Orientalism is
a book published in 1978 by Edward Said that has been highly influential and controversial
in postcolonial studies and other fields. In the book, Said effectively redefined the ter !"rientalis# to ean a constellation of false assuptions underlying $e $estern stern attitudes toward the %iddle East. &his body of scholarship is arked by a !subtle and persistent Eurocentric pre'udice against (rabo)Islaic (rabo)Islaic peoples and their culture.# *e argued that a long tradition of roantici+ed iages of (sia and the %iddle East in $estern culture had served as an iplicit 'ustification for European and the (erican colonial and iperial abitions. ust as fiercely, he denounced the practice of (rab elites who internali+ed the -S and ritish orientalists/ ideas of (rabic culture. So far as the -nited States sees to be concerned, it is only a slight overstateent to say that %uslis and (rabs are essentially seen as either oil suppliers or potential terrorists. 0e 0ery little of the detail, the huan density, the passion of (rab)%osle (rab)%osle life has entered the awareness of even those people whose profession it is to report the (rab world. $hat we have instead is a series of crude, essentiali+ed caricatures of the Islaic world presented in such a way as to ake that world vulnerable to ilitary aggression. Edward Said ( central idea of Orientalism Orientalism is is that $estern knowledge about the East is not generated fro facts or reality, but fro preconceived archetypes that envision all !Eastern# societies as fundaentally siilar to one another, and fundaentally dissiilar to !$estern# societies. &his a priori knowledge priori knowledge establishes !the East# as antithetical to !the $est.# Such Eastern knowledge is constructed with literary te2ts and historical records that often are of liited understanding of the facts of life in the %iddle East. 3ollowing the ideas of %ichel 3oucault, Said ephasi+ed the relationship between power and knowledge in scholarly and popular thinking, in particular regarding European views of the Islaic (rab world. Said argued that "rient and "ccident worked as oppositional ters, so that the !"rient# was constructed as a negative inversion of $estern $estern culture. &he work of another thinker, (ntonio 4rasci, was also iportant in shaping Edward Said/s analysis in this area. In particular, Said can be seen to have been influenced by 4rasci/s notion of hegeony in understanding the pervasiveness of "rientalist constructs and representations in $estern $estern scholarship and reporting, and their relation to the e2ercise of power over the !"rient#. (lthough Edward Said liited his discussion to acadeic study of %iddle Eastern, (frican and (sian history and culture, he asserted that !"rientalis is, and does n ot erely represent, a significant diension of odern political and intellectual culture.# 56 Said/s Said/s discussion of acadeic "rientalis "rientalis is alost entirely liited liited to late 19th and early :th century scholarship. %ost acadeic (rea Studies departents had already abandoned an iperialist or colonialist paradig of scholarship. *e naes the work of ernard ;ewis as an e2aple of the continued e2istence of this paradig, but ack nowledges that it was already soewhat of an e2ception by the tie of his writing 51977. &he idea of an !"rient# is a crucial aspect of attepts to define !the $est.# $est.# &hus, histories of the 4reco<=ersian $ars ay contrast the onarchical governent of the =ersian Epire with the deocratic tradition of (thens, as a way to ake a ore general co parison between the 4reeks and the =ersians, and between !the $est# and !the East,# or !Europe# and !(sia,# but ake no ention of the other 4reek city states, ost of which were not ruled deocratically.
&aking a coparative and historical literary review of European, ainly ritish and 3rench, scholars and writers looking at, thinking about, talking about, and writing about the peoples of the %iddle East, Said sought to lay bare the relations of power between the coloni+er and the coloni+ed in those te2ts. Said/s writings have had far)reaching iplications beyond area studies in %iddle East, to studies of iperialist $estern attitudes to India, >hina and elsewhere. It was one of the foundational te2ts of postcolonial studies. Said later developed and odified his ideas in his book Culture and Imperialism 5199, another ust read. Edward Said, was a =alestinian (erican literary theorist and advocate for =alestinian rights. *e was a -niversity professor of English and >oparative ;iterature at >olubia -niversity and a founding figure in =ost)>olonial Studies. *e died in Septeber :: after a long battle with cancer. %any scholars now use Said/s work to attept to overturn long)held, often taken)for)granted $estern ideological biases regarding non)$esterners in scholarly thought. Soe post)colonial scholars would even say that the $est/s idea of itself was constructed largely by saying what others were not. If !Europe# evolved out of !>hristendo# as the !not)y+antiu,# early odern Europe in the late 1?th century 5see attle of ;epanto, 1671 defined itself as the !not)&urkey.# Said puts forward several definitions of !"rientalis# in the introduction to Orientalism. Soe of these have been ore widely @uoted and influential than othersA
!( way of coing to ters with the "rient that is based on the "rient/s special place in European $estern e2perience.# 51
!a style of thought based upon an ontological and episteological distinction ade b etween the "rient/ and 5ost of the tie Bthe "ccident/.# 5
!( $estern style for doinating, restructuring, and having authority over the "rient.# 5
!Cparticularly valuable as a sign of European)(tlantic power over the "rient than it is as a veridic discourse about the "rient.# 5?
!( distribution of geopolitical awareness into aesthetic, scholarly, econoic, sociological, historical, and philological te2ts.# 51
In his =reface to the :: edition of "rientalis, Said also warned against the !falsely unifying rubrics that invent collective identities,# citing such ters as !(erica,# !&he $est,# and !Isla,# which were leading to what he felt was a anufactured !clash of civilisations.# *ere/s a little critical !D(# to guide you through the central arguents 5the first 1:: or so pages of the te2t. Question One:
Said starts his first chapter with a @uote fro 3ourier in the Fescription de l/Egypte, !le genie in@uiet et abitieu2 de 5sic EuropeensC ipatient d/eployer les nouveau2 instruents de leur puissance, # which roughly translates as, !the abitious and an2ious spirit of the European s.. eager to use the new tools of their power.# E2plain the sentence and coent on why it is the opening @uote for this chapter. Answer:
&hough, Said notes, feelings of "rientalis and dearcation of an European !us# and an "riental !the# were long in the aking, the iddle of the eighteenth century brought about two principal eleents in the
relationship between the $est and the EastA !growing systeatic knowledge in Europe of the "rient, and Europe/s position of strength GreadA doinationH.# 59): &his eerging body of literature is what, according to Said, constituted European knowledge of the "rient and is what gave the control of the region < knowledge is power, Said writes, taking fro 3oucault. 5, ? , and : Said structures this paradig of knowledge in the following annerA !England knows Egypt, Egypt is what England knowsJ England knows that Egypt cannot have self)governentJ England confirs that by occupying EgyptJ for the Egyptians, Egypt is what England has occupied and now governsJ foreign occupation therefore becoes !the very basis# of conteporary Egyptian civili+ationJ Egypt re@uires, indeed insists upon, ritish occupation.# 5 (s such, England/s age of discovery, which preceded this period of doination and governent, produced a body of knowledge that allowed the to witness Egypt/s inabilities to self)govern and thus fed into England/s occupation. &his tieline presented by Said is the thrust of the first chapter < that is to say that the eergent feelings of colonialis ste fro systeatic knowledge flooding Europe which place Europe an culture and knowledge above that of the "rient and create a hierarchy of power between the $est and the East. &he tools of Europe/s power, the tools entioned in the @uote at the beginning of the chapter are these aforeentioned tools of knowledge. &he knowledge gathered during the (ge of Fiscovery was harnessed in the id)eighteenth century to serve racial and geographic paradigs of power. &his construct of knowledge feeds into Said pivotal phrase < !"rientalis orientali+es the "rient# < eaning that the "rient 5and the "ccident for that atter is an ade constructs built out of the systeatic knowledge gathered in Europe at this tie. &he "rient is only the "rient when placed in opposition to the "ccident. Question Two:
>oent on Said/s @uestion which is central to his entire bookA !>an one divide huan reality, as indeed huan reality sees to be genuinely divided, into clearly different cultures, histories, traditions, societies, even races, and survive the conse@uences huanlyK# 56 Is this siply a rhetorical @uestion or a stateent about a uch ore difficult and unresolved issue. Answer:
Ideally, Said/s book ais to answer this @uestion though in this conte2t 5placed in the first chapter the @uestion is asked rhetorically. Foes this stateent have to be either a rhetorical @uestion or an unresolved issueK >an it not be bothK In the first chapter it is eant to be rhetorical < it is eant to ake that reader believe that the author will attept to answer the @uestion or that the reader will be able to answer the @uestion coe the end of the book. In the conte2t of the whole book however, it is a stateent of deeply unresolved issues of race and superiority and how each and every individual defines theselves and those around the. Is Said not saying with this stateent that while we Gthe collective huan raceH wish no t to adit such things, we all define ourselves in opposition to othersK 5I a I because I a not youCso on and so forth >an discussing such practices and their roots ever ake the practice ceaseK I don/t think Said had an answer, try as he ight to find one in the process of this book.
Question Three:
E2plain what Said eans byA !(s a discipline representing institutionali+ed $estern knowledge of the "rient, "rientalis coes to e2ert a three)way force, on the "rient, on the "rientalist, and on the $estern !consuer# of "rientalis# 5?7 $hat do you think about Said/s iplied position about the constitution and growth of knowledgeK Answer:
&his stateent, on page ?7, harkens to the phase entioned in the response to the first @uestion < !"rientalis orientali+es the "rient.# "rientalis, as a practice, penali+es the "rient for not being Europe. In the process of penali+ing the "rient, the "ccident is orientalizing the "rient by ipleenting a set of constraints, liitations upon the "rient 5these constraints are apart of Said/s description of the practice of "rientalis on page 1. In this process that "ccident receives that it believes to be !truths# of the "rient, but in reality the !truths# they are ingesting are learned 'udgents of the "rient built upon the power dynaic established. &hus the process of "rientalis is as destructive to the $est as it is to the East, for as entioned above 5response to @uestion 1 both operate under false senses of theselves and the other. Question Four:
Said argues that there are two a'or reasons which favor a !te2tual attitude# Gaccepting the authority of te2tsH over direct huan encountersA one has to do with the huan need for the cofort of te2tual authority when confronted with !soething relatively unknown, threatening and previously distant#, the second has to do with !the appearance of success# 59 E2plain his point in relation to "rientalis. Answer:
Said writes that all things, all e2periences and places, cane be described as a book. &herefore, all reality can be described and thus descriptions garner authority as sources of reality. *is over siplified e2aple of the an who reads of a fierce lion, encounters a fierce lion, believes in the authority of the author about lions and thus subse@uently about all other realities that he or she ight write on is apropos. &he written word garners power because of its relationship 5even if only perceived relationship to reality. &his relationship that Said constructs of how an individual will take a written account as authentic over or in place of a personal account is a large piece of both Said/s and 3oucault/s arguents on the power of both language and knowledge. &his is essential to the "rientalist dialectic because the power relationship between East and $est, "rient and "ccident, is built upon power 5readA language and knowledge. If the $est has ore knowledge they have ore power, then get ore knowledge through language 5written word, thus power is ibued into written accounts of travels in the "rient and encounters with the "rient. &hus the written account will trup the personal account. &his book and its ain arguents serves as the basis for a paper I wrote on "rientalist painting and Lapoleon/s e2plorations in Egypt and 4reater Syria,here.
