Orientalism and Area Studies: Continuities and Differences on Power Discourse

Presentation by Vee Chansa-Ngavej

Concept of OrientalismSocial / intellectual construct of the “Orient”

through perspective of “Orientalists” (i.e. the western observer) based on unequal power relations (colonizer/colonized)

Imposition of identity of “the Other” in relation to self, creating reified opposites

Portrayal of the Orient as exotic, effeminate, disorderly, conquerable (as juxtaposed to the West)

Concept (Cont.) System of knowledge about the “Orient” that is

employed to justify colonialism, generated by the West, for the West

Michel Foucault – Knowledge as power: Power reinforces knowledge, knowledge perpetuates power!

Dissemination of knowledge during colonial era by those who held power was key

Concept (Cont.) Rise of Orientalist scholarship during

British-French colonial rule (books, travelogues, novels, art)

In US, traces of Orientalism has continued since post-WWII through various media outlets (Clash of Civilizations, Islam and terrorism, Japan’s economic rise during 1980s, current rise of China)

Other colonial powers engaged in Orientalism as well: Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch, etc.

Origins of OrientalismExpansion of West to the “New

World” Began as religious endeavor, later

developed into colonialist and capitalist enterprise

Preconceptions and Intention (agenda/motives/interests) of the West: exploitation and rule over the powerless

Knowledge of other areas developed into discourse of power and representation, identifying “Us” against “the Other”

Rise of OrientalismOrientalist scholarship peaked during heyday of

British and French colonialism (19th cent.) Clear patterns in Orientalist scholarship:

1. Projection of idealization (innocent, simple, exotic societies living in harmony with nature) 2. Tendency to lump different cultures together (inaccurate stereotyping) 3. Degradation of “Other” as barbaric and uncivilized, justifying imposition of European “order” and “noble” laws/norms Stemmed from asymmetry of power relations!

Decline of OrientalismSaw rapid decline in post-colonial era

(WWII, fall of European empires, rise of nationalist and independence movements)

US hegemony since post-WWII: Area Studies replaced Orientalism as mainstream study of “The Other”

Shift of methodology from passive Orientalist accounts towards the social scientific study of other regions (anthropology, sociology, political science, economic development)

Decline of Orientalism (cont.)

Edward Said’s critique of Orientalism (1978) considered as seminal study on post-colonialism – sparked a revolution against mainstream thinking – rise of the voices of feminists, the marginalized

Gave “Orientalism” a bad name – politically incorrect!

Local accounts of the “East” generated by the “natives” are not given importance as much as Western accounts

Call for a humanistic critique to open up intellectual knowledge and exchange from different sources, creating less divide between “East” and “West”… free the shackles of imperialist scholarship which were inherent in Orientalism

Edward Said – Orientalism (1978)

Brief Synopsis of Edward SaidPalestinian born in Jerusalem (1935)

Father fought for Americans in WWI Attended elite British school in Egypt but

was expelled for troublesome behaviour. Sent to elite private boarding US,

obtained degrees in English literature from Princeton and Harvard

Taught as professor at Columbia, Yale Stanford (wrote Orientalism in 1978), etc.

Died in 2003 Experienced world from two perspectivesChildhood experience under colonial rule

Said’s propositions Methodology on dealing with different

sources: Advocate the philological approach – study of literatures and cultures in their original forms and historical contexts – empathizing with the author of those works

Objective: To generate knowledge from the perspectives of both the subjugator (powerful) and subjugated (powerless)...knowledge as non-political “truths”

Legacy of OrientalismKarl Marx and Max Weber, founding fathers

of modern sociology, characterized Asiatic and Islamic societies as follows:

Marx: Asiatic societies are stagnant, incapable of developing into modern societies because they lack pre-conditions such as class struggle, making capitalist colonialism a regrettable necessity

Weber: Islamic societies are “mosaic” of tribes and groups, never cohering into proper social system, existing under despotic rule with Islam as monolithic religion

Legacy of Orientalism (cont.)

Language of US foreign policy discourse on terrorism, esp. after 9/11 (“Us” vs. “”Them”) Islam = terrorism

Ethnocentric view in American policy towards Middle East and other regions (spread democracy and western liberal values / western economic development model)

Area Studies scholars dilemma over objective of discipline: to serve national interests or to simply “know” facts and establish “truths” (anti-war protests against Vietnam and Iraq, insensitivity to “national” interests)

Alienation of Area Studies scholars by producing works critical of US govt.

The changing discourse on power?Due to globalization and economic

development, power relations have been distributed more evenly among nations, races, regions and societies of the world

Voices previously neglected and suppressed have been given more intellectual space and free from “Orientalist” shackles

Knowledge of the world has, as a result, become increasingly more contextualized, localized and complete

Two contrasting images to illustrate

Misconceptions still remain in discourse of “Us” vs. “Them”, but scenes of anti-war protests (right) would not exist in era of colonialism!

Questions

Can one study and generate knowledge about other cultures and societies completely detached from one’s own perspective?

Should the aim of Area Studies be to serve national interests or should scholars conduct research to simply “know” facts and establish “truths”?