The topic of this symposium is generally Orientalism, specifically post-Edward Said Orientalism. Orientalism encompasses several overlapping areas as a way of thinking and expertise: first, the variable historical and cultural relationship between Europe and Asia; second, the scientific discipline in the West that emerged as a result of specialization in the study of various Eastern cultures and traditions since the first half of the 19th century; and third, the ideological assumptions, images, and imaginary depictions of the region currently known as the East, which attracts significant attention from a political perspective.
In his proposal to study Orientalism as a discourse, Said (1999: 13) provides a comprehensive description of Orientalism: "Whether dealing with it in its specific or general aspects -whether as an anthropologist, sociologist, historian, or philologist- the person who writes, teaches, or researches on the Orient is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism. [O]rientalism is a way of thinking based on an ontological and epistemological distinction made between 'the Orient' and (most of the time) 'the Occident'. [I]f a starting point were to be selected roughly, as the late eighteenth century, Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient, which is dealt with by an institution, a vocabulary, scholarship, imagery, doctrines, even colonial bureaucracies and colonial styles." (Said, 1999: 12-13).
Although the institutionalization of Orientalism as an academic discipline took place in the 19th century, the history of the West's interest in the East and the formation of its imagination about the East goes back much further. The characteristics that determine the "imagination of the West towards the East" lie in the distinction between the East and the West. The border that separates the East from the West has been highly variable throughout history. During the Crusades, the East referred to the Islamic world. With the rise of the Ottoman Empire, however, it was associated with the Ottomans and Turks.
Although it is not exactly known what the initial reactions of Christian leaders were to Islamic conquests, some of the responses in works written in the 7th century were not entirely negative. However, the Crusades began to shape the basic images of Islam and Muslims in the Western Christian mind.
The development of political and economic relations, an increase in the number of travelers and missionaries traveling to the East, and the weakening of ideological unity and dominance of Christianity in Europe allowed for the collection of more objective information about Muslim East in the 16th century. While the East-West symbolism had not yet clearly emerged as opposing social and historical entities by the end of the century, the conditions had matured for such a situation.
Notes from travel, political writings, and reference sources on different regions of the Muslim world, historically Europe's most important rival, were responding to a need for Europeans to be aware of their own biases and engage in self-criticism, rather than simply gaining unbiased knowledge. The Enlightenment in Europe opened the way for the study of the East for non-religious reasons and encouraged it. With the works of figures like Edward Pocock and Simon Ockley, the Prophet of Islam was no longer evaluated as the Antichrist.
From the last quarter of the 18th century onwards, the event that shaped Europe's view of the East was imperialism. In this context, two important colonial experiences are significant in the establishment of Orientalism as an academic discipline: the activities of the Institut d'Egypte established during Napoleon's attempted invasion of Egypt in 1798, and the activities of the Bengal Asiatic Society (1784) established as part of England's colonial policies in India.
In parallel with these initiatives, the Living Eastern Languages School was established in Paris in 1795 through the efforts of Louis Langlés and played an important role. Sylvestre de Sacy (1758-1838), regarded as the founder of modern Islamic and Arabic studies, was appointed as head of the institution, and the YDDO presented an example of a secular Orientalist institution. The institutions in Paris and Vienna began to pursue an education free of theological ties, driven by commercial and political concerns and needs, such as training interpreters.
This period is one in which Orientalist associations were established one after the other and magazines were published. The main task of the group of experts who gathered in these associations and university lecturers was to learn and teach Arabic and other languages spoken in the Islamic world, and to provide tools for understanding written works in these languages. In this context, they produced many dictionaries and grammar books for the languages spoken in the Muslim world. They catalogued manuscripts in major European libraries and produced facsimile prints of important and valuable theological, legal, historical, and literary works related to Islamic culture.
Slowly, modern social sciences began to be used in Orientalist studies. Orientalists used the theses of sociologists, but the use of anthropology in Orientalist studies was more widespread and effective. In addition, a populist image of the East was created in literature in the 19th century that appealed to a "broad readership." In Warburton's work, the East was portrayed as an endless source of entertainment and interest, and the White Man's dominant position and prestige in the East were described.
At the turn of the century, the work of two important Orientalists, Ignaz Goldziher and Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje, who served as advisors to Dutch colonial administrations for many years, showed that the Orientalist perspective on Muslim societies needed to be reviewed. Hurgronje had concluded that the Islamic world was a living and changing reality. According to him, the Netherlands needed to reorganize its policies in its colonies in this light.
After the Second World War, Orientalist studies began to enrich themselves with the scientific and technological tools of the time and started to benefit significantly from the methodologies and explanation models of modern humanities. Economic history and social history, which had been neglected for a long time, were being studied by specialists who were increasingly defining themselves with names that identified the country or region they were interested in, such as Turkologist, Egyptologist, Sinologist, Arabist, and Islamicist. The changing balances in world politics also had a significant contribution to these developments.
In the atmosphere of the First World War, the tendency to use the information about Eastern societies in accordance with the political goals of the colonizers was embodied in figures such as Arabist Lawrence and Gertrude Bell, whom Said positioned in the category of "agent Orientalists". The disappointments and uncertainties of the 20th century awakened in perceptive Western intellectuals a more or less conscious approach towards the other, a need for reconciliation with colonized peoples. Of course, these approaches were not being expressed for the first time in this era.
Parallel to the changing international balances after the Second World War, Orientalist studies in Europe went through a crisis. It was the time for historians, lawyers, economists, and other experts in social sciences, rather than philologists, and the works and regulations carried out by the United States, newly established organizations, and modern studies were envied. In short, it was desired to establish a balance between modern and classical studies, and financial and new organization needs were mentioned to promote Orientalist studies. The proposals of British Orientalists in the field would later be carried out by the United States. In the post-Second World War conditions, America's economic and political interests in the Middle East took a clearer shape. In the new era, studies were increased in almost every field, from humanities to social sciences, from ancient studies to modern studies, with the support of foundations financed by the arms and energy sectors and the government. Orientalism was now being organized as a narrow region-based and interdisciplinary logic in line with the foreign policy needs of the United States.
Another characteristic of Orientalist studies in the United States is that it has been associated with regional studies since its inception. Regional studies largely began with the establishment of an education program on international public administration at Columbia University. These efforts were continued with the establishment of language departments at Princeton, Michigan, Indiana, and Pennsylvania universities.
As a natural consequence of the changes in the political environment mentioned above, the United States preferred to carry out studies that were free from the negative image of European politics and Orientalism in the field of Orientalist studies. However, despite all these restructuring efforts, American Orientalism continued to contain the dominant basic approaches of European Orientalism towards the East in the 19th century. This continuity was achieved both by the fact that the United States was ultimately a part of Western collective imagination and by some of the leading European Orientalists of the period, such as Gibb, Grunebaum, and Lewis, serving as educators and guides in the construction process of Orientalism in the United States. In this sense, American Orientalism demonstrates the characteristics of "continuity and differentiation" together.
From the end of the 19th century, some objections to the methods and perspectives of the study areas voiced among Orientalists increased during the interwar period, but especially after 1945, and these criticisms, in which non-Western world intellectuals also participated, gradually took on a questioning character towards the foundations of Orientalism. The criticisms primarily targeted 19th century Orientalism due to its ideological formation and Eurocentric essence. The emergence of the United States as a new superpower after 1945 has played a motivating function in the easy expression and acceptance of these criticisms.
Undoubtedly, Edward Said has been the most serious critic of the Orientalist discourse. In Orientalism, which was first published in 1978 and is considered a "paradigm-shifting work," Said examined a long-standing tradition of writing rooted in Europe's cultural, political, and economic interests related to the East. While there were other individuals before him who had ideas about Orientalism and had made certain criticisms of Orientalist thought, particularly its methodology, such as Muhammed el-Behiy, Malik Bin Nebi, Mustafa Sibai, Meryem Cemile, Enver Abdülmalik, Abdullah Laroui, Yves Lacoste, Talal Esad, Bryan S. Turner, none of them were able to achieve the impact of Said's book.
Said's expertise and wealth of knowledge in his field undoubtedly played a significant role in the resounding impact of Orientalism. As Holbrook accurately noted, "The genius of Orientalism was that he said something that we all already knew, but he legitimized it with the institutional authority of education" (2000: 6). Additionally, his close ties to the Palestinian cause, as well as being a Palestinian Christian Arab himself, are another important factor. It should also be noted that Said did not limit the term Orientalism to a professional expertise and attempted to demonstrate that the term was in effect in general culture, literature, ideology, and both social and political attitudes. This is another important aspect of the work that makes it significant. By using Foucault's formulation of knowledge-power to show how power and knowledge (colonialist West and Orientalist knowledge) are inevitably intertwined, Said also revealed how Orientalists, who until that time had explained their research as impartial or driven by academic curiosity - and expected their observations to be unquestionably accepted - created "facts" in a value-focused manner.
Said emphasizes the political nature of knowledge with the help of Foucault's concepts and tries to show the connection between the orientalist studies developed in England, France, and later in the USA and these countries' imperialist interests in the Middle East. Said evaluates this tradition as "a cultural power practice" that is set in motion by much broader power and sovereignty structures in Europe. Edward Said's work has received both intense praise and violent backlash due to these characteristics. Orientalism has been the subject of numerous introductions and critical writings and many conferences since its publication over 30 years ago. Some have considered it a "polemic," while others have popularized a sense of historical consciousness for many different nations around the world. Some have felt the need to reexamine their own work in the light of the ideas expressed in Orientalism (see Bulut, 2012 for Said's criticisms and the discussions triggered by them).
Today, orientalist studies are in a two-sided position. On the one hand, they are being questioned and condemned both in the West and in international academic circles, while on the other hand, they continue to function and be effective as ready-made arguments and orientalist clichés that political powers resort to when they need them. In evaluations of orientalism made today, a cautious attitude that does not ignore the ideologically biased structure of orientalism but also does not disregard the contributions of orientalist research to humanity's knowledge accumulation is required.