Dont ask where Im from ask where Im a local Taiye Selasi

Last year, I went on my first book tour.

In 13 months, I flew to 14 countries

and gave some hundred talks.

Every talk in every country

began with an introduction,

and every introduction began,
alas, with a lie:

“Taiye Selasi comes
from Ghana and Nigeria,”

or “Taiye Selasi comes
from England and the States.”

Whenever I heard this opening sentence,

no matter the country that concluded it –

England, America, Ghana, Nigeria –

I thought, “But that’s not true.”

Yes, I was born in England
and grew up in the United States.

My mum, born in England,
and raised in Nigeria,

currently lives in Ghana.

My father was born in Gold Coast,
a British colony,

raised in Ghana,

and has lived for over 30 years
in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

For this reason, my introducers
also called me “multinational.”

“But Nike is multinational,” I thought,

“I’m a human being.”

Then, one fine day, mid-tour,

I went to Louisiana, a museum in Denmark

where I shared the stage
with the writer Colum McCann.

We were discussing the role
of locality in writing,

when suddenly it hit me.

I’m not multinational.

I’m not a national at all.

How could I come from a nation?

How can a human being come from a concept?

It’s a question that had been bothering me
for going on two decades.

From newspapers, textbooks, conversations,

I had learned to speak of countries

as if they were eternal, singular,
naturally occurring things,

but I wondered:

to say that I came from a country

suggested that the country
was an absolute,

some fixed point in place in time,

a constant thing, but was it?

In my lifetime, countries
had disappeared – Czechoslovakia;

appeared – Timor-Leste;
failed – Somalia.

My parents came from countries
that didn’t exist when they were born.

To me, a country – this thing that could
be born, die, expand, contract –

hardly seemed the basis
for understanding a human being.

And so it came as a huge relief
to discover the sovereign state.

What we call countries are actually

various expressions
of sovereign statehood,

an idea that came into fashion
only 400 years ago.

When I learned this, beginning my
masters degree in international relations,

I felt a sort of surge of relief.

It was as I had suspected.

History was real, cultures were real,

but countries were invented.

For the next 10 years, I sought
to re- or un-define myself,

my world, my work, my experience,

beyond the logic of the state.

In 2005, I wrote an essay,
“What is an Afropolitan,”

sketching out an identity
that privileged culture over country.

It was thrilling how many people
could relate to my experience,

and instructional how many others
didn’t buy my sense of self.

“How can Selasi claim to come from Ghana,”
one such critic asked,

“when she’s never known the indignities

of traveling abroad
on a Ghanian passport?”

Now, if I’m honest,

I knew just what she meant.

I’ve got a friend named Layla
who was born and raised in Ghana.

Her parents are third-generation
Ghanians of Lebanese descent.

Layla, who speaks fluent Twi,
knows Accra like the back of her hand,

but when we first met years ago,
I thought, “She’s not from Ghana.”

In my mind, she came from Lebanon,

despite the patent fact
that all her formative experience

took place in suburban Accra.

I, like my critics,

was imagining some Ghana
where all Ghanaians had brown skin

or none held U.K. passports.

I’d fallen into the limiting trap

that the language of coming
from countries sets –

the privileging of a fiction,
the singular country,

over reality: human experience.

Speaking with Colum McCann that day,
the penny finally dropped.

“All experience is local,” he said.

“All identity is experience,” I thought.

“I’m not a national,”
I proclaimed onstage.

“I’m a local. I’m multi-local.”

See, “Taiye Selasi comes
from the United States,” isn’t the truth.

I have no relationship
with the United States,

all 50 of them, not really.

My relationship is with Brookline,
the town where I grew up;

with New York City, where I started work;

with Lawrenceville,
where I spend Thanksgiving.

What makes America home for me
is not my passport or accent,

but these very particular experiences

and the places they occur.

Despite my pride in Ewe culture,

the Black Stars,
and my love of Ghanaian food,

I’ve never had a relationship
with the Republic of Ghana, writ large.

My relationship is with Accra,
where my mother lives,

where I go each year,

with the little garden in Dzorwulu
where my father and I talk for hours.

These are the places
that shape my experience.

My experience is where I’m from.

What if we asked, instead
of “Where are you from?” –

“Where are you a local?”

This would tell us so much more
about who and how similar we are.

Tell me you’re from France,
and I see what, a set of clichés?

Adichie’s dangerous single story,
the myth of the nation of France?

Tell me you’re a local of Fez and Paris,

better yet, Goutte d’Or, and I see
a set of experiences.

Our experience is where we’re from.

So, where are you a local?

I propose a three-step test.

I call these the three “R’s”:
rituals, relationships, restrictions.

First, think of your daily rituals,
whatever they may be:

making your coffee, driving to work,

harvesting your crops,
saying your prayers.

What kind of rituals are these?

Where do they occur?

In what city or cities in the world
do shopkeepers know your face?

As a child, I carried out fairly standard
suburban rituals in Boston,

with adjustments made for the rituals
my mother brought from London and Lagos.

We took off our shoes in the house,

we were unfailingly
polite with our elders,

we ate slow-cooked, spicy food.

In snowy North America,
ours were rituals of the global South.

The first time I went to Delhi
or to southern parts of Italy,

I was shocked by how at home I felt.

The rituals were familiar.

“R” number one, rituals.

Now, think of your relationships,
of the people who shape your days.

To whom do you speak at least once a week,

be it face to face or on FaceTime?

Be reasonable in your assessment;

I’m not talking about
your Facebook friends.

I’m speaking of the people who shape
your weekly emotional experience.

My mother in Accra,
my twin sister in Boston,

my best friends in New York:

these relationships are home for me.

“R” number two, relationships.

We’re local where we carry out
our rituals and relationships,

but how we experience our locality

depends in part on our restrictions.

By restrictions, I mean,
where are you able to live?

What passport do you hold?

Are you restricted by, say, racism,
from feeling fully at home where you live?

By civil war, dysfunctional governance,
economic inflation,

from living in the locality
where you had your rituals as a child?

This is the least sexy of the R’s,

less lyric than rituals and relationships,

but the question takes us past
“Where are you now?”

to “Why aren’t you there, and why?”

Rituals, relationships, restrictions.

Take a piece of paper

and put those three words
on top of three columns,

then try to fill those columns
as honestly as you can.

A very different picture
of your life in local context,

of your identity as a set of experiences,

may emerge.

So let’s try it.

I have a friend named Olu.

He’s 35 years old.

His parents, born in Nigeria,
came to Germany on scholarships.

Olu was born in Nuremberg
and lived there until age 10.

When his family moved to Lagos,
he studied in London,

then came to Berlin.

He loves going to Nigeria –

the weather, the food, the friends –

but hates the political corruption there.

Where is Olu from?

I have another friend named Udo.

He’s also 35 years old.

Udo was born in Córdoba,
in northwest Argentina,

where his grandparents migrated
from Germany, what is now Poland,

after the war.

Udo studied in Buenos Aires,
and nine years ago came to Berlin.

He loves going to Argentina –
the weather, the food, the friends –

but hates the economic corruption there.

Where is Udo from?

With his blonde hair and blue eyes,
Udo could pass for German,

but holds an Argentinian passport,
so needs a visa to live in Berlin.

That Udo is from Argentina
has largely to do with history.

That he’s a local
of Buenos Aires and Berlin,

that has to do with life.

Olu, who looks Nigerian,
needs a visa to visit Nigeria.

He speaks Yoruba with an English accent,

and English with a German one.

To claim that he’s
“not really Nigerian,” though,

denies his experience in Lagos,

the rituals he practiced growing up,

his relationship with family and friends.

Meanwhile, though Lagos
is undoubtedly one of his homes,

Olu always feels restricted there,

not least by the fact that he’s gay.

Both he and Udo are restricted
by the political conditions

of their parents' countries,

from living where some of their
most meaningful rituals

and relationships occur.

To say Olu is from Nigeria
and Udo is from Argentina

distracts from their common experience.

Their rituals, their relationships,
and their restrictions are the same.

Of course, when we ask,
“Where are you from?”

we’re using a kind of shorthand.

It’s quicker to say “Nigeria”
than “Lagos and Berlin,”

and as with Google Maps,
we can always zoom in closer,

from country to city to neighborhood.

But that’s not quite the point.

The difference between
“Where are you from?”

and “Where are you a local?”

isn’t the specificity of the answer;

it’s the intention of the question.

Replacing the language of nationality
with the language of locality asks us

to shift our focus
to where real life occurs.

Even that most glorious expression
of countryhood, the World Cup,

gives us national teams comprised
mostly of multilocal players.

As a unit of measurement
for human experience,

the country doesn’t quite work.

That’s why Olu says, “I’m German,
but my parents come from Nigeria.”

The “but” in that sentence
belies the inflexibility of the units,

one fixed and fictional entity
bumping up against another.

“I’m a local of Lagos and Berlin,”
suggests overlapping experiences,

layers that merge together,
that can’t be denied or removed.

You can take away my passport,

but you can’t take away my experience.

That I carry within me.

Where I’m from comes wherever I go.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting
that we do away with countries.

There’s much to be said
for national history,

more for the sovereign state.

Culture exists in community,
and community exists in context.

Geography, tradition, collective memory:
these things are important.

What I’m questioning is primacy.

All of those introductions on tour
began with reference to nation,

as if knowing what country I came
from would tell my audience who I was.

What are we really seeking, though,
when we ask where someone comes from?

And what are we really seeing
when we hear an answer?

Here’s one possibility:

basically, countries represent power.

“Where are you from?”
Mexico. Poland. Bangladesh. Less power.

America. Germany. Japan. More power.

China. Russia. Ambiguous.

(Laughter)

It’s possible that without realizing it,
we’re playing a power game,

especially in the context
of multi-ethnic countries.

As any recent immigrant knows,

the question “Where are you from?”
or “Where are you really from?”

is often code for “Why are you here?”

Then we have the scholar
William Deresiewicz’s writing

of elite American colleges.

“Students think that
their environment is diverse

if one comes from Missouri
and another from Pakistan –

never mind that all of their parents
are doctors or bankers.”

I’m with him.

To call one student American,
another Pakistani,

then triumphantly claim
student body diversity

ignores the fact that these students
are locals of the same milieu.

The same holds true on the other end
of the economic spectrum.

A Mexican gardener in Los Angeles
and a Nepali housekeeper in Delhi

have more in common
in terms of rituals and restrictions

than nationality implies.

Perhaps my biggest problem
with coming from countries

is the myth of going back to them.

I’m often asked if I plan
to “go back” to Ghana.

I go to Accra every year,
but I can’t “go back” to Ghana.

It’s not because I wasn’t born there.

My father can’t go back, either.

The country in which he was born,

that country no longer exists.

We can never go back to a place
and find it exactly where we left it.

Something, somewhere
will always have changed,

most of all, ourselves.

People.

Finally, what we’re talking
about is human experience,

this notoriously and gloriously
disorderly affair.

In creative writing,
locality bespeaks humanity.

The more we know
about where a story is set,

the more local color and texture,

the more human
the characters start to feel,

the more relatable, not less.

The myth of national identity
and the vocabulary of coming from

confuses us into placing ourselves
into mutually exclusive categories.

In fact, all of us are multi –
multi-local, multi-layered.

To begin our conversations
with an acknowledgement of this complexity

brings us closer together, I think,
not further apart.

So the next time that I’m introduced,

I’d love to hear the truth:

“Taiye Selasi is a human being,
like everybody here.

She isn’t a citizen of the world,
but a citizen of worlds.

She is a local of New York,
Rome and Accra.”

Thank you.

(Applause)

去年,我开始了我的第一次读书之旅。

在 13 个月的时间里,我飞到了 14 个国家

,做了几百次演讲。

每个国家的每一次谈话都

介绍开始,每一次介绍都
以一个谎言开始,唉,

“Taiye Selasi
来自加纳和尼日利亚”

或“Taiye Selasi
来自英国和美国”。

每当我听到这个开场白时,

无论是哪个国家——

英国、美国、加纳、尼日利亚——

我都在想,“但这不是真的。”

是的,我出生在英国
,在美国长大。

我的妈妈出生在英格兰
,在尼日利亚长大,

目前住在加纳。

我父亲出生在英国殖民地黄金海岸,

在加纳长大

,在沙特阿拉伯王国生活了 30 多年

为此,我的介绍人
也称我为“跨国公司”。

“但耐克是跨国公司,”我想,

“我是一个人。”

然后,在巡演中途的一个晴天,

我去了丹麦的路易斯安那州博物馆,在

那里我
与作家 Colum McCann 同台演出。

我们正在讨论
地方性在写作中的作用

,突然我想到了。

我不是跨国公司。

我根本不是国人。

我怎么可能来自一个民族?

人怎么可能来自一个概念?

这是一个困扰了
我二十年的问题。

从报纸、教科书、谈话中,

我学会了把国家说

成是永恒的、奇异的、
自然发生的东西,

但我想知道

:说我来自一个国家

意味着这个国家
是一个绝对的

、固定的点。 时间地点,

一个不变的东西,但它是吗?

在我有生之年,
国家消失了——捷克斯洛伐克;

出现了——东帝汶;
失败——索马里。

我的父母来自
他们出生时不存在的国家。

对我来说,一个国家——这个
可以诞生、死亡、扩张、收缩的东西——

几乎不是
理解人类的基础。

因此
,发现主权国家是一种巨大的解脱。

我们所说的国家实际上

是主权国家地位的各种表达方式,

这种想法
仅在 400 年前才流行起来。

当我了解到这一点,开始
攻读国际关系硕士学位时,

我感到一种如释重负的感觉。

正如我所怀疑的那样。

历史是真实的,文化是真实的,

但国家是发明出来的。

在接下来的 10 年里,我
试图超越国家的逻辑,重新定义或取消定义我自己、

我的世界、我的工作、我的经历

2005 年,我写了
一篇文章,“什么是非洲大都会”,

勾勒出一种
将文化置于国家之上的身份。

令人兴奋的是,有多少人
能与我的经历联系起来,

有多少人
不相信我的自我意识。

“塞拉西怎么能声称自己来自加纳,”
一位这样的评论家问道,

“当她从不知道

持加纳护照出国旅行的耻辱时?”

现在,老实说,

我知道她的意思。

我有一个朋友叫 Layla
,她在加纳出生长大。

她的父母
是黎巴嫩血统的第三代加尼亚人。

Layla 说一口流利的 Twi,
对阿克拉非常了解,

但几年前我们第一次见面时,
我想,“她不是来自加纳。”

在我看来,她来自黎巴嫩,

尽管她所有的成长经历

都发生在阿克拉郊区。

我和我的批评者一样

,想象在某个加纳
,所有加纳人的皮肤都是棕色的,

或者没有人持有英国护照。

我掉进

了来自国家的语言所
设置的限制性陷阱

——一个虚构
的国家,一个奇异的国家,

凌驾于现实之上:人类经验。

那天与 Colum McCann 交谈时
,一分钱终于下降了。

“所有的经验都是本地的,”他说。

“所有的身份都是经验,”我想。

“我不是国民,”
我在台上宣称。

“我是本地人。我是多本地人。”

看,“泰耶·塞拉西
来自美国”不是真的。


和美国没有关系,

全部 50 个,不是真的。

我与布鲁克林的关系
是我长大的小镇。

在我开始工作的纽约市;

和劳伦斯维尔
一起过感恩节。

让美国成为我的家
的不是我的护照或口音,

而是这些非常特殊的经历

和它们发生的地方。

尽管我对母羊文化

、黑星
和我对加纳食物的热爱感到自豪,但

我从来没有
与加纳共和国建立过关系。

我与阿克拉的关系
是我母亲居住的

地方,我每年去的地方,

还有我父亲和我在 Dzorwulu 的小花园,在
那里谈了几个小时。

这些
地方塑造了我的经历。

我的经验就是我来自哪里。

如果我们问,而
不是“你来自哪里?”怎么办? ——

“你是哪里的本地人?”

这将告诉我们更多
关于我们是谁以及我们有多相似。

告诉我你来自法国
,我明白了什么,一套陈词滥调?

阿迪奇的危险单人故事,
法兰西民族的神话?

告诉我你是非斯和巴黎的本地人,

更好的是,Goutte d’Or,我看到
了一系列经历。

我们的经验就是我们来自哪里。

那么,你是哪里的本地人?

我建议进行三步测试。

我称之为三个“R”:
仪式、关系、限制。

首先,想想你的日常仪式,
不管它们是什么

:煮咖啡、开车上班、

收割庄稼、
祈祷。

这些是什么仪式?

它们发生在哪里?

世界上哪些城市的
店主认识你的脸?

小时候,我在波士顿进行了相当标准的
郊区仪式,

并针对
我母亲从伦敦和拉各斯带来的仪式进行了调整。

我们在屋里

脱鞋,对长辈始终彬彬有礼

,吃的是慢煮辣的食物。

在白雪皑皑的北美,
我们的仪式是全球南方的仪式。

我第一次去德里
或意大利南部时,

我对自己在家的感觉感到震惊。

仪式很熟悉。

“R”第一,仪式。

现在,想想你的人际关系,想想
那些塑造你生活的人。

您每周至少与谁交谈一次

,无论是面对面还是在 FaceTime 上?

合理评估;

我不是在谈论
你的 Facebook 朋友。

我说的是塑造
你每周情感体验的人。

我在阿克拉的母亲,
我在波士顿的双胞胎姐姐,

我在纽约最好的朋友:

这些关系是我的家。

“R”第二个,关系。

我们在当地
进行仪式和建立关系,

但我们如何体验我们的地方性

部分取决于我们的限制。

所谓限制,我的意思是,
你能住在哪里?

你持有什么护照?

你是否受到种族主义的限制,
无法在你所居住的地方感到宾至如归?

由于内战、治理失灵、
经济通货膨胀,

来自于
你小时候生活在你举行仪式的地方?

这是 R 中最不性感的,

不像仪式和关系那样抒情,

但问题让我们超越了
“你现在在哪里?”

“你为什么不在那里,为什么?”

仪式、关系、限制。

拿一张纸

,把这三个词
放在三列的顶部,

然后尽可能诚实地填满这些列

一个非常不同的
关于你在当地环境中的生活画面

,你作为一组经历的身份,

可能会出现。

所以让我们试试吧。

我有一个朋友叫奥卢。

他今年 35 岁。

他的父母生于尼日利亚,
靠奖学金来到德国。

Olu 出生在纽伦堡
,一直住到 10 岁。

当他的家人搬到拉各斯,
他在伦敦学习,

然后来到柏林。

他喜欢去尼日利亚——那里

的天气、食物、朋友——

但讨厌那里的政治腐败。

奥卢来自哪里?

我还有一个朋友叫 Udo。

他也是35岁。

乌多出生
在阿根廷西北部的科尔多瓦

,他的祖父母在战后
从德国(现在的波兰)移民到那里

乌多在布宜诺斯艾利斯学习
,九年前来到柏林。

他喜欢去阿根廷——那里
的天气、食物、朋友——

但讨厌那里的经济腐败。

乌多来自哪里?

乌多有着金色的头发和蓝色的眼睛,
可以通过德国人的身份,

但持有阿根廷护照,
因此需要签证才能住在柏林。

Udo 来自阿根廷
很大程度上与历史有关。


是布宜诺斯艾利斯和柏林的本地人,

这与生活息息相关。

看起来像尼日利亚人的奥卢
需要签证才能访问尼日利亚。

他说约鲁巴语,带有英语口音

,英语带有德语口音。

然而,声称他
“不是真正的尼日利亚人”,

否认了他在拉各斯的经历,他在

成长过程中所练习的仪式,

他与家人和朋友的关系。

与此同时,尽管拉各斯
无疑是他的家之一,但

奥卢总是觉得那里受到限制

,尤其是因为他是同性恋这一事实。

他和乌多都受到父母所在国家
的政治条件

的限制,

无法生活在他们一些
最有意义的仪式

和关系发生的地方。

说 Olu 来自尼日利亚
而 Udo 来自阿根廷,这会

分散他们的共同经历。

他们的仪式、他们的关系
和他们的限制是一样的。

当然,当我们问,
“你来自哪里?”

我们正在使用一种速记。

说“尼日利亚”比说
“拉各斯和柏林”要快,

而且与谷歌地图一样,
我们总是可以拉近

从国家到城市再到社区的距离。

但这还不是重点。

“你来自哪里?”和“你来自哪里?”的区别

和“你是哪里人?”

不是答案的具体性;

这是问题的意图。

用地方语言代替民族
语言要求

我们将注意力转移
到现实生活发生的地方。

即使是最光荣的国家
表现形式,世界杯,也

给了我们
主要由多国球员组成的国家队。

作为人类经验的衡量单位

这个国家并不完全有效。

这就是为什么 Olu 说:“我是德国人,
但我的父母来自尼日利亚。”

那句话中的“但是”
掩盖了单位的僵化,

一个固定的和虚构的
实体与另一个相撞。

“我是拉各斯和柏林的本地人,”
暗示重叠的体验,

融合在一起的层次
,不能否认或删除。

你可以拿走我的护照,

但你不能拿走我的经验。

我携带在我体内。

我来自哪里,我去哪里。

需要明确的是,我并不是
建议我们取消国家。

对于国家历史,有很多话要说,

对于主权国家来说更多。

文化存在于社区中
,社区存在于语境中。

地理、传统、集体记忆:
这些都很重要。

我要问的是首要问题。

巡演中的所有介绍都是从
国家开始的,

好像知道我来自哪个国家
就可以告诉我的听众我是谁。

然而,
当我们问某人来自哪里时,我们真正在寻求什么?

当我们听到答案时,我们真正看到
了什么?

这是一种可能性:

基本上,国家代表权力。

“你从哪来?”
墨西哥。 波兰。 孟加拉国。 功率较小。

美国。 德国。 日本。 更多的权力。

中国。 俄罗斯。 模糊的。

(笑声)

有可能在不知不觉中,
我们正在玩一场权力游戏,

尤其是在多民族国家的背景
下。

任何最近的移民都知道,

“你来自哪里?”这个问题。
或“你真的来自哪里?”

通常是“你为什么在这里?”的代码。

然后是学者
威廉·德雷谢维奇(William Deresiewicz)

关于美国精英大学的著作。

“如果一个来自密苏里州和另一个来自巴基斯坦,学生们认为
他们的环境是多种多样的

——

别介意他们所有的父母
都是医生或银行家。”

我和他在一起。

称一个学生为美国人,
另一个为巴基斯坦学生,

然后得意洋洋地声称
学生群体的多样性

忽略了这些学生
是同一环境的当地人这一事实。 在经济光谱

的另一端也是如此

洛杉矶的墨西哥园丁
和德里的尼泊尔管家在

仪式和限制方面的共同点

比国籍所暗示的要多。

也许我
来自国家的最大问题

是回到他们的神话。

经常有人问我是否
打算“回到”加纳。

我每年都去阿克拉,
但我不能“回到”加纳。

这不是因为我不是在那里出生的。

我爸也回不去了。

他出生的

那个国家,那个国家已经不存在了。

我们永远无法回到一个地方,
并在我们离开它的地方找到它。

某事,某处
总是会改变,

最重要的是,我们自己。

人们。

最后,我们正在谈论的
是人类经验,

这是一个臭名昭著且光荣的
混乱事件。

在创意写作中,
地方性代表了人性。

我们
对故事的背景了解

得越多,当地的色彩和

纹理就越多
,角色开始感受到的人性

越多,就越有关联性,而不是更少。

民族认同的神话
和来自的词汇

使我们感到困惑,将自己
置于相互排斥的类别中。

事实上,我们所有人都是多的——
多局部的、多层次的。 我认为,

以承认这种复杂性开始我们的对话,

使我们更加紧密地联系在一起,
而不是进一步分开。

所以下次我被介绍时,

我很想听到真相:

“泰耶·塞拉西是一个人,
就像这里的每个人一样。

她不是世界公民,
而是世界公民。

她是一个 纽约、
罗马和阿克拉的当地人。”

谢谢你。

(掌声)