Difference between revisions of "Orientalism" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
Line 105: Line 105:
 
[[Image:Léon Cogniet - L'Expédition d'Egypte.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Léon Cogniet]]'s  1835 depiction of [[Napoleon I of France|Bonaparte]]'s Egyptian Expedition expresses Western perception of "The Exotic Orient"]]
 
[[Image:Léon Cogniet - L'Expédition d'Egypte.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Léon Cogniet]]'s  1835 depiction of [[Napoleon I of France|Bonaparte]]'s Egyptian Expedition expresses Western perception of "The Exotic Orient"]]
  
American-Palestinian scholar [[Edward Said]] made a famous analysis of the Orient in his groundbreaking work ''[[Orientalism (book)|Orientalism]],'' coining the term himself. Through his study of literary texts and historical records, Said interpreted that the Orient contains societies all fundamentally similar, all sharing crucial characteristics that are not possessed by "Western" societiesSaid beleived that the Orient and Occident worked as oppositional terms, so that the "Orient" acted as a negative inversion of Western culture.  
+
==Orientalism==
 +
{{Main|Orientalism (book)}}
 +
Said is best known for describing and critiquing "[[Orientalism]]", which he perceived as a constellation of false assumptions underlying [[Western world|Western]] attitudes toward the [[Middle East|East]]. In ''[[Orientalism (book)|Orientalism]]'' (1978), Said described the "subtle and persistent [[Eurocentrism|Eurocentric]] prejudice against Arabo-Islamic peoples and their culture."<ref>Keith Windschuttle, [http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/17/jan99/said.htm "Edward Said's "Orientalism revisited,"] [[The New Criterion]] [[January 17]], [[1999]], accessed [[January 19]], [1999].</ref> He argued that a long tradition of false and romanticized images of Asia and the [[Middle East]] in [[Western society|Western culture]] had served as an implicit justification for Europe and America's colonial and imperial ambitions. Just as fiercely, he denounced the practice of Arab elites who [[internalization|internalized]] the American and British orientalists' ideas of [[Arabic culture]].
  
Before Said's work, "Oriental" was widely used to mean the opposite of "[[occident]]al" ('western'). Although comparisons made between the two terms were generally unfavorable to the former, respected institutions like the [[Oriental Institute]] of Chicago, the London [[School of Oriental and African Studies]], and the [[Università degli studi di Napoli L'Orientale]], carried the term with no explicit reproach.  Following the ideas of [[Michel Foucault]], Said emphasized the relationship between power and knowledge in scholarly and popular thinking, in particular regarding European views of the [[Islamic]] [[Arab]] world.
+
In 1980 Said criticized what he regarded as poor understanding of the Arab culture in the West:
Although Edward Said limited his discussion to academic study of Middle Eastern, African and Asian history and culture, he asserted that "Orientalism is, and does not merely represent, a significant dimension of modern political and intellectual culture." (p. 53) The idea of an "Orient" is a crucial aspect of attempts to define "[[the West]]." Thus, histories of the [[Greco-Persian Wars]] may contrast the monarchical government of the Persian Empire with the democratic tradition of Athens, as a way to make a more general comparison between the Greeks and the Persians, and between "[[western world|the West]]" and "[[eastern world|the East]]," or "[[Europe]]" and "[[Asia]]," but make no mention of the other Greek city states, most of which were not ruled democratically.
 
  
Taking a comparative and historical literary review of European, mainly British and French, scholars and writers looking at, thinking about, talking about, and writing about the peoples of the Middle East, Said sought to lay bare the relations of power between the colonizer and the colonized in those texts. Said's writings have had far-reaching implications beyond area studies in [[Middle East]], to studies of imperialist Western attitudes to [[India]], [[China]] and elsewhere. It was one of the foundational texts of [[postcolonialism|postcolonial studies]]. Said later developed and modified his ideas in his book ''Culture and Imperialism'' (1993).  
+
{{cquote|So far as the United States seems to be concerned, it is only a slight overstatement to say that Moslems and Arabs are essentially seen as either oil suppliers or potential terrorists. Very little of the detail, the human density, the passion of Arab-Moslem life has entered the awareness of even those people whose profession it is to report the Arab world. What we have instead is a series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world presented in such a way as to make that world vulnerable to military aggression.<ref>Edward W. Said, [http://www.thenation.com/doc/19800426/19800426said "Islam Through Western Eyes,"] [[The Nation]] [[April 26]], [[1980]], first posted online [[January 1]], [[1998]], accessed [[December 5]], [[2005]].</ref>}}
 +
 
 +
===The argument===
 +
''Orientalism'' has had a significant impact on the fields of [[literary theory]], [[cultural studies]] and human [[geography]], and to a lesser extent on those of history and oriental studies. Taking his cue from the work of [[Jacques Derrida]] and [[Michel Foucault]], and from earlier critics of western Orientalism such as A. L. Tibawi,<ref>A. L. Tibawi, "English-speaking Orientalists: A Critique of Their Approach to Islam and Arab Nationalism", ''Islamic Quarterly'' 8 (1964): 25-45</ref> Anouar Malek-Abdel,<ref>Anouar Malek-Abdel, "L’orientalisme en crise", ''Diogène'' 44 (1963): 109-41</ref> [[Maxime Rodinson]],<ref>"Bilan des études mohammadiennes", ''Revue Historique'' 465.1 (1963)</ref> and Richard William Southern,<ref>Richard William Southern, ''Western views of Islam in the Middle Ages'' (1978; Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1962).</ref> Said argued that Western writings on the Orient, and the perceptions of the East purveyed in them, are suspect, and cannot be taken at face value. According to Said, the history of European colonial rule and political domination over the East distorts the writings of even the most knowledgeable, well-meaning and sympathetic Western ‘Orientalists’ (a term that he transformed into a pejorative):
 +
 
 +
{{cquote|I doubt if it is controversial, for example, to say that an Englishman in India or Egypt in the later nineteenth century took an interest in those countries which was never far from their status in his mind as British colonies. To say this may seem quite different from saying that all academic knowledge about India and Egypt is somehow tinged and impressed with, violated by, the gross political fact – and yet ''that is what I am saying'' in this study of Orientalism.  (Said, ''Orientalism'' 11)}}
 +
 
 +
Said contended that Europe had dominated Asia politically so completely for so long that even the most outwardly objective Western texts on the East were permeated with a bias that even most Western scholars could not recognise. His contention was not only that the West has conquered the East politically but also that Western scholars have appropriated the exploration and interpretation of the Orient’s languages, history and culture for themselves. They have written Asia’s past and constructed its modern identities from a perspective that takes Europe as the norm, from which the "exotic", "inscrutable" Orient deviates.
 +
 
 +
Said concludes that Western writings about the Orient depict it as an irrational, weak, feminised "Other", contrasted with the rational, strong, masculine West, a contrast he suggests derives from the need to create "difference" between West and East that can be attributed to immutable "essences" in the Oriental make-up.  In 1978, when the book was first published, with memories of the [[Yom Kippur war]] and the [[OPEC]] crisis still fresh, Said argued that these attitudes still permeated the Western media and academia. After stating the central thesis, ''Orientalism'' consists mainly of supporting examples from Western texts.
 +
 
 +
===Criticism ===
 +
"Orientalism" and other work by Said has sparked notable controversy in the academic community.
 +
 
 +
*[[Ernest Gellner]]<ref>Ernest Gellner, "The Mightier Pen? Edward Said and the Double Standards of Inside-out Colonialism", rev. of ''Culture and Imperialism'', by Edward Said, ''Times Literary Supplement'' [[February 19]], [[1993]]: 3-4.</ref> argued that Said's contention that the West had dominated the East for more than 2,000 years (since the composition of [[Aeschylus]]’s ''The Persians'') was unsupportable, noting that until the late 17th century the Ottoman Empire had posed a serious threat to Europe. Mark Proudman notes that Said claimed the British empire extended from Egypt to India in the 1880s, when in fact the Ottoman and Persian empires intervened.  <ref>Mark F. Proudman, "[http://canadianreview.ca/MFP/Proudman%20-%20JHS%20-%20Disraeli%20and%20Said.pdf Disraeli as an Orientalist: The Polemical Errors of Edward Said]," [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/jhis/5/4 Journal of the Historical Society], 5[4] December 2005</ref> 
 +
*Another criticism is that the areas of the Middle East on which Said had concentrated, including Palestine and Egypt, were poor examples for his theory, as they came under European control only for a relatively short period in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.  These critics suggested that Said devoted much less attention to more apt examples, including the [[British Raj]] in India, and Russia’s dominions in Asia, because Said was more interested in making political points about the Middle East.<ref> Robert Irwin ''For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies'' (London: Allen Lane, 2006) 159-60, 281-2.</ref> Islamic apostate Ibn Warraq was the most recent critic of Said's Orientalism in his titular book; ''Defending the West: a Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism'' 
 +
 
 +
*Strong criticism of Said's critique of "Orientalism" has come from academic Orientalists, including some of Eastern backgrounds. [[Albert Hourani]], [[Robert Graham Irwin]], [[Nikki Keddie]], [[Bernard Lewis]], and [[Kanan Makiya]] address what Keddie retrospectively calls "some unfortunate consequences" of Said's ''Orientalism'' on the perception and status of their scholarship.<ref>Bernard Lewis, "The Question of Orientalism", in ''Islam and the West'' (London 1993) 99&ndash;118; Robert Irwin, ''For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies'' (2003; London: Allen Lane, 2006.</ref> [[Bernard Lewis]] is among scholars whose work Said questioned in ''Orientalism'' and subsequent works. The two authors came frequently to exchange disagreement, starting in the pages of the ''[[New York Review of Books]]'' following the publication of ''Orientalism''. Lewis's article "The Question of Orientalism" was followed in the next issue by "Orientalism: An Exchange." Other scholars, such as [[Maxime Rodinson]], [[Jacques Berque]], [[Malcolm Kerr]], [[Aijaz Ahmad]], and [[William Montgomery Watt]], also regarded ''Orientalism'' as a overly simplistic - or dangerous - account of Western scholarship.<ref>Aijaz Ahmad, ''In Theory: Classes, Natures, Literatures'' (London: Verso, 1992); Malcolm Kerr, [http://www.geocities.com/orientalismorg/Kerr.htm rev. of ''Orientalism''], by Edward Said, ''International Jour. of Middle Eastern Studies'' 12 (Dec. 1980): 544-47; and [[Martin Kramer]], [http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/SaidSplash.htm "Said’s Splash"], ''Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America'', Policy Papers 58 (Washington, D.C.: Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001).  ISBN 0-944029-49-3.  Kramer observes in "Said's Splash" that "Fifteen years after publication of ''Orientalism'', the UCLA historian [http://www.history.ucla.edu/keddie/ Nikki Keddie] (whose work Said had praised in ''Covering Islam'') allowed that the book was 'important and in many ways positive.' But she also thought it had had 'unfortunate consequences'"; in an interview published in ''Approaches to the History of the Middle East'', ed. Nancy Elizabeth Gallagher (London: Ithaca Press, 1994) 144-45, as cited & qtd. by Kramer, Keddie says:<blockquote>"I think that there has been a tendency in the Middle East field to adopt the word "orientalism" as a generalized swear-word essentially referring to people who take the "wrong" position on the Arab-Israeli dispute or to people who are judged too "conservative." It has nothing to do with whether they are good or not good in their disciplines. So "orientalism" for many people is a word that substitutes for thought and enables people to dismiss certain scholars and their works. I think that is too bad. It may not have been what Edward Said meant at all, but the term has become a kind of slogan."</blockquote></ref>
 +
 
 +
*Some of Said's academic critics argue that Said made no attempt to distinguish between writers of very different types: such as on the one hand the poet [[Johann Wolfgang von Goethe|Goethe]] (who never even travelled in the East), the novelist [[Flaubert]] (who undertook a brief sojourn in [[Egypt]]), [[Ernest Renan]] (whose work is widely regarded as tainted by racism), and on the other scholars such as [[Edward William Lane]] who was fluent in [[Arabic]]. In Said's mind their common European origins and attitudes, overrode such considerations, these critics contend.<ref>Said, ''Orientalism'' 87&ndash;88, 336; Ibn Warraq, ''[http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=23 Debunking Edward Said''].</ref>  Irwin (among others) points out that Said entirely ignored the fact that Oriental studies in the 19th century were dominated by [[Germans]] and [[Hungarian people|Hungarian]]s, from countries that, inconveniently for Said's purposes, did not possess an Eastern empire.<ref>Irwin, ''For Lust of Knowing'' 8, 150&ndash;166.</ref>  Such critics accuse Said of creating a monolithic ‘[[Occidentalism]]’ to oppose to the ‘Orientalism’ of Western discourse, arguing that he failed to distinguish between the paradigms of [[Romanticism]] and the [[Enlightenment (concept)|Enlightenment]], that he ignored the widespread and fundamental differences of opinion among western scholars of the Orient; that he failed to acknowledge that many Orientalists (such as [[William Jones (philologist)|Sir William Jones]]) were more concerned with establishing kinship between East and West than with creating "difference", and had frequently made discoveries that would provide the foundations for anti-colonial nationalism.<ref>O.P. Kejariwal, ''The Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Discovery of India’s Past'' (Delhi: Oxford UP, 1988) ix-xi, 221-233.</ref>  More generally, critics argue that Said and his followers fail to distinguish between Orientalism in the media and popular culture (for instance the portrayal of the Orient in such films as ''[[Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom]]'') and academic studies of Oriental languages, literature, history and culture by Western scholars (whom, it is argued, they tar with the same brush).<ref>Said, "Afterword" to the 1995 ed. of ''Orientalism'' 347, as cited by Irwin, ''[http://aspen.conncoll.edu/politicsandculture/page.cfm?key=314 For Lust of Knowing]''  3&ndash;8; cf. Kaizaad Navroze Kotwal, [http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue12/templeofdoom.html "Steven Spielberg's Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom as Virtual Reality: The Orientalist and Colonial Legacies of Gunga Din,"] ''The Film Journal'' no. 12 (April 2005).</ref>
 +
 
 +
*Finally, Said's critics argue that by making ethnicity and cultural background the test of authority and objectivity in studying the Orient, Said drew attention to the question of his own identity as a Palestinian and as a "[[Subaltern (post-colonialism)|Subaltern]]."  Ironically, given Said's largely Anglophone upbringing and education at an elite school in Cairo, the fact that he spent most of his adult life in the United States, and his prominent position in American [[academia]], his own arguments that "any and all representations … are embedded first in the language and then in the culture, institutions and political ambience of the representer … [and are] interwoven with a great many other things besides the 'truth', which is itself a representation" (''Orientalism'' 272) could be said to disenfranchise him from writing about the Orient himself. Hence these critics claim that the excessive relativism of Said and his followers trap them in a "web of [[solipsism]]",<ref>D.A. Washbrook, "Orients and Occidents: Colonial Discourse Theory and the Historiography of the British Empire", in ''Historiography'', vol. 5 of ''The Oxford History of the British Empire'' 607.</ref> unable to talk of anything but "representations", and denying the existence of ''any'' objective truth.
 +
 
 +
===Supporters of Said and his influence===
 +
Said’s supporters argue that such criticisms, even if correct, do not invalidate his basic thesis, which they say still holds true for the 19th and 20th centuries and in particular for general representations of the Orient in Western media, literature and film.<ref>See Terry Eagleton, Rev. of ''For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies'', by Robert Irwin (London: Penguin, 2003).  ISBN 0-7139-9415-0.  ''[http://www.newstatesman.com/Bookshop/300000110103 New Statesman Bookshop]'' [[November 1]], [[2003]].</ref>  His supporters point out that Said himself acknowledges limitations of his study's failing to address German scholarship (''Orientalism'' 18-19) and that, in the "Afterword" to the 1995 edition of ''Orientalism'', he, in their view, convincingly refutes his critics, such as Lewis (329-54). 
 +
 
 +
Said's continuing importance in the fields of literary criticism and cultural studies is represented by his influence on scholars studying India, such as Gyan Prakash,<ref>Gyan Prakash, “Writing Post-Orientalist Histories of the Third World: Perspectives from Indian Historiography,” ''Comparative Studies in Society and History'' 32.2 (1990): 383-408.</ref>  Nicholas Dirks,<ref>Nicholas Dirks, ''Castes of Mind'' (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001).</ref> and Ronald Inden,<ref>Ronald Inden, ''Imagining India'' (New York: Oxford UP, 1990).</ref> and literary theorists such as [[Hamid Dabashi]], [[Homi K. Bhabha]]<ref>Homi K. Bhaba, ''Nation and Narration'' (New York & London: Routledge, Chapman & Hall, 1990).</ref> and [[Gayatri Spivak]].<ref>Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ''In Other Worlds: Essays in Cultural Politics'' (London: Methuen, 1987).</ref>
 +
 
 +
Both supporters of Edward Said and his critics acknowledge the profound, transformative influence that his book ''Orientalism'' has had across the spectrum of the humanities; but whereas his critics regret his influence as limiting, his supporters praise his influence as liberating. <ref>Andrew N. Rubin, "Techniques of Trouble: Edward Said and the Dialectics of Cultural Philology," The South Atlantic Quarterly, 102.4 (2003): 862-876.</ref>
  
Many scholars now use Said's work to attempt to overturn long-held, often taken-for-granted Western ideological biases regarding non-Westerners in scholarly thought. Some post-colonial scholars would even say that the West's idea of itself was constructed largely by saying what others were not. If "Europe" evolved out of "[[Christendom]]" as the "not-Byzantium," early modern Europe in the late 16th century (see [[Battle of Lepanto]]) certainly defined itself as the "not-Turkey." 
 
  
 
Said puts forward several definitions of 'Orientalism' in the introduction to ''Orientalism''. Some of these have been more widely quoted and influential than others:
 
Said puts forward several definitions of 'Orientalism' in the introduction to ''Orientalism''. Some of these have been more widely quoted and influential than others:

Revision as of 21:57, 12 September 2007


The Women of Algiers by Eugène Delacroix

Orientalism is the study of Near and Far Eastern societies and cultures, languages, and peoples by Western scholars. It can also refer to the imitation or depiction of aspects of Eastern cultures in the West by writers, designers and artists. The former has come to acquire negative connotations in some quarters and is interpreted to refer to the study of the East by Westerners influenced by the attitudes of the era of European imperialism in the 18th and 19th centuries. When used in this sense, it implies old-fashioned and prejudiced outsider interpretations of Eastern cultures and peoples, allowing frequent misunderstanding of their cultural, ethical, and religous beliefs.

Meaning of the term

Orientalism derives from a Latin word oriens meaning "east" (literally "rising [sun]"). This is the opposite of the term Occident. In terms of The Old World, Europe was considered to be 'The West' or Occidental, and the furthest known Eastern extremity 'The East' or 'The Orient'.

Over time, the common understanding of 'the Orient' has continually shifted East as Western explorers traveled deeper into Asia. From at least the time of the Roman Empire until at least the Middle Ages, what is now considered 'the Middle East' was then considered 'the Orient'. In Biblical times, the Three Wise Men 'from the Orient' were probably Magi from the Persian Empire or Arabia which are east relative to Israel. Determination of the location of 'the Orient' continually shifted eastwards, until the Pacific Ocean was reached, the region which is now known as 'the Far East'.

However, there still remain some contexts where 'the Orient' or 'Oriental' refer to older definitions. For example, 'Oriental Spices' typically come from regions extending from the Middle East through the Indian sub-continent to Indo-China. Also, travel on the Orient Express (from Paris to Istanbul), is eastward bound (towards the sunrise), but does not reach what is currently understood to be the Orient.

Furthermore, the english Oriental is usually a synonym for the peoples, cultures and goods from the parts of East Asia traditionally occupied by East Asians and Southeast Asians, categorised by the racial label "Mongoloid." This would exclude Indians, Arabs and other more westerly peoples. In some parts of America it is considered derogatory to use "Orientals" to refer to East Asians. For example, in Washington state it is illegal to use the word 'oriental' in legislation and government documents [2].

History of Orientalism

File:Yar alone.gif
Ehsan Yarshater, of Columbia University, is one of the world's leading Persian historians.

It is difficult to be precise about the origin of the distinction between the "West" and the "East," which did not appear as a polarity before the oriens/occidens divided administration of the Roman Empire under Diocletian. However the rise of both Christianity and Islam produced a sharp opposition between European Christendom and the Muslim cultures to the East and in North Africa. During the Middle Ages Islamic peoples were the "alien" enemies of the Christian world. European knowledge of cultures further to the East was very sketchy. Nevertheless, there was a vague awareness that complex civilizations existed in India and China, from which luxury goods such as woven silk textiles and ceramics were imported. As European explorations and colonisations expanded a distinction emerged between non-literate peoples, for example in Africa and the Americas, and the literate cultures of the East.

In the 18th century Enlightenment thinkers sometimes characterized aspects of Eastern cultures as superior to the Christian West. For example Voltaire promoted research into Zoroastrianism in the belief that it would support a rational Deism superior to Christianity. Others praised the relative religious tolerance of Islamic countries in contrast with the Christian West, or the status of scholarship in Mandarin China. With the translation of the Avesta by Abraham Anquetil-Duperron and the discovery of the Indo-European languages by William Jones complex connections between the early history of Eastern and Western cultures emerged. However, these developments occurred in the context of rivalry between France and Britain for control of India, and it is sometimes claimed that knowledge was associated with attempts to understand colonised cultures in order to control them more effectively. Liberal economists such as James Mill denigrated Eastern countries on the grounds that their civilizations were static and corrupt. Karl Marx characterised the "Asiatic mode of production" as unchanging due to the narrowness of the village communities and the productive role of the state, hence he stated that the system of British colonialism unconsciously prepared future revolutions in India by destroying this mode of production.

The first serious European studies of Buddhism and Hinduism were undertaken by scholars such as Eugene Burnouf and Max Müller. In this period serious study of Islam also emerged. By the mid-19th century Oriental Studies was an established academic discipline. However, while scholarly study expanded, so did racist attitudes and popular stereotypes of "inscrutable" and "wily" orientals. Often scholarly ideas were intertwined with such prejudicial racial or religious assumptions. [1] Eastern art and literature were still seen as "exotic" and as inferior to Classical Graeco-Roman ideals. Their political and economic systems were generally thought to be feudal "oriental despotisms" and their alleged cultural inertia was considered to be resistant to progress. Many critical theorists regard this form of Orientalism as part of a larger, ideological colonialism justified by the concept of the "white man's burden." The colonial project, then, is not imagined as a process of domination for political and economic gain, it is figured as a selfless endeavor carried out to recuperate the Orientals from their own backwardness and self-mismanagement.

Orientalism in the arts

Imitations of Oriental styles

Edward Blore's Alupka Palace (1828–46) was one of the earliest intimations of the Victorian taste for Moorish Revival architecture.

Orientalism has also come to mean the use or reference of typical eastern motifs and styles in art, architecture, and design.

Early use of motifs lifted from the Indian subcontinent have sometimes been called "Hindoo style," one of the earliest examples being the façade of Guildhall, London (1788–1789). The style gained momentum in the west with the publication of the various views of India by William Hodges and the Daniells from about 1795. One of the finest examples of "Hindoo" architecture is Sezincote House (c. 1805) in Gloucestershire. Other notable buildings using the Hindoo style of Orientalism are Casa Loma in Toronto, Sanssouci in Potsdam, and Wilhelma in Stuttgart.

Chinesischer Turm in the Englischer Garten of Munich. Initial structure built 1789–1790

Chinoiserie is the catch-all term for decorations involving Chinese themes in Western Europe, beginning in the late 17th century and peaking in waves, especially Rococo Chinoiserie, ca 1740–1770. From the Renaissance to the 18th century Western designers attempted to imitate the technical sophistication of Chinese ceramics with only partial success. Early hints of Chinoiserie appear, in the 17th century, in the nations with active East India companies: England (the British East India Company), Denmark (the Danish East India Company), Holland (the Dutch East India Company) and France (the French East India Company). Tin-glazed pottery made at Delft and other Dutch towns adopted genuine blue-and-white Ming decoration from the early 17th century, and early ceramic wares at Meissen and other centers of true porcelain imitated Chinese shapes for dishes, vases and teawares (see Chinese export porcelain).

After 1860, Japonaiserie, sparked by the arrival of Japanese woodblock prints, became an important influence in the western arts in particular on many modern French artists such as Monet. The paintings of James McNeill Whistler and his "Peacock Room" are some of the finest works of the genre; other examples include the Gamble House and other buildings by California architects Greene and Greene.

Depictions of the Orient in art and literature

File:IngresBainTurc.jpg
"Le Bain turc," (Turkish Bath) by J.A.D. Ingres, 1862

Depictions of Islamic "Moors" and "Turks" (imprecisely named Muslim groups of North Africa and West Asia) can be found in Medieval, Renaissance, and Baroque art. But it was not until the 19th century that "Orientalism" in the arts became an established theme. In these works the myth of the Orient as exotic and decadently corrupt is most fully articulated. Such works typically concentrated on Near-Eastern Islamic cultures. Artists such as Eugène Delacroix and Jean-Léon Gérôme painted many depictions of Islamic culture, often including lounging odalisques, and stressing lassitude and visual spectacle. When Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, director of the French Académie de peinture painted a highly-colored vision of a turkish bath (illustration, right), he made his eroticized Orient publicly acceptable by his diffuse generalizing of the female forms, who might all have been of the same model. If his painting had simply been retitled "In a Paris Brothel," it would have been far less acceptable. Sensuality was seen as acceptable in the exotic Orient. This orientalizing imagery persisted in art into the early 20th century, as evidenced in Matisse's orientalist nudes. In these works the "Orient" often functions as a mirror to Western culture itself, or as a way of expressing its hidden or illicit aspects. In Gustave Flaubert's novel Salammbô ancient Carthage in North Africa is used as a foil to ancient Rome. Its culture is portrayed as morally corrupting and suffused with dangerously alluring eroticism. This novel proved hugely influential on later portrayals of ancient Semitic cultures.

The use of the orient as an exotic backdrop continued in the movies such as in those starring Rudolph Valentino. Later the rich Arab in robes became a more popular theme, especially during the oil crisis of the 1970s. In the 1990s the Arab terrorist became a common villain figure in Western movies.

Examples of Orientalism in the arts

File:Cover of Le Japon Artistique no 1 may 1888.jpg
Cover of the French magazine le Japon artistique (May 1888) showing one of Hokusai's views on Mount Fuji.

Literature

Opera, ballets, musicals

Shorter musical pieces

  • Albert Ketèlbey — In a Persian Market (1920), In a Chinese Temple Garden (1925), and In the Mystic Land of Egypt (1931)

Theater

  • Oscar Wilde's Salomé (1893, first performed in Paris 1896)

Painting

  • Eugène Delacroix (1798–1863)
  • Jean-Léon Gérôme (1824–1904)
  • Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres (1780–1867)

Movies

  • Lives of a Bengal Lancer (1935)
  • Exodus (1960)
  • Raiders of the Lost Ark(1981)
  • Iron Eagle (1985)
  • True Lies (1994)
  • 300 (2007)

Edward Said and "Orientalism"

Léon Cogniet's 1835 depiction of Bonaparte's Egyptian Expedition expresses Western perception of "The Exotic Orient"

Orientalism

Said is best known for describing and critiquing "Orientalism", which he perceived as a constellation of false assumptions underlying Western attitudes toward the East. In Orientalism (1978), Said described the "subtle and persistent Eurocentric prejudice against Arabo-Islamic peoples and their culture."[2] He argued that a long tradition of false and romanticized images of Asia and the Middle East in Western culture had served as an implicit justification for Europe and America's colonial and imperial ambitions. Just as fiercely, he denounced the practice of Arab elites who internalized the American and British orientalists' ideas of Arabic culture.

In 1980 Said criticized what he regarded as poor understanding of the Arab culture in the West:

So far as the United States seems to be concerned, it is only a slight overstatement to say that Moslems and Arabs are essentially seen as either oil suppliers or potential terrorists. Very little of the detail, the human density, the passion of Arab-Moslem life has entered the awareness of even those people whose profession it is to report the Arab world. What we have instead is a series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world presented in such a way as to make that world vulnerable to military aggression.[3]

The argument

Orientalism has had a significant impact on the fields of literary theory, cultural studies and human geography, and to a lesser extent on those of history and oriental studies. Taking his cue from the work of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, and from earlier critics of western Orientalism such as A. L. Tibawi,[4] Anouar Malek-Abdel,[5] Maxime Rodinson,[6] and Richard William Southern,[7] Said argued that Western writings on the Orient, and the perceptions of the East purveyed in them, are suspect, and cannot be taken at face value. According to Said, the history of European colonial rule and political domination over the East distorts the writings of even the most knowledgeable, well-meaning and sympathetic Western ‘Orientalists’ (a term that he transformed into a pejorative):

I doubt if it is controversial, for example, to say that an Englishman in India or Egypt in the later nineteenth century took an interest in those countries which was never far from their status in his mind as British colonies. To say this may seem quite different from saying that all academic knowledge about India and Egypt is somehow tinged and impressed with, violated by, the gross political fact – and yet that is what I am saying in this study of Orientalism. (Said, Orientalism 11)

Said contended that Europe had dominated Asia politically so completely for so long that even the most outwardly objective Western texts on the East were permeated with a bias that even most Western scholars could not recognise. His contention was not only that the West has conquered the East politically but also that Western scholars have appropriated the exploration and interpretation of the Orient’s languages, history and culture for themselves. They have written Asia’s past and constructed its modern identities from a perspective that takes Europe as the norm, from which the "exotic", "inscrutable" Orient deviates.

Said concludes that Western writings about the Orient depict it as an irrational, weak, feminised "Other", contrasted with the rational, strong, masculine West, a contrast he suggests derives from the need to create "difference" between West and East that can be attributed to immutable "essences" in the Oriental make-up. In 1978, when the book was first published, with memories of the Yom Kippur war and the OPEC crisis still fresh, Said argued that these attitudes still permeated the Western media and academia. After stating the central thesis, Orientalism consists mainly of supporting examples from Western texts.

Criticism

"Orientalism" and other work by Said has sparked notable controversy in the academic community.

  • Ernest Gellner[8] argued that Said's contention that the West had dominated the East for more than 2,000 years (since the composition of Aeschylus’s The Persians) was unsupportable, noting that until the late 17th century the Ottoman Empire had posed a serious threat to Europe. Mark Proudman notes that Said claimed the British empire extended from Egypt to India in the 1880s, when in fact the Ottoman and Persian empires intervened. [9]
  • Another criticism is that the areas of the Middle East on which Said had concentrated, including Palestine and Egypt, were poor examples for his theory, as they came under European control only for a relatively short period in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. These critics suggested that Said devoted much less attention to more apt examples, including the British Raj in India, and Russia’s dominions in Asia, because Said was more interested in making political points about the Middle East.[10] Islamic apostate Ibn Warraq was the most recent critic of Said's Orientalism in his titular book; Defending the West: a Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism
  • Strong criticism of Said's critique of "Orientalism" has come from academic Orientalists, including some of Eastern backgrounds. Albert Hourani, Robert Graham Irwin, Nikki Keddie, Bernard Lewis, and Kanan Makiya address what Keddie retrospectively calls "some unfortunate consequences" of Said's Orientalism on the perception and status of their scholarship.[11] Bernard Lewis is among scholars whose work Said questioned in Orientalism and subsequent works. The two authors came frequently to exchange disagreement, starting in the pages of the New York Review of Books following the publication of Orientalism. Lewis's article "The Question of Orientalism" was followed in the next issue by "Orientalism: An Exchange." Other scholars, such as Maxime Rodinson, Jacques Berque, Malcolm Kerr, Aijaz Ahmad, and William Montgomery Watt, also regarded Orientalism as a overly simplistic - or dangerous - account of Western scholarship.[12]
  • Some of Said's academic critics argue that Said made no attempt to distinguish between writers of very different types: such as on the one hand the poet Goethe (who never even travelled in the East), the novelist Flaubert (who undertook a brief sojourn in Egypt), Ernest Renan (whose work is widely regarded as tainted by racism), and on the other scholars such as Edward William Lane who was fluent in Arabic. In Said's mind their common European origins and attitudes, overrode such considerations, these critics contend.[13] Irwin (among others) points out that Said entirely ignored the fact that Oriental studies in the 19th century were dominated by Germans and Hungarians, from countries that, inconveniently for Said's purposes, did not possess an Eastern empire.[14] Such critics accuse Said of creating a monolithic ‘Occidentalism’ to oppose to the ‘Orientalism’ of Western discourse, arguing that he failed to distinguish between the paradigms of Romanticism and the Enlightenment, that he ignored the widespread and fundamental differences of opinion among western scholars of the Orient; that he failed to acknowledge that many Orientalists (such as Sir William Jones) were more concerned with establishing kinship between East and West than with creating "difference", and had frequently made discoveries that would provide the foundations for anti-colonial nationalism.[15] More generally, critics argue that Said and his followers fail to distinguish between Orientalism in the media and popular culture (for instance the portrayal of the Orient in such films as Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom) and academic studies of Oriental languages, literature, history and culture by Western scholars (whom, it is argued, they tar with the same brush).[16]
  • Finally, Said's critics argue that by making ethnicity and cultural background the test of authority and objectivity in studying the Orient, Said drew attention to the question of his own identity as a Palestinian and as a "Subaltern." Ironically, given Said's largely Anglophone upbringing and education at an elite school in Cairo, the fact that he spent most of his adult life in the United States, and his prominent position in American academia, his own arguments that "any and all representations … are embedded first in the language and then in the culture, institutions and political ambience of the representer … [and are] interwoven with a great many other things besides the 'truth', which is itself a representation" (Orientalism 272) could be said to disenfranchise him from writing about the Orient himself. Hence these critics claim that the excessive relativism of Said and his followers trap them in a "web of solipsism",[17] unable to talk of anything but "representations", and denying the existence of any objective truth.

Supporters of Said and his influence

Said’s supporters argue that such criticisms, even if correct, do not invalidate his basic thesis, which they say still holds true for the 19th and 20th centuries and in particular for general representations of the Orient in Western media, literature and film.[18] His supporters point out that Said himself acknowledges limitations of his study's failing to address German scholarship (Orientalism 18-19) and that, in the "Afterword" to the 1995 edition of Orientalism, he, in their view, convincingly refutes his critics, such as Lewis (329-54).

Said's continuing importance in the fields of literary criticism and cultural studies is represented by his influence on scholars studying India, such as Gyan Prakash,[19] Nicholas Dirks,[20] and Ronald Inden,[21] and literary theorists such as Hamid Dabashi, Homi K. Bhabha[22] and Gayatri Spivak.[23]

Both supporters of Edward Said and his critics acknowledge the profound, transformative influence that his book Orientalism has had across the spectrum of the humanities; but whereas his critics regret his influence as limiting, his supporters praise his influence as liberating. [24]


Said puts forward several definitions of 'Orientalism' in the introduction to Orientalism. Some of these have been more widely quoted and influential than others:

  • "A way of coming to terms with the Orient that is based on the Orient's special place in European Western experience." (p. 1)
  • "a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between 'the Orient' and (most of the time) 'the Occident'." (p. 2)
  • "A Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient." (p. 3)
  • "...particularly valuable as a sign of European-Atlantic power over the Orient than it is as a veridic discourse about the Orient." (p. 6)
  • "A distribution of geopolitical awareness into aesthetic, scholarly, economic, sociological, historical, and philological texts." (p. 12)

In his Preface to the 2003 edition of Orientalism, Said also warned against the "falsely unifying rubrics that invent collective identities," citing such terms as "America," "The West," and "Islam," which were leading to what he felt was a manufactured "clash of civilisations."

Criticisms of Said

Critics of Said's theory, such as the historian Bernard Lewis, argue that Said's account contains many factual, methodological and conceptual errors. Said ignores many genuine contributions to the study of Eastern cultures made by Westerners during the Enlightenment and Victorian eras. Said's theory does not explain why the French and English pursued the study of Islam in the 16th and 17th centuries, long before they had any control or hope of control in the Middle East. He has been criticised for ignoring the contributions of Italian, Dutch, and particularly the massive contribution of German scholars. Lewis claims that the scholarship of these nations was more important to European Orientalism than the French or British, but the countries in question either had no colonial projects in the Mideast (Dutch and Germans), or no connection between their Orientalist research and their colonialism (Italians). Said's theory also does not explain why much of Orientalist study did nothing to advance the cause of imperialism. As Lewis asks,

"What imperial purpose was served by deciphering the ancient Egyptian language, for example, and then restoring to the Egyptians knowledge of and pride in their forgotten, ancient past?" [25]

Lewis argued that Orientalism arose from humanism, which was distinct from Imperialist ideology, and sometimes in opposition to it. Orientalist study of Islam arose from the rejection of religious dogma, and was an important spur to discovery of alternative cultures. Lewis criticised as "intellectual protectionism" the argument that only those within a culture could usefully discuss it.[26]

In his rebuttal to Lewis, Said stated that Lewis' negative rejoinder must be placed into its proper context. Since one of Said's principal arguments is that Orientalism was used (wittingly or unwittingly) as an instrument of empire, he contends that Lewis' critique of this thesis could hardly be judged in the disinterested, scholarly light that Lewis would like to present himself, but must be understood in the proper knowledge of what Said claimed was Lewis' own (often masked) neo-imperialist proclivities, as displayed by the latter's political or quasi-political appointments and pronouncements.

Specifically, Lewis is aligned with prominent "think tanks" that promote "neoconservative" views on U.S. Middle East Policy. Most scholars in Middle Eastern Studies departments at American and European universities take a position much closer to Said's than to Lewis', and scholars at certain privately-funded "think tanks," such as Martin Kramer at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Daniel Pipes at the Middle East Forum, who are aligned with Lewis, have alleged that this constitutes bias, and is a reason to cut federal funding from these Middle Eastern Studies departments, and subject all such academic departments to federal government oversight in order to prevent scholarly bias.[27] Pipes is the author of a website, campuswatch.org, which encourages students to report bias on the part of their professors.

Bryan Turner critiques Said’s work saying there were a multiplicity of forms and traditions of Orientalism. He is therefore critical of Said’s attempt to try to place them all under the framework of the orientalist tradition.[28] Other critics of Said have argued that while many distortions and fantasies certainly existed, the notion of "the Orient" as a negative mirror image of the West cannot be wholly true because attitudes to distinct cultures diverged significantly.[29] In any case it is a logical necessity that other cultures will be identified as "different," since otherwise their distinctive characteristics would be invisible, and that the most striking differences will hold up the mirror to the observing culture. [30] John MacKenzie notes that Said’s Orientalism is critiqued for implying that western dominance is and has been unchallenged, ignoring for example the ‘Subaltern Studies’ group of scholars work of resistance and giving voice to the unvoiced.[31] Further criticism includes the observation that the criticisms levied by Said at Orientalist scholars of being essentialist can in turn be levied at him for the way in which he writes of the west as a hegemonic mass, stereotyping its characteristics.[32]

From "Oriental Studies" to "Asian Studies"

In most North American universities, Oriental Studies has now been replaced by Asian Studies localized to specific regions, such as, Middle Eastern or Near Eastern Studies, South Asian studies, and Far East or East Asian Studies. This reflects the fact that the Orient is not a single, monolithic region but rather a broad area encompassing multiple civilizations. The generic concept of Oriental Studies, to its opponents, has lost any use it may have once had and is perceived as obstructing changes in departmental structures to reflect actual patterns of modern scholarship.

Opponents offer various political explanations for the change. They point out that a growing number of professional scholars and students of East Asian Studies are Asian Americans, especially Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, and Korean Americans. This change of labelling may be correlated in some cases to the fact that sensitivity to the term "Oriental" has been heightened in a more politically correct atmosphere, although it began earlier: Bernard Lewis' own department at Princeton University was renamed a decade before Said wrote his book, a detail that Said gets wrong.[33] By some, the term "Oriental" has come to be thought offensive to non-Westerners. Area studies that incorporate not only philological pursuits but identity politics may also account for the hestitation to use the term "Oriental."

Supporters of "Oriental Studies" counter that the term "Asian" is just as encompassing as "Oriental" and may well have originally had the same meaning, if it were derived from an Akkadian word for "East" (a more common derivation is from one or both of two Anatolian proper names.). Replacing one word with another is to confuse historically objectional opinions about the East with the concept of "the East" itself. The terms Oriental/Eastern and Occidental/Western are both inclusive concepts that usefully identify large-scale cultural differences. Such general concepts do not preclude or deny more specific ones.

A mirror image: Eastern views of the West

In an enlightening contrast, many of the essentially dismissive and patronizing concepts associated with Western "Orientalism" as expressed above are summed up — but in reverse orientation — in the epilogue to the "Chapter on the Western Regions" according to the Hou Hanshu. This is the official history of the Later (or "Eastern") Han Dynasty (25-221 C.E.). The book was compiled by Fan Ye, (died 445 C.E.), and it succinctly expresses the Han opinion of the Western Hu culture (in what is now western China):

The Western Hu are far away.
They live in an outer zone.
Their countries' products are beautiful and precious,
But their character is debauched and frivolous.
They do not follow the rites of China.
Han has the canonical books.
They do not obey the Way of the Gods.
How pitiful!
How obstinate!

Derogatory or stereotyped portrayals of Westerners appear in many works of Indian, Chinese and Japanese artists.

Ravi Varma's Woman Playing the Veena

In contrast, some Eastern artists adopted and adapted Western styles. The Indian painter Ravi Varma painted several works that are virtually indistinguishable from some Western orientalist images. In the late 20th century many Western cultural themes and images began appearing in Asian art and culture, especially in Japan. English words and phrases are prominent in Japanese advertising and popular culture, and many Japanese anime are written around characters, settings, themes, and mythological figures derived from various Western cultural traditions.

Recently, the term Occidentalism has been coined to refer to negative views of the Western world sometimes found in Eastern societies today. In a similar ideological vein to Occidentalism, Eurocentrism can refer to both negative views and excessively positive views of the Western World found in discussions about 'Eastern culture'.

See also

  • Arabist
  • Area studies
  • Assyriology
  • Black Orientalism
  • Byzantine Empire
  • Circassian beauties
  • Colonialism
  • Dhimmi
  • Edward Said
  • Egyptology
  • Ethnic nationalism
  • Exoticism
  • Folklore
  • Hydraulic empire
  • Imperialism
  • Indology (study of India)
  • Islamism
  • Iranistics
  • Japonism
  • Robert Irwin
  • List of Islamic studies scholars
    • at section 5. "Orientalists/Non-Muslims" appears an annotated list of over 150 western & eastern non-Muslim scholars, often with titles of their writings on Islam.
  • Middle Eastern studies
  • Modernism
  • Occidentalism
  • Orientalism (book)
  • Ottoman Empire
  • Oriental Institute
  • Philology
  • Silk Road
  • Sinology (study of China)
  • SOAS
  • Sotadic zone
  • Pan Arabism
  • Messianism
  • Romanticism
  • Joseph Needham
  • Karl A. Wittfogel
  • Sir John Woodroffe
  • Sufism
Commons-logo.svg
Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

External links

Further reading

  • Biddick, Kathleen. "Coming Out of Exile: Dante on the Orient(alism) Express," The American Historical Review, Vol. 105, No. 4. (Oct., 2000), pp. 1234–1249.
  • Davies, Kristian. The Orientalists: Western artists in Arabia, the Sahara, Persia & India. New York: Laynfaroh, 2005 (hardcover, ISBN 0-9759783-0-6).
  • Crawley, William. "Sir William Jones: A vision of Orientalism," Asian Affairs, Vol. 27, Issue 2. (Jun. 1996), pp. 163–176.
  • Fleming, K.E. "Orientalism, the Balkans, and Balkan Historiography," The American Historical Review, Vol. 105, No. 4. (Oct., 2000), pp. 1218–1233.
  • Halliday, Fred. "'Orientalism' and Its Critics," British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (1993), pp. 145–163.
  • Irwin, Robert. For lust of knowing: The Orientalists and their enemies. London: Penguin/Allen Lane, 2006 (hardcover, ISBN 0-7139-9415-0). As Dangerous Knowledge: Orientalism and Its Discontents. New York: Overlook Press, 2006 (hardcover, ISBN 1-58567-835-X).
  • Jersild, Austin. Orientalism and Empire: North Caucasus Mountain Peoples and the Georgian Frontier, 1845–1917. Montreal: McGill–Queen's University Press, 2002 (hardcover, ISBN 0-7735-2328-6); 2003 (paperback, ISBN 0-7735-2329-4).
  • Kabbani, Rana. Imperial Fictions: Europe's Myths of Orient. London: Pandora Press, 1994 (paperback, ISBN 0-04-440911-7).
  • Kennedy, Dane. "'Captain Burton's Oriental Muck Heap': The Book of the Thousand Nights and the Uses of Orientalism," The Journal of British Studies, Vol. 39, No. 3. (Jul., 2000), pp. 317–339.
  • Klein, Christina. Cold War Orientalism: Asia in the Middlebrow Imagination, 1945–1961. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003 (hardcover, ISBN 0-520-22469-8; paperback, ISBN 0-520-23230-5).
  • Knight, Nathaniel. "Grigor'ev in Orenburg, 1851–1862: Russian Orientalism in the Service of Empire?," Slavic Review, Vol. 59, No. 1. (Spring, 2000), pp. 74–100.
  • Kontje, Todd. German Orientalisms. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004 (ISBN 0-472-11392-5).
  • Little, Douglas. American Orientalism: The United States and the Middle East Since 1945. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2001 (hardcover, ISBN 0-8078-2737-1); 2002 (paperback, ISBN 0-8078-5539-1); London: I.B. Tauris, 2002 (new ed., hardcover, ISBN 1-86064-889-4).
  • Lowe, Lisa. Critical Terrains: French and British Orientalisms. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992 (hardcover, ISBN 978-0801425790; paperback, ISBN 978-0801481956).
  • Macfie, Alexander Lyon. Orientalism. White Plains, NY: Longman, 2002 (ISBN 0-582-42386-4).
  • MacKenzie, John. Orientalism: History, theory and the arts. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995 (hardcover, ISBN 0-7190-1861-7; paperback, ISBN 0-7190-4578-9).
  • Murti, Kamakshi P. India: The Seductive and Seduced "Other" of German Orientalism. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001 (hardcover, ISBN 0-313-30857-8).
  • Noble dreams, wicked pleasures: Orientalism in America, 1870–1930 by Holly Edwards (Editor). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000 (hardcover, ISBN 0-691-05003-1; paperback, ISBN 0-691-05004-X).
  • Orientalism and the Jews, edited by Ivan Davidson Kalmar and Derek Penslar. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University Press, 2004 (paperback, ISBN 1-58465-411-2).
  • The Orientalists: Delacroix to Matisse: The Allure of North Africa and the Near East, edited by Mary Anne Stevens. Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art, 1984 (paperback, ISBN 0-297-78435-8).
  • Paul, James. "Orientalism Revisited: An Interview with Edward W. Said," MERIP Middle East Report, No. 150. (Jan.–Feb., 1988), pp. 32–36.
  • Peltre, Christine. Orientalism in Art. New York: Abbeville Press, 1998 (hardcover, ISBN 0-7892-0459-2).
  • Prakash, Gyan. "Orientalism Now," History and Theory, Vol. 34, No. 3. (Oct., 1995), pp. 199–212.
  • Richardson, Michael. "Enough Said: Reflections on Orientalism," Anthropology Today, Vol. 6, No. 4. (Aug., 1990), pp. 16–19.
  • Rotter, Andrew J. "Saidism without Said: Orientalism and U.S. Diplomatic History," The American Historical Review, Vol. 105, No. 4. (Oct., 2000), pp. 1205–1217.
  • Sahni, Kalpana. Crucifying the Orient: Russian Orientalism and the Colonization of Caucasus and Central Asia. Bangkok; Oslo: White Orchid Press, 1997 (hardcover, ISBN 974-8299-50-3).
  • Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978 (ISBN 0-394-42814-5); New York: Vintage, 1979 (ISBN 0-394-74067-X).
  • Schneider, Jane. Italy's "Southern Question": Orientalism in One Country. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 1998 (hardcover, ISBN 1-85973-992-X; paperback, ISBN 1-85973-997-0).
  • Visions of the East: Orientalism in film by Matthew Bernstein (Editor), Gaylyn Studlar (Editor). Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1997 (hardcover, ISBN 0-8135-2294-3; paperback, ISBN 0-8135-2295-1).

Notes & References

  1. J Go"Racism" and Colonialism: Meanings of Difference and Ruling Practice in America's Pacific Empire in Qualitative Sociology. Vol. 27 No. 1 March 2004
  2. Keith Windschuttle, "Edward Said's "Orientalism revisited," The New Criterion January 17, 1999, accessed January 19, [1999].
  3. Edward W. Said, "Islam Through Western Eyes," The Nation April 26, 1980, first posted online January 1, 1998, accessed December 5, 2005.
  4. A. L. Tibawi, "English-speaking Orientalists: A Critique of Their Approach to Islam and Arab Nationalism", Islamic Quarterly 8 (1964): 25-45
  5. Anouar Malek-Abdel, "L’orientalisme en crise", Diogène 44 (1963): 109-41
  6. "Bilan des études mohammadiennes", Revue Historique 465.1 (1963)
  7. Richard William Southern, Western views of Islam in the Middle Ages (1978; Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1962).
  8. Ernest Gellner, "The Mightier Pen? Edward Said and the Double Standards of Inside-out Colonialism", rev. of Culture and Imperialism, by Edward Said, Times Literary Supplement February 19, 1993: 3-4.
  9. Mark F. Proudman, "Disraeli as an Orientalist: The Polemical Errors of Edward Said," Journal of the Historical Society, 5[4] December 2005
  10. Robert Irwin For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies (London: Allen Lane, 2006) 159-60, 281-2.
  11. Bernard Lewis, "The Question of Orientalism", in Islam and the West (London 1993) 99–118; Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies (2003; London: Allen Lane, 2006.
  12. Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Natures, Literatures (London: Verso, 1992); Malcolm Kerr, rev. of Orientalism, by Edward Said, International Jour. of Middle Eastern Studies 12 (Dec. 1980): 544-47; and Martin Kramer, "Said’s Splash", Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America, Policy Papers 58 (Washington, D.C.: Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001). ISBN 0-944029-49-3. Kramer observes in "Said's Splash" that "Fifteen years after publication of Orientalism, the UCLA historian Nikki Keddie (whose work Said had praised in Covering Islam) allowed that the book was 'important and in many ways positive.' But she also thought it had had 'unfortunate consequences'"; in an interview published in Approaches to the History of the Middle East, ed. Nancy Elizabeth Gallagher (London: Ithaca Press, 1994) 144-45, as cited & qtd. by Kramer, Keddie says:

    "I think that there has been a tendency in the Middle East field to adopt the word "orientalism" as a generalized swear-word essentially referring to people who take the "wrong" position on the Arab-Israeli dispute or to people who are judged too "conservative." It has nothing to do with whether they are good or not good in their disciplines. So "orientalism" for many people is a word that substitutes for thought and enables people to dismiss certain scholars and their works. I think that is too bad. It may not have been what Edward Said meant at all, but the term has become a kind of slogan."

  13. Said, Orientalism 87–88, 336; Ibn Warraq, Debunking Edward Said.
  14. Irwin, For Lust of Knowing 8, 150–166.
  15. O.P. Kejariwal, The Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Discovery of India’s Past (Delhi: Oxford UP, 1988) ix-xi, 221-233.
  16. Said, "Afterword" to the 1995 ed. of Orientalism 347, as cited by Irwin, For Lust of Knowing 3–8; cf. Kaizaad Navroze Kotwal, "Steven Spielberg's Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom as Virtual Reality: The Orientalist and Colonial Legacies of Gunga Din," The Film Journal no. 12 (April 2005).
  17. D.A. Washbrook, "Orients and Occidents: Colonial Discourse Theory and the Historiography of the British Empire", in Historiography, vol. 5 of The Oxford History of the British Empire 607.
  18. See Terry Eagleton, Rev. of For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies, by Robert Irwin (London: Penguin, 2003). ISBN 0-7139-9415-0. New Statesman Bookshop November 1, 2003.
  19. Gyan Prakash, “Writing Post-Orientalist Histories of the Third World: Perspectives from Indian Historiography,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 32.2 (1990): 383-408.
  20. Nicholas Dirks, Castes of Mind (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001).
  21. Ronald Inden, Imagining India (New York: Oxford UP, 1990).
  22. Homi K. Bhaba, Nation and Narration (New York & London: Routledge, Chapman & Hall, 1990).
  23. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, In Other Worlds: Essays in Cultural Politics (London: Methuen, 1987).
  24. Andrew N. Rubin, "Techniques of Trouble: Edward Said and the Dialectics of Cultural Philology," The South Atlantic Quarterly, 102.4 (2003): 862-876.
  25. Lewis, Bernard, Islam and the West, Oxford University Press, 1993, p.126
  26. Kramer, Martin. (1999). "Bernard Lewis". Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing Vol. 1: pp. 719–720. London: Fitzroy Dearborn. Retrieved on 2006-05-23.
  27. [1]
  28. Turner, B.S., 1994, Orientalism, Postmodernism and Globalism, London, Routledge
  29. Edward Said’s “Orientalism revisited” by Keith Windschuttle.
  30. Edward Said and the Saidists: or Third World Intellectual Terrorism, by Ibn Warraq
  31. MacKenzie, J.M., 1995, Orientalism: history, theory and the arts, Manchester, Manchester University Press, page 11
  32. MacKenzie, J.M., 1995, Orientalism: history, theory and the arts, Manchester, Manchester University Press
  33. Princeton University, Near Eastern Studies department

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.