This book bothered me. It could have been a lesson in how (and how not) to approach community work as an outsider, but the delivery is awful. I’ll break down my critiques by category.
WRITING STYLE
Novogratz started writing this book as a letter to herself, and it is evident that she never transitioned to a delivery style for a broader audience. The book reads like a diary, with tedious details about interactions and people hardly relevant to the larger message, as if she wanted to include those details to help herself remember each experience. That’s fine for a diary - I sometimes do that myself - but it distracts from the story when presented for a wider audience. We don’t need to know what color dress shirt and skirt she wore to each meeting, that she got coffee at the hotel before getting in a car, or how round a woman’s face is who is mentioned for two sentences in the whole book.
PURPOSE
It’s not clear what the intention of the book is. The title suggests a primer on connecting monetarily affluent and impoverished individuals and communities, but then there is a whole section devoted to the (incompletely presented) history of the Rwandan genocide, with lots of examples on how *not* to interact with refugees who have experienced trauma (more on that below). Is the book supposed to teach us how to work with refugee populations? If so, why are there no resources on refugee advocacy work in the suggested reading section at the end? In the second half of the book she mentions her organization, the Acumen Fund, countless times. Is the purpose of the book to advertise for her organization? Or is it just an autobiography of her life thus far? After having read the entire book and gone back and skimmed through it all a second time, I’m still unclear what the primary message was supposed to be.
ON REFUGEES
I worked with refugee populations - including individuals from Rwanda - for two years. I probably would have been fired if I questioned my colleagues and clients on their actions during the genocide or peppered them with as many questions about their experience as she does. One of the most important rules I learned over those two years was never to ask about trauma even when I befriend refugees; they share when and how they want, in their own time. It was infuriating to read Jacqueline’s approach with each Rwandan woman on her visits after the genocide. Just because she is already friendly with these women does not grant her the right to interrogate them on such a tender subject to satisfy her own curiosity, and even in some cases to question their morals and actions! The Rwandan genocide and the events leading up to it caused people to have to make very difficult choices, not all of which are easy to understand from an outside perspective. Jacqueline clearly did not understand how humiliating and belittling her interrogations could be.
DIRECT QUOTES
This is a small complaint, but how were there possibly so many direct quotes in this book? Much of this story focused on events that happened 10-20 years ago in Jacqueline’s life, yet practically every page is filled with quotes from people she encountered. Either she kept scrupulous notes her entire life, or she is guessing what was said 20 years ago and putting it into quotes. Seems like an odd choice to use this dialogic style of writing.
DESCRIPTIONS
Jacqueline’s descriptions of individuals were incredibly tedious. An example: “The 30-something, balding man with a black mustache and honest face who wore conservative glasses over his serious eyes and carried pens in his front pocket was not one to dream small” (230). Time and again she’d present details like the above about individuals mentioned for just a few lines in the entire book. I zoned out so many times, or didn’t catch the gist of what experience she was trying to describe right away because it was so bogged down with details about clothing and physique.
Some of Jacqueline’s descriptions were, frankly, shallow; she seems to have a “West Is Best” attitude. When describing outfits women are wearing (which happens pretty much every sixty seconds), she uses words like “professional,” “formal,” and “smart” to describe Western-style dress clothes. She especially loves to remark on this when African women wear this style. An example: “She carried herself with no-nonsense professionalism in her matching black-and-white top and skirt” (205).
Such descriptions are never used for traditional African clothing, instead describing women wearing those outfits as “exotic,” “birdlike,” “a butterfly conservatory,” etc. The closest complement I could find for someone wearing traditional garb is “affable-looking 50-year-old with straight black hair flecked with gray, wearing a long, traditional cotton dress in black and yellow and green” (203).
Novogratz shows shallowness even in her description of dolls with different hair colors, clearly favoring blonde: “There was a glamorous blonde in a veil who reminded me of the heroine of Bewitched, a brunette, and even a handsome man…I received the gorgeous blonde and the brunette” (275-276).
The descriptions get worse when she introduces body type. Even for characters we meet for just one or two sentences, she takes time to describe their physique. Watch out if you’re too skinny or overweight, she will not hold back her judgement. She presents descriptions like “slender and beautiful” (253), “tall and fit with high cheekbones” (205), and “tall, thin, formidable” (156), compared to far less flattering terms for women she deems less physically fit. Notice the lack of endearing descriptors:
“exotic-looking” 21
“her wide foot” 56
“solid, affable-looking woman…built like tree trunks” 74
“short, affable woman” 92
“slight, crooked woman with raisin eyes and a walnut face” 102
“Brightly colored cloths in turquoise, fuchsia, orange, and lime shimmied around thick waists” 102
“a large woman with thick forearms and a blue scarf around her head stared at me intensely with her enormous eyes” 114
“a skinny woman” 132
“Her massive body was draped in a deep purple, flowing robe” 132
“Draped in an enormous dress of screaming yellow and defensive blue…she made me think of a vulture” 133
“a uniformed, overweight woman in a white cap” 160
“Her massive hands were folded in front of her” 161
“A young, birdlike woman with a red scarf wrapped around her head” 163
“stocky in stature and huge in personality” 208
“her big thigh” 236
“of medium build” 240
“the big woman with two long braids bellowed in her baritone voice” 262
We do get one description of “strong and straightforward with a decidedly urban image” (208). I guess that one’s nice enough, but who knows what “decidedly urban” means. Probably an African woman wearing a pantsuit.
We meet one lesbian character, who Jacqueline describes as “black, gay, and built like a truck driver” (156). Likewise, she describes a colleague she is proud to have hired as “a crusty investment banker” (220). Built like a truck driver and crusty…what nice descriptors for people she claims to respect.
FINAL THOUGHTS
One final quote from Jacqueline, describing one of her first interactions with Lisa, that lesbian woman “built like a truck driver.” She didn’t think they’d get along because of this encounter:
“I arrived at the Jackson Airport on a cool fall day in a pleated skirt and heels. She wore jeans, sneakers, and a baseball cap. Perfect” (159).
I wouldn’t want to wear heels and a nice skirt for a plane ride. Sneakers and jeans sound much more comfortable.
This book taught me about Jacueline’s journey toward creating Acumen Fund. The story of why she chose that name made me laugh…she wanted to connect with her clients and send the right message. Her clients are organizations supporting and individuals from impoverished communities, many who may not speak English as a first language. As a native-born AmericanI didn’t know what “acumen” meant before looking it up…would her clients? The name makes me think that Jacqueline is always going to be a little disconnected from those she wants to empower.
Novogratz is clearly a powerful businesswoman with good intentions and smart business sense, but I was frustrated by this book. I wonder what she thinks of it now, and what the individuals she described in the story think, if they’ve read it. While the intention of the book is a good one, and it contains some important messages about privilege, communication, etc., I’m surprised it has so many 5-star reviews.