Edward Saids Criticism of the Europeans on the Issue of Orientalism - Essay Example

Edward Saids orientalism Introduction Orientalism has become an important of dis It is due to its importance that it becomes pertinent to critically analyze Edward Said’s orientalism and its validity as a critical tool in the analysis of shifting boundaries between ‘West’ and ‘East’. Said’s orientalism tried to give a clearer picture of what has been referred to as the ‘orients’ or ‘oriental’ and corrected the misconception of the Europeans on this issue. According to the Europeans, the term “oriental or orients” refers to the region of the Middle East and Far Eastern countries. The European scholars classified these different countries into one form of study, which involved translating other various native languages into their own context. In this process, the misrepresentations of the orients and the various aspects of the oriental cultures led to confusion and misinterpretation by the western scholars and politicians. It was due to these misinterpretation and anomaly that Edward Said sought to present a clearer perspective about the subject matter. Edward Said’s criticism of the Europeans on the issue of Orientalism Edward Said critiqued the works of the Europeans on their impression about Orientalism and points out the errors of the method that these past scholars applied. He questions the validity of the westerner’s claim that the East is a subordinate region and that they should be dominated by the West.1 Said is of the opinion that the belief that the Europeans are studying the language, history and culture of the people of the Middle East and the Far East is highly unacceptable. 2 His claim is borne out of the fact that these western scholars actually made no move to fully understand Islam (which is the major religion of the region of the Middle East), the Muslims and the other cultures of the Eastern region. Rather, the European scholars have viewed the complex and relatively unknown cultures of the Eastern countries as a global menace and threat to world peace.3 Said criticized these assumptions and states that orients are to be identified as who they are, not by the idea given by the western scholars and this formed the basis of his argument in his book, ‘Orientalism’. They should be able to represent themselves by their own cultures, societies, and religion. Though Edward Said’s work could be said to be a radical approach to the issue, but the fact remains that it remains a logical passage to modernization of Orientalism studies. Understanding the perception of Orientalism and idea of the Orientalists The main concept to understand the study of Orientalism is the balance of power structure, quest for knowledge, and representation of race. Orientalists disregard the distinguished and the depth of the oriental cultures. Most cultures looks at and judges other cultures in terms of assumption based on their own context, not in the terms of what and who they are. In Said’s Orientalism, James Balfour, judges and decides that the Egyptians have never had any proper form of government but were ruled by tyrants. According to Balfour, the Egyptians can only thrive and survive, if they are colonized and ruled by the so called, ‘superior’ western powers. 4 Balfour’s argument forms the basis of Orientalism and the idea of the Orientalists. Balfour completely undermines the Egyptians’ rights to speak out, and tries to justify the relationship that exists between the ‘inferior’ people (Eastern world) and the superior people (Western world). Balfour speaks unfriendly of the Egyptians, or gives the readers a notion that he does not understand the culture of the Egyptians. He tries to give “respect” for the greatness of the orients, yet still disregards their sovereignty. Balfour assumes the supremacy of British knowledge, and thinks that the westerners are doing what is “best” “for” the Orients. This is ironic because how can one be superior of another when they do not know the ability that the so-called “inferior subjects” hold? Why would the Egyptians or any other Eastern Orientals appreciate the unfair dominance? In a way Balfour’s perception is the result of persisted method of Orientalism study. Said calls this dominating framework, which these orientalists, including Balfour inherited and function within as the cause of the misconceptions about what the life of the Orients should be or is created for them by the domineering power of the Europeans.5 In this unconstrained environment of dominance, Balfour exercise predominant power over the orients. The framework creates confined philosophy, which overstresses the supremacy of the westerners and emphasizes the inadequacy of the Easterners. As Said rightly pointed out, the result of this one-way perspective and approach made the image of the orients more orients, westerners more western and thus creating a wide rift between the ‘West’ and the ‘East’. The westerns may have had the initial interest in the other cultures and the knowledge, but the fear of the unknowns’ society blindfolded them, thus exerting the idea of tyrannical dominance in the western created framework of Orientalism. The validity of Edward Said’s orientalism as a critical tool of analysis in a world of shifting boundaries between West and East However, like James Clifford explained, Edward Said’s idea of universal humanity is based on the western perspective of colonization and dominance.6 Clifford believed that his explanation is redundant and provides critical problems, which contradicts his idea of “re-evaluation.” For instance, Clifford believed that Said has limited knowledge of the orients he narrates about, and continues to give loose meanings and quality of Orientalism throughout the book. 7 Also, despite how Edward Said tries to explain the balanced relationship and identity of the orients and the western population, he defines Orientalism as “corporate institution for dealing with the Orients,” 8which Clifford states that such definition is similar to western perspective of authority and dominance over the orients. Taking it from another angle, it could be seen that Edward Said gives clear points on the problems of the Orientalism studies and states the errors in the approach of the westerners. However, Edward Said is considered as an oriental identity, and is a possible target to criticize for limited knowledge and perspective. For example, Said could be seen as “anti-west” due to his identity, but also that his books persists westerners’ misconception and misrepresentation of the Islamic society, and religion. For example, Said points out that since the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States and other western countries has portrayed Islam as terrorists and malicious world of violence. Edward Said defends himself that what he wanted was a re-evaluation of the Orientalism by the westerners themselves who created this erroneous framework of Orientalism. From this analysis, it is clear that Said’s orientalism is still valid a critical tool of analysis in a world of shifting boundaries between West and East BIBLIOGRAPHY Clifford, James. The Predicament of Culture: twentieth-century ethnography, literature, and art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 Huntington, Samuel. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996 Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat, Mauldon, Margaret & Kahn, Andrew. Persian letters. Trans. Margaret Mauldon. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008 Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979 Said, Edward. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books, 1995 Said, Edward , “The Nation,” October 22, 2001. “The Clash of Ignorance.” The Nation 22 October 2001: 11-13. Read More