Zuma/Foster Make Me Uncomfortable

In response to Jacob's Ladder:

First, I want to agree with my friend ellen and echo her reaction that Douglas Foster assumes the reader has a good knowledge of the history and politics of race in South Africa. Maybe I am of the relatively uneducated minority, but I wanted a little more background information to establish the political, social, and historical context of Jacob Zuma’s life. On the same note, I found myself Wikipedia-ing names and acronyms used in the piece. While I don’t think the author should outline the entire life history of every player in his story, I would have appreciated a little more information about some characters, like Mbeki. As a reader who is new to a lot of the people, places and politics of this piece, it would have been easier to read and follow with just a bit more explanation of who was who.

Secondly, I also want to acknowledge Foster’s writing and the way he used “comfortable language” to portray Zuma. I disagree that Foster meant to dismiss Zuma’s flaws and crimes. Rather, I think he highlights them and uses language and presentation to portray this man, Jacob Zuma, and his crimes in a way that I imagine is similar to the way he is seen in South Africa by many. Ellen said the story, and specifically the way Zuma’s crimes were almost swept aside by his political fame, made her uncomfortable. It made me feel uncomfortable as well. In this case, I think that is a hallmark of good journalism. In the light of such a story and such a man as Jacob Zuma, I think it is good for us to be uncomfortable. I think that may be exactly what Douglas Foster wanted.