Africa should not have to resemble Europe to be described as beautiful, cultured, or sophisticated.
I’ve been listening to a series of narrations about African capitals, and a pattern stood out almost immediately.
Again and again, African cities were introduced through European reference points:
“Little Paris of Africa.”
“Colonial architectural jewel.”
“Francophone elegance.”
“European-style plazas and palaces.”
Colonial architecture is part of the historical record, and it should not be erased. But it should not repeatedly become the primary lens through which African cities are presented to the world.
Brazzaville does not need Paris to validate its refinement.
Kinshasa does not need French identity to explain its cultural influence.
Praia should not be defined mainly by colonial buildings or its position between Africa, Europe, and the Americas.
These cities have identities rooted in African history, local languages, music, craftsmanship, political movements, spiritual traditions, commerce, community life, and the people who continue to shape them.
The Poto-Poto School of Painting, Congolese rumba, soukous, Lingala culture, Cabo Verdean Creole identity, Indigenous architectural traditions, local markets, and precolonial history are not side notes.
They are the story.
The issue is not that colonial history is mentioned. The issue is that colonialism too often remains the narrator.
European cities are usually allowed to stand on their own identities. African cities are too often described by how closely they resemble Europe.
Africa deserves better framing.
Its cities should be presented from the inside out—not primarily through what Europe occupied, renamed, constructed, or left behind.
It is time to stop using Europe as the benchmark for African beauty, sophistication, and cultural legitimacy.
#africa #africancities #africanculture #africanhistory #decolonizethenarrative #culturalrepresentation #africandiaspora #sovereignsoil
