Orientalism and Culture

Said introduces Orientalism by talking about his visit to Beirut. “The orient was almost a European invention, and has been since antiquity a place of romance exotic beings, haunting memories and landscapes, remarkable experiences” (Said, 1). He had gone in with so many expectations, and realized nothing was the same. Said states that there are three meanings of Orientalism, that although very different ideas, all go together to make a definition that is more whole. The first definition is, “The most readily accepted designation for Orientalism is an academic one, and indeed the label still serves in a number of academic institutions. Anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient… either in its specific or its general aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism” (Said, 2). This definition refers more toward University level education. For example, at the University of Oxford, one can get a degree in Oriental studies. In the U.S., one may get a degree in Latin studies. Said here is trying to point out the White/European so-called “scholars” who come back from studying a place to teach others on what it’s like to live there and what the culture is there. But, the main question is, can you really teach exactly what you saw and exactly how you immersed yourself in it?

A slightly more general meaning for Orientalism is, “a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between “the Orient” and… ‘the Occident’” (Said, 2). This definition allows one to use compare and contrast to understand the differences. Using ontological and epistemological thoughts is using what you know as part of your nature of being and what you think you know- based on opinion- to make distinctions. However, these differences are seen as negative, as if one is more dominant than the other. As if an Orient is backwards and uncivilized. In Said’s book, he states that “a very large mass of writers… have accepted the basic distinction between East and West as the starting point for elaborate theories… concerning the Orient, its people, customs, “mind,” destiny, and so on” (Said, 2–3). Therefore, poets and other writers take what’s already been framed for them by others who have seen places and its people, and add in their beliefs and opinions. This comes off in writing as more beautiful or more tragic. It is hard to picture what someone else saw because we are all people and everything and anything can mean something different to everyone.

The final meaning is “something more historically and materially defined.” “Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient- dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it; in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient” (Said, 3). This is Orientalism as discourse. This brings it back to colonialism and how people used to benefit at the cost of others. In Ishi: The Last Indian, it talks about genocide and how people were paid to hunt Native Americans. The colonists gained their land at the cost of the deaths of the native people who lived there. The “Western” way to do things is to dominate over whatever is trying to be gained, no matter the cost or the damages. It is all about power and who is on top.

If one were to look at all three of these meanings of Orientalism separately, it can feel unorganized and choppy. However, when looking at all three meanings and putting them together, it is easier to see what Orientalism means to Said. Discourse has put a lot of weight on the meaning of Orientalism and what it means to be a person of Orient. All three meanings have to do with having power and believing one knows all. The academic definition gives power to the person teaching it, who calls themselves a scholar. The ontological and epistemological gives power to writers to write what they please based on what they know. The final meaning puts us back into time and makes us look at how much power Westerners had as far as being a corporate institution. They had dealt with the Orient by making their own statements about it, teaching that to others, and ruling over the knowledge that was spread about the Orient. All of these discourses oppressed the Orient and gave power to the Occident.

According to Huntington, “the rivalry of the superpowers is replaced by the clash of civilizations” (Huntington). For him, it is less about history and having power over a country for politics and economics, but more about civilizations and their cultures. “In this new world the most pervasive, important, and dangerous conflicts will not be between social classes, rich and poor, or other economically defined groups, but between peoples belonging to different cultural entities” (Huntington). This is seen after 9/11 and how relations between the Middle East and the U.S. changed. Huntington’s argument can be seen as discourse because he is emphasizing the differences between countries based on the differences of cultures. “Societies united by ideology or historical circumstance but divided by civilization either come apart…or are subjected to intense strain…” (Huntington). He sees that differences in culture and on the Orient will either become stronger by the people staying together or become weaker. “The West is and will remain for years to come the most powerful civilization. Yet its power relative to that of other civilizations is declining” (Huntington). There are three levels of culture: concrete objects and artifacts, behavioral, and mental ideologies. Huntington doesn’t really focus on any of these, except a bit of mental ideologies. He states, “The philosophical assumptions, underlying values, social relations, customs, and overall outlooks on life differ significantly among civilizations” (Huntington). Other than that, he only mentions that the Eastern countries are all “shaped by their civilizational identities” (Huntington). Culture needs to consist of all three levels, but Huntington does not have the knowledge to expand on it because of the fact that he is using Orientalist discourse. He is going based off of his knowledge that was taught to him by someone else, and through what history has told him.

My community partner site is Young Moms Marin and there is always something on TV and social media about teen/young moms. One example of an “othering” discourse found is the MTV show “Teen Mom”. Teen Mom follows around a few teenagers who got pregnant in high school. I’ve realized that they usually try to have different demographics for all of the girls. For example, a cheerleader, a bookworm, a girl with divorced parents, etc. They are always trying to sell the show at the cost of the teen girls. They show the moms as unable to support themselves, having parental relationship issues, and having problems with their significant other. These girls are put into a category of “other” that makes all young moms seem incapable of being a good mother and providing for their families. The girls at Young Moms Marin are seen as irresponsible because of the fact that they’re young. No one knows that at least half of them were planned pregnancies and that some have multiple kids who were also planned. The community also doesn’t see how hard they are trying to stay above the poverty line and some are trying to get an education while working and trying to take care of their families. These girls are put into the category of the “other” which includes descriptive words like: irresponsible, incapable, poor, careless, uneducated, and dumb. No one sees that they are also human beings that have the right to live within their community without being looked at as incompetent. The Other is a label that defines a person if they are not what society sees as fit to be a part of the community, and that is to be blamed on popular discourse.