Presentation on theme: "Yong Haeju #I 29012 Lee Jinse #I 33010 Lee Hoggie #I 34009."— Presentation transcript:
Yong Haeju #I 29012 Lee Jinse #I 33010 Lee Hoggie #I 34009
About Edward Said /“ORIENTALISM” 1978 / From Orientalism to Area studies About Edward Said /“ORIENTALISM” 1978 / From Orientalism to Area studies Orientalist Past and the Future of Middle East Studies / The West and the Rest: Discourse and Power Orientalist Past and the Future of Middle East Studies / The West and the Rest: Discourse and Power Occidentalism / Beyond Occidentalism Occidentalism / Beyond Occidentalism
1935~2003. 9. 24 Studied in VictoriaUniversity, Cairo, Egypt In 1950, Ph.D. in Harvard University.
The distinction between pure and political knowledge The methodological question The personal dimension
Area studies need to be understood in its relation to Orientalism in terms of its being the heir to this academic discipline. - Sociology - Economics - Political science - Idiographic history - Anthropology - Orientalism
Orientalism and Area studies must be taken into consideration is the novel forms that this heritage takes under the geopolitics of the post-World War II era. Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient. Orientalism is one of the haapiest and most durable marriages of power and knowledge housed under the unequal relationship between the West and the East, one stemming from the structure of the capitalist World-system.
Area studies and Orientalism will be the distinctive and disruptive places that these two disciplines hold within the organization of the social sciences. Oriental societies do not exist anymore, and no more Oriental congresses convene. What was the result of all these efforts: surveys, policy recommendations, governmental decisions, foundation support?
Does Orientalism still correctly define the society of Asia? How should we develop or use “Area studies” properly?
Martin Kramer presents a critique of Middle Eastern Studies. Time for Middle East specialists to put their house in order and drop fashionable theories - a legacy of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Kramer thinks in favor of straightforward policy-relevant work by adopting approaches that would explain and predict changes in the Middle East. He said this could be remedied by going back to their roots in Oriental Studies to restore some continuity with great tradition. He also maintains that the last thing Middle Eastern studies have sought to do has been to serve American foreign policy or private initiative.
Orientalism is a great tradition which was discredited by Said writings in 1978. Said is critical of the Orientalist tradition because he considers it a ‘supremacist ideology of difference, articulated in the West to justify its dominion over East’. Said understands Orientalism as a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between the Orient and the Occident. In Kramer’s view, it was during this period that Middle East studies ceased to be relevant to U.S. interests. This was mainly because they alienated policy makers by producing work critical of U.S. policies.
American Orientalism is defined as a tendency to underestimate the peoples of the region and to overestimate America’s ability to make a bad situation better. U.S. governments were victims of the Orientalist outlook that not only limited how they were able to think about the Middle East but also established a hierarchical distinction between the Middle East and the West, thereby resulting in an underestimation of Middle Eastern actors and overestimation of what the U.S. was capable of.
Kramer argues that Middle East studies have failed its major funder, U.S. government and that the remedy would be found by going back to its roots in Oriental studies to re-establish links between Middle East scholarship and policy making. Thanks to the Middle East centers based in U.S. universities, an American prevalence exists in Middle East studies. This phenomenon of the indigenization of Middle East studies in the USA could be viewed as a sign of success for Middle East studies. Area studies centers have been highly influential. Such a development would have been unfathomable within the limits imposed by the Oriental studies tradition that rested on the Orient/Occident divide and did not allow the Middle East to represent itself.
“The West" is no longer only in Europe, and not all of Europe is in "the West." The Eastern Europe doesn't belong properly to "the West"; whereas the United States, which is not geographically in Europe, definitely does. These days, technologically speaking, Japan is "western," though on our mental map it is about as far "East" as you can get. By "western" we mean the type of society : a society that is developed, industrialized, urbanized, capitalist, secular, and modern. The meaning of this term is therefore virtually identical to that of the word "modern."
The concept or idea of "the West" can be seen to function in the following ways: 1. It allows us to characterize and classify societies into different categories – e.g. "western," "non-western." 2. It is an image, or set of images. It condenses a number of different characteristics into one picture. It functions as part of a language, a "system of representation.” e.g.) "western" = urban = developed; or "non-western" = non-industrial = rural = agricultural = under- developed. 3. It provides criteria of evaluation against which other societies are ranked and around which powerful positive and negative feelings cluster. e.g.) "the West" = developed = good = desirable; or the "non- West" = under-developed = bad = undesirable. In short, it functions as an ideology.
The very term "the West," makes the West appear unified and homogeneous. But the West has always contained many internal differences. The same necessary simplification is true to "the Rest." This term also covers enormous historical, cultural, and economic distinctions - for example, between the Middle East, the Far East, Africa, Latin America, indigenous North America, and Australasia. It can equally encompass the simple societies of some North American Indians and the developed civilizations of China, Egypt, or Islam. In short, the discourse, as a "system of representation," represents the world as divided according to a simple dichotomy - the West/the Rest.
Gradually, despite their many internal differences, the countries of Western Europe began to conceive of themselves as part of a single family or civilization - "the West.“ But in the Age of Exploration and Conquest, Europe began to define itself in relation to a new idea - the existence of many new "worlds," profoundly different from itself. The two processes - growing internal cohesion and the conflicts and contrasts with external worlds - reinforced each other, helping to forge that new sense of identity that we call "the West.“
Discourses are ways of talking, thinking, or representing a particular subject or topic. They produce meaningful knowledge about that subject. This knowledge influences social practices, and so has real consequences and effects. Discourses always operate in relation to power. Europe brought its own cultural categories, languages, images, and ideas to the New World in order to describe and represent it. It tried to fit the New World into existing conceptual frameworks, classifying it according to its own norms, and absorbing it into western traditions of representation The discourse of "the West and the Rest" could not be innocent because it did not represent an encounter between equals.
A major object of the process of idealization was Nature itself. Sexuality was a powerful element in the fantasy which the West constructed. Said says that "the essence of Orientalism is the ineradicable distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority. “Europeans were immediately struck by what they interpreted as the absence of government and civil society - the basis of all "civilization" - among peoples of the New World. Living close to Nature meant that they were “uncivilized”. The extent of any cannibalism was considerably exaggerated.
1) idealization; 2) the projection of fantasies of desire and degradation; 3) the failure to recognize and respect difference; 4) the tendency to impose European categories and norms, to see difference through the modes of perception and representation of the West. These strategies were all underpinned by the process known as stereotyping. The stereotype is split into two halves - its "good" and "bad" sides; this is "splitting" or dualism. The world is first divided, symbolically, into good-bad, us-them, attractive-disgusting, civilized-uncivilized, the West-the Rest. All the other, many differences between and within these two halves are collapsed, simplified.
The philosopher John Locke claimed that the New World provided a prism through which one could see "a pattern of the first ages in Asia and Europe" - the origins from which Europe had developed. "In the beginning," Locke said, "all the World was America". He meant by this that the world (i.e. the West) had evolved from a stage very much like that discovered in America - undeveloped, and uncivilized. It produced the idea that the history of "mankind" occurred along a single continuum, divided into a series of stages. A different mode of subsistence, these stages being defined as hunting, pasturage, agriculture and commerce. Without ‘the Rest’, ‘the West’ would not have been able to recognize and represent itself as the summit of human history.
It is unfair to characterize both the West and the Rest in a simple dichotomy because of internal differences within. I concur with Edward Said’s view that Orientalism is the distinction based on Western superiority and Oriental inferiority. Going back to Orientalist roots and restoring the links between scholarship and policy-relevant work is not the proper way in area studies. Study into a specific area should be based on the scientific approaches and disciplinary-oriented ways in conjunction with particular studies into the country to expect and predict changes in the region more accurately. Orientalist outlook not only limited how the U.S. was able to think of the Middle East but also established a hierarchical distinction between the Middle East and the West, thereby resulting in an underestimation of Middle Eastern actors and overestimation of what the U.S. was capable of. Scholars should go beyond the distinction between Orient and Occident and reflect the Middle Eastern perspectives to produce more accurate and relevant knowledge that would enable specialists to predict the changes in the region.
“OCCIDENTALISM: THE WORLD TURNED UPSIDE DOWN” Orientalism Attracts the most attention Ethno-orientalism Essentialist renderings of an alien societies by the member s of those societies themselves Ethno-occidentalism Essentialist renderings of the West by members of alien societie Occidentalism The essentialistic rendering of the West by Westerners.
Gift and commodity relations means that each is shaped by the other Occidentalism makes sense only when it is juxtaposed with its matching Orientalism, the essentialized society of the gift, the West is the society of the commodity – these two essentializations defining and justifying each other dialectically.
Essentialism is a view that, for any specific kind of entity, there are a set of characteristics all of which any entity of that kind must have. Antiessentialism is Seeking to reduce or eliminate Orientalist tendencies, the critics have urged anthropologists to look at societies in less stereotyped ways or to adopt new textual or representational devices for portraying them
“BEYOND OCCIDENTALISM: TOWARD NONIMPERIAL GEOHISTORICAL CATEGORIES” Maps A medium for representing the world as well as for problematizing its representation. The West and the East The West: the occident, the center, the first world : often identified with Europe, the States, us, we, the modern Self The East: the orient, the periphery, the third world : underdeveloped, the other
The Dissolution of the Other by the Self In this modality, Western and non-Western cultures are opposed to each other as radically different entities and their opposition is resolved by absorbing non-Western people into an expanding and victorious West The Incorporation of the Other into the Self In this second modality of Occidentalism, a critical focus on Western development unwittingly obscures the role of non-Western people in the making of the modern world, subtly reiterating the distinction between Other and Self that underwrites Europe’s imperial expansion. The Destabilization of Self by Other In this form, non-Western people are presented as a privileged source of knowledge of the West. the depiction of radical Otherness is used to unsettle Western culture.
The examination of Western representations of Otherness can be encompassed within an interrogation of why Otherness has become such a peculiarly modern concern from the perspective of a critique of Occidentalism. The map of modernity is being redrawn by global changes in culture, aesthetics, and exchange that are commonly associated with the emergence of post-modernity. The interaction between geography and history involves an exchange between past and present and present and future.