Africa: Etats faillis, miracles ordinaires

The book reads like a personal narrative, but I wonder what drove the decision to frame it this way instead of a traditional history. Did the author want to highlight individual stories or broader trends?

The book spans thousands of years and countless cultures. Was that breadth helpful or did it make parts feel rushed or superficial?

With such a vast continent, I was curious how the author decided what to include or omit. Did the structure help in understanding the interconnectedness of its regions?