Orientalism

Edward Said's Orientalism can be summed up in three following points: 1st he talks of the distinction between pure and political knowledge, shows the power relation of any text to political, cultural, intellectual and moral domain; second he shows how the methodology used by the West to define and rendering the Orient is just a part of the process that Orientalises the Orient and how his methodology of "historical generalization" is several from all these previous methodologies; and third he clarifies his position by explaining his ethnic background, critical interests, and societal circumstances he has intimate as an oriental.

Following Philosopher it can be assumed the idea of "Orientalism" or "orient' a part of a binary oppositions pair, wherever the occidental forms the else side of this binary oppositional coin. Levis Strauss' Methodology , if applied to this binary opposition, we reach at the same conclusion as Edward Said, that these two (i.e. the concepts of Orient and Occident; or East and West ) are the two 'entities' that 'support and to an extent reflect each other'(p.5). To do it much clear, 'Orient' has move to be a part of our consciousness due to the process of categorization by the 'West' – i.e. Westerners' view or supposition just about their identity, ready-made the idea of 'Orient' possible. As in a binary pair, one's presence is defined in terms of the absence of 'the other' (i.e. the opposition to it).In case of the Orientalism , (i.e. the discipline that came to front after the completion of this process or the 'event', the sense in which Philosopher had used the term in his essay Structure, Sign and play in the Discourse of Human sciences) the 'East' is defined in terms of the qualifications of the 'West'. In Said's words:"European culture gained in strength and identity by setting itself off against the Orient as a sort of surrogate and even as under grounded self".

And this process of establishing the identity of 'the other' by creating the identity of the self , is part of the process which same terms in this particular case as being "Orientalized" which means the moment one tries to understand which means the moment one tries to understand culture, history and ideas, one from that moment comes under their direct force. That means once one expresses his interpretation, (which is fundamentally an activity of art) can no longer be external as croce has remarked: 'A activity of art is always internal; and what is called external is no longer a activity of art' (quoted in Rene Wellek's essay The Fall of Literary history).

That's why Same has avoided presenting any notion or definition of his subject in his book (i.e. Orientalism) rather he chooses a the path of indirectness, by placing in to the pages the various ideas related to the Orientalism that exist 'spatially and complexly interlinked' in his mind and are a part of his consciousness which ultimately he refers to as his subject i.e. the "Orientalism" – the "transdental signified". He is aware that this "transcendental signified" has been a part of the "collective unconscious' of the west and has been growing since the really time the west is conscious just about the 'other sidedness' of his existence, on various levels – physical, as well as psychological. This has been since that time of its evolution, has been expressed in various manners production reference to several geographical cultural and philosophical difference that exist between the west and the east. To avoid complexness of our interpretation we can just put this as the fact that due to the ethno-centric attitude of the west there came the relative measure of various dimensions in the several cultural values, belief systems and this ultimately formed the idea of the "Orient".

Said likewise does this point clean in his introduction : "The orient was Orientalised not only because it was discovered to be oriental in all those route considered common place by an average nineteenth century European, but likewise because it could be – that is submitted to being – ready-made oriental".

This indicates that the really process of identifying orient from the occident is itself a process of Orientalising the orient. Said's use of "historical generalizations" (p.4) – which he announces in his introduction as a several 'methodological alternative' likewise could not able to escape from being taking part in the process of Orientalization.

This haunts Same as in the last lines of the third chapter he confesses that the study of orient involves a consecutive process of degredation in knowledge,"If the psychological feature of the Orientalism has any meaning, it is in being a reminder of this beguiling degradation of knowledge".And mayhap writing of Orientalism by Same can be seen as the really next adscititious part of this process which he himself indicates in the following line:"Orientalism failing to identify with human experience, failing likewise to see it as human experience […] if this book has any futurity use it wish be as a modest contribution to that challenge, […] that system of thought like Orientalism , discourse of power , philosophical fictions – mind-forg'd manacles – are too easily made, applied , and guarded". And to which he concludes that the attended degradation to this is 'Now mayhap much than before' .

That means he himself studies the process of which he is a part of . We need to understand how Same has unsuccessful to describe the process of 'Orientalising the orient' by men in the past before him ( of which he becomes a part of , by writing his book , by doing explanations on Orientalism – which is now the aim of our experiment, to understand how the process of his explanation (on Orientalism) has the similarities to the this above mentioned process.

Said uses a new kind of methodology to bring the whole matter related to Orientalism to light. He does so as explains that :

'Orientalism is not an inert fact of nature'– i.e. it is not only related to geographical reality .

it would-be be [also] wrong to conclude that the orient was fundamentally an idea or a production with no corresponding reality,

He says so because he knows that the geographical sectors as orient and occident are man made, but on with that there is 'a brute reality' which is exerted by the idea of orient if they are at all any orient exists in ideas .

The fact that Said's belief system once comes to front has a centre which alters its meaning and deconstructs it as no particular opposition of the binary pair 'idea / thing' or 'mental dimension/ physical dimension is valid for much than an instance, so the moment he does a reference to idea associated with the orient he discards the temperament of the orient and vise versa. From such reason we can assume that once an expression on the orient is ready-made it either lies just about orient or discard it it is because by 'lying' or creating story just about it, one can contribute to its existence, and the moment several expression is ready-made to explain it, it is no much 'that' and thus it blows out its existence. Same points to this complexness in his introduction: "One ought ne'er to assume that the structure of Orientalism is nothing much than a structure of lies or myths which, were the truth just about them to be told, or just blow away"!

What Same has done to solve this problem is that he coined a new methodology which he termed as "representation".

That means he stresses through his book Orientalism on the aspect of how than whatof Orientalism. He tries to explain how orient is created than what it actually is .

He through his historical generalization, moves from Writer to Sacy then to Renan and else Orientalists who build their own structures of Orientalism which forms a stack of structures, wherever no particular structure has spell trying to understand the the 'what' aspects of Orientalism unconsciously created it .

Thus what the West did in the past to discover on orient created orient. and thus orient became an western invention.

That means that we are , by following Same , in fact starting a process of unlearning just about the Orientalism , in order to let orient exist as it is . but the moment we attempt to discover just about orient we are in fact from that moment starts off another chain reaction of changes in its existence—which ultimately leads us to no truth as the moment he we understand it , our understanding itself becomes a part of the invention of the orient.

He explains the epistemic aspect and historical aspect of the Orientalism which can be summarized in the following points:

the 1st phase of Orientalists were those who saw the rise of the Muslims in the Asian region as a threat to Christianity – during this period the Orient was defined as the geographical regions that was under the control of the so called pagan , barbarous non-Christian races , especially Muslims. They were considered as threats to the West , i.e. the Christian occupied European geography. This can be copied in Chaucer's writings, Mendellive's stories.

the next phase of the Orientalists were those who depending upon the 1st phase description began to explore these areas. During renaissance the spirit started and this continuing for centuries. During this phase many an military adventures were ready-made especially by that of Napoleon who planned to conquer the Egypt on several military and cultural ground. This phase continuing till the production of Urban centre canal and Orientalists like Renan, Sacy and Writer gave shape to the idea of Orientalism on the basis of their either experiences in the Orient or the views that they had possessed from their predecessors, which was shaped by the western attempt to define its ascendancy over the idea that was termed as the Orient by the 1st phase definitions.

the third or the latest phase was brought forward by the process of de-colonization wherever the modern west men began to emphasize the differences of the Orient from the Occident; east from the West.

After this categorization Same put forward the theory of the 'power relationship of knowladge'—how all these Orientalists of the three phase spell shaping the Orient have contributed to the process of the Orientalisation.

This is the power relationship of psychological feature in the context of the orient.

The west tried to find his identity through an opposition to it and named it orient.

The ethenocentricism of the west ready-made the distinguistions of else cultures from it and labeled all oppositional charactered cultures as oriental cultures.

Different parts of the west thus had diffeent views on orient due to their several geographical locations , which has created their own taste , own customs etc. thus "culectiveconciousness" of one part of the west saw its opposition in a manner , which was mayhap had subordinate place in the list of oppositions ready-made by another part of the west. Thus their own definition of the orient differs .

This is exemplified by Same in the 4th section of the 2nd chapter tiltled as "Pilgrims and pilgrimages, British and French"

Well one may arise the question that if the ethenic values shaped by geographical locations in the west vary from each else , how can it be possible that they did not see each else as oppositions .

To this explanation can be found in the fact which Levis Strauss as well as Philosopher terms as scandals . to put it plainly scandals are the characters that belong to the several oppositional sides.

And there in every culture there exists scandals. Due to the most common properties in between them (for instance Christanity) each part of west ne'er saw each else as oppositional representation of it.

Now this does it clean that there are as many an number orients created as the western groups.

And thus orient is a set of imagination, values, ideas, customs, geographical locations which can be seen as the result of many an attempts to explain self identity in terms of the else . thus orient was created out of the process of production an orient.

The next phase of Orientalists are those who, following the create by mental act orient in their western mind tried to discover just about it . Thus they became the part of the creators of the orient. Such phase includes Baudelaine and Sacy etc.

Thus the supposed to be 'discoverers' are themselves the inventers of the orient.

And the modern Orientalists who tried to categorize the diffent aspect of the orient became themselves another addition to such inventers.

Thus what we see in above that the process of learning is it self the mode of production of Orientalism.

This is what Same explains as power relation ship of psychological feature i.e. here psychological feature exerts its power to build what it is about.

And this is the part of various degree of complex hegemony, which likewise includes the military and political political system f the orient ( in their general accepted meanings).

Another part to understand here is that the power relationship is fundamentally political here. It is so, because if the production of orient as a subordinated field or structure can be considered as one of the political dimension of hegemony, then the learning just about orient likewise owns this political dimension.

To do it much clean the moment the idea of Orientalism came to mind of the 1st westerner, it came as an opposition to his own existence. That does it clean that we see orient in terms of its oppositional values of the west, i.e. Orient has been explained in terms of west and ne'er the opposite. This ethenocentrism in psychological feature just about orient can be seen as a political hegemony. And we have no resolution to it as we can explain the else of us in terms of what we are not. After that moment any reference ready-made to us wish be ready-made only once we believe that the else exists . so , after that even as if we are defined in the other's terms still the underlying causes of the existence of the else is in our terms. So, if one wish say that if orient starts to define west as its opposition then likewise , the existence of the orient is ready-made from in the terms of the west. And thus the psychological feature of the orient has its political political system intact.

© Samir K. Dash, 2004

About The Author

Samir K. Dash is a UGC-NET qualified, MA (English) from Ravenshaw (auto) College, Cuttack, Province (India).

You can contact the author at : samirk_dash@yahoo.com

Home page: www.samirshomepage.zzn.com

This article was announce on March 21, 2005