School of thought: Postcolonial
Historiography of Scholarship: Foucault (Discipline and Punish), Gramsci (Consent and Hegemony)
Said argues the 'orient' to be an European invention, and presents three meanings of his term 'Orientalism'. First, in the academic world, Orientalism apples to everyone who studies, writes, teaches about the Orient. Second, it is style of thought based upon an ontological difference created between the 'Occident' and the 'Orient'. Third, in a larger sense, Orientalism can be thought of as a corporate institution of the west, for dominating, restructuring and having authority over the orient.
By employing Foucault's notion of discourse, Said argues Orientalism to be a discourse through which the Europe created a a systematic discipline (myth turned into a discipline) through which they managed and produced the 'orient'. Second, by using Gramsci's idea of hegemony, or rather cultural hegemony, he argues by orientalising, Europe established its identity as being far superior to all other non-europeans. The west was defining itself by defining the 'Other'. (Ex: because the religion of Christ is called Christianity, they termed the religion following Muhammed as Muhammedism")
A dichotomy was constructed with the west being civilized, hygienic, intellectual, rational world; and the oriental world being uncivilized, unhygienic, mysterious, esoteric, superstitious etc. This construction of the orient was eventually employed for political dominance.
Said uses 19th century novels by Stacy and Renan where they romanticized the East, as being an entirely different place from the west. Said argues that earlier European novels depicting the East as esoteric created a bias and prejudice for further writers and visitors who encountered the orient with a colored lens.
He argues that today (post WW2) the center of orientalism has shifted from Europe to the USA. While earlier oriental studies were undertaken to understand the colonial populace, make policies for them, and rule them; the independence of European colonies put an end to such a discourse. Later, orientalism has been occurring through western academic scholarship centered in the the US.
Said's final argument is that his primary contention is against the creation of boundaries of 'self' and 'other', rather than critiquing scholars who generalize an entire population or exclude the orient's perspective in their narrative.
Critique: Critiquing an entire scholarship created of the Orients by western scholars as Orientalism is in itself a sweeping generalization.
Historiography of Scholarship: Foucault (Discipline and Punish), Gramsci (Consent and Hegemony)
Said argues the 'orient' to be an European invention, and presents three meanings of his term 'Orientalism'. First, in the academic world, Orientalism apples to everyone who studies, writes, teaches about the Orient. Second, it is style of thought based upon an ontological difference created between the 'Occident' and the 'Orient'. Third, in a larger sense, Orientalism can be thought of as a corporate institution of the west, for dominating, restructuring and having authority over the orient.
By employing Foucault's notion of discourse, Said argues Orientalism to be a discourse through which the Europe created a a systematic discipline (myth turned into a discipline) through which they managed and produced the 'orient'. Second, by using Gramsci's idea of hegemony, or rather cultural hegemony, he argues by orientalising, Europe established its identity as being far superior to all other non-europeans. The west was defining itself by defining the 'Other'. (Ex: because the religion of Christ is called Christianity, they termed the religion following Muhammed as Muhammedism")
A dichotomy was constructed with the west being civilized, hygienic, intellectual, rational world; and the oriental world being uncivilized, unhygienic, mysterious, esoteric, superstitious etc. This construction of the orient was eventually employed for political dominance.
Said uses 19th century novels by Stacy and Renan where they romanticized the East, as being an entirely different place from the west. Said argues that earlier European novels depicting the East as esoteric created a bias and prejudice for further writers and visitors who encountered the orient with a colored lens.
He argues that today (post WW2) the center of orientalism has shifted from Europe to the USA. While earlier oriental studies were undertaken to understand the colonial populace, make policies for them, and rule them; the independence of European colonies put an end to such a discourse. Later, orientalism has been occurring through western academic scholarship centered in the the US.
Said's final argument is that his primary contention is against the creation of boundaries of 'self' and 'other', rather than critiquing scholars who generalize an entire population or exclude the orient's perspective in their narrative.
Critique: Critiquing an entire scholarship created of the Orients by western scholars as Orientalism is in itself a sweeping generalization.
No comments:
Post a Comment