Said, Orientalism: Introduction

In this introduction Said does much to define, clarify, set out, and prepare the reader for the coing discusssion. He does well in outlineing how Orientalism (O) is political, how it is presentational (in that it occupies certain positions through political presentations) and how it is inherently constructive as well.

There are several fine points in the introudction where Said offers a good defintion of O. However, I think the best may be offered here. I mean to lift up this quote in orer to highlight not simply a defintion of O, but rather to accentuate certain implications that stem from Said's understanding of how O formed and how it exists. It exists--meaning it functions more as a state rather than a lens. ( I realize this is super long. And hopefully will try and unpack what these insanely long sentences mean).

Therefore Orientalism is not a mere political subect matter or field that is reflected passively by culture, scholarhsip, or institutions; nor is it a large and diffuse collection of texts about the Orient; nor is it representative and expressive of some nefarious "Western" imperialist plot to hold down the "Oriental" world. it is rather a distribution of geopolitical awareness into aesthetic, schaolarly, economic, sociological, historical, and philogical texts; it is an elaboration not only of a basic geographical distinction (the world is made up of two unequal halves, Orient and Occident) but also of a whole series of "interests" which by such means as scholarly discovery, philological reconstruction, psychological analysis, landscpae and sociological description, it not only creates but also maintains; it is, rather than expresses, a certain will or intention to understand, in some cases to control, manipulate, even to incorporate, what is a manifestly different (or alternative and novel) world; it is , above all, a discourse that is by no means in direct, corresponding relationship with poltical power in the raw but rather, is produced and exists in a nuneven exhcange with various kinds of power, shaped to a degreee by the exchange with power political (as with a colonial or imperial establishment), power intellectual (as with reigning sciences like comparative linguistics or anatomy, or any of the modern polciy sciences), power cultural (as with ideas about what "we" do and what "they" cannot do or understand as "we" do).

Much of what Said mentions above is connected to the idea of Hegemony. Said uses Gramsci's notion of hegemony, and more specifically the space that culture opperates in, to outline and explicate how O, moves or gains positions within the world. Importantly, Said notes the fact that within any sort of study, or position or outlook there needs to be a beginning. This beginning automatically excludes a certain amount of historical evnets, work, thought, basic history within itself. This choice to begin at a certain point, is something that Said notes helps delineate the notion of O itself.

Said comments upon the work of Edward Lane, along with scientific, religious, historical and cultural interest within the orient along the time of Napoleon. This is interesting in that it serves to heavily mark or outline an increase in thinking of the Orient as "other." A side note--O serves complementarilly in that it helps define and establish cultural, identity notions of the Occident as much as it helps establish an identity of the Orient.

In the end, aspects that are important in consdiering Said's conception of O are the historical, social, cultural reconstruction of the Orient; the political power that O weilds over the Orient due to the ideological, religious, social, defintions that are provided through Orientalism. Indeed, Said speaks of O as if it is impossible to think of the Orient outside or isolated from this influence. I agree. However, I would extend this not only to the Orient, but to other geographic, cultural locations as well. Interestingly, it seems that Said does not disagree with this, but rather means to hold up the point that O outlines a distinct power, and authority that O gives to the Occident over the Orient. This social and very real aspect of O is connect, yet may operate separately, from the academic theoretical ideas, foundations of Orientalism.