Amazon.com Widgets

Friday, March 9, 2007

Martin Kramer, reviewing Robert Irwin's new book, Dangerous Knowledge: Orientalism and Its Discontents, takes some of his always fascinating, always interesting shots at the Edward Said legacy: Enough Said

In other words, Edward Said got it exactly wrong. Other scholars said as much in the years after his book came out; Irwin’s critique echoes those made by Jacques Berque, Malcolm Kerr, Bernard Lewis, and Maxime Rodinson. These doyens of Islamic and Arab studies came from radically different points on the political compass, but they all found the same flaws in Said’s presentation. Even Albert Hourani, the Middle East historian closest to Said personally, thought that Orientalism had gone “too far” and regretted that its most lasting effect was to turn “a perfectly respected discipline” into “a dirty word.”

Yet the criticisms did not stick; what stuck was the dirt thrown by Said. Not only did Orientalism sweep the general humanities, where ignorance of the history of Orientalism was (and is) widespread; not only did it help to create the faux-academic discipline now known as post-colonialism; but the book’s thesis also conquered the field of Middle Eastern studies itself, where scholars should have known better. No other discipline has ever surrendered so totally to an external critic.

As it happens, I witnessed a minute that perfectly compressed the results of this process. In 1998, to mark the 20th anniversary of the publication of Orientalism, the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) invited Said to address a plenary panel at its annual conference. As Said ascended the dais, his admirers leaped to their feet in an enthusiastic ovation. Then, somewhat hesitantly at first, the rest of the audience stood and began to applaud. Fixed in my seat, I surveyed the ballroom, watching scholars whom I had heard privately damn Orientalism for its libel against their field now rising sheepishly and casting sideways glances to see who might behold their gesture of submission...

4 Comments

Said got it "exactly" wrong, more critically he got it formidably and devastatingly wrong, as his strategic, ideological foray - founded upon all manner of multi-culti, pomo and broadly leftish tropes - did a lot of damage at foundational levels.

Reb Martin
The Scariest part of this post is

Fixed in my seat, I surveyed the ballroom, watching scholars whom I had heard privately damn Orientalism for its libel against their field now rising sheepishly and casting sideways glances to see who might behold their gesture of submission...

It shows how weak minded these anti-Israel "scholars" really are

it also shows the power of honor-shame concerns among these alleged scholars. when the crowd behaves in this manner, they don't have the integrity to resist, lest they draw opprobrium from a peer group they (at least in principle) don't approve of. and looking around, hoping no one will see their cowardice.

i a sense, Said was able to play on this and make it shameful to mention honor-shame, so that we have a generation of post-orientalists who don't even understand (and certainly won't discuss) the basic dynamics of the cultures they are supposed to have expertise about.

tragedy. especially now when we need to understand the dynamics of global jihad and islam under the spell of toxic honor-shame.

What do you think of Obadiah Shoher's extensive reply to Ed Said at http://samsonblinded.org/titles/edward_said_end_peace_process.htm ?

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]