Orientalist perception

Author Topic: Orientalist perception  (Read 325 times)

Offline Shah Nister Kabir

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • Test
    • View Profile
Orientalist perception
« on: April 27, 2015, 10:59:20 AM »
Muslim nations and their issues are perceived through an Orientalist prism (Karim 2000; McAlister 2001; Izadi and Saghaye-Biria 2007, 161) that legitimates Western elite policy, and the Western mainstream media rarely challenge the dominant ideology (Poole 2002). Any changes (or lack of changes) in the ‘Islamic world’ have been identified through the lens of an Orientalist view. The Orientalist view presents the Orient through discriminatory categorical and stereotypical labelling. However, such “[c]ategori[zation] and label[ling] can help us understand why” and how a cultural group is discriminated against in a particular institutional or cultural setting (New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education 2010, 9). This stereotypical Orientalist view “obscure” reality, misguides social perception and can be threatening towards the identity of the ‘Other’ (New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education 2010, 9). Alatom (1997 [cited in Saghaye-Biria 2007, 149]) observes eight categories of Orientalist elements—‘inferiority’, ‘backwardness’, ‘irrationality’, ‘submissiveness’, ‘Islam as a threat’, ‘Jews vs. Arabs’, ‘strangeness’ and ‘untrustworthiness’.
Source: Iran nuclear issue in New Zealand Newspaper (by Shah Nister Kabir, 2014)

Offline Tahsina

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Test
    • View Profile
Re: Orientalist perception
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2015, 02:25:55 PM »
Edward Said is a pioneer in this area. Have you read his Orientalism (1978)?
Tahsina Yasmin
Associate Professor
Department of English, DIU

Offline Shah Nister Kabir

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • Test
    • View Profile
Re: Orientalist perception
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2015, 11:36:09 AM »
I did and yes, indeed it was a part of my thesis (and my later contributions) to construct argument on the basis of Saidian Orientalist view. Yet, I did not lose my track to read (I better should say STUDY) other parts of the trilogy-- i.e. Reporting Islam and The Question of Palestine-- in building my argument.
Once again, I must say that the Orientalist view can be and is criticized from many corners (this [i.e. the criticism] does not devalue Said's scholarship in anyway, however).

I thank you very much.
Sincerely,