The Concept Of Orientalism History Essay [Internet].
Orientalism" has become a highly charged and contested term in several disciplinary fields, especially postcolonial studies. Since the appearance of Edward Said's landmark Orientalism (1978), many scholars have pursued lines of inquiry opened up by Said, arguing that Western modes of representation have created a fabric of ideological fictions about "the East". This article argues that the many insights of Said notwithstanding, his model of "orientalism" presents a distorted and misleading account of the actual historical realities, particularly with respect to the West's encounter with the religious traditions of Asia. It concludes with some reflections about alternative perspectives on orientalism, especially those offered by traditionalist writers such as René
The three definitions as expounded by Said illustrate how Orientalism is a complex web of representations about the Orient. The first two definitions embody the textual creation of the Orient while the latter definition illustrates how Orientalism has been deployed to execute authority and domination over the Orient. The three are interrelated, particularly since the domination entailed in the third definition is reliant upon and justified by the textual establishment of the Orient that emerges out of the academic and imaginative definitions of Orientalism. Orientalism" has become a highly charged and contested term in several disciplinary fields, especially postcolonial studies. Since the appearance of Edward Said's landmark Orientalism (1978), many scholars have pursued lines of inquiry opened up by Said, arguing that Western modes of representation have created a fabric of ideological fictions about "the East". This article argues that the many insights of Said notwithstanding, his model of "orientalism" presents a distorted and misleading account of the actual historical realities, particularly with respect to the West's encounter with the religious traditions of Asia. It concludes with some reflections about alternative perspectives on orientalism, especially those offered by traditionalist writers such as René Part of the pervasive power of Orientalism is that it refers to at least three different pursuits, all of which are interdependent: an academic discipline, a style of thought and a corporate institution for dealing with the Orient. As an academic discipline, Orientalism emerged in the late-eighteenth century and has since assembled an archive of knowledge that has served to perpetuate and reinforce Western representations of it. Orientalism is ‘the discipline by which the Orient was (and is) approached systematically, as a topic of learning, discovery and practice‘ (1978:73). As a style of thought it is ‘based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction‘ (1978:2) between the Orient and the Occident. This definition is more expansive and can accommodate as diverse a group of writers as classical Greek playwright Aeschylus (524–455 BC), medieval Italian poet Dante Alighieri (1265–1335), French novelist Victor Hugo (1802–85) and German social scientist and revolutionary Karl Marx (1818–83). The third definition of Orientalism as a corporate institution is demonstrative of its amorphous capacity as a structure used to dominate and authorize the Orient. Hence, Orientalism necessarily is viewed as being linked inextricably to colonialism. Edward Said is viewed as the creator of the academic development of post-colonialism, largely with his transmission of the concept " Orientalism. " Orientalism is considered his magnum opus. He is a forerunner in the deconstruction of the so-called 'Western' forms of hegemony that not only subverts the traditional understandings of 'Occident' and 'Orient', but also the " East-West, " as being simplistic, binary oppositional platforms, divorced from the necessary divergent ontological framework for understanding the reality of the current-day. Yet, these false and simplified platforms are continuing in the common worldviews, at the expense of losing a clearer understanding of our conditions. Said concludes Orientalism with a reminder that representations and knowledge are instrumentalized: “My whole point about this system is not that it is a misrepresentation of some Oriental essence—in which I do not for a moment believe—but that it operates as representations usually do, for a purpose, according to a tendency, in a specific historical, intellectual, and even economic setting. In other words, representations have purposes, they are effective much of the time, they accomplish one or many tasks.” Thus far, the scholars I examined above ought to understand caste for the purposes of conversion, nostalgic comparison, and in order to uncover fundamental structures of society, religion, and the traditional ‘Orient.’ This epistemology of caste was predicated upon assumptions of hierarchy, the four varnas, and Brahmanical authority. Furthermore, knowledge on caste was often comprehended through a comparison with the Occident. For example, Louis Dumont positioned caste as part of India’s fundamental religiosity and commitment to social values and community—aspects that the modern world lost. With British influence and direct Crown rule in 1858, previous knowledge on Indian society, caste, and religion was increasingly instrumentalized in the service of British colonial rule. Scholarship produced by colonial scholar-officials such as J.H. Hutton continued to build upon earlier missionary assumptions of caste, hierarchy, and religion. For example, Hutton examined caste as the foundation of Indian social and religious life. Hutton argues that caste was an intrinsically Indian phenomenon and governed all aspects of life from food and clothing to marriage and social organization. At the same time, the increasing scholarship produced by colonial officials and census workers dedicated more attention to local variations in regional conditions. In this way, Hutton moves way from earlier interpretations that Brahmans held the final authority, but rather that Brahmans declared scripturally conducive behavior. At the same time, the mutually defined relationship of dominance between the Brahman and the untouchable continued to be evidence of the rigidity of caste in pre-colonial and colonial scholarship. Nevertheless, colonial scholarship was produced in the service of colonial efficiency and bureaucratic rule. In his cardinal work, Orientalism, the Western Conception of the Orient and other works, Edward Said reconfigures the historical construction of European and Euro-American discourses about Near-East civilizations, cultures and peoples. By defining the "Oriental" study as discourse, it can be examined within the power structure of hierarchies. Said's repeated utilization of Foucault's theory about the relationship between power and discourse led him to an examination of the cultural imperialism. With abundant references and illustrations, he has demonstrated how Orientalism was created alongside the European cultural penetration into the lands of the "Other" and how it was justified by various disciplines and practices. Scholars in China have now criticized the ideology of Orientalism and offered their unique reflections on the subject matter in the contemporary time.
Ideas in the concept of orientalism
In his cardinal work, Orientalism, the Western Conception of the Orient and other works, Edward Said reconfigures the historical construction of European and Euro-American discourses about Near-East civilizations, cultures and peoples. By defining the "Oriental" study as discourse, it can be examined within the power structure of hierarchies. Said's repeated utilization of Foucault's theory about the relationship between power and discourse led him to an examination of the cultural imperialism. With abundant references and illustrations, he has demonstrated how Orientalism was created alongside the European cultural penetration into the lands of the "Other" and how it was justified by various disciplines and practices. Scholars in China have now criticized the ideology of Orientalism and offered their unique reflections on the subject matter in the contemporary time.
Edward said theory of orientalism
Since the 1990s, sociologists and others have increasingly used the term orientalism to refer commonly to ethnocentrism, Eurocentrism, prejudicial stereotyping, and cultural misrepresentations of non-'western' societies, particularly those influenced by Islamic knowledge and practices. I chart how theorist Edward Said has helped initiate the sociology of orientalism by emphasizing the relationship of orientalism as a set of cultural practice and discourse to modern empires and global imperialism. I discuss the prominent clusters of studies published in English in the sociology of orientalism: (i) cultural representations and (ii) cultural regulation and social-identity formation. I argue that these studies have examined the ways orientalisms have deployed signifying practices of abstraction, difference, and desire in constructing problematic images and social relations. Furthermore, I contend that sociology as an intellectual endeavor still needs to confront seriously the issues raised by critics of orientalisms.
Part I: Orientalism: The Development of a Discourse
Subsequent scholarship on caste must confront these Orientalist assumptions of caste and the unchanging nature of Indian society. For example, Indian sociologist Mysore Narasimhachar Srinivas challenges the assumption of Indian society as static and the universal structure of the four Varnas, the lack of mobility between castes, and the complete changes wrought by Western influences. In Social Change in Modern India published in 1963, Srinivas advances a theory of historical change and social mobility around the uneven and regional processes of Sanskritization and Westernization. Srinivas elaborates on the process of Sanskritization—the process by which lower castes or tribal groups adopt customs, rituals, and ways of life of a higher, Brahmanic caste. Srinivas emphasizes that mobility afforded through sanskritization was one of ‘positional’ change rather than total ‘structural’ change. In this way, Srinivas suggests the importance of relational power and the significant regional differences through jatis, endogamous caste groups. His later chapter examines Westernization—the uneven borrowing of certain western influences upon social status and caste particularly among the new Indian elite who had contact with the small population of Europeans through education, bureaucracy, and trade. Overall, Srinivas begins to call attention to how centuries of scholarship on caste had privileged the role of Brahmans and the immutability and universality of the four varnas. Nevertheless, Srinivas still attributes real structural change to colonialism. It is not until the scholarship of Bernard Cohn, Nicholas Dirks, in conjunction with Edward Said’s critique of Orientalist representations that commence the complete critique and dismantling of colonial epistemologies on studies of India and caste.