The Essence and Reliability of Documented Information

A particular contrast in this week’s readings stood out to me between Umutesi’s and Jefremovas’ review article. Umutesi’s writing is so candid, descriptive, and honest. It is a strong documentation of information as it is a personal narrative and primary source, and all of the descriptions she provides are direct and clear. The main point of Jefremovas’ article, on the other hand, is to highlight weaknesses and strengths in various publications on Rwanda and Burundi. She tries to emphasize the extensive ways in which the RPF has and continues to influence the media and academic world’s discussion about what happened. I find it so interesting that there is such an overall façade accepted by much of the academic world and global community when it comes to understanding the genocide, while there are smaller voices like Umutesi’s that have such blatant and descriptive accounts. I would imagine it would be difficult both legally and emotionally for many victims of the genocide to write about their experiences and publish books the way Umutesi did, but I wish it could happen. This is exactly the kind of work that counters the weaknesses Jefremovas points out, and it gives me hope that outsiders may be able to gain some bit of accurate insight into Rwandan history.