Few things are the subject of fiercer fights than food. In our new series “Food Wars,” we’re going to the front lines of the dishes and debates that matter most. This week, writer Saidat Giwa-Osagie explains why this pan-African dish inspires fierce debate, accusations, and the occasional Hillary Clinton meme.
Here is a recipe ripe for dissent. Take a popular one-pot dish, add millions of West-Africans into the mix, and watch as a heated contest simmers over one question: Which country’s dish reigns supreme?
Jollof rice, darling of West Africa, is the crowd-pleaser that just can’t please everyone. A tantalizing fusion of blended tomatoes, onions, scotch bonnet peppers and rice are the basic building blocks. However, it’s not just its savory spiciness that sets it apart. Jollof’s duality as an emblem of both national and pan-African pride makes it a source of never-ending debate. Though I am partial to several versions of the dish, I am just one voice out of 290 million West Africans and counting.
[quote position="full" is_quote="false"]When Jamie Oliver made the unheard-of additions of lemon and parsley, the controversy was quickly dubbed ‘Jollofgate.’[/quote]
A sprawling West-African diaspora means the debate has gone global. If Helen of Troy caused a thousand ships to set sail with her beauty, then Jollof rice is her culinary equivalent. Inspiring thousands of tweets to bid battle in the name of #jollofwars, the favorite rice dish has many willing defenders. The hashtag is the digital manifestation of the playful rivalry between different West-African countries, and the fight rarely lets up.
Jollof’s derivative origins contribute to the debate of which version is the best. Each country’s take represents a unique slant on the dish. Jollof originates from the Wolof people of Senegal and Gambia, which was an ancient empire spanning the 14th to 19th century. However, historian James McCann notes the far-reaching influence of the dish may be due to a form of “cultural dispersion.” Through this form of dispersion, it is thought that the recipe became popular in different regions and women within those areas used locally available ingredients to put their own spin on the dish.
As the recipe travelled through people to different countries, it evolved in a unique way, characteristic of the locale it had reached. In Liberia, shrimp is added, while in Senegal, a mixture of vegetables and fish makes the dish. It is thought that Jambalaya—a New Orleanian dish composed of rice with a mix of meat, fish and vegetables—is a distant derivative of Jollof.
Comparisons between versions, however, are highly contentious. On a recent trip to Nigeria, Mark Zuckerberg sampled the dish and lightheartedly recounted how he was told not to compare Nigerian Jollof to any other country’s. Earlier this year, Ghanaian singer Sister Deborah released her food-inspired diss track, “Ghana Jollof”, which was met with a mixture of laughter and annoyance. The song extols the virtues of her nation’s version and simultaneously pokes fun at Nigeria’s rice.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGEr7TQA2eQ
Then, there are the memes —humorous takes infused with unexpected pop-culture relevance. #Jollofwars is a means for digitally attuned generation to playfully roast one another and competitively flex in the name of national pride. A snapshot of just 1500 #jollofwars tweets have reached over 432,000 Twitter users. The hashtag is one of the ways the digital diaspora is having this debate. #Jollofwars spans beyond West Africa, with fierce arguments coming from diasporic countries including the U.S.A., South Africa, the U.K. and more.
Even though there is little agreement on the best version of the Jollof online or off, there’s a shared emphasis on the importance of preserving the cultural hallmarks and culinary traditions of the recipe as it pertains to each country, despite its many “original” versions. At the same time, there is an accepted level of creative freedom dictated by personal taste. For instance, the spiciness of the rice may change depending on the cook, or the audience. Some cooks might add red peppers for richer color, or prefer to use one type of rice over another. Such quirks can lead to further debate, but they’re both allowable and expected.
Jollof is not a rigid recipe with precise measurements; it’s a recipe of experience, cooked with the eyes as much as it is with the heart. But any attempt to reinvent Jollof without careful consideration of its context is taken seriously and immediately shot down and labeled a form of cultural appropriation.
When celebrity chef Jamie Oliver tried his hand at the dish with unheard-of additions of lemon and parsley, the controversy was quickly dubbed “Jollofgate”. The recipe drew 4,500 comments, with many complaining about the lacklustre nature of the dish. The African blogger who goes by Motely Musings wrote: “How can you gentrify Jollof rice to the extent that it starts looking like paella? Sacrilege!”
Though Oliver’s representative tried to calm the furor by stating the recipe was the chef’s “twist”, it was perceived as an inaccurate depiction of the dish. UK supermarket chain, Tesco, had to remove its Jollof rice recipe from its website after many complained of the dish’s inauthenticity, due to its lack of rudimentary Jollof sauce. After all, what gives Jollof its orange color, except its tomatoey and pepper-infused base? Instead, the recipe substituted the sauce with chopped bell peppers, and was met with ire on social media.
Recent food trends have inspired Jollof variations such as Jollof bulgur and Jollof cous cous. In London, Nigerian pop-up restaurant “Chukus” is even serving Jollof quinoa. Torn between a devoted love of the traditional rice dish and my strong curiosity, I have yet to sample the superfood spin-off. However, diners have flocked to the dish, and lauded it for adding flavor to a health-conscious alternative.
[quote position="full" is_quote="true"]How can you gentrify Jollof rice to the extent that it starts looking like paella? Sacrilege![/quote]
Sure, as a dish known for reinvention, Jollof rice is subject to transformation—but whether it’s among West-African countries or internationally, such reinvention requires delicate care. Despite its tendency to stir debate, Jollof rice is actually a highly effective pan-African unifier. From personal experience, if there’s a gathering hosted by a Jollof-loving host, the dish is an anticipated highlight; though contentious, appreciation for Jollof is part of an appreciation for life’s big events. It even has its own celebratory day: August 22, 2016 marked the second ever World Jollof Rice Day.
At surface-level, the argument about which country has the best Jollof could be taken as typical neighborly rivalry, but behind the squabbles are a rich tapestry of West African history and culture. Jollof’s richness in flavor is only superseded by the passion of its staunchest fans. Though the argument rages on, there’s almost one thing that’s universally agreed on: get to the party before the Jollof is gone.
Why do some folks use social media but don't engage?
Psychologist says people who never comment on social media share these 5 positive traits
For over 20 years, social media has developed into a staple in many people’s day-to-day lives. Whether it’s to keep in communication with friends and family, following the thoughts of celebrities, or watching cat videos while sipping your morning coffee, there seem to be two types of social media users: commenters and lurkers.
The term “lurker” sounds equally mysterious and insidious, with some social media users writing them off as non-participants at best or voyeurs at worst. However, mindfulness expert Lachlan Brown believes these non-commenters have some very psychologically positive and healthy traits. Let’s take a look at how each one of these traits could be beneficial and see how fruitful lurking might be even though it can drive content creators crazy.
1. Cautious about vulnerability
Consciously or not, making a post online or commenting on one puts you and your words out there. It’s a statement that everyone can see, even if it’s as simple as clicking “like.” Doing so opens yourself up to judgment, with all the good, bad, and potential misinterpretation that comes with it. Non-commenters would rather not open themselves up to that.
These silent users are connected to a concept of self-protection by simply not engaging. By just scrolling past posts or just reading/watching them without commentary, they’re preventing themselves from any downsides of sharing an opinion such as rejection, misunderstanding, or embarrassment. They also have more control on how much of themselves they’re willing to reveal to the general public, and tend to be more open face-to-face or during one-on-one/one-on-few private chats or DMs. This can be seen as a healthy boundary and prevents unnecessary exposure.
Considering many comment sections, especially involving political topics, are meant to stir negative emotional responses to increase engagement, being extra mindful about where, when, and what you comment might not be a bad idea. They might not even take the engagement bait at all. Or if they see a friend of theirs post something vulnerable, they feel more motivated to engage with them personally one-on-one rather than use social media to publicly check in on them.
2. Analytical and reflective mindset
How many times have you gone onto Reddit, YouTube, or any other site and just skimmed past comments that are just different versions of “yes, and,” “no, but,” or “yes, but”? Or the ever insightful, formerly popular comment “First!” in a thread? These silent browsers lean against adding to such noise unless they have some valid and thoughtful contribution (if they bother to comment period).
These non-posters are likely wired on reflective thinking rather than their initial intuition. Not to say that all those who comment aren’t thoughtful, but many tend to react quickly and comment based on their initial feelings rather than absorbing the information, thinking it over, researching or testing their belief, and then posting it. For "lurkers," it could by their very nature to just do all of that and not post it at all, or share their thoughts and findings privately with a friend. All in all, it’s a preference of substance over speed.
3. High sense of self-awareness
Carried over from the first two listed traits, these silent social media users incorporate their concern over their vulnerability and their reflective mindset into digital self-awareness. They know what triggers responses out of them and what causes them to engage in impulsive behavior. It could be that they have engaged with a troll in the past and felt foolish. Or that they just felt sad after a post or got into an unnecessary argument that impacted them offline. By knowing themselves and seeing what’s being discussed, they choose to weigh their words carefully or just not participate at all. It’s a form of self-preservation through restraint.
4. Prefer to observe rather than perform
Some folks treat social media as information, entertainment, or a mix of both, and commenting can feel like they’re yelling at the TV, clapping alone in a movie theater when the credits roll, or yelling “That’s not true!” to a news anchor that will never hear them. But contrary to that, social media is a place where those yells, claps, and accusations can be seen and get a response. By its design, social media is considered by experts and the media as performative, regardless of whether it is positive or negative. Taking all of the previously mentioned traits into account, one can see why they would prefer to “observe the play” rather than get up on the stage of Facebook or X.
On top of that, these non-commenters could be using social media differently than those who choose to fully engage with it. Using this type of navigation, there may be nothing for them to comment about. Some commenters are even vying for this for their mental health. There are articles about how to better curate your social media feeds and manipulate algorithms to create a better social media experience to avoid unnecessary conflict or mentally tiring debate.
If you go on a blocking spree on all of your accounts and just follow the posters that boost you, it could turn your social media into a nice part of your routine as you mainly engage with others face-to-face or privately. In terms of commenting, if your curated Instagram is just following cute dogs and all you have to offer for a comment is “cute dog,” you might just enjoy the picture and then move on with your day rather than join in the noise. These non-commenters aren’t in the show and they’re fine with it.
5. Less motivated by social validation
The last trait that Brown showcases is that social media users who browse without posting tend to be independent from external validation, at least online. Social media is built to grow through feedback loops such as awarding likes, shares, and reposts of your content along with notifications letting you know that a new person follows you or wants to connect. This can lead many people to connect their activity on social media with their sense of self worth, especially with adolescents who are still figuring out their place in the world and have still-developing brains.
Engaging in social media via likes, shares, comments, and posts rewards our brains by having them release dopamine, which makes us feel good and can easily become addictive. For whatever reason, non-commenters don’t rely on social media as a means to gauge their social capital or self worth. This doesn’t make them better than those who do. While some non-commenters could have healthier ways to boost their self worth or release dopamine into their systems, many get that validation from equally unhealthy sources offline. That said, many non-commenters’ silence could be a display of independence and self confidence.
Whether you frequently comment online or don’t, it’s good to understand why you do or don’t. Analyzing your habits can help you determine whether your online engagement is healthy, or needs to be tweaked. With that information, you can then create a healthy social media experience that works for you.