Resumo de Orientalism

Edward
Said has a problem with the modern way of thinking. Specifically, with the way the Western world perceives ?The
Orient? and ?Orientalism? in general.
Actually, his discontentment reaches beyond the skewed visions we
pretentious Westerners hold, and lies deep within the ways we came to
hold these perceptions to begin with.
The things we think, the way we came to think them, and the effect this
thinking has on society are all components of his dissatisfaction. Said?s larger project in Orientalism,
is to evaluate and critique the set of beliefs that have come to be known as
Orientalism, and provide a framework for the way these beliefs came to dominate
western thought. By highlight the
inaccuracies and assumptions Orientalism embraces, he attempts to communicate
the biased notions it instills upon western culture to this day.

Defined by Said as ?a manner of regularized (or Orientalized) writing,
vision, and study, dominated by imperatives, perspectives, and ideological
biases ostensibly suited to the Orient,? Orientalism extends further than a
discipline, and is portrayed as an entire system of thought and
scholarship. To understand the basic
implications inherent in his book, it is also mandatory to grasp what he means
by ?the Orient.? This signifies a
system of representations in Western learning that exists and was constructed
by the West, with no contribution or participation from anybody else. Western thinkers who developed all concepts
of Orientalism did so from a completely outside standpoint. Considered a vast region, spreading across
Asia and into the Middle East, it is impossible to classify this enormous
territory under one vague heading.

All images of the Orient were created from a
Western perspective without any actual experience within the Orient. The entire image of the Orient that we are
faced with is a comparison with Western culture. By failing to study the Orient as an isolated, independent
culture, it is presented from a Western perspective as ?the other.? It is not portrayed as an individual
civilization with independent beliefs, rather, an alternative way of life than
Westerners are used to. This carries
with it a negative connotation, implying that one version is superior while the
other is inferior. The other, being the
Orient, is compared relentlessly to ?the Occident,? Western culture, and posed
in a persistently destructive light.

Referred to as ?backwards? and ?peculiar? the
Orient came to accommodate an entirely pessimistic association. Said builds a forefront of claims addressing
the various origins of these judgments, claiming that ?by knowing the Orient,
the West came to own it.? Under the
pretense that knowledge is power, the intellectual Westerners deciphered the
doctrines of the Orient, and in doing so staked a claim of ownership over
them. Said argues that Western
civilization approached the Orient with the mindset of conquest, and
consequently felt as if they had conquered the people, customs, and land as
each piece of culture was individually exposed. The Orient was seen as passive, while the Occident was the active
pursuer. Supremacy exists only in the
minds of those who long to be superior over others, not within the minds of
those who are content on their own.
Striving for supremacy over the Orient, Westerners utilized the
application of knowledge, following the misconception that knowledge of a
subject is equivalent to having power over than subject. An enormous delusion about the correlation
between knowledge and power allowed the Westerners to forge a road of
destruction about stereotypical thought that permanently manifested itself in
the culture.

Said?s assertions are laid out in an easily digestible
manner, making his arguments quite convincing.
His ideas can be considered somewhat obscure because the topic is not a
mainstream subject in American institutions.
Upon first approaching the book, his idea of Orientalism is rather
startling. The degrading connotation of
Orientalism is not something American?s are consciously aware of, and at first
glance seems overwhelmingly doubtful, if not offensive. Merely because of the hostile slant it poses
on traditional Western ideals, the book can be seen as an attack on the Western
way of life. With an open mind and
realistic attitude, Said?s arguments can hardly be overlooked.

While a strong line of reasoning is maintained that
certainly wins over readers, the entire book is looked at under a lens of
skepticism. Said makes an interesting
statement relatively early in his work that puts an adverse spin on everything
within the text. Page 93 reads, ?To
apply what one learns out of a book literally to reality is to risk folly or
ruin.? For the author of a
philosophical text to make a statement debunking the validity all published
works, he is asking his readers to question his own relevance. Said uses this remark in reference to texts
written about the Orient, attempting to communicating the naiveté of those who
took Orientalism to heart. While many works
written on the Orient may indeed be intellectual in foundation, no written text
should serve as a bible to be strictly adhered to. Said?s mention of this can be looked at as an ingenious tactic,
or a fatal flaw. Blatantly explicating
a weakness of his own argument brings his humanity down to earth, and creates a
base for the reader to identify with him.
By recognizing his own limitation, he is announcing that he is well
aware that his own works should be acknowledged on a practical level. This makes the reader trust in his argument
more. At the same time, his text?s
intention is to discredit an entire philosophy. It is difficult to apply this theory to reality, when we have
just been told not to take any text too seriously. So what are we supposed to take from Orientalism? A new conception of the correlation between
knowledge and power, with the realization that ?superiority? only exists to
those who lack both.

Resumos Relacionados