swim togetherhalf-naked with his fully growndaughteror a mother with herson. But it is a socialimpossibility or an African o do so....I amtoldin U.S.A. there are clubs of the NUDESwhose num-bersincludeeven Professors.What has led to this primitivepractice?

What is of course remarkableaboutthis way of castingthe issue is how whatappearto be conservative (Christian?Western?)values are invoked in thename of an essentialized "African"culture,all in a move to critiqueWesterncultural decadence.A meaningful examination of the genesis of the system of values thatunderlay such judgments cannot be accomplished here, but some of thebroaderpressuresandconstraintsthat made it perhapsan inescapablesystemin this time andplace may briefly be sketched. Centralhere is the theme ofrespectability and-to take a cue fromFerguson's 2002)provocative discus-sion-staking claims to "membership"and an equalstanding within a globalsocio-cultural order. In this context, the campaign can be read as a projectthat sought to secure membership as respectable equals, first, for Maasaiin the nation, and second, for the Tanzanian nation in its global family (onthe key role of clothing in staking out identities and political claims overthe course of the twentieth century, see Allman 2004a, 2004b; Hay 2004;Martin 1994).Apartfrom being desirable in and of itself, being part of the modernnation and being seen that way carried important implications. Sokoine,Tanzania's most prominent Maasai politician, for instance, was acutelyawareof the political implications of the image of backwardnessofhis people(see the long quote near the beginning of this section). Changingthis imagemust, if nothing else, have seemed an essential concession to make in theongoing struggleto secure Maasai land rights, resources, andrespect-all ofwhich they had so often been denied (Swantz1995:230;Waller 1993:244).Tochange such dynamics, something would have to give, and it was not likely

-I0a

I

z0

Ncb

-

HmK

m


26/32

going to be deeply rooted and global standards that accordedrespectabilityto some, and not to other, ways of self-(re)presentation."Traditional"Maasaidress must have seemed a small sacrifice to make. Ideally,the observerwithliberal inclinations might hope, it should be through changes in the world'sexoticizing vision of Maasai,and not througha coercedchangeof their outerappearance,that the Maasai's "normalization"would be achieved (Galaty2002:360);even if they sharedthe sentiment, the politician and other "mod-ernizing"members of the Maasaicommunity might not have felt that theyhad the luxury of hoping for such a differentworld (Ferguson1999, 2002).Respectabilityalso matteredto many participants n the public discus-sion over Operation Dress-Up for different,but related, reasons. Here, theaudiencewas not domestic, but international."Tanzania s a new nation andhas to establish herself beside olderstates," SecondVice-PresidentKawawadeclared n his 1965memorandum"The Promotionof CulturalActivities inTanzania"(quoted n Mbughuni 1974:17).Establishingoneself next to othernations meant to be respectablein the eyes of the world-whose standardsone shared, but which, even more certainly, one had to conform with andperformfor(onGhana,see Allman 2004b). Appropriatedemonstrationswereoften quite an explicit project.20With an international audience in mind,"modern" Tanzaniansexpressedan acute sense of embarrassment that theMaasai were "roaming he landscape" n a state of "semi-undress"-a situa-tion that was againandagain judgedto be "unbecomingto Tanzania'srapidsocial and economic progress."'2' s is discernible from many of the state-ments quoted above, this was a ubiquitous sentiment in the public debatearound Operation Dress-Up. Many interventions focused explicitly on thedamage done to Tanzania'sglobal respectability by the Maasai'simage. Asone letter to the editor imploredits readers:

Supposewe all comply with those who defend the Masaicustom and retreat ourselves to our formercustoms eachaccordingo his tribe[,]and thus ourPresidentputson ragsofbuttered eatherfromanimals as his forefathersdid[,J nd letour Ministersandthe governmentofficialsand .. everybodydo the same. Whata funny, disgustingand a sarcasticnationwill appear!Nationalist, 22 Feb.1968)

How, then, did Tanzanian elites' visions of modernity relate to colonialand "Western"conceptions? Although there were many proclamations ofa radical breakwith colonial ways, it was of course, as Iliffe has taught usabout Tanzanian history more generally, "more complicated than that"(1979:412).Tanzanian visions of modernity participated in a larger, global,iconographic order.Operation Dress-Up was shaped by such wider, alwaysbounded anddiscriminating, discourses-which, whether sharedor suffered,neither Maasai,nor other Tanzanians, could entirely escape.

-I0a0aNJ

Imz0m:D


27/32

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Four anonymous referees for this journal provided many helpful comments and suggestions.The article has also benefited greatly from the comments of David Edwards,Dorothy Hodg-son, and Andrew Ivaska.None, of course, bears any responsibilityfor the perspectives andconclusions here expressed.

NOTES1. Fabian 1983)andKoselleck1985)explore he dynamic, eleologicaldimensionof a distinc-

tively moderntemporality.See also Anderson(1991)and Mitchell 2000b);both drawonWalterBenjamin's otionof "empty ime;'a precondition orthe possibilityof speeding uptimeorhistory =development?);ee Galaty,who drawson Ricoeur's otionof"emplotment"to capturethe idea that images of Maasaiare situatedin largernarratives,which explain"how they [Maasai] xist in time, and what destinies for them are foretold and justified"(2002:351).

2. This ssuewasageneral avoritewithhigh-ranking oliticians. econdVice-President awawa,forinstance,admonished"allpeasants o discard ustomsthatforbade hemto eat meat andeggs"(Nationalist,5 Nov.1969)Thenextday, he paper ollowedupthe story:"it sobviousfor example that a people who stillhold that to eat eggs is'dangerous'orwomen have avery lowconsciousness.Certainlyhe organization f the modernprogressive tate callsfora relentless ight againstsuch beliefsno matterwho holds them and howeverdeep-rootedthey maybe'

3. Ivaska 1999, 2002) has previouslyanalyzedpresscoveragesurroundinghis and a relatedcampaign.

4. Onthe press,see Chachage 1997 )andTordoff ndMazrui1972).5. According o Talle 1999:116), he issue of Maasaidresswas again on the politicalagenda

"morerecently"the early 1990s?);Swantz(1995:230),however,notes that"contemporary"rules o weartrousersunderthe lubega have"in he courseof time been forgotten.' ndeed,Hodgson(2001:150) emarkshat"authentic"Maasaihavein recentyears become valued astouristattractions;ee also Bruner2001).6. Hodgson (2001), Mwansasu(1985), and Swebe (1984) providebiographicalsketches ofSokoine's ife.

7. "Wamasai utembeaUchi"23 Aug.1968) [Tanzania ationalArchives13/P4/9/l1l],mphasesinthe original.

8. "Wamasai utembeaUchi"26Nov.1968) [Tanzania ationalArchives13/P4/9/l1l].9. Experimentationwith having the Game Departmentmake game meat availableto the

Watingidanthe new village of YaedaChini,because they had inthe past"[t]ime ndagain... disappeared nto the bush to look forhoneyandgame meat" Nationalist, 7Aug.1971;see also 5July1971 and6 Sept.1971),echoesthe idea of sanitizingraditionshereexpressed.The searchfor game meat was objectionablebecause it was associated with a "savage"lifestyle,but it became legitimate ood provisioningwhen performedbythe GameDepart-ment.Similarly,n 1970,there was talkof canninggame meat as partof an UtingidaWildlifeUtilization roject:anninggame meatwasglossedascommendable"utilization,7whilesing

p'-

0

m

z0

H

n

-Im


28/32

it for local consumption was cast as objectionable"poaching"TanzaniaNationalArchives599/GD/21MLU33/1.

10. Parkipuny lso contributeda later piece to the DailyNewsof 29 Nov.-2 Dec. 1972. (Jacobs1980).See also Parkipuny1979).

11. Onthe constructionof such visceralperceptionsor reactions, ee Burke1996).In he 1920s,LuoChristianswho used soap inresponse to missionaries' rgingsabout cleanliness"stank"to their"traditionalist"eighbors Hay2004:73).

12. While presenting one's fellow Maasaicountrymenas a photo opportunity o tourists wasapparentlymorallyrepulsive o Tanzania'smodern elites in the 1960s and early1970s (seealso Shivji1973), his stance seems to havechangedoverthe years(Bruner 001; Hodgson2001:1 0).Therise o globalprominence fthe politicsof indigenousness ndcultural uthen-ticity today position"traditions"na ratherdifferentglobalaestheticeconomy."Traditional"Maasaidresstoday also marks ts weareras a much-sought-after ecurityguardin DaresSalaam.

13. CompareMitchell: modernizing pproaches .. must gather all the differenthistoriesofcolonialismnto a singularnarrative f the comingof modernity.Theycandeal with the non-modern onlyas the absence of modernity, nlyas forms hat lack he discipline,rationality,and abstraction fthe modernorderofthings-and therefore, incetheyaredefinedbywhattheyarenot,as essentially imilar o non-modern ormseverywhere lse" 2000a:xvi).

14. TheStandard's riticalreportingon the ban and violentenforcementby the YouthLeaguemadeitthe targetof harshcriticism, ndthe YouthLeaguestruckbackat the paper na pro-test that turnedviolent(Nationalist, Jan.1969).Thepaper's ritical eportingon OperationVijanawas repeatedlycited in criticisms hat lambasted t as an organof 'imperialism"nd"reactionarydeas"(e.g.,Nationalist 1 Oct. 1968 and 3 Jan.1969).15. E.g.,ettersto the editorof TheNationalist f 11, 14,and 29 October1968;but critical oicesalso found a place (e.g.,Nationalist, 1 Oct.1968).

16. Thefeaturepartlydrewon a photo opportunitypresentedbya receptionatthe State Houseof agroupoffortyyoungMaasaimen ledbySokoine.TheNationalist f 12February968 hadalreadyeatureda pictureof this occasionon itsfrontpage,andTheSundayNews ad coveredthe samestoryon 11 February 968.

17. In its exclusive ocus on Maasaimen, exemplifiedhere, development discourse n the late1960s carried n an also historically revalentgenderedness (Hodgson1999b,1999c,2001).

18. TheNationalistwas awash in contributions hat critically eflecton Tanzania's ostcolonialcondition nthislight;on 17January 969, orinstance, t offereda lengthy reviewof Fanon'sBlackSkin,WhiteMasks,ommenting hat the colonizedwas"elevated bove the jungle statusin proportion o his adoptionof the mothercountry's ultural tandards'Similar oncernsfound echoes in manystatementsby politicians, s in the President'snaugural ddressof10 December1962:"Ofall the crimesof colonialism here is none worse than the attemptto makeus believewe had no indigenouscultureof ourown;or that what we did have wasworthless-something ofwhichwe shouldbe ashamed, nsteadof asourceof pride"(Nyerere1966:186).

19. WhetherTanzania'srawingcloserto China n the late 1960s effected significant hanges inthese orientations s debatable:Nyerere'sntroduction f the "Chou-En-Laiuit" o Tanzania(see Smith 1981 13), orinstance,could be interpreted s signalingdifferent nfluences n amattercloseto the main ssues of the presentdiscussion; suggest, however, hat this was stilla comfortably ompatiblevariation n a very amiliarheme.

-I0;L

zI

z

r-

mzm

zmm


29/32

20. See, for instance, he invitationof "Ex-Colonialulers"o Tanzania'sen-year ndependencecelebrations-according to Nyerere-'because beforethey left they believedand actuallysaid hat we could notdevelopwithout hem.'Wewant themto come and see forthemselveswhether heirprophecyhas come trueornot"' Nationalist,1 June1971; or he followup,28Feb.1972).

21. "Even oday,'Hodgson remarks,"forcertain Tanzaniansand other Africans,the Maasai'represent mbarrassing eminders f a lifestylenow despisedanddenigrated"2001:3).

REFERENCES

Allman, ean.2004a.FashioningAfrica: owerand the Politics f Dress. nFashioningAfrica:Powerandthe Politics fDress.EditedbyJeanAllman.Bloomington:ndianaUniversity ress.2004b. "LetYourFashionBe in LinewithOurGhanaianCostume":Nation,Gender,and thePolitics of Cloth-ing in Nkrumah's Ghana. In Fashioning Africa:Power and the Politics of Dress.Editedby Jean Allman.Bloomington:ndianaUniversity ress.

Anderson,Benedict.1991.ImaginedCommunities.nd ed. London:Verso.Anderson, David M.,and V.Broch-Due, eds. 1999. ThePoorAreNot Us:Poverty&Pastoralism nEastAfrica.

Athens:OhioUniversity ress.Arhem, Kaj. 1984. The Maasai and the State-The Impact of RuralDevelopment Policies in a Pastoral

PeoplenTanzania. openhagen: nternationalWorkGroup orIndigenousAffairs.1985. Pastoral Man in the Garden of Eden: The Maasai of the Ngorongoro Conservation Area,Tanzania. ppsalaResearchReportsnCultural nthropology.Uppsala:Universityf Uppsala.Berger, Peter L. 1974. Pyramidsof Sacrifice:PoliticalEthics and Social Change. New York:Basic Books.

Bourdieu, Pierre.1984. Distinction:ASocialCritiqueoftheJudgmentof Taste.Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversity ress.

Burgess,Thomas.2002.Cinema,BellBottoms,and Miniskirts:trugglesoverYouthandCitizenshipnRevolutionary Zanzibar.InternationalJournalofAfrican HistoricalStudies 35(2-3):287-313.2005. TheYoungPioneersand the Ritualsof Citizenshipn Revolutionary anzibar.AfricaToday51(3):3-28.

Bruner,Edward. 001. The Maasaiand the LionKing:Authenticity,Nationalism, ndGlobalizationnAfricanTourism. American Ethnologist 28(4):881-908.Burke, Timothy. 1996. Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women: Commodification, Consumption, and Cleanliness inModern imbabwe.Durham:DukeUniversity ress.

Chachage,C. S.L.1997.Democracy nd the FourthEstate nTanzania. nPoliticalCulture ndPopularParticipationnTanzania. ares Salaam:University f Dares Salaam.

Chatterjee, artha. 993.TheNationand ItsFragments. rinceton,N.J.: rincetonUniversity ress.Comaroff, ean,and John L.Comaroff. 992. Home-MadeHegemony:Modernity,Domesticity,and

ColonialismnSouthAfrica. nAfrican ncounters ithDomesticity. ditedby K.T.Hansen.NewBrunswick: utgersUniversity ress.

,and John L.Comaroff. 1997 TheDialectics of Modernity on a South AfricanFrontier.Vol. 2. ofOf Revelation and Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Cooper,Frederick. 997.ModernizingBureaucrats, ackward fricans, ndthe DevelopmentConcept.

InInternational Development and the Social Sciences. Edited by Frederick Cooper and RandallPackard. erkeley:University f California ress.

~-t0;40

-1

I

00

m

Izm

mV)


30/32

Escobar, rturo. 995.Encountering evelopment: heMaking ndUnmakingf the ThirdWorld. rince-ton: PrincetonUniversity ress.

Fabian, ohannes.1983.Time ndthe Other:HowAnthropologyMakes tsObject.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity ress.

Fanon,Frantz. 967.Black kin,WhiteMasks.NewYork:GrovePress.Ferguson,James. 1994. TheAnti-PoliticsMachine:"Development,"epoliticization,nd BureaucraticPowerinLesotho.Minneapolis:University f MinnesotaPress.

1999.Expectationsf Modernity:Myths nd Meanings f UrbanLife n theZambianCopperbelt.Berkeley:University f California ress.

.2002. Of Mimicry ndMembership: fricans nd the "NewWorldSociety'CulturalAnthropol-ogy 17(4):551-569.

Finucane, amesR.1974.RuralDevelopmentndBureaucracynTanzania: heCaseofMwanzaRegion.Uppsala: candinavian nstituteof African tudies.

Galaty, ohn.2002. HowVisualFiguresSpeak:Narrative nventionsof "ThePastoralist"n EastAfrica.VisualAnthropology5:347-367.Harries-Jones,1972.Anthropological ethod ndRuralDevelopment:AaseStudynSudan.CanadianAssociationof African tudies.Paperpresentedat the AnnualMeeting nWaterloo,Ontario,25-26 February.

Hay,Margaretean.2004.Changes nClothingandStrugglesover IdentitynColonialWesternKenya.In FashioningAfrica: owerand the Politicsof Dress.Edited by Jean Allman.Bloomington:IndianaUniversity ress.

Hodgson, DorothyL.1999a.Images&Interventions: he Problemsof PastoralistDevelopment.InThePoorAreNot Us:Poverty&Pastoralismn EastAfrica.Editedby DavidM.AndersonandV.Broch-Due.Athens:Ohio University ress.1999b. Pastoralism,Patriarchy nd History:Changing GenderRelationsamong Maasai nTanganyika, 890-1940.Journal fAfricanHistory0:41-65.1999c. "OnceIntrepidWarriors": odernityand the Productionof Maasai Masculinities.Ethnology 8:121-150.2000.TakingStock:StateControl,Ethnic dentity ndPastoralistDevelopment nTanganyika,1948-1958.JoumalofAfricanHistory 1:55-78.

.2001. Once ntrepidWarriors:ender, thnicity,nd theCultural olitics f MaasaiDevelopment.Bloomington: ndianaUniversity ress.

Iliffe, ohn. 1979.AModernHistoryf Tanganyika. ambridge: ambridgeUniversity ress.Ivaska,AndrewM. 1999. 'Anti-Mini ilitantsMeetModernMisses". DebateoverDress n 1960sTanza-nia.Paperpresentedat the inaugural onferenceof theJournal orImperialndPost-ColonialStudies,MichiganStateUniversity, astLansing,February.2002. "Anti-MiniMilitantsMeet Modern Misses":UrbanStyle,Gender,and the Politicsof"NationalCulture'in1960s DaresSalaam,Tanzania. ender&History 4(3):584-607.

.2003. Cosmopolitanismnd the Production f"Culture":tyle, he City, nd the State nDar sSalaam,1930-2000. Ph.D.diss.,University f Michigan.

Jacobs,A. H.1980. PastoralDevelopment nTanzanianMaasailand. uralAfricana:1-14.Keesing,Roger.1994.Colonial ndCounter-Colonial iscourse nMelanesia.CritiquefAnthropology14(1 :4158.Knowles,J. N.,and D. P Collett. 1989. Natureas Myth,Symbol and Action:Notes towards a His-

toricalUnderstanding f DevelopmentandConservationnKenyanMaasailand. frica 9(4):433-461.

-I0)4

0

z

Imz0mAX


31/32

Koselleck,Reinhart.1985. FuturesPast:On the Semanticsof HistoricalTime.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.

Martin, .1994."TheStatusof Clothes nColonialBrazzavillel'ournal fAfricanHistory 5(3):1-26.Mbughuni,L.A.1974. TheCulturalPolicyf theUnitedRepublicofanzania. tudiesandDocumentson

Cultural olicies.Paris:UNESCOress.Miller,Williaman. 1997.TheAnatomyfDisgust.Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversity ress.Mitchell,Timothy. 2000a. Introduction.In Questionsof Modernity.Edited by TimothyMitchell.

Minneapolis:University f MinnesotaPress.2000b. The Stage of Modernity. n Questionsof Modernity.Editedby TimothyMitchell.Minneapolis:University f MinnesotaPress.

Mwansasu,B.U.1985.EdwardMoringe okoine,1938-1984.Dares Salaam:TanzaniaNewsAgency.Ndagala,D.K.1974.SocialandEconomicChangeamongthe PastoralWakwavind ItsImpact n Rural

Development.M.A.hesis,University f Dares Salaam.1992.Territory,astoralists,ndLivestock:esource ontrolmongtheKisongoMaasai.UppsalaStudies nCulturalAnthropology, 8.Uppsala:University f Uppsala.Nyerere, uliusK.1966.FreedomandUnity:ASelection romWritings ndSpeeches 1952-65. Oxford:OxfordUniversity ress.

Parkipuny,M.L.1979.Some CrucialAspectsof the MaasaiPredicament.nAfricanocialismnPractice:TheTanzanian xperience. ditedbyAndrewCoulson.Nottingham: pokesmanBooks.

Rahnema,Majid, nd VictoriaBawtree, ds. 1997.ThePost-Developmenteader.London:ZedBooks.Ranger,Terence.983.TheInvention fTraditionnColonialAfrica. nThe nvention f Tradition. dited

by EricHobsbawmand TerenceRanger.Cambridge: ambridgeUniversity ress.Rigby,Peter.1969a.Cattle ndKinshipmong theGogo.Ithaca:CornellUniversity ress.

1969b.Pastoralism nd Prejudice:deologyand RuralDevelopment n EastAfrica. nSocietyandSocialChange n EastemAfrica.Editedby R.J.Apthorpe.NkangaEditions, . Kampala:Makererenstituteof SocialResearch.

Rowlands,M.1995. InconsistentTemporalitiesna Nation-Space.nWorlds part:ModemityThroughthePrism ftheLocal.EditedbyDanielMiller.New York: outledge.

Sachs,Wolfgang, d. 1992.TheDevelopmentDictionary. ondon:Zed Books.Saibull,S.A.1974.SocialChangeamongthe PastoralMaasai nTanzania n Response o the Ujamaa

Vijijini olicyof Tanu ince the ArushaDeclaration f 1967. M.A.hesis,University f DaresSalaam.

Schneider,Leander. 003.Developmentalism ndItsFailings:WhyRuralDevelopmentWentWrong n1960s and 1970sTanzania. h.D.diss.,ColumbiaUniversity.2004. Freedomand Unfreedom n RuralDevelopment:JuliusNyerere,UjamaaVijijini,ndVillagization. anadian ournal fAfrican tudies38(2):344-392.2006. Colonial Legacies and PostcolonialAuthoritarianismn Tanzania:Connects andDisconnects.African tudiesReview 9(1):93-118.

Shivji, ssa,ed. 1973. TourismndSocialistDevelopment.Dares Salaam:Tanzania ublishingHouse.Smith,WilliamE.1981.Nyereref Tanzania.Harare: imbabwePublishingHouse.Spear,Thomas,and RichardWaller,ds. 1993.BeingMaasai:Ethnicity&IdentitynEastAfrica.Athens:

OhioUniversity ress.Swantz,M.S.1995.Conflictsbetween the Systemsof Knowledgeof the Pastoralists ndDevelopmen-talists:TheCaseof ParakuyoMaasai nBagamoyoDistrict. n TheTanzanianeasantry:urtherStudies.EditedbyPeterForster nd SamMaghimbi.Avebury:Aldershott.

Swebe,B.S.1984.EdwardMoringe okoine.Dares Salaam:TanzaniaBooksellers.

-I0

I

)-k

z0roH

Im


32/32

Talle, A. 1999. Pastoralists at the Border: Maasai Poverty & the Development Discourse in Tanzania.In The Poor Are Not Us: Poverty & Pastoralism in East Africa. Edited by D. M. Anderson andV. Broch-Due. Athens: Ohio University Press.

Tidrick, K. 1980. The Masai and Their Masters: A Psychological Study of District Administration. AfricanStudies Review 23(1): 15-31.

Tordoff, W., and A. Mazrui. 1972. The Left and the Super-Left in Tanzania. Journal of Modem AfricanStudies 10(3): 427-445.Tranberg Hansen, Karen. 2004. Dressing Dangerously: Miniskirts, Gender Relations, and Sexuality in

Zambia. InFashioningAfrica:PowerandthePoliticsofDress. Edited byJean Allman. Blooming-ton: Indiana University Press.

Waller, Richard. 1993. Acceptees &Aliens: KikuyuSettlement in Maasailand. InBeing Maasai: Ethnicity&Identity in East Africa. Edited by Thomas Spear and Richard Waller. Athens: Ohio UniversityPress.

I-'.P-i0

0