The Arab World and the Occident: Toward the Construction of an Occidentalist Discourse

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Z. Salhi
{"title":"The Arab World and the Occident: Toward the Construction of an Occidentalist Discourse","authors":"Z. Salhi","doi":"10.29117/jcsis.2021.0306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This article aims to engage in a meaningful discussion of Occidentalism as a discourse that draws its roots from Orientalism. It scrutinizes the limitations of Occidentalism in investigating the East-West encounter from the perspective of Orientals (Arab intellectuals) and the multifarious ways the latter relate to and imagine the Occident. It will cast a critical eye on the multiple and diverse constructions of Occidentalism as a discourse, arguing that unlike Orientalism, which homogenizes the Orient, Occidentalism does not Occidentalize/homogenize the Occident. Methodology: We take as a starting point Edward Said’s definition of Orientalism as a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident’, and we explore the limitations and the possibilities of Occidentalism as a method to construe the colonial mechanisms of misrepresentation of the Other as everything different from the Self. This article compares and contrasts a plethora of existing definitions of Occidentalism as formulated by scholars from both the Arab world and the Occident. Findings: This paper concludes that the Oriental’s encounter with the Occident cannot, and should not, be projected as a reverse relationship, or, as some claim, as an ‘Orientalism in reverse’. Instead, it should be projected as a diverse set of relationships of Orientals who have experienced the Occident in a variety of manners. Furthermore, while Orientalism derives from a particular closeness experienced between the Occident and its Orient, often through real or imagined encounters, Occidentalism is also the outcome of a long cultural relationship between the Orient and its Occident. What differs between the Orient and Occident, however, is the position of power and hegemony, which characterizes the Occident’s encounter with the Orient. Originality: This article takes an all-inclusive view to discuss the term Occidentalism from the perspectives of both the Orient and the Occident. It teases out the limitations of this term. It challenges Orientalist methods of misrepresentation, which continues to blemish the Arab world and its discourse of Occidentalism as a discourse of hatred of the Occident. Furthermore, through the discussion of Alloula’s Oriental Harem, it offers insight into the suggested Occidentalism method, which emphasizes the disfigurations of the Orient while tactfully writing back to the Occident.","PeriodicalId":40091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of College of Sharia and Islamic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of College of Sharia and Islamic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29117/jcsis.2021.0306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This article aims to engage in a meaningful discussion of Occidentalism as a discourse that draws its roots from Orientalism. It scrutinizes the limitations of Occidentalism in investigating the East-West encounter from the perspective of Orientals (Arab intellectuals) and the multifarious ways the latter relate to and imagine the Occident. It will cast a critical eye on the multiple and diverse constructions of Occidentalism as a discourse, arguing that unlike Orientalism, which homogenizes the Orient, Occidentalism does not Occidentalize/homogenize the Occident. Methodology: We take as a starting point Edward Said’s definition of Orientalism as a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident’, and we explore the limitations and the possibilities of Occidentalism as a method to construe the colonial mechanisms of misrepresentation of the Other as everything different from the Self. This article compares and contrasts a plethora of existing definitions of Occidentalism as formulated by scholars from both the Arab world and the Occident. Findings: This paper concludes that the Oriental’s encounter with the Occident cannot, and should not, be projected as a reverse relationship, or, as some claim, as an ‘Orientalism in reverse’. Instead, it should be projected as a diverse set of relationships of Orientals who have experienced the Occident in a variety of manners. Furthermore, while Orientalism derives from a particular closeness experienced between the Occident and its Orient, often through real or imagined encounters, Occidentalism is also the outcome of a long cultural relationship between the Orient and its Occident. What differs between the Orient and Occident, however, is the position of power and hegemony, which characterizes the Occident’s encounter with the Orient. Originality: This article takes an all-inclusive view to discuss the term Occidentalism from the perspectives of both the Orient and the Occident. It teases out the limitations of this term. It challenges Orientalist methods of misrepresentation, which continues to blemish the Arab world and its discourse of Occidentalism as a discourse of hatred of the Occident. Furthermore, through the discussion of Alloula’s Oriental Harem, it offers insight into the suggested Occidentalism method, which emphasizes the disfigurations of the Orient while tactfully writing back to the Occident.
阿拉伯世界与西方:西方主义话语的建构
目的:本文旨在对西方主义作为一种根源于东方主义的话语进行有意义的讨论。它从东方人(阿拉伯知识分子)的角度审视了西方主义在研究东西方相遇时的局限性,以及后者与西方联系和想象西方的各种方式。它将以批判的眼光审视西方主义作为一种话语的多重和多样化的建构,认为与东方主义将东方同质化不同,西方主义并没有将西方西方化/同质化。方法论:我们以萨义德对东方主义的定义为出发点,将其定义为一种基于“东方”和“西方”的本体论和认识论区别的思维方式,并探索西方主义作为一种方法的局限性和可能性,以解释将他者误解为与自我不同的一切的殖民机制。本文比较和对比了阿拉伯世界和西方学者对西方主义的大量现有定义。发现:本文的结论是,东方与西方的相遇不能也不应该被预测为一种反向关系,或者像一些人声称的那样,被预测为“逆向东方主义”。相反,它应该被投射成东方人以各种方式经历西方的各种关系。此外,虽然东方主义源于西方和东方之间的一种特殊的亲密体验,通常是通过真实或想象的遭遇,但西方主义也是东方和西方之间长期文化关系的结果。然而,东方与西方的不同之处在于权力和霸权的地位,这是西方与东方相遇的特征。原创性:本文以全方位的视角,从东方和西方两个角度来探讨西方主义。它消除了这个术语的局限性。它挑战了东方主义的歪曲方法,这种方法继续玷污阿拉伯世界及其西方主义话语,使其成为一种仇恨西方的话语。此外,通过对Alloula的东方后宫的讨论,它提供了对建议的西方主义方法的洞察,这种方法强调东方的变形,同时巧妙地写回西方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
50.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信