orientalism explored

27
RELS 3990 Orientalism Explored Taylor Webb 2/1/2011 1

Upload: abu-isa-webb

Post on 29-Nov-2014

129 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Orientalism Explored

RELS 3990

Orientalism Explored

Taylor Webb

2/1/2011

1

Page 2: Orientalism Explored

The following essay is part of an independent study done through the

University of Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, for the Religious Studies

department. It is a 3000-level study that received a B+ before corrections

were made. This is the corrected copy that was also submitted. The purpose

of publishing this paper is to give other students and prospective students an

idea of what to expect as far as quality, subject, and quantity if they are

considering a similar field or an independent study at the University of

Lethbridge. This is the first of two essays that were researched

independently for the same study. This work can be copied or reproduced in

any way freely, however all regular plagiarism restrictions still apply. The

main area of study is Edward Said’s book Orientalism which can be found

free right here on scribd.

2

Page 3: Orientalism Explored

Introduction

Edward Said’s Orientalism is an immensely influential book because of

its impact on the intellectual world. Through the articulation of a basic mode

of human self-understanding and interaction Said touches on a common

undercurrent in many disciplines while elaborating on only a single

expression of the philosophy he explores. This paper will be an attempt to

extract and understand the theory that Orientalism is based on and its

application to the subject adopted by Said. I will proceed first through an

extrapolation of the contents of the book, pausing where necessary to better

define or outline important points. Having covered the content of the original

book I will then discuss some of the many criticisms faced by Said and their

bearing on his core ideas.

It seems Orientalism has come to signify something much greater than

originally intended. In his work Said defines the concept repeatedly in novel

ways underscoring the vastness as well as the ambiguity of the term. This is

not because he does not have a definite idea of what it is he is defining, but

rather because he is defining for the very first time a concept that has

existed unexpressed in the minds of men for generations. Said uses the

example of orientalism as an academic subject, but his revelations touch on

a broader undercurrent in human relations. By the time Said addresses his

subject it already has had a tangible history for millennia. He repeatedly uses

examples from ancient Greece to support his thesis, but the major part of his

3

Page 4: Orientalism Explored

work is on “modern Orientalism,” which occurs mainly from the eighteenth

century onward. The term “orientalism” is taken from a very well established

academic community and so Said must already work with a concept with

specific, sometimes dogmatic, understandings and then redefine it according

to a much more broad, and in many aspects opposing, view point. For these

reasons orientalism as a concept becomes very hard to define in one brief

sentence, and becomes even more difficult to deconstruct.

Orientalism

Said presents nearly an entire chapter of definitions and parameters

for his idea, and is open about his broad definition, he says on the very first

page “It will be clear to the reader (and will become clearer still on the pages

that follow) that by Orientalism I mean several things, all of them, in my

opinion, interdependent.”1 Said later goes on to describe the hegemony

involved in the propagation of orientalism, summed up very well in his

phrase “Orientalism lives on through its doctrines and theses about the

Orient and the Oriental.”2 This helps him to define more closely the nuances

of the concept, and get to the conclusion, what the hegemonic method has

created. He says “because of Orientalism the Orient was not (and is not) a

free subject of thought or action.”3 Through exploring and backing up this

claim Said describes orientalism as a form of oppression, but at the same

1 Edward Said, Orientalism (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978), 2.2 Ibid, 23 Ibid, 3

4

Page 5: Orientalism Explored

time he says “European Culture gained in strength and identity by setting

itself off against the Orient,”4 underscoring the oppressive nature of

orientalism but also importantly highlighting the fact that Orientalism is a

form of self-expression and identity creation for Europe. This was one of the

most important claims that Said made, it was this claim that was adapted

and re-adapted into hundreds of modes in historical analysis, and this was

one of the most criticized and praised ideas in Said’s career5.

Another very influential and important claim made by Said in the

beginning of his book is that political entities supersede other

categorizations. This implies that an American or British explorer of the

Orient must understand the orient through an orientalist mentality first and

foremost despite his personal goals or aims. This idea is expressed in no

uncertain terms when Said affirms that “all academic knowledge about India

and Egypt is somehow tinged and impressed with, violated by, the gross

political fact.” This idea permeates Said’s concept of orientalism and wins

him again a great number of critics. The implication that is taken from this is

that no Westerner, Orientalist or not, can understand the Orient properly,

and indeed their attempts to understand the Orient no matter how well-

intentioned will almost definitely lead to the oppression of that Orient.

A related and supporting idea would come up in the academic world a

few years later through the avenue of Anthropology. The Sapir-Whorf

4 Ibid, 35 Gaham Hugan, “(Not) Reading Orientalism” Research in African Literatures 36 (2005): 125

5

Page 6: Orientalism Explored

hypothesis includes the idea that “The structure of anyone’s native language

strongly influences or fully determines the world-view he will acquire as he

learns the language.”6 This theory seems to support Said’s assumption,

especially considering the fact that much of Said’s sources are in fact

examples of Orientalist literature, emphasising the role of language to form

the perspectives of a culture. This would imply that the French, English and

later American Orientalists were nearly incapable of understanding the

Orient in any way other than the way it had been presented to them through

the literature common in the era. Furthermore the Orientalists would also be

rendered incapable of knowing that they were misrepresenting the Orient as

any way of communicating this idea to them would have to be through the

very languages that trained them to think that way. Even if the Orientalists

took on the project of understanding their “subject” cultures in their native

languages they would still be educated through means that would lead to a

distinctly orientalist flavour of the language7. Said discusses this later in his

work at various points where he elaborates on the translation and language

instruction principles of the time, and when he talks about contemporary

understandings of the influence of language on culture.

The question of agency also challenges the way much of Western

academic research is done, and the claims to objectivity that it holds dear.

6 Paul Kay. "What is the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis?" American Anthropologist 86, no. 1 (March 1984): 667 Some introductions into Oriental languages such as William Jones’s translation of the Sakuntala were

very wide-spread and would have been read by both those interested in learning about the language and

those simply widening their literary horizons.

6

Page 7: Orientalism Explored

The implications of this forced and sub-conscious bias exclude the West from

the ability to analyse and interpret foreign cultures within or outside the

Orient and invalidate much of the scholarship that is foundational to Western

hegemony. Said admits later that there were those engaged in the “career”

of the Orient during the publication of his book that quite agreed with him,

however, the implications of what he was saying would lead to a significant

devaluation of their professions were it to be accepted and so they attacked

him in defence of themselves rather than in pursuit of the truth8. Aside from

the academic world the implications of this statement become even more

tangible when it is taken into diplomatic and political arenas. The challenge

of the academic community to accept a new idea is great, but in the political

sphere where “tenure” is much more precarious it can be an even greater

challenge and much more dangerous to suddenly not know the world you are

involved with9. For this reason the criticism of Said’s ideas must be very

heavily scrutinized by those interested in what realities are imagined, which

ones are not, and how they relate to one another.

Furthermore it can easily be seen that there is a certain inertia to the

intellectual world that tends to oppress change, even progress, in favour of

the status-quo. This too is an important theme of orientalism, it can be said

that it is not because of the Orient’s inherent incapacities but rather because

of the oppressive incapacitation of the Orient through Occidental hegemony

8 Edward Said. "Orientalism Reconsidered." Cultural Critique, (1985): 99.

9 This can be seen today as the politics in the Middle East are being re-written in a way that Orientalists

are having trouble adapting to.

7

Page 8: Orientalism Explored

that the reality described in Orientalist literature is realized. This

incapacitation of the Orient provides a space for Orientalist academics to fit

into and contribute to society, and once they are there they are quite

opposed to re-evaluating the appropriateness or effects of their existence.

A related and final elaboration that helps to outline the concept of

Orientalism very well is that of agency. Said is careful to include in his

definition of orientalism the concept that the oriental is incapable of defining

himself or his history alone and is in need of the Orienatlist to define him.

This occurs repeatedly through orientalist history as expounded by Said, but

even comes up again after the publication of his book in the work of a critic,

Daniel Pipes. Said is quick to use this opportunity to outline his theory even

better when he says “Here, of course, is perhaps the most familiar of

Orientalism’s themes – since Orientals cannot represent themselves they

must therefore be represented by others who know more about Islam than

Islam knows about itself.”10 With this additional definition Said is able to

paint a relatively clear and full picture of what the many things are that he

means by “Orientalism.”

To finalize a definition of Orientalism according to the interpretations

of Edward Said: Orientalism is essentially a method used by European

scholars to define and promote a certain European identity. This identity was

created through defining Europe against the Orient, and therefore the

hegemony of this identity creates a lens through which all Western

10 Said, "Orientalism Reconsidered," 97.

8

Page 9: Orientalism Explored

scholarship must see the Orient. Because this lens is in fact a mirror, and

there is very little of the Orient to be seen through it, Orientalists are not

able to deal or interact with the “real” Orient in a meaningful way, but rather

must attempt to deal with a fabrication of inferiority and chaos. Because of

their subsequent methodologies and manners in dealing with the Orient it is

oppressed, incapacitated, and loses its agency in the eyes of the Orientalist

policy makers and overlords and is thereby oppressed, incapacitated, and

stripped of its agency in reality through their policies and rulership.

The history of Orientalism is described in detail in the later part of his

book, serving to illustrate many of Said’s illuminating observations.

Orientalism is then followed through many key players such as Renan, Stacy,

Flaubert, Lane and others. As he states in the beginning, though, Said traces

almost entirely British and French sources, concluding that any other sources

were essentially secondary11.

Said places the foundation of “modern Orientalism” around the

beginning of the nineteenth century12 with Silvestre de Stacy in France

largely because “he was a self-aware inaugurator13” of Orientalism. Said

does not, however, mean to imply that Orientalism was an ‘invention’ of

sorts by de Stacy. On the contrary Said explicitly states that his thesis in fact

was that “the essential aspects of modern Orientalist theory... can be

11 Said, Orientalism12 Ibid., 124.13 Ibid., 124

9

Page 10: Orientalism Explored

understood... as a set of structures inherited from the past.”14 He describes

de Stacy’s Influence in France, French policy in the Orient itself, including

very direct influence such as the contributions to the tableau historique15 but

maintains the link to the earliest Orientalist sensibilities.

Throughout his discussion of the history of Orientalism Said

continuously re-defines what it is the Orientalist academics were doing.

Through the practice of Orientalism Said shows the reader just how in many

very specific cases the Orientalists were intentionally or otherwise

oppressing the Orient. This background serves very well as an exposé of

Orientalist thought, bringing the reader to a closer understanding of the very

complex ideas that Said starts the work with. The history also sets up one of

the principles that Said is very interested in exposing: the continuity

between the religious and academic institutions of Europe.

Through establishing a firm link with the past Said is able to continue

with great continuity to the colonization of the Orient. In this way such

conquests as Napoleon’s in Egypt do not seem sudden or out of place, but

perfectly appropriate for an Orientalist state to pursue. Furthermore the

power structures that are set up in the Oriental colonies are quite easy to

understand, and even more importantly, easy to see for what they are, for

later when the current power structures of those colonies are discussed the

reader has an appreciation for the history and ideals behind the manipulation

14 Ibid., 12215 Ibid., 126

10

Page 11: Orientalism Explored

of the Orient. This leads the reader to be more capable of understanding the

complex links between Orientalist colonialism and Oriental power structures

such as the contemporary Egyptian ruling class.

Said’s last chapter is on the contemporary state of Orientalism, or

orientalism as it relates to the twentieth century. He describes the various

tensions that developed and changed as America came to power, as Turkey

fell from power, and as the first and second world wars changed the world

powers at large. Said expounds on the perceptions of anonymity and

tendency toward collectiveness that are tacked on to the image of the

typical “Arab”, and on how the mystique granted to the Orient helped to

subordinate rather than empower it after it had to be realized and “dealt

with” by the world powers.

The final chapter is devoted to the post-war period and especially the

Arab-Israeli conflict. The mystique and ambiguity of the Arab and the idea of

a single “form” of Arab are shown to be drawn up from the turn of the

century and adapted to modern Orientalist tastes. The idea of what an Arab

is and the immortal and unchanging nature of this generalization are

explored in great detail, and the follies of these interpretations are

demonstrated in such a way as to expose and discredit the whole practice of

Orientalism. Said spares no blows for example when he lashes out at the

11

Page 12: Orientalism Explored

generalizations regarding the Arab language16, and even goes after Bernard

Lewis for what he has left out of his literature as much as what he has in it17.

In total the final two chapters offer as much insight in the two of them

as the first one had alone, and much of it is repeated, though more carefully

articulated and very well illustrated. This leads the reader out of an obscure

and sometimes incomprehensible conversation based in epistemology and

philosophy and into a much more practical application of the ideas in

question where he can enjoy a relatively lucid and contiguous demonstration

of very complicated concepts. Furthermore the history of Orientalism as

interpreted by Said demonstrates the concepts he espouses very well, and

outlines the traps and problems faced by scholars who may be involved with

simply transmitting “idées, recues.”

Near the end of the book Said states that it is not his project to attack

the entirety of Western scholarship on Islam or the Orient in general, but

rather it is his goal to bring to light the aspects of it which are not in fact

borne out of an honest interest in the truth, but which are simply self-

replicating and constraining ideas that he calls the “straight jacket” of

Orientalism.18

Criticism

16 Ibid., 32017 Ibid., 31818 Ibid., 326

12

Page 13: Orientalism Explored

Orientalism is Said’s most heavily criticized and discussed book for a

variety of reasons. There are a few objections that are commonly made to

Said’s work, and they seem to repeat themselves in the innumerable books

and articles written about Orientalism in a context more familiar to each

contemporary audience as time goes on. The sheer number and frequency of

the criticisms against Orientalism show the great importance that the work

has in many varying fields of study and many varying cultures.

One criticism that turns up quite frequently is that Said was far too

specific in his application of Orientalism19. The accusation is that Said was

too narrow-sighted to realize the scope and impact of his theory, as he

focused instead on a very specific context in which Orientalism existed. More

importantly he focused only on that mode of Orientalism that was most

connected to his own life and identity. This especially poses a problem

because it seems to promote a sort of exceptionalism regarding the Oriental-

Occidental clash20, possibly passing a very important value judgement on

other civilisations and their conflicts.

Said does, however, recognize his narrow approach and he justifies it

by saying that a broader approach is not possible due to the sheer volume of

19 C.F. Beckingham. "Review [Untitled]." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 42, no. 3

(1979)

20 Fred Halliday. "'Orientalism' and its Critics." British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 20, no. 2

(1993): 158

13

Page 14: Orientalism Explored

evidence available21. Even in his justification of such a narrow approach he

does belie a very particular appreciation for the application of his idea only

to the interaction between Europe and the Orient. No matter how broad or

constrained, or how nuanced and subtle one makes these terms out to be

they are remarkably specific compared to how immense the subject could be

if it were applied (as it has been innumerable times since) to a situation

outside the interaction between Europe and the East. Orientalism, the book,

gets its name from the area of study that it critiques and opposes, however

the underlying criticism and the epistemological impact of the realization of

Said’s idea extends far beyond the constraints of “the European idea of the

Orient” which Said states is his original “guiding principal.”22

The hegemonic domination of one culture over another is a

characteristic in nearly every culture on the planet. Here in Canada we are

no strangers to defining ourselves based on what we are not (American for

example), and defining others based on what they are not allowed to be

(good hockey players to continue the example). Said’s focus on the Oriental-

Occidental clash is very illuminating, but the application of his principles to

dozens of other disciplines, and their use as a tool in illuminating the

conflicts and relationships of hundreds of other cultural exchanges illustrate

that it was not his focus on Orientalism that was his most valuable exploit,

21 Said, Orientalism, 16-1722 Ibid., 16

14

Page 15: Orientalism Explored

but the tools he created to better interpret and understand human power

structures in a more general sense.

Another critique regarding the imposed limits Said set on his study is in

his deliberate exclusion of German literature23. This has little relevance on

his core ideas, except that it displays again that his focus on a specific mode

or historical occurrence of the power systems he is analysing is not as

complete or useful as his comments on the broader principles that have

been taken from his work. The various problems that have been picked over

by critics in the method and historical nature of Said’s book could lead to the

conclusion made by Manzalaoui that “Inside this prolix and ill-considered

book there is a slimmer and genuinely excellent one trying to get out.”24 The

implication, to me, is that if Said were to have written a short, general study

of power structures and cross-cultural exchange illustrated and supported by

the institution of Orientalism it would have been a much more concise and

lucid read than his current book.

Said does acknowledge the potential for adaptation of his idea later in

his article Orientalism Reconsidered and he seems to approve of the very

diverse fields in which it has been applied. He says “There are many more

examples that one could give of analyses and theoretical projects

undertaken out of similar impulses as those fuelling the anti-Orientalist

critique.” It is obvious then that Said realized the full potential of his critique

23 Beckingham, “Review [Untitled]” 24 Mahmoud Manzalaoui. "Review: [Untitled]." Modern Language review 75, no. 4 (Oct 1980): 837

15

Page 16: Orientalism Explored

after all, but since he claims no responsibility for the origination of the basic

concept that has been so readily adapted and re-applied (that of the “anti-

Oriental critique”) it follows that he may have felt that he was in fact simply

contributing to an already existing academic tradition. The goal of Said’s

book it seems was to criticize the practice of orientalism in following an

academic tradition that already existed, hence his very simple title, however,

the ideas that Said put forward were not after all only applicable to

Orientalism, but to a large part of human interaction in general. Because

Said wished to reveal the basic drivers of orientalism, from identity creation,

to domination, to politicisation of perspectives, his book is justifiably

constrained only to the practice of Orientalism, but because of the way

Orientalism was exposed in Said’s work his ideas have become much more

foundational to understanding inter-cultural relationships in general, thus

creating a tension between the very specific content of the book Orientalism

and the much more broad application of its principles.

A further very common critique of Said’s work is that Said himself

exhibits and promotes orientalism through the book that bears that name.

This allegation of hypocrisy is based largely on conclusions about the agency

of the Orient that Said makes. In claiming that the Orient is truly

incapacitated by the Orientalists the implication is that Said himself is in fact

contributing to the incapacitation of the Orient in the same way the

Orientalists are. Said does not have a fatalistic approach to this concept

however, just as his conclusions about the Orientalists’ scholarship does not

16

Page 17: Orientalism Explored

lead him to declare them completely incapable of academic contributions

were they to address the faults inherent in their ideals.25

Said does, even in his rebuttal to his critics, tend to categorize others

quite openly. He systematically categorizes the opponents of Orientalism in

Orientalism Reconsidered by saying “Some attack Orientalism as a prelude

to assertions about the virtues of one or another native culture: these are

the nativists. Others criticize Orientalism as a defence on attacks on one or

another political creed: these are the nationalists. Still others criticize

Orientalism for falsifying the nature of Islam these are, grosso modo the

fundamentalists.”26 He then excludes himself from any of these

categorisations and says “I have always tried never to forsake a critical

sense or reflective detachment.”27 This method of categorization and then

implied self-exeptionalism seems to be the very root of the criticism Said

lays against the Orientalists. Here again we see the implication of moral and

academic inferiority of those who seem to hold opinions based on one of the

constructed categorisations of the author, while the author holds himself up

as largely untouched by those same categories, and capable by virtue of not

being a part of those categories to impose his own unbiased interpretation.

Instead of being based on a geographical and historical proximity as is the

case with the study of the Orient, Said’s categories are based on ideological

and academic proximity. Indeed even the term “Orientalism” is questioned

25 Said, Orientalism, 32626 Said, "Orientalism Reconsidered," 94-95

27 Ibid, 95

17

Page 18: Orientalism Explored

by Fred Halliday for possibly over-generalizing and “[identifying] such a

widespread and pervasive single error at the core of a range of literature.”28

Again, it must be seen that Said does recognize repeatedly in

Orientalism that the generalizations and categories used by all academics

are full of holes, generally flawed, and are far from absolute. One can

assume that the categories Said imposes are likewise generalizations, not

restrictive and neither entirely inclusive nor exclusive of a whole group.

There is still no method or language that academics can use to

constructively talk about the world they live in without including some form

of false category or generalization. Perhaps it is because of the effects found

in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and we are restricted by our limited

languages to speak in broad and inaccurate generalities, but regardless of

why we do it, as Said himself says “I would not have undertaken a book of

this sort if I did not also believe that there is a scholarship that is not as

corrupt… as the kind I have been mainly depicting.”29

Conclusion

28 Haliday, “Orientalism and its Critics,” 14829 Said, Orientalism, 326

18

Page 19: Orientalism Explored

Despite the criticisms, attacks, and errors faced by Orientalism, the

book has remained a foundational learning tool for decades. It often seems

that Said goes out of his way to make his work inaccessible by failing to

translate foreign phrases and repeating ideas in a language ever growing in

complexity. Despite this inaccessibility, decades of scholarship have been

put forward in an effort to understand it, challenge students and scholars by

it, and adapt it to an every growing number of areas of study. The book

recieves as much criticism or more than it does praise indicating that it is a

challenge; a challenge to read, a challenge to the status-quo, and it would be

a challenge to replace. Said has changed the academic world with this book,

and it may be the perfect way for the current changes in the political world

of the Orient to be understood.

19

Page 20: Orientalism Explored

BibliographyArkoun, Mohammed. "Rethinking Islam Today." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (Sage Publications, Inc.) 588 (July 2003): 18-39.

Beckingham, C. F. "Review [Untitled]." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 42, no. 3 (1979): 562-564.

Halliday, Fred. "'Orientalism' and its Critics." British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 20, no. 2 (1993): 145-163.

Huggan, Gaham. "(Not) Reading Orientalism." Research in African Literatures (Indiana University Press) 36, no. 3 (2005): 124-136.

Kay, Paul. "What is the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis?" American Anthropologist (Blackwell Publishing) 86, no. 1 (March 1984): 65-79.

Lewis, Bernard. Islam and the West. USA: Oxford University Press, 1994.

—. The Muslim Discovery of Europe. New York: W.W. Norton $ Company, 1982.

Manzalaoui, Mahmoud. "Review: [Untitled]." Modern Language review 75, no. 4 (Oct 1980): 837-839.

Rice, James P. "In the Wake of Orientalism." Comparative Literature Studies 37, no. 2 (2000): 223-238.

Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978.

Said, Edward. "Orientalism Reconsidered." Cultural Critique, 1985: 89-107.

Turner, Bryan S. Orientalism, Postmodernism & Globalism. Taylor&Francis, 1994.

Varisco, Daniel Martin. Reading Orientalism: Said and the unsaid. University of Washington Press, 2007.

Vtikiotis, P.J. Revolution in the Middle East, and Other Case Studies; proceedings of a seminar. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1972.

Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West. New York: Prometheus Books, 2007.

20