If he were reading, I would suggest that "hapless" was a poor word choice (it's used several times) ... and is a word that might be better applied to his own flailings.

Clearly, Reagan as translator, guide, and possibly guerilla did not match Wadhams expectations ... I found myself wonder how Regan gained the English he has attained and about how hustling as bad translator probably beats the hell out of relying on handouts or ... what? And I thought of all the Iraqi translators our war has created out of people who used to have "real" jobs where they were able to use a lot more of their education.

Yes, Wadhams was/is naive... yes, even in confines of this essay, there was more that could have/should have been explored.

The mystery of why Reagan was at the wrong hotel is never explained, for instance. Was the "mistake" a cover for being unable make the two day journey in time or at all? (I've experienced similar face-saving cover stories, like having a fictional "prior engagement" when you can't afford to give a wedding present, iykwim.)

Whatever. I still enjoyed the essay. It still doesn't offend me. The graphic is offensive.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/blogs/wolcott

His blog in a format that's not letting me copy/paste ...

Our use of airstrikes against civilian and mixed use areas has never received the attention it deserves (not to mention prosecution) ... apparently, we've been bombing INFRASTRUCTURE ...

check it out.

treating every African or every Ethiopian or every translator you hire as your "charge" deserving of handouts, extraordinary "understanding" and charity ... because things are SO AWFUL in Africa, Ethiopia, where ever, is also condescending and potentially racist ... fair compensation paid as agreed plus customary gratuity, the occasional meal, reasonable "accomodation" ... anything more could also be considered patronizing, elitist ... etc.

Yes, I frowned over a few several things in the article ... but to suggest that the author's lack of "compassion" indicates racism or elitism misses the fact that the author was EMPLOYING Reagan to help him with WORK .... this was not a humanitarian mission ... it was work (and work the author was new to)... to turn employment into charity undermines its dignity.

Ditto with regard to the phone chip/card ... For the desk clerk to demand the card be turned over is not okay ... it's not .. it's a racket being played on rich tourists. Perhaps there's some charity which might benefit from the card ... in addition, since the cards are controlled because of their use by rebels, as a foreigner and a reporter, "inadvertantly" aiding the rebels or participating the blackmarket of contraband is a very dangerous, stupid mistake to make.

Finally, this article was not about the civil war in Ethiopia ... it was about a reporter new to this "beat" getting in over his head ... mostly it was a "travel" story. If you're disappoint this article wasn't about the civil war or a survey of humanitarian conditions, you're reading the wng article.

Is cross-cultural travel writing just too "hot button" when it moves away from the picturesque and/or the fairly idyllic realms of Bruce Chatwin and Pico Iyer?

How would anyone here suggest Salon avoid infuriating their readers or should they just stop trying and stick with the innocuous and predictable .... Chatwin's long dead and Iyer (who was published here in the 1990s) has been way out of Salon's league for a long time ... Oh, and having personally experienced Joan Walsh's distain of the rabble -- truly, don't expect her to even acknowledge you exist.

Bono said, in preparing the Africa Issue for Vanity Fair, he was repeatedly begged by Africans to present what was good and hopeful about Africa ... that young Africans despair of being seen as a hopeless, desperate place ...

just two more cents.

I found it objectionable because it seemed to me to make Reagan a comical/buffoon character (which he is not) and as if he were shouting pidgen-English ... which he did not. Actually, I'm not sure how good his English verbal skills are ... written language skills usually lag behind verbal ... consider the many people who are functionally illiterate, but may speak several languages ...

I don't know what stereotypic "african" looks like ... but I'll "take your word for it." I suspect that cartoon caricatures of most "other" ethnicities are rather inherently racist -- if you've seen old depictions of Anglos by the Chinese, they're hardly flattering or un-exaggerated and seem "distorted" ...

I did not find the article objectionable -- although as I mentioned I frowned from time to time. Actually, I posted quite early that I DID find the graphic objectionable although I failed to detail the reasons.

I have wondered if the more negative reactions to the article were generated and/or amplified by the graphic. The graphic really seems, to me, to at least make Reagan appear to be simpleton ethnic type.

Regarding "hapless" -- I was suprised to find it means "unfortunate", syn. "unlucky" ... I think I generally have thought of it meaning "ineffectual" or "unable to get-it-together" or perhaps "inept"

Taken as meaning "unfortunate" -- it suggested that Reagan is somehow a "star-crossed" person, rather than "unfortunate" for the author.

It seemed to me that Reagan "delivered" pretty well, all things considered, except for the "wrong place, right time" ... which remains a mystery ... if you're meeting up with someone a 2-day journey from where you started, don't you touch base to ensure that the other party is "on the way" and has not been delayed? I'm not really anxious to second-guess or hindsight 20/20 with the author, however, I wondered also if Reagan sensed the authors rapidly cooling enthusiasm for HIM.

Happy Monday ... thanks for your input, it was informative and interesting -- but NOW, I must get back to work.

you all must be very proud very proud of your handiwork ... and it reflect so well on the quality of Salon's "discourse"