Reverse Orientalism: Scrutinizing the Western Society

Blog #8 (10/27):

I know that for all bloggers on this particular site, you know what I am referring to when I use the term “orientalism”. And for readers of these blogs on this site, well, I am confident that most of you, if not already, then are now familiar with the definition of the term ‘orientalism.’ The definition synonymous to the term are stereotypes compiled from Middle-Eastern attitudes. In Mirza Sheikh I’tesamuddin’s memoir “The Wonders of Vilayet: Being the Memoir,” the narrative offers a unique perspective developed from his travels in Scotland and England. I began reading the synopsis expecting for sure traces of orientalism, and quickly realized that the text in fact openly participates in the discourse of Orientalism. I was searching for passages in the text that promoted the common stereotypes that are known in England, and in Scotland. However, for every passage of reverse orientalism that I observed, there was a remark that promoted equality. This is theory was expressed during a session of discussion with a couple of my peers. In his text, I’tesamuddin invites his audience to understand that all societies are equal through the admirations of the English and the Scottish societies that he voices aloud and his seemingly snide remarks.

Mirza of India is a character that is strong in his Islamic faith and culture traveling through the Western societies. During his travels he experiences a society rich in food, and intellect. He comments on their passion for art and literature. He even at one point exclaims, “It would be surprising if knowledge and the arts didn’t flourish in this country.” (Page 74). He goes on to discuss the affinity for knowledge in his home country. Supposedly, “In India, by contrast, even if one devotes all of one’s life to learning and the arts, and is acknowledged the world’s greatest master in these fields, the leaders of society will not pay him any respect; rather they will despise and condemn him…” It is understandable that both lines contradict each other, for they literally do. However, they contradict each other in a manner that compliments each other. He is not condemning India for not pursuing to enrich its citizens academically the way England does, but he is highlighting the values that each society is struck by.

During his travels, the Mirza considerably recounts his observations of Western societies. At one part, the narrator recaps a story told of a Highlander – a story that takes place on Scottish territory (Starting page 83, and ends page 84). He then continues to make the observation, “There are amusing stories about the English too, particulary their country people.” (Page 84). An obvious key observation is that he is focused on enlightening his readers with humor and adventures generated from his experiences in Western societies. He relates his experiences with what he knows from India. His method may appear to be reverse orientalism because of his focus. But I believe that he in fact promotes equality. After all, he is a man born and raised in India, who is a devout Muslim, traveling and befriending English and Scottish people.

Blog #7 (10/20):

I know that for all bloggers on this particular site, you know what I am referring to when I use the term “orientalism”. And for readers of these blogs on this site, well, I am confident that most of you, if not already, then are now familiar with the definition of the term ‘orientalism.’ The definition synonymous to the term are stereotypes compiled from Middle-Eastern attitudes. In Mirza Sheikh I’tesamuddin’s memoir “The Wonders of Vilayet: Being the Memoir,” the narrative openly participates in the discourse of Orientalism. This narrative is a Western account experienced from Mirza of India – implying orientalism in reverse, which just means the stereotypes that have become evident from Western societies. Mirza is a character that is strong in his Islamic faith and culture and one that values his familiarities from when he had explored the Western society with his friend Captain Swineton.

During his travels, the Mirza considerably recounts his observations of Western societies. Such observations include the undeniable greed for more territory obtained through methods of war – as Westerners are notoriously known for; fighting for what they want, even if what they want isn’t something they should just take. This notion comes from the western subculture that is derived from Western Eurpeans. In his narrative, the Mirza points this particular stereotype out on page 24, “Their arrogance rose to such heights that they prepared to attack the Faujdar. Even though they had only thirty European soldiers and one hundred and fifty Eurasian and native Christian sepoys, they were bent on taking on the Mughals.” These soldiers had rushed into war upon the first sign of chaos – they ultimately created more chaos.

In his narrative, I’tesamuddin remarks on many of the English culture and traditions, ultimately participating in the discourse of Orientalism.

They’re All Unreliable Narrators

There were several ideas that I touched upon throughout my blog post, such as how Lady Mary depicts Muslim women, Orientalism and Hellenism. Also, in my blog post I have mentioned the role of the narrator and the effect that role creates in its discussion about the western and eastern world in regards to agency. I did not feel like there was a consistency with ideas and themes within my chain of posts, but I felt that they both illustrate the power and role of the narrator. To further, the type of narration that is given in all the text we have read have given us an unbiased perspectives of the Truth and have only further the ideologies present within their time. It does not matter what time of narrator we encounter because their accounts of events are only interpretations of history. For example, Lady Mary and Joseph Pitts offer a first person narration that give an certain perspective that is shaped by the current culture, while simultaneously creating a culture that challenges the western ideals of the east (in Pitts and Lady Mary’s accoumts). Although many don’t consider first person narrations to be objective, the authors consider themselves to be intellectuals (mostly Lady Mary) and historians (Joseph Pitts) and therefore they strive to be objective, but fail. Even with third person narrations, we do not get an unbiased perspective that removes the text from the ideologies pertinent to the author. For example, The Giaour has several narrators, including third person narrations that have no objectivity. The narrator imposes how they view characters and the situation that depicts things as a good or bad.

Moreover, there is no way in viewing these narrations through an objective lens for it is tainted with the traces of the dominant ideologies that promote the western world as less than the eastern world. As a result, the ideas represented in all these text constantly promote the West and the East, as binary oppositions and have created a hierarchy that people cannot escape from. For instance, Lord Byron and Lady Mary’s obsession with Hellenism only offer interpretation of the Truth that generates a discourse of Islam that only comes from the perspective of the West being better than East. Furthermore, this illustrates how these perspectives only offer a limiting insight to the Truth and have created an orientalist discourse that continues to circulate power and the hierarchical notion of the West and the East. Thus, the continuation and focus of the discourse of the East keeps the West as the dominant force that removes the agency from the people of the East, for they are constructed through an outside perspective.

The Giaour’s Compassion

Much is dramatized in the poem The Giaour, written by Lord Byron: the poem itself is adorned with descriptive detail, the characters monologue with an affluence of words, and the each scene is rich with enough imagery to commission a film. It is for this reason that it comes as no surprise that the main character himself is overly lauded. In the lines 352-387, a Muslim boatman comes into contact with said main character. This narrative perspective (that of the Muslim boatman), which is not uncommon of Lord Byron in The Giaour (he makes use of several outside narrative point of views, including unnamed third person narrators), observes and critiques the Giaour’s appearance, as well as his identity.

In the preliminary lines of the passage, the Muslim boatman scans over the new faces coming in on boats: “I hear the sound of coming feet….More near– each turban I can scan” (352-3). Among the faces, which are men that he has seen before is a new face and from this new face, words that he cannot fully comprehend. The Muslim boatman is then instructed by this man to “rest from your task–so– bravely done” (370). Despite the fact that the Muslim boatman lacks the capacity to understand the Giaour’s language (“but not a voice mine ear to greet”(353)), the praise the Giaour gives the boatman for a smooth voyage is meant to show how compassionate the Giaour is. The Giaour sees and is grateful for even a lowly Muslim boatman like himself. In this instance, the Giaour is portrayed as differently than one would expect of a Western immigrant. Rather than ignore the boatman, he is reminded to thank the boatman for safe passage, as it was the boatman’s hard work that ensured their safe passage. This passage is one of many that highlights and further lauds the Giaour as a person.

 

Pitts and Orientalism

Edward Said defines Orientalism as the way in which the West looks at the Middle East through an indirect perspective that distorts the actual reality of the Middle East. Therefore, Joseph Pitts’ A True and Faithful Account of the Religion and Manners of the Mohammetans enacts the discourse of Orientalism. For example, when giving an account of their camps, Pitts notes that “The Moors are a people much given to sloth for after sowing time they have nothing to do, not betake themselves to anything, but only wait for the harvest” (240). This illustrates how Pitts forces his western work ethic on the Moors and considers them to be lazy. He does not consider the possibility that all they probably can do is wait until the harvest comes. He jumps to conclusions about how they do their jobs and makes generalizations about their work ethic based on this encounter. Also, Pitts explains that the Moors are “very lazy that they make their wives saddle their horses while they go to ease themselves, which they are ashamed to do in a plain and open place but go a pretty way off, accounting it a great piece of rudeness to exonerate” (241). This exemplifies how Pitts’ account enacts Orientalism because it holds non-Western customs to different standards. Pitts is basically claiming that Moors are lazy because they do not want to relive themselves out in the open for everyone to watch. I don’t think there are a lot of people out there who are comfortable with relieving themselves out in the open. Pitts is nitpicking the Moors lifestyles as a way to separate the West and the Middle East while attempting to prove the West as far more superior because they would “ease themselves” out in the open.

Orientalism in Pitts’ Account

Edward Said’s concept of Orientalism can be simply explained as the Western perception of Eastern peoples and culture, which includes stereotypes of the Middle East as being exotic, as well as dangerous, uncivilized, and inferior. In Joseph Pitts’ A True and Faithful Account of the Religion and Manners of the Mohammetans, with an Account of the Author Being Taken Captive, Pitts enacts Orientalism. Given his situation of having been taken captive, he writes begrudgingly about Muslims, offering a critical view of Eastern culture which aligns with Orientalist ideology.

The primary emphasis in Pitts’ text is religion, as Islam serves as the foundation of Eastern cultural values and practices. In some instances, Pitts compares Eastern culture and Islamic practices with Western culture and Christian practices. He writes that, at the dinner table, “everyone says his grace (more to my knowledge than thousands of Christians do).” Commenting on the strictness of the Muslims and their devotion to their religion, Pitts states “If they are so strict in their false worship, it must needs be a reprimand to Christians who are so remiss in the true.” This serves as an example of Orientalism being enacted in a manner that is condescending. It is as if Pitts is saying “They do their foolish practices better than we do our righteous ones, therefore we should be ashamed for not measuring up in this regard to those who are below us.” It assumes the practices of another culture to be wrong, and in doing so encourages those of Western culture to perform their tasks better, which serves as an example of Orientalism in Pitts’ writing.