Songs of Dust and Watera novel by M.J. Hydara
Anything later in the book stays hidden. Saved only in this browser.

Example essays · United States

United States

Two example essays on the novel, each modelled on one kind of final-year task set in United States.

About these essays. They are example essays written for this site, in the voices of imagined students; they are not the work of real pupils. They discuss the whole novel, including the ending, so each one stays hidden until you say you have finished the book. Every quotation is checked against the paperback, and page numbers refer to it.

Both essays imitate Advanced Placement (AP) coursework from the College Board, the program many American high-school juniors and seniors take for college credit. Essay 1 is the kind of senior-year research paper set in AP English Literature and Composition classes: a literary argument of roughly 2,000 to 2,500 words built on close reading, in MLA 9 format with parenthetical page citations and a Works Cited list. Essay 2 imitates the AP Seminar Individual Written Argument (IWA), part of a scored performance task, in which a student poses a research question prompted by a stimulus text, weighs perspectives and evidence in a line of reasoning, and proposes a resolution, usually in about 2,000 words with APA or MLA citations. This one is a classroom practice piece rather than a compliant submission: it runs longer than the 2,000-word limit, and it takes the novel as its main source instead of the stimulus materials the College Board sets. The students and schools are fictional.

Example essay 1

Who Is Allowed to Touch It: Systems and Hands in M.J. Hydara’s Songs of Dust and Water

Written as
An imagined student aged 17, senior at a public high school in Dayton, Ohio
Format
AP English Literature and Composition, senior-year research paper (MLA 9)
Task
Write a research-supported literary argument of at least 2,000 words on a novel from the independent-reading list. Your thesis should rest on close reading of the text and engage with at least two secondary sources.
Length
2,753 words, not counting headings and references
Hidden until you have read the whole book, including the vote and the ending.

My grandfather was a machinist in Dayton for most of his working life, and the first rule he taught me in his basement was that you do not own a tool until you know how to take it apart and put it back. I thought of that rule often while reading M.J. Hydara’s Songs of Dust and Water, a novel that opens with the “dry clack” of a loom and closes with two pairs of hands on a well rope. In between, Hydara sets two kinds of making against each other. On one side is what the foreign engineer Adam Sterling calls a system: a solar and water plant for the Sahelian village of Madina, built so that “Nobody in Madina will ever need to touch it” (Hydara 8). On the other side are hands: a smith’s forge, a box of sisal, charcoal and grass, a weaver’s wet jute sacks, a loom, a rope. It would be easy to read the book as a contest in which the old ways beat the new machine, but the second half of the novel is full of machines that the villagers build and keep, including a water harvester, a mill and electric vehicles assembled in their own workshops. What Hydara distrusts is narrower and more interesting: a machine that the people who depend on it are not allowed to open. The novel defines ownership as the right to mend, and it measures Adam Sterling’s education by what happens to his hands, from the “clean, uncalloused hands” (7) of the first chapter to the scarred palms that hold a lamp for a stranger near the end.

Hydara makes Adam’s philosophy clear before he ever reaches Madina. In the hot conference room in the capital, Bakoro, Adam sees “a list of uncontrolled variables,” and the narrator tells us plainly, “He meant to seal all of it out of his project” (6). The plant he presents is “a lattice of silver frames” (6), and when Minister Khresay asks whether the village will help build it, Adam explains that “the warranty holds only if certified hands do the work” (8). The only hands his system will accept are licensed ones from somewhere else. The Minister’s griot, Balla, has already given his verdict with his eyes on “Adam’s clean, uncalloused hands”: “A system with no roots . . . is a house built for the wind” (7). Now Khresay adds an old saying from his Sarahule ancestors, that “a man who does not help build the granary will never fight to defend it” (8). Both men are making a prediction about ownership. People defend what they had a hand in making, and Adam has designed a plant that no one in Madina will have touched.

The first real test comes on the second day of construction, when a “certified” support bracket snaps. Malik, the village blacksmith, carries the pieces to his forge and welds them with a sliver of his own iron, and holds out a bracket that is “blackened, a little misshapen, solid” (15). Nobody takes it. Adam looks at it and sees only “An uncontrolled variable in a balanced design” (15). He logs a week’s delay and waits for the certified replacement. Malik then says the sentence that I think the whole novel grows out of: “A thing you are not allowed to mend is not yours. . . . Remember that when it breaks” (16). Matthew B. Crawford makes almost the same argument in Shop Class as Soulcraft. He describes how more and more modern products are designed to hide their insides, so that the people who use them can no longer fix them and come to depend on specialists and replacement parts. For Crawford, being able to repair something is part of what it means to be responsible for it, and losing that ability changes how people relate to the objects around them. Malik’s line puts that idea in eleven words. What I appreciate is that Hydara does not make Adam a fool for refusing the bracket. Later the engineer Aisha writes in her notebook that refusing the smith’s bracket “had been sound engineering, and that leaving it in the dust without learning the smith’s name had not” (44). Adam’s mistake was human more than technical. His design had no place in it for the smith.

Aisha’s pre-filter makes the conflict sharper because, this time, the hand-made solution is plainly better. The plant’s air intakes are choking on a wet, salty dust that Adam’s lab never tested, and Aisha offers what the village already uses for its grain stores: “Coarse sisal fibre for the big particles,” then acacia charcoal, then fine woven grass. “It’s cheap. Anyone can replace it” (25). Those last four words are the exact opposite of a warranty. Adam calls it “A box of charcoal and leaves” (25), and when his apprentice Talib tries to order the materials through the government purchasing portal, he finds that the approved vendors “did not sell anything that grew” (27). Adam’s frustration explains his whole outlook: “None of it is certified. I can’t put any of it in the model” (29). Even Talib, who is on Adam’s side at this point, thinks the box sits on the intake “like a patch on a good shirt” (29), an image that comes from cloth and mending, the world of his father’s loom. Wendell Berry’s The Unsettling of America helps me see what is going on in these scenes. Berry argues that modern specialization separates knowledge from responsibility. Experts apply standards that were set far away, and the practical knowledge of people who actually live in a place gets treated as backward or unscientific. The portal is that kind of system in miniature. It cannot even name sisal.

The trial on Intake-06 settles the question, at least for the reader. The intake with Aisha’s box runs cooler, and “Its pressure line on the screen had been as flat as a ruler” (31). Adam tells Talib that “The data was . . . inconclusive” (31) and has the box thrown in the scrap store. Then Hydara closes the chapter with my favorite sentence in Part One: “In the scrap store behind them, in the dark, the charcoal in Aisha’s box drew the damp out of the air” (31). The hand-made thing keeps doing its job even after it has been thrown away, quietly, with no one watching. Aisha later rescues it “because the charcoal was still good” (43), and the box disappears from the story for more than a hundred and fifty pages. When its three layers come back, they are inside a new machine.

Before that, though, Part One shows what happens to a system that refuses hands. Adam teaches Talib, “You don’t fix things by feel or by hand,” and adds that “manual intervention only introduces human error” (30). Talib sums up the lesson in the phrase that becomes the slogan of Adam’s whole approach: “Nothing gets in. Nothing stops” (31). Adam agrees that “Inside the fence everything is tested, rated and covered” (31). The irony arrives fast. When Minister Dunia brings the amendment that will let her ministry take over the plant, Adam remembers “Talib on the observation deck” (40) and his slogan, and then signs the amendment, although the narrator admits that “he did not read it to the end” (40). The plant was sealed against dust, and a pen walked straight in. Later, when a bearing is burning out and the replacement parts turn out to be fakes, Adam finally puts his hands inside the machine, but only in a panic and against the manual: “The manual didn’t account for sabotage!” (46). He and Talib swap a motor out of the backup intake “with rags wrapped round their hands” (46). Hands enter the system for the first time without knowledge or permission, at the worst possible moment. Two weeks later the plant burns, and the last image of Adam in that chapter is “His hands were burned” (54). Hydara seems to be saying that a system built to keep hands out only delays them until they can do the most damage.

The loom is the counterweight to all of this, and it is worth remembering that a loom is also a machine. In the opening chapter, Talib’s hands are “calloused from the hoe and useless on the loom” (4), and his father, Ibrahim, tells him, “A weaver’s craft is in his hands” and that their thread “asks only for your hands” (3, 4). Talib breaks a warp thread and runs away to his notebook of diagrams. The thread hangs there, untouched, for most of Part One, like Aisha’s box in the scrap store. At the end of the ninth chapter Talib finally ties it, remembering his father’s words, “Then you must re-tie it. That is the work,” and “The old rhythm came back into his arms” (76). The repair is tiny, and that is the point. A loom can be mended by the person who sits at it. Adam leaves Madina with nothing in his hands except a piece of glass from the burned plant. He holds it on the bus “the rest of the way” (69), and years later, at night, “Its edges would bite into his palm” (77). The only thing his hands kept from the Glass House is something that cuts them.

Part Two, set ten years later in the floodplain village of Nafawol, tests whether Adam has learned anything, and Hydara shows the answer through his body first. Dr Arramata, the engineer from Nafawol whose idea the project is, notices that “The skin of both his palms was tight and shiny with old burns” (83). When she suggests that he has seen a village lose ownership of a project, he says only, “I’ve done it” (83). This time, when the demonstration harvester overheats in front of the whole village, a weaver named Bakary steps forward and tells him what the women do when the dye pots get too hot: cover them with wet jute. “The cloth drinks the heat. The air takes it away” (97). Adam accepts at once, and that night he sits by the machine pouring water over the sacks himself. The village’s suspicion still runs along the line between hand and machine. The Water-Keeper, Kadiatou, thinks of her well, “The rope knows me,” and of the new device, “This thing only hums” (96). The written agreement turns Malik’s idea into law. The seventh clause says that Nafawol “might build from them, mend from them and copy them, and nothing in the paper let Proxima stop it” (101). The right to mend, which Adam denied the smith in Madina, is now written into the contract. Even the key to the system is small enough to hold; an elder turns it over and says, “It’s lighter than a groundnut” (101).

Hydara is careful, though, not to replace one simple idea with its opposite. When the village builds its own road, Kadiatou blesses it with the words “Let it be a road of hands” (112), and the builder Edrisa sets the road’s crown using the rope from the old well, “pulled it tight and sighted along it with one eye shut” (112). The skeptical elder Mamadou asks, “Is this the machinery?” and Edrisa answers, “Some of it” (112). Those three words may be the novel’s best answer to its own question. The village also hires a roller and buys fuel. The novel’s real line falls between machines that the village can understand and keep and machines that keep the village out, which is a different line from the one between machines and hands.

The clearest proof is the K-Purifier, which the student Bintu designs at the village academy. Adam finds it on a workbench in the final year of his contract: “a porous clay vessel holding layers of sisal, charcoal and grass” (212). These are the same three layers as Aisha’s box, rebuilt as a machine with a small solar pump. Bintu explains that “Every part can be bought nearby or made here” (212), and the design is published free for any village to copy. She is honest about its limits, too: it cleans the water, but “Not the salt” (212). Adam does not say anything about Aisha’s box, and the narrative never tells us what he feels, but earlier that day he had told Kadiatou about “a weaver’s son at Madina” and admitted, “I taught him to trust mine over his own hands” (211). The circle closes in the last chapter, when Talib himself visits Nafawol and, as Hassan later reports, asks Bintu how the purifier’s filter is layered. When she shows him, “He laughed. He said they used to make those for the grain stores where he came from, and once, a long time ago, for a machine” (231). By then Talib has become the person Adam once told him not to be. In Madina he repairs pumps for the district, and when a borehole’s leathers wear out he carries two kinds of seals, the government’s and the ones Malik cuts from a hide. “Talib fitted Malik’s” (218). Asked whether they will last, he says, “Malik says till the rains,” and asked about after the rains, “Then he cuts more” (218). Ownership in this novel looks like that: a part you can make again.

The scene I keep coming back to is Adam’s last drive out of Nafawol. His vehicle dies on a causeway at night, and a young mechanic from a road crew opens the panel and finds the problem in under a minute: “The connector. . . . The road shakes them loose” (215). The scene echoes Part One. On the night the Glass House first lit up, Adam had diagnosed a dead string of panels from a screen and sent a man to a junction box “where a connector had been seated by hand and not quite home” (22). Now the roles are reversed. The woman tells Adam to hold her lamp, and “He held it where she told him to and did not let it move” (215), which repeats almost word for word what Talib’s sister Hawa did with a torch during the blackout delivery in Bakoro, when “she did not let it move” (32). Adam has become the helper whose hands hold the light. Then, “She did not ask his name” (215). In Madina, Adam never learned the smith’s name. On the causeway, a stranger with skilled hands does not need to learn his. Hydara does not tell us how Adam feels, only that “For a long way he watched the mirror more than the road” (215).

The novel ends at the well. In the first chapter of Part Two, Kadiatou drew the bitter water alone, “the fibres biting into her calloused palms” (85), and noticed that “The weight was wrong” (85). In the final scene she is too old to draw it alone, and her great-granddaughter Halima puts her hands on the rope below hers, “the fibres biting both their palms,” and this time the weight “was right” (232). The coda that follows is four short sentences about the lost empire of Wagadu, and it ends: “One pair of hands can always be made to let go” (233). Read against the rest of the book, the line explains the Glass House. Madina’s plant had one pair of hands on it. Adam held Proxima’s power of attorney and “could sign for the Proxima Fund alone” (40), so when Dunia needed one signature, she only had to win over one person. Nafawol’s system has many hands on it, and they were all allowed to learn it.

I do not want to make Hydara sound like someone who thinks hands can fix everything. The harvester in Nafawol settles at a little under seventy percent of its design yield and stays there, no matter how many tricks Alie tries, Bakary’s wet jute among them, and the purifier cannot remove salt. The novel admits that some problems need equipment, deep boreholes and outside money. Crawford makes a similar point in his book; he is not against technology, only against arrangements that make people passive in front of it. What Songs of Dust and Water argues, I think, is that the test of a machine is who is allowed to put their hands on it. My grandfather would have understood Malik on the first page. He kept his tools oiled and his micrometer in a wooden box, and he never let me use either until I could take them apart.

Works Cited

Berry, Wendell. The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. Sierra Club Books, 1977.

Crawford, Matthew B. Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work. Penguin Press, 2009.

Hydara, M.J. Songs of Dust and Water. 2026.

Example essay 2

Who Holds the Off Switch? Community Ownership as a Condition for Aid

Written as
An imagined student aged 17, senior at a public high school in Tucson, Arizona
Format
Practice essay modelled on AP Seminar Performance Task 2, the Individual Written Argument (APA style); a classroom exercise, not a submission that meets the task rules
Task
Using one of the stimulus texts as a starting point, identify a research question, gather evidence from a range of perspectives, and write an argument that evaluates those perspectives and proposes a resolution. Research question: Should development aid be released only where the community that will live with a project owns it and can stop it?
Length
2,915 words, not counting headings and references
Hidden until you have read the whole book, including the vote and the ending.

Introduction

Most of the water that comes out of my kitchen tap in Tucson started as snow in the Rocky Mountains. It travels hundreds of miles through the Central Arizona Project canal and is soaked into the ground west of the city before it is pumped back up. For most of the twentieth century Tucson simply pumped its aquifer, and the water table dropped so far that the state passed the Groundwater Management Act in 1980 to slow it down. Then, in August 2021, the federal government declared the first-ever shortage on the Colorado River, and Arizona lost about 18 percent of its Colorado River supply, with most of the cut falling on farms in central Arizona (“Arizona to face water cuts,” 2021). What struck me was that nobody in our neighborhood had voted on any of it. The decisions were made by federal agencies and negotiators from seven states, and the people who would live with the results mostly found out from the news.

That is why the borehole chapters of M.J. Hydara’s novel Songs of Dust and Water felt so close to home. In the floodplain village of Nafawol, the engineer Dr. Arramata lowers a tape into the village borehole every Friday and posts the depth on a public wall, and in a hot year “Every Friday the figure was lower” (Hydara, 2026, p. 205). The difference is that in Nafawol the people watching the water level also own the pump. The novel is built around a rule adopted by a fictional aid organization, the Proxima Fund, after its first project failed: it will release money only where the people who will live with the result “owned it, and could stop it” (Hydara, 2026, p. 82). This paper uses the novel as a stimulus text to investigate a real policy question: Should development aid be released only where the community that will live with a project owns it and can stop it?

I will argue that the ownership-and-stop rule should be the default condition for long-term development projects such as water systems, mills and roads, but that it needs three limits to be fair: emergency and basic health spending should be exempt, community control should be paired with outside auditing, and funders should help pay the cost when a community uses its right to say no.

The Stimulus: Two Projects and One Rule

The novel’s first part shows what aid looks like without the rule. In the village of Madina, in the fictional Republic of Awdagha, an engineer named Adam Sterling builds a solar and water plant for Proxima. He gets the village’s consent from a single government-registered signatory, Mustapha, even after an elder named Samba warns him that “A signature tells you who held the pen” and “It does not tell you who agreed” (Hydara, 2026, p. 18). A minister later takes over the plant through a contract amendment that Adam signs alone, and the plant burns. Two years after the fire, at Proxima’s board meeting, a member from one of the banks asks what the village had paid, in figures, and the director, Mark, can only answer, “We didn’t ask them” (Hydara, 2026, p. 82). The board then passes the rule. “A trustee said it would slow everything down by years,” and Mark simply says, “Yes” (Hydara, 2026, p. 82).

Part Two follows the rule into practice in Nafawol, in the neighboring Republic of Tekuru, where the project is Dr. Arramata’s idea and Adam introduces himself with the words “Now I carry the money” (Hydara, 2026, p. 90). When Dr. Arramata first proposes that Proxima keep control for ten years to protect the village, Adam, now working at the fund’s review desk, rejects it: “Ten years is also long enough for a village to forget it was ever meant to own the thing” (Hydara, 2026, p. 83). His instruction to her is “Write it so it doesn’t need you. Then it won’t need me either” (Hydara, 2026, p. 84). The story that follows is a fifteen-year test of whether that kind of ownership works. To evaluate it, I compare the novel with four real perspectives from the debate about foreign aid.

Perspective One: Aid Needs Speed and Scale

The strongest argument against the rule comes from economist Jeffrey Sachs. In The End of Poverty (2005), Sachs argues that the poorest communities are stuck in a “poverty trap”: they are too poor to save and invest, so they cannot buy the basic things, such as fertilizer, clinics, clean water and bed nets, that would let them grow. His solution is a large, coordinated push of outside investment, and he argued that extreme poverty could be ended by 2025 if rich countries committed enough money (Sachs, 2005). From this perspective, a rule that delays aid until a community has organized itself to own and govern a project would cost lives, because the people who are sick right now cannot wait for committee meetings.

The novel gives this argument to some of its most sympathetic characters. In Part One, Minister Khresay accepts Adam’s flawed project because “When your own well is dry, you do not refuse the bucket because you dislike the man holding the rope” (Hydara, 2026, p. 9). In Part Two, Evelyn Reed of the agribusiness company TransGlobal makes the Sachs argument almost directly when she tells Adam that other villages will suffer if the slow method is the only one available: “They’ll wait ten years for your method to reach them. Some of their children won’t be there when it does” (Hydara, 2026, p. 194). The novel never says she is wrong. Adam does not answer her.

Perspective Two: Searchers, Planners and Feedback

William Easterly’s The White Man’s Burden (2006) is almost a direct reply to Sachs. Easterly divides aid workers into “Planners,” who announce large goals and design solutions from the top, and “Searchers,” who look for what works in a specific place and change course when it doesn’t. His central claim is that aid fails because the poor have no way to give feedback or hold aid agencies accountable. A business that serves customers badly loses them, but an aid agency that serves people badly often faces no consequence, since the people it serves are not the ones paying (Easterly, 2006). Proxima’s rule is essentially a way to give the poor that missing power. If the community can stop the money, the funder has to listen.

The novel supports Easterly in its description of failed projects. Minister Dunia remembers that “Before I was twenty I had counted eleven plaques in my district” (Hydara, 2026, p. 61), each one from a charity that had gone home, and in Part Two Adam himself says, “Charity hands out what can be photographed, then disappears” (Hydara, 2026, p. 90). But the novel complicates Easterly as well. Dunia, who steals the Madina plant’s money, has a real argument: “Your Mr Sterling is an island. So is every fund like his. I am trying to build a country” (Hydara, 2026, p. 61). Village ownership can bypass the national government, and in Tekuru the government pushes back. Minister Sulayman tries to take control of Nafawol’s fund, and when he fails, a regional safety inspector seals the boiler of the new mill in the neighboring village of Sirawol for ten months. Fatou, Nafawol’s treasurer, is sure the Minister is behind it. Kadiatou, Nafawol’s Water-Keeper, sums it up: “He has taken the year” (Hydara, 2026, p. 160). Owning a project does not protect a community from the state, which can still reach it through other rules.

Perspective Three: Aid as Dependency

Dambisa Moyo’s Dead Aid (2009) attacks the aid system from a different angle. Moyo, an economist from Zambia, argues that large, long-term aid given to African governments has encouraged corruption and dependency, because governments that are funded from abroad answer to donors instead of their own citizens. She proposes phasing this kind of aid out and replacing it with trade, foreign investment, bond markets and microfinance. Importantly, she separates this government-to-government aid from emergency relief and smaller charitable projects, which she does not reject (Moyo, 2009).

The novel agrees with Moyo that aid should be a temporary bridge. Proxima’s money in Nafawol is time-limited, and Dr. Arramata describes it as buying “room to make mistakes without starving” (Hydara, 2026, p. 173). But the novel’s climax tests the part of Moyo’s argument that relies on private investment, and the Union of villages that grows out of Nafawol refuses the biggest investor it ever sees. TransGlobal offers up to two billion dollars across the region, fifty thousand dollars per family, a hospital and a university. Reed is honest that the company wants “the first right to buy what you grow”: “Anyone can copy the charter on your academy wall. Nobody else can deliver your crop” (Hydara, 2026, p. 186). “With whose hand on the key,” Kadiatou says (Hydara, 2026, p. 187), and Reed stops smiling. When the worst clause, which would have given TransGlobal the Union’s future inventions “in perpetuity,” is removed, Adam warns that “They have taken out the part that frightened people,” and “They have left in the part that matters” (Hydara, 2026, p. 197), meaning the company’s veto over large investments. From the novel’s point of view, investment can create the same dependency Moyo blames on aid if the investor holds the veto. Ownership is the issue regardless of where the money comes from.

Perspective Four: What the Evidence Shows

Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo, who later shared the 2019 Nobel Prize in economics, argue in Poor Economics (2011) that the Sachs-versus-Easterly debate is too big to be useful. They recommend breaking aid into specific questions that can be tested with randomized trials, such as whether charging a small price for a bed net helps or hurts. They discuss evidence that even small fees can sharply reduce how many poor families take up important health products (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011). This matters for my question, because it suggests that some kinds of aid work best when they are simply given, without conditions.

The most relevant study I found is Benjamin Olken’s (2007) field experiment on village road projects in Indonesia. Olken compared two ways of reducing corruption. When the chance of a government audit was raised from 4% to 100%, the share of road money that went missing fell from about 27.7% to about 19.2%. When villagers were instead invited to community accountability meetings, attendance went up, but on average corruption did not significantly fall (Olken, 2007). This is a serious problem for the idea that community ownership is enough on its own.

Songs of Dust and Water seems to know this. Nafawol’s fund is robbed from the inside, a little at a time. Lamin, the grandson of the elder Mamadou, steals through nine small payments, each kept just under the three-signature limit, and he is caught only when a schoolgirl, Mariam, adds up a column on the public wall. Mamadou had insisted earlier that the three-signature rule apply to everyone, himself included, because “I want the rule to say no to him, so that I do not have to” (Hydara, 2026, p. 129). Even Fatou, the treasurer, makes an error that an outside bank regulator catches, along with a payment carrying only two of the three required signatures. The regulator’s warning is close to Olken’s conclusion: “If you let it be two when it is convenient, it will be two when it is not” (Hydara, 2026, p. 138). In the novel, ownership survives because it is combined with outside review and a ledger anyone can read. Or, as Fatou puts it about the charter’s rules, “Writing them is free,” but “Keeping them is not” (Hydara, 2026, p. 173).

The Counterweight: What Saying No Cost

If a community can stop a project, it can also stop something that would have helped it. The novel’s vote on the TransGlobal offer is the clearest test of this. The twenty-four delegates vote with black and white stones, and the offer is refused “Fourteen to ten” (Hydara, 2026, p. 200). Technically the TransGlobal deal is investment, not aid, but it shows what “can stop it” really means: the power to refuse comes with the cost of refusing.

Hydara does not hide those costs. The next year, a fall in crop prices caused by a glut and a subsidy far away leaves the Union with no surplus. The Teranu family cannot keep up their loan repayments, and they sell their bullocks and leave for the coast; old Teranu says, “My sons have waited ten years,” and “They are young once” (Hydara, 2026, p. 204). Kadiatou’s granddaughter Mariam, first on the list to study in the south, loses her place for a year. When Mariam demands that her grandmother admit the vote was wrong, Kadiatou says, “It cost you a year,” and “I will not tell you it did not. I will not tell you it was wrong either” (Hydara, 2026, p. 204). In the hot season, when the borehole drops and the taps are rationed, Fatou, who would have voted for the offer, says, “Reed would have carried this year,” and Kadiatou only answers, “Yes” (Hydara, 2026, p. 205). Most painfully, an old man named Jankero, who had asked Kadiatou how far away TransGlobal’s hospital would be, dies of heart failure. His son tells her, “He asked you how far the hospital would be,” and then, “It is as far as it was” (Hydara, 2026, p. 206). Years later, Kadiatou still names “the hospital that was never built” (Hydara, 2026, p. 227) as one of the reasons some people think Fatou was right.

The novel also raises a question about who “the community” is. When the women of the cooking group hear about the fifty thousand dollars per family, their leader, Isatou, asks one question: “Into whose hand?” (Hydara, 2026, p. 190). Payments would go to the head of each registered household, usually a man. Even generous outside money has an ownership problem. Fifteen years in, when a visitor from Madina asks, “Who is poor here now?”, Hassan, who led the Union’s technical work for years, admits that it is “The farmers at the edges,” and that “We have argued about it in council for eight years. We have not solved it” (Hydara, 2026, p. 229). One village, Kerewol, even sells its mill to a coastal company and leaves the Union, and “The charter allowed it” (Hydara, 2026, p. 225).

Resolution

Weighing these perspectives, I think the answer to my research question is a qualified yes. For long-term development projects such as wells, power plants, roads and mills, aid should be released only where the community that will live with the result owns it and can stop it. Easterly’s argument about feedback, Moyo’s warning about dependency, and the whole first half of the novel all point the same way: a project that the people cannot stop becomes, sooner or later, a project that somebody else controls. Proxima’s rule, along with Adam’s warning that a long period of outside control lets a village “forget it was ever meant to own the thing,” is a good model.

But the rule needs three limits, and each one comes from a perspective that challenged it.

First, emergency relief and basic health spending, the kinds of aid that Sachs and Banerjee and Duflo show can save lives quickly, should be exempt. Jankero’s death shows that the people who pay for slow ownership are often the old and the sick. A rule designed to protect villages from distant funders should not make a clinic wait on a committee.

Second, community ownership should always be paired with outside auditing and public accounts. Olken’s study shows that community meetings alone did not reduce corruption on average, and in the novel, Nafawol’s fund survives because a regulator checks its books and a schoolgirl can read the wall.

Third, if a community has the right to stop a project, the funder should help pay the cost of stopping. In the novel, Nafawol writes a “suspension clause” so that a village halted by the government does not fall into debt, but nothing covers a village that refuses a bad deal and then has a bad harvest. Proxima’s money “built things; it did not pay debts” (Hydara, 2026, p. 163). A small reserve fund for communities that use their veto would make the right to say no something poorer families could actually afford.

Limitations

My main stimulus is a novel, so its villages and outcomes are fictional, even if they are carefully realistic. The real studies I have used are also limited: Olken studied one program in one country, and the debate between Sachs, Easterly and Moyo is mostly about large government aid, which is different from a pooled fund like Proxima. Finally, “community” is harder to define than my research question assumes, as Madina’s single signatory and Isatou’s question both show.

Conclusion

Back in Tucson, I am not sure my neighbors would vote any better on the Colorado River than federal negotiators do, and I am not sure the aquifer under the city cares who owns it. But I do think people take better care of water they are responsible for. Songs of Dust and Water does not pretend that ownership is free. It takes fifteen years, a lost year of school, a family that leaves, and a hospital that was never built. In the last chapter, though, Kadiatou draws a bucket from the old well and finds that the water has come back, and she is not the only one with her hands on the rope. That outcome required that the people of Nafawol be able to say no, even when saying no was expensive.

References

Arizona to face water cuts after first-ever water shortage declared. (2021, August 16). AZFamily. https://www.azfamily.com/2021/08/16/arizona-face-water-cuts-after-first-ever-water-shortage-declared

Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. PublicAffairs.

Easterly, W. (2006). The white man’s burden: Why the West’s efforts to aid the rest have done so much ill and so little good. Penguin Press.

Hydara, M. J. (2026). Songs of dust and water.

Moyo, D. (2009). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Olken, B. A. (2007). Monitoring corruption: Evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia. Journal of Political Economy, 115(2), 200–249.

Sachs, J. D. (2005). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. Penguin Press.

All example essays

Get the book

Paperback, hardcover or Kindle. Choose where you shop.

Shop in:

Not sure yet? Read the opening of chapter 1 first.

Songs of Dust and WaterPaperback, hardcover and KindleGet the book