Orientalism In Heat And Dust

Orientalism in anthropology is the "western scholarship about the eastern world" (Said, 1978) but more importantly is the "fictional and irrational representation of the middle east by the western world" (Said, 1978) which is done to establish a sense of western superiority. In her introduction of the book, Ghannam expresses her dissatisfaction with the way Arab men are portrayed in the western "media, policy circles and some scholarly works" and aims to portray them with - to an extent - unprejudiced view of the issue. In addition, although she identifies and introduces herself being from a "middle eastern origin" (Ghannam, 2013), she considers herself among the western audience when she refers to them as "we" or considering the west "here". Therefore, no matter how much of an insider she considers herself to be, she still is looking at the orient from the perspective of a westerner and even her comparison of her daughter with Ahmed shows

He saw this through many ways and because of what was mentioned in the above quote and “the Middle East crisis of 1973 that provoked Said to research and write Orientalism, which was published in 1978” (Irwin 2006, 281). His book however, is not a book about the “history[s] of the Oriental studies, but rather a highly selective polemic on certain aspects of the relations of knowledge and power. Its style and content strongly suggest that it is addressed exclusively to a Western readership” (Irwin 2006, 281). In his book he starts with two points or problems that he saw happen with what others said when studying the Orient. The first one was from Karl Marx who stated that “They cannot represent themselves; they must be represented” and the second was from Benjamin Disraeli who said “The East is a career” (Krishna 2009, 73). Both these points did not sit well with Said as they showed that knowledge or

It is this balanced combination of contemporary experience and aspiration for transcendence that gives Joshi’s novel a place of distinction in post-Independence Indian fiction in English.5

The way in which Said and Huntington define culture within their texts Orientalism and The Clash of Civilisation, divulges each author’s position within and perception of both the Arab and Western Worlds. The difference in each author’s ideology and contexts - Said (a professor in comparative lit with a Palestinian background, writing in 1978, a time of conflict and devastation in the middle east) and Huntington, (an American political scientist writing at a time in which his country is at a height of its power), causes what is described by Said as “The clash of definitions” (SD). Said views culture as a culmination and product of ideologies, morals and beliefs propagated by members of society. Huntington views culture as more definite, established and finite. Said defines a specific culture in relation to others whist Huntington believes each culture is its own separate entity. Through the exploration of these contrasting views it can be interpreted that a key difference between each definition is that Said defines culture as more broad and capable of being influenced whilst Huntington views it only as a powerful influencer. This may also reflect their positions as either from the West or the Orient.

In A Fine Balance, Mistry investigates the subaltern status of the Dalits and the impact of untouchability on politics. At that point, Mistry highlights the cruelty of political issues in this novel. Judith Fetterley expounds the power in politics: “Power is the issue in the politics of literature, as it is in the politics of anything else. To be excluded from a literature , that claims to define one’s identity is to experience a peculiar form of powerlessness” (492).

If we grasp an understanding of what colonisation institutes, we can begin to realise that the theories of psychoanalysis, Marxism and postcolonialism each hold parallel qualities through which opinions of race and identity are expressed, and exercised. Furthermore, through the roots of postcolonialism, we can begin to understand that it is specifically a postmodern discourse that consists of the responses and scrutiny of cultural injustices which, in turn, result from the

Like Flaubert, the Occident arbitrarily interpret and create the Orient as a way of domination. The Orient have no choice but to keep silence under the authority and power of the Occident. The Occidental understanding of the East that doesn’t contain opinion and position of the East leads to prejudice and forms Orientalist discourses. These discourses solidify into Orientalism by methodical systemization and are prevalent in the society.

Occidentalism, as a concept, remains debated amongst scholars to this day. While the essential components have a modicum of consensus, the finer points remain vague, and its prevalence amongst intellectuals in Oriental societies varies dramatically. At the most basic level, Occidentalism is the mirror image of Orientalism. Just as Orientalism consists of an abstract, disconnected rendering of “Oriental” societies within the mentality of Orientalists, Occidentalism provides a similarly essentialist perception of the West, or “Occident”. The Occident is perceived as a monolithic entity, diametrically opposed to the Orient on a cultural level. Occidentalism as practiced by Oriental scholars traces its intellectual roots to traditional European Orientalism, and retains the very same fallacies that have recently become so reviled amongst Western academics in regard to Orientalism.

The Mistress of Spices is a tale of joy and sorrow and Tilo’s magical powers. The protagonist Tilo’s magic lies in the knowledge of spices. She opens a spice shop in Oakland, California and provides spices not only for cooking but also to cure and heal the immigrants suffering from homesickness who visit her store. Tilo find herself in dilemma when she falls in love with a non Indian. She is in conflict whether to serve the people or follow her own happiness. The immigrant tale of dreams, desires, pain, struggle and hope form the

Occidentalism, as a concept, remains debated amongst scholars to this day. While the essential components have a modicum of consensus, the finer points remain vague, and its prevalence amongst intellectuals in Oriental societies varies dramatically. At the most basic level, Occidentalism is the mirror image of Orientalism. Just as Orientalism consists of an abstract, disconnected rendering of “Oriental” societies within the mentality of Orientalists, Occidentalism provides a similarly essentialist perception of the West, or “Occident”. The Occident is perceived as a monolithic entity, diametrically opposed to the Orient on a cultural level. Occidentalism as practiced by Oriental scholars traces its intellectual roots to traditional European Orientalism, and retains the very same fallacies that have recently become so reviled amongst Western academics in regard to Orientalism.

A French military whcih was in command under Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Egypt in 1978. They invaded Egypt because they wanted to break off the British route to their new settlements in India. Bonaparte took control of the country in a quick way and he defeated its Mamluke rulers and putting an end to popular rebellions. At the same time he announced to the people that he had come to set them free from Mamluke tyranny, and give them liberty and equality. He wanted people to respect the correct values of Islam. With him he brought many scientists and academic scholars. Who investigated Egypt and did a lot to forward the area of Orientalism and whose activities who got the attention of Egyptian scholars. He developed a council of ‘ulama’ but people would not accept being controlled by non-Muslims. The British were revolted and forced to be put down and disease forced the French to depart in 1801.

In short, the orientalists’ aim is to speak for the Orient. Their method was simply to render the Oriental man incapable of representing himself or his environment. Thereafter, it became the duty of the modern and knowledgeable Western man to speak for and redefine the Orientals. “The unfortunate danger is that this premise is officially upheld by the Western authorities and is given more authority than what is occurring in the orient.” (Said, 1977 Pg.93-94).

Orientalism tries to answer the question of why, when we think of the Orient, we have a preconceived notion of what kind of people live there, what they believe, and how they act; even when we may have never been there or met anyone from there. Said argues that the way we acquire this knowledge is not objective, but rather the end result of a process that reflects certain interests. Said claims that the way the West looks at the countries and peoples of the Orient is through a lens that distorts the actual reality of those places and people.

The interpreter spoke to the white man and he immediately gave his answer. "All the gods you have named are not gods at all. They are gods of deceit who tell you to kill your fellows and destroy innocent children.

In 1978, Edward Said made a critical analysis on the general idea of Orient spread in the Western world. He demonstrated that Orientalism is a way of cultural domination of the West against the East, and therefore it is none other than a product of European ethnocentrism. Furthermore, the Europe came to be self-confident that it is a mission of the West to save and develop the Orient, which led them justified their colonisation. In doing so, he also pointed out, the conviction of their own knowledge of the Orient gave a power of domination to the Europeans. (1978, p.11) In this essay, I will argue that these Said’s insights are useful to understand why development has been viewed as necessary and how development has actually been conducted by the West. Cases of India and African countries will be illustrated as examples.