Introduction to Orientalism by Edward Said

In his introduction to the term “Orientalism,” Edward Said begins by paraphrasing

the writing of a French journalist’s view of the present-day Orient in order to express the

major common Western misconception about the East. This misconception exists in the

Western mind, according to Said, as if it were irrelevant that the Orient itself was actually

sociologically affected. He then goes on to describe the basis of Orientalism, as it is

rooted in the Western consciousness.

Said uses the phrase “The Other” to describe the Western fascination with the

Orient. This is a reference to Jacques Lacan’s terminology, which describes the mirror

stage of development. This is the stage in growth during which children supposedly learn

their own identity by successfully separating their own being from a mirror image of

themselves. In this context, someone only finds an idea of themselves through a contrast

with an “Other.” It is in this circumstance that our desires and expectations of being

complete are projected onto this entity. This is a fitting comparison to Said’s topic,

considering the emphasis he puts on “the Orient’s special place in the Western

experience.” Said suggests that the Orient does not mean the same to American as it does

to the European countries, which fits logically into the equation (Europe as the analog of

the child that derives its feeling of self from an “Other”). This makes historical sense,

since the Orient was adjacent to Europe’s earliest civilizations and the cultural exchange

has always existed.

The first designation Said uses for the topic is the academic interpretation. He

lends this to the field of work of anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the

Orient. This definition is gener...

... middle of paper ...

...electronic and popular media.

In his concluding remarks, Said delves further into the reasoning behind the

futility of a positive view of Arab life in the West. His remaining comments include that

his experiences as a person of Arab descent are what motivated him to write about

Orientalism in the first place. For someone who is so directly and negatively affected by

Western perceptions of the Arab world and the Orient altogether, his analysis is a fairly

objective and sophisticated view of Orientalism. Perhaps it is because of his experiences

with lifelong stereotypes and the apparent dichotomy of Western and Eastern approaches

to the subject. His final comment is somewhat of a plea to the reader in the hopes that if a

greater understanding of the topic is derived from reading, then an unlearning of the

processes of cultural domination can conceivably begin.