SUMMARY REVIEW OF EDWARD SAID’S ORIENTALISM

Orientalism, or as put by Said; the difference between east and west; is a tri chapter work of what Edward Said concludes, should not have been done in the first place regarding the classification of peoples between the so called civilised west to the uncivilised east. This has greatly contributed to the bias and propaganda that still exists to this day.  
 

In the first chapter, he writes how the world was divided between the east and west. The orients were regarded as sub-human, uncivilised, incapable of running their own affairs, hence needed the intervention of the civilised west. And because they (orients) were incapable, the west could, without their knowledge, represent them. Everything was studied and interpreted according to the interpretation of the west. European generally defined themselves by defining the orient.

The second chapter writes the orients’ land and behavior being highly romanticized as the east being exotic and pure. It was in the easts’ purity that defined their inferiority to the west, particularly Europeans.   Europeans were biologically superior.

In the third chapter, the quest for geographical knowledge of the world gave fuel or prominence to the basis of orientalism. There was this comparison between the early orients and the new orients who were more involved or had a more ‘hands on’ approach in the study of the uncivilised east. The reason behind such an approach was not to understand the orient, but to know how to rule over them.

The roots of generalisations and prejudice on certain race and religions have been fueled by this very concept. The religion of Islam has suffered greatly the most from this contemptuous ideology. 

And western prejudice against the eastern countries continues to fuel propaganda even on mainstream (media, education, politics, economics, etc.). Said’s insight is a revelation of what is normally downplayed to conspiracy theory. Disciplines like anthropology and sociology need to tread carefully when it comes to study of people and societies outside Europe.  

Review of Smith's 'Decolonising Methodologies'

Smith has articulated one of the most impressive and informative writings I have ever come across. Research, as her book articulates, “it stirs up silence, it conjures up bad memories, it raises a smile that is knowing and distrustful.” The relevance resounds arguably in many ‘indigenous’ communities as they cannot but agree with subconscious contempt. Having imperialism as the driving force that has and continues to enable research to infiltrate and to an extent ‘colonise’ indigenous groups throughout the world, implies only of the West’s arrogance towards structures and systems that have been established and practiced for thousands of years by indigenous peoples throughout the world.

For Bougainville, research is a well-known term in many communities, villages, hamlets, etc. And as a region coming out of two big waves of colonization and then the bloody 10-year civil war, the region has seen much outside influence as much from within their own. Conceptions of outside influence are much treated with contempt and also debated as solutions to problems within. It is a no brainer to point out the issue of mining as one contentious example, with indigenous communities being continually talked down to about knowing what is best for them without understanding or even inquiring into what they want or need. 

Going back to the intention of Smith’s writing, research in this aspect tends to overlook the subtle nuances that can interpret a peoples understanding. And at many instances, interpretations are taken from a point of view not representative of the people concerned, hence misrepresentation becomes the representative of the concerned people.

In indigenous research, an important element is to allow for the researched or participants to partake in the research itself, as articulated in the twenty-five indigenous projects, “the survival of peoples, cultures and languages; the struggle to become self-determining, the need to take back control of our destinies.” This allows for accurate collection of data, even better takes out elements of distrust and contempt as the people and their beliefs, stories, legends, and their cultures are given the space express or articulate themselves.