Saturday, August 7, 2010

Habitus, Cultural Capital and Unspoken Memories


Tradition is a word used on a daily basis to denote beliefs or customs taught by one generation to the next. Such traditional content may be transmitted orally through sermons, tales and legends; content can also be taught through physical repetition of an act as the case can be found in hunting practices, cooking techniques and handiwork. Whatever the content may be, there have been numerous studies performed about what is passed over to the next generation and so too have been various experiments conducted to ascertain the different modes of learning found cross culturally.
How unspoken traditions are passed down from one generation to the next is both phenomenological as well as socially bound. These are peculiar in that they are identifiable by the native populous to whom the tradition belongs but the tradition itself is in a constant state of exchange regarding traditional and contemporary elements. A small, personal example may highlight the subject of unspoken traditions with regards to Middle Eastern traditions – Having been invited for afternoon tea at an older relative’s place, one’s position of ‘guest hood’ (as it were) is precarious due to the hospitality exhibited in one’s being there but also as being the younger family member, one is expected to relieve the older relative by taking on any form of physical labour required throughout one’s time there.
The familial relational circle endows one with greater responsibility the closer they are in terms of blood-line to the relative whom they are visiting. In other words, one’s unspoken traditional responsibility at a grandparent’s residence is far greater than a relative through marriage. One would rise to wash dishes, clear tables and serve other guests the closer they are to the person who they are visiting as opposed to being waited on as one would be had one visited someone such as a relative through marriage. Not performing such tasks would very rarely be rebuked or remarked upon, however the socio-cultural rubric by which family members are bound within would inevitably form a negative judgement upon one’s behaviour had they not obliged to perform these tasks.
On the other hand, performing these tasks and the limit to which they are performed is left completely to the individual’s discretion. It is therefore quite possible for one to over-perform a task in the hopes of exceeding any expectations of them – no matter how high or abstract.
As a form of ideology by way of being a socially constructed image perceived as natural and where culture is seen as nature, habitus’ operation in one’s life requires no cognitive awareness – only a silence to accept the ‘natural’ social order. Bourdieu attributes habitus’ direct effect on traditions and customary practises to its unspoken nature. (Bourdieu 1977:188 as cited in Dovey).  Bearing the aforementioned example in mind, this essay aims to draw on the theoretical framework of Bourdieu’s notions of habitus as well as capital and field to explain embodied traditions and the implied cultural memories inherent in traditions. How Bourdieu’s theory constitutes a prime cultivatable space for the past to be embodied in performative practices will be considered in two ethnographic accounts; the former will highlight the notion of learned habitus and embodied culture whilst the latter seeks to uncover Bourdieu’s notion of ‘cultural capital’.
Habitus and the implicated processes by which it functions and operates on human interactions is examined and defined as a remnant of a society’s past which is both active and evolving in the present (Crossley 2001:83). It is able to shape perceptions, direct thoughts, action and therefore moulds human agency but is also directed by it. The difficulty of pinning down or classifying habitus as a silent social process rather than a premeditated etiquette arises from habitus’ functioning below the level of consciousness and language, beyond the reach of introspective scrutiny or control by the will.”(Bourdieu as cited in Crossley 2001:83) Habitus can therefore be regarded as a societal function transmitted between individuals and their respective societies whilst being a form of constructed knowledge.

Crucial to the definition of habitus is the method by which it functions in society; again Bourdieu thoroughly explains it as a ‘structural apprenticeship’(Bourdieu 1977:89 cited in Dovey 32:2010) whereby the individual internalises and embodies the societal structures they have developed in as well as being a vector for the habitus in its advancement between generations. Bourdieu’s ‘structural apprenticeship’ is an appropriate lens by which one can observe body rituals evolving into a natural, lived ideology. Starrett (1995) examines such a notion as manifest in Islamic popular schools in Egypt. By regarding a religion as an ideology, the definitions of ritualistic practises are made relational to social practises and conflicts. In other words, one should recognise that the daily actions of Islamic popular school students not as religious practices, but rather as ideological and lived practices. Habitus therefore, needs to be understood as an ideological category that stands for the specific relationships where people’s habits are unconsciously between bodily, visible structures on the one hand and beliefs, attitudes on the other hand. Starrett (1995) provides a salient example of a physical-belief ritual with the process of ablution in Islamic tradition as he cites a state introduced Egyptian textbook used in public high schools;
“...And the modern physician agrees with Islam in this, for doctors call on us to bathe at least once a week, guarding the body’s cleanliness and freeing it from diseases...” (Starrett, 1995:961)

Understandably the Qur’an like many other religious texts promotes physical cleanliness – the oddity in this text is that it arises from a public schooling textbook and therefore implies the oneness which the religious entity has tied itself to regarding the student’s habitus. Starrett (1995) regards the physical, secular act of bathing has having been aligned with an essential Islamic ritual eventuating into a total amalgamation of both secular and religious practises in the daily life of the student.

Reasoning that this is an attempt to modernise Islam into a version capable of combating European colonialism, Starrett (1995) questions the colonial gaze responsible for the habitus of the Egyptian popular school student to be so contorted from natural development. Returning to Bourdieu’s ‘structural apprenticeship’ cited by Starrett (1995), one encounters the term ‘Hexis’ (the classical Greek cognate for ‘habit’) relating to the public performance of habit-shaping practices. ‘Hexis’ is therefore a wordless, unconscious and practical transmission of bodily habit. (Starrett, 1995: 954) Performances are embedded in the cultural memory primarily due to their physical embodiment. The clarity of this process can be reflected in that;

“...Egyptian children are taught in school that the straight lines of correct Muslim prayer ‘embody’ the ideology of order and discipline.” (Starrett, 1995:963)

Starrett’s notion of embodied ideology rings true in one’s ear when recalling the daily speech patterns of local Cairenes. Phrases such as “Insha’Allah” (if God permits), “rabena y’ sahel” (may God ease it), or “la elah ela Allah” (there is no God but God) mingle the divine discourse with the mundane actions of the human population. Uses of these phrases include but are not limited to business transactions, daily niceties and as previously stated – the educational system. Interestingly, not only is the Qur’an the primary text by which study and contemplation is instructed within popular Egyptian schools but the space in which it is taught has been specifically designed and adjusted to permit the most efficient transmission of religious practices. One could consider this as being a prime example of a ‘structural structured structure’. (Bourdieu, 1977:89) To comprehend the ‘structured’ habitus as immediately related to the visible structures of public spaces, (which in turn are understood to be productive and expressive of moral boundaries) we turn to Schielke (2008) who reconsiders Starrett’s article on ‘hexis’ little over a decade after the latter author’s publication.


The aforementioned amalgamation of clerical ideals with secular norms eventuates into a state in which the solemn, purified state of mind is the preferred habitat of religion, morality, and social order. (Schielke, 2008:542) Religion (in considering itself) should be kept strictly clean of any form of profanity; whilst not permeable to external influence, it should remain aware of its surroundings and when necessary be capable of asserting itself in state affairs. This kind of structured habitus of Egyptian modernism and Islamic reformism, is “dignified,” “civilized,” and “educated” (Schielke, 2008:542) and above all able to direct social affairs to satisfy a religious if not entirely clerical agenda.

Schielke reviews Starrett’s notion of ‘hexis’ by relating habit to one’s cultural embodiment and thereby expands the breadth of hexis to encompass universal class boundaries existing in society. These learned habits imply not only an order directed at the delineation and control of class demarcation but also of habitus and the self. Learning and by extension the societal element which teaches – namely schools, institutions and private classes form the basis upon which the social habitus is internalised (or embodied) and constructed. Lasting effects of internalised habitus’ are immense; Bourdieu argues that the reproduction of the social structure results from the habitus of individuals implicated in the education system. (Bourdieu as cited in Dumais, 2002:46) In other words, the current employable adult population and their respective jobs are likely to be inherited by the said population’s children. A physician’s daughter may not become a physician; however it is unlikely that she will become a construction worker. Dumais notes this concept as hereditary educational habitus;

“...On the basis of the class position they were born into, people develop ideas about their
individual potential; for example, those in the working class tend to believe that they will remain in the working class.” (Dumais, 2002:46)

Similarly, taught beliefs and rituals are internalised as habitus and then externalised into actions. Therefore it is not much of a surprise when clerical fundamentalists embody particular religious statements and act upon the direction of these statements; just as a free market economy theory could inspire an individual to lobby against government legislation, an embodied religious ideology confirmed and developed in an individual’s lifelong habitus could lead to the instigation of an act which serves to fulfil such a religious ideology.

As the habitus of the student is fashioned by these traditional rituals, the taught religious element becomes a reflection of a shared past where education plays an encompassing role in developing an individual and by extension the national habitus. By intertwining the mundane and seemingly unrelated aspects such as cultural, political and environmental affiliations with a schooled religious discourse, a habitus serving as one’s memory bank orients the individual’s present condition under the structure of their past learning experience. In other words, as a student embodies a structured habitus (a religious one in the case of Egyptian popular schools), their entire livelihood reflects a cultural remembrance of applied tradition. Such apprenticeships of cultural traditions are considerable avenues by which the individual’s mastery of their own culture can be explored. Turkish folkloric music, the cultural capital it embodies and the bastions of these sources of capital are some of the topics explored by Bryant with her experience of ‘saz’ playing in Istanbul, Turkey.
How cultural capital features in the notion of habitus must first be considered, especially in that the Islamic tradition is present in both Cairo and Istanbul – however its manifestations are distinct when compared to each other. While the Islamic tradition ‘adab’ (loosely translated into mannered etiquette or moral virtue) conceptualises the body as a site for representing learned virtues, the folkloric Turkish identity has come to signify an authentic Turkish rather than Islamic memory.

Being a lute-like instrument, the Turkish ‘saz’ features heavily in the repertoire of Eastern Mediterranean bands aside from Spain where there is a guitar shaped version. Its rise to popularity in Turkish folklore is attributed to an Oriental revival evident with the newly formed Turkish republic in the years post World War II which placed greater value on individuals who had skills relating to classical Turkish culture – or as Bourdieu coins it, were wealthy in cultural capital. The incorporation of tradition into the nation-state elevated the status of musicians from simple entertainers to guardians of a symbolic representation of Turkish nationalism. (Bryant, 2005:227)
Bryant herself became a student of a ‘saz’ school where she attempted to learn playing as a means to achieving embodiment of a tradition she was not previously part of or had any of its habitus. One of the greatest problems she encountered as expressed in her field notes was not a sociologic or cultural distance but rather of musical tradition. In short, Bryant’s experience of cultural embodiment was constantly slowed by her admitted inability to comprehend the focus on rhythm and melody of Oriental music as compared to the harmony-based tradition of Western music.
While much of Bryant’s article deals with masculinity and ‘saz’ playing as an extension of a purely male element such as self control, for the purposes of this essay we will only consider the masculine habitus of ‘saz’ playing rather than the engenderment of music as Bryant’s article thoroughly explores. Traditional practices in Turkish culture are associated with a particular ‘heaviness’ – this extends to the speed of one’s speech as well as their movement. The self-control and seriousness of a ‘heavy’ persona exemplifies the good ‘saz’ player;
“A man’s walk might be said to be ‘agir’ (heavy), as he walks not only with deliberation but also with a visible gravity, rolling from heel to toe.” (Bryant, 2005:232)
Involvement in the ‘saz’ community is a prerequisite of a respectable ‘saz’ player. Dexterity and musical skill are considerably important, but the entire bodily interpretation of ‘saz’ playing is expected to be culturally embodied in the apprentice of the folkloric tradition.
“Learning to play the saz did not involve learning to play notes on an instrument; it involved learning to become the type of person who could play the saz.” (Bryant, 2005:229)
As embodiment does not entail mastery of saz playing, the habitus endows the saz apprentice with the necessary skills to discern good saz playing from bad saz playing. Self-formation of this habitus required Bryant to accept that any musical skill she acquired as a student of Western musical traditions would not be useful in the pursuit of mastering the saz. Contrary to the rigidity and adherence to the musical score as was required in the early months of learning the instrument, Bryant conveys her amazement at intermediate playing musicians being expected to improvise when the scoresheet is hidden from them or if they were to be called upon to perform an impromptu piece. National embodiment in the saz player’s habitus is best understood as aesthetic and not as embodiment but as empersonment (Bryant, 2005:230) – in other words the individual’s responsibility as guardian of a national tradition. The process at work in this self-formation is neither the mind training of education nor the unselfconscious learning of socialisation. It is an apprenticeship, a technique of learning that entails a self-conscious moulding of the self. When mastered, the aesthetics learnt during apprenticeship lead to a structured habitus whose human proprietor is able to assimilate into a cultural tradition. Cultural embodiment of this improvisatory skill is manifest in the malleable standards of aesthetics in Turkish culture. Whereas Western traditions may uphold a constant coefficient standard, Turkish habitus calls for the overlap of Western innovation and Eastern sensibility in discerning taste in music.
 Where habitus is concerned, cultural embodiment of tradition relies solely on transmission of rituals from one generation to the next. This essay has aimed to examine two examples of embodied cultural memory with specific reference to traditional performances of Islamic ritual and saz playing – much of which will be open to interpretation with each successive generation.

Reference List
Bryant R., The Soul danced into the Body: Nation and improvisation in Istanbul. American Ethnologist, Vol. 32, No.2 (2005)
Crossley N., The Phenomenological Habitus and Its Construction. Theory and Society, Vol. 30, No. 1 (2001)

Dovey K., Becoming Places: Urbanism/Architecture/Identity/Power. (2010) Routledge: London
Dumais S. A., Cultural Capital, Gender, and School Success: The Role of Habitus. Sociology of Education, Vol. 75, No. 1 (2002)
Schielke S., Policing Ambiguity: Muslim saints-day festivals and the moral geography of public space in Egypt. American Ethnologist. Vol. 35 No. 4 (2008)
Starrett G., The Hexis of Interpretation: Islam and the Body in the Egyptian Popular School. American Ethnologist, Vol. 22, No.4 (1995)



As written for ANTH381 - Semester One 2010 - Macquarie University, Sydney

Questioning Globalisation's True Effect

One cannot think of a larger domain than the global nor a broader
topic than culture...the field, if not controlled, can degenerate into
what we might call “global-babble.” – Janet Abu-Lughod.[1]

Considering the globalisation thesis under the lens of either proliferation of homogenous cultures or transformation of culture and evolution of identities would normally result in a cliché summary of the history of globalisation, mechanics of geopolitical expansion under which globalisation is a key element as well as strong ties with the concepts of imperialism, modernism and postmodernism. Objectifying ‘globalisation’ and the study of its effect on culture (a mirror to the human condition) as an entity, thereby demarcating such focus to a particular field of study is problematic. The plethora of academic commentary on this highly ambiguous component of human history ranges from anthropology, sociology, philosophy, economics, politics and history.[2] [3]
Such immersion within multidisciplinary breadth requires one to venture with new angles to the deconstruction of the monolith that is globalisation as well as culling many viable and unviable theories regarding the effect of globalisation in order to be as succinct as possible. Tracing globalisation to any historical point such as expansionist European imperialism limits the study of globalisation to a single and therefore unique period in human history. Globalisation is evident in a peculiar paradigm and the processes which are borne of it exist should not be regarded as a product of imperialism, modernism or postmodernism[4]. Observing through the cultural lens, this essay aims to consider globalisation in its various manifestations with emphasis on the numerous historical examples of globalisation and its undoubtable congruency with the advent and development of culture.  
Simply put the effect of globalisation is far more authentic and inevitably of greater importance when looked at through the lens of cultural experience rather than the mere existence of globalisation as a process of human society. Inda and Rosaldo ascribe more ‘anthropological’ value to this approach in that concentration is placed upon the local manifestations of globalisation and its effects.
Citing Foster’s notion of ‘connectedness’[5] as being vital to the cultural exchanges evident throughout globalised links, Inda and Rosaldo’s views on this topic will be explored thoroughly as their argument is a vital concept from which both aforementioned theses can be derived. Inda and Rosaldo present a case for the deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation of culture early in their argument for the effect of globalisation on world cultures. The definition of deterritorialisation is given by Inda and Rosaldo as;
“[A] term [which] captures at once the lifting of cultural subjects and objects from fixed
spatial locations...”
The lesser known term ‘reterritorialisation’, is also defined within the same sentence as;
                “[And] their relocation in new cultural settings.”[6]
Stressing that the two processes do not follow each other in cyclic fashion, Inda and Rosaldo make it clear that deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation are simultaneously linked and inevitably reliant on each other for the total effect of globalisation to be complete and stable.
Firstly, one should consider the manner in which culture has been deterritorialised especially in that it is not a passive process. The momentum required to deterritorialise an indigenous culture thereby allowing the reinscription[7] of another is usually dramatic and often violent.
Since cultural deterritorialisation is not an ‘ethereal’[8] transition, meaning that culture simply does not float from a ‘cultured place’ to an empty space to ‘cultural-ise’ that space. This is regarded by Inda and Rosaldo as being a pivotal point to understanding the paradigm of culture and the place it occupies within spaces and the effect globalisation has on both the place and culture it encroaches upon.
Reterritorialisation on the other hand is not a case of an empty space being re-filled by a cultural entity, but rather it is the instantaneous result of deterritorialisation. In other words, as a culture is displaced its existence is not nullified or made redundant but rather it survives in some capacity within the original spatial confines of its native source, and even outside these confines through cultural flows and exchanges. Reinscription is what allows globalised contact and is an anti-thesis to the idea of homogenous globalisation or any form of uniformity found after the permeation of a culture by globalising forces.
If we consider the effects of deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation on culture, how can one position culture if its place is constantly shifted, re-arranged, erased and re-drawn? We turn to a common denominator found within all cultures, an entity which must be capable of binding peoples of different races, traditions and customs with each other. Religion has been instrumental in the proliferation of globalised cultures; bridging any language restraint, all socio-economic boundaries and multiple cultural adaptations, religion transcends all boundaries. Peter Beyer explores the role of religion as both active participant in globalisation as well as the reversed role it finds itself functioning in as a traditionalist institution.

Beyer presents us with a second definition of globalisation as a single, globally extended society.[9] He then delineates the processes concerned with globalisation transparently by stating both explicit and implicit commitment[10] of the term. Simply put, globalisation evolves to simultaneously take on and release connotations attributed to it using obvious and subtle forces on the culture being globalised. Interestingly, Beyer firmly supports Inda and Rosaldo’s notion of reterritorialisation but designates it as ‘cultural respecification’.[11]  Agreeing to the notion of reterritorialisation and in turn respecification requires one to accept the first of the globalisation theses – ‘transformation of culture and evolution of identities’. When compared with a thesis pertaining to the proliferation of homogenous cultures, it is clear through Beyer as well as Inda and Rosaldo that the latter thesis is not evident in the contemporary world. Though it would seem that Beyer prefers the concept of proliferation of homogenous cultures, one should not hasten to retire his discussion seeing as there are multiple positions for religion to occupy when discerning its role in globalisation.
Religion is seen by Beyer as an organisation that cannot be solely identified with any of its manifestations at a local level.[12] Provocative as it may seem, one could consider a religious denomination such as the Roman Catholic Church as being a possible vehicle for an ethnologic process such as globalisation and therefore warrants an ethnographic study unto itself. Immersion of the Roman Catholic Church into institutions relating to political, economic, health, educational, media and various other societal avenues[13] has inevitably been challenged by increasing secularisation – one of the contemporary renditions of globalisation. This congruency between globalisation and secularisation can be investigated by examining both Peter Beyer and Roland Robertson’s alternate views on the aforementioned subjects.
Beyer insists that organised religion (exemplified by Roman Catholicism, Islam and Pentecostalism) is affected by local and global factors to an extent that understanding the effect of secularisation is not possible if studied on a country-by-country[14] basis. He regards such a venture as one which underestimates the variation of religion and secularisation at the localised stage and therefore missing the dynamicism to be found at this level. He reiterates his primary argument by stating that;
“...a global perspective asks us to look at the religious market as global, as well as local or national.”[15]
Beyer stipulates that the religious institution’s strength and weakness as being a stable element throughout the entire history of religion’s globalising endeavour. Since globalisation has placed greater onus on the individual and their human agency; is the ebb and flow of religion’s globalising capability therefore an issue of the individual’s involvement? Supporting this notion, Beyer observes Muslim migrants to Europe and North America as an example of religion’s adaptability in that individuals of such a religious congregation will take up multifunctional roles differing immensely from the institution’s manifestation found where it originates.[16] In this, the individual is the ‘unit’ of change and the catalyst for variability in whatsoever the instance religion encounters globalisation through secularisation.  
In contrast with Beyer’s identification of secularisation as being the prime implement for the installation of globalisation, Robertson approaches the globalisation dilemma via identity in culture. Commentary by Robertson on the identity required of culture to perform its function within globalisation requires steady concentration and constant re-alignment with philosophical and social theory concepts.[17]

Robertson’s focus on the notion of homogenous globalisation is defined within the first sentence of his article regarding the problem of globality. He speaks of modern societies which;
“...are characterised less by what they have in common...than by the fact of their involvement in the issue of universalism.”
He continues to hone in on his focussed study of globality with,
“The need, even the urgency, for ‘universal reference’ has never been felt so strongly as in our time...” [18]
Tempting as it may seem to instinctively align Robertson’s ‘universalism’ as a synonym for the contentious terms ‘globalism’ and by extension ‘globalisation’, Robertson is hasty to correct misinterpretation that may have arisen in the reader’s mind by using the word ‘reference’ to restrain any imaginative connotations to globalisation. He uses the terms ‘universalism’ and ‘particularism’ throughout his text as representations for the societal and the personal cross-flow of culture respectively. Whilst delving into Bourricaud’s mechanisms regarding globalised culture, Robertson simplifies his labyrinthine concepts of ‘universalism’ and ‘particularism’ by equating them neatly as the ‘interaction and communication between collective and individual actors on the global scene’.[19]
Robertson prompts readers in his text on the problem of globality (synonymous with globalisation in Robertson’s perspective) that there should always be a concerted effort to;
                                                “...address the issue... [as] an analytical package.”[20]
Designating the study as a package strongly suggests the variability of the subject matter and therefore the individual upon whom the subject is extended to for the purpose of analysis. To an extent, personalised results concerning culture constitute the basic problem of globalisation which both Beyer and Robertson convey.
Sampling the notion of ‘universalism’ in globalised culture is the ‘general’ resistance (not aimed any particular nation, company or media) found in various modern societies against globalisation in the effort of sustaining individual identity – regarded by Robertson as an effort of anti-modernity.[21] Alternatively, an example of a cultural struggle in the guise of particularism is presented by Robertson in the form of the Islamic movement which he considers as being opposing to any homogenised world system and thereby a considerable force of anti-postmodernity.
Robertson revives Geertz’s nostalgic commentary on diversity within culture as found in the latter’s article ‘The Uses of Diversity’ (1986) whereby Geertz describes the pursuit of diversity (alluding to cultural diversity) as being rather ‘nostalgic’[22] and not an ‘undangerous’[23] romanticised dream. Through Geertz, Robertson directs the attention of the anthropological lens to the internal cultural struggles found within societies rather than the strife exhibited between distinctly separable cultures; one would regard such a vantage point as being well displaced from the concept of homogenous globalisation. Though globalisation may be evident in every society and by default affecting all cultures, the individual manifestations (as previously examined by Beyer regarding the Roman Catholic Church) render the notion of homogeneity as being defunct. Such incongruity only serves to highlight the contrasting view Robertson maintains especially in regards to globality and the identity of culture. Robertson responds to the secularisation theory and by association any proliferation of homogenous cultures thesis by explicitly distancing himself from secularisation and even goes as far as describing the whole theory as uninteresting.[24]

For the purposes of this essay, compressing the highly complex and intertwined phenomenon of philosophical anthropology (in Robertson’s perspective), one can safely summarise Robertson’s view of globalisation in a metaphor whereby globalisation can be likened to a vehicle; whilst different cultures serve as distinct fuel products – each producing a varied effect on the performance of globalisation. The overarching concept however is that neither culture nor globalisation can exist or function without human agency; or as Bourricaud explains it – ‘[we] form [ourselves] into an open ensemble of interlocutors and partners...’[25]
Human agency is undoubtedly more suitable as the catalyst for transformation of culture and evolution of identities as the concept relies heavily on interactions humans have with globalising powers from generation to generation. Each successive cultural amalgamation as a result of war, alliance or dissolution of power centres has caused a constant effect and resulted in the re-incarnation of the affected culture. Inextricably linked to the ebb and flow of cultural exchange is the identities of the populous within these cultures; certainly transforming but unlikely to become a homogenous mass. Having examined the respective views of Beyer and Robertson, one is inclined to agree with their preferred conclusion rendering culture as highly transformable and in this same adaptability lays culture’s inherent immunity to any absolute homogeneity.






Reference List
Beyer P. Secularization from the Perspective of Globalization: A Response to Dobbelaere. Sociology of Religion, Vol. 60, (1999) Oxford University Press
Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) Blackwell Publishers
King A. D., (ed.) Culture, Globalisation and World Systems: Contemporary Conditions for the Representation of Identity (2000) University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis
Robertson R. Globalisation: A Brief Response. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 31 (1992) Blackwell Publishers

Further Reading List
Arce A. and Long N., Anthropology, Development and Modernities: Exploring discourses, counter-tendencies and violence. (2000) Routledge: London
Bodley J. H., Victims of Progress 5th Edition. (2008) Altamira Press: New York
Brantlinger P. Dark Vanishings: Discourse on the extinction of Primitive Races, 1800-1930. (2003) Cornell University Press: London
Hoerder D. Cultures in Contact: World Migrations in the Second Millennium (2002) Duke University Press: London


[1] Abu-Lughod J. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 128
[2] Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) pp. 7
[3] Hall S. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 19
[4] Robertson R. Globalisation: A Brief Response. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 31 (1992) pp. 319
[5] Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Citing Foster in Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) pp. 7
[6] Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) pp. 14
[7] Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) pp. 14
[8] Inda J. X., and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) pp. 14
[9] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 290
[10] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 289
[11] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 291
[12] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 292
[13] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 292
[14] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 293
[15] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 293
[16] Beyer P. Secularisation from the Perspective of Globalisation. Sociology of Religion Vol. 60.(1999) pp. 292
[17] Robertson R. Globalisation: A Brief Response. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 31 (1992) pp 319
[18] Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 69
[19] Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 75
[20] Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 70
[21] Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 77
[22] Robertson cites Geertz in Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 70
[23] Robertson cites Geertz in Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 70
[24] Robertson R. Globalisation: A Brief Response. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 31 (1992) pp 319
[25] Robertson R. Culture, Globalisation and World Systems (2000) pp. 70


As written for ANTH375 - Semester One 2010 - Macquarie University, Sydney

Post-nationalism - an anti-thesis to multiculturalism?


Multiculturalism features heavily in the repertoire of anthropologists. Its effects are implicated through multiple uses of the word and the inherent definition it ushers in. To channel the meaning of multiculturalism, one should not restrict the term ‘multiculturalism’ to its demographic usage (the existence of an ethnically diverse population of a society or state) or to the political reference it alludes to (referring to specific types of programmes and policy initiatives designed to respond to ethnic diversity). (Dijkstra S., et al. 2001: 55) Instead, by considering multiculturalism in light of ideological-normative meanings such as “...a slogan and model for political action emphasising that acknowledging the existence of ethnic diversity and ensuring the rights of individuals to retain their culture should go hand in hand with...constitutional principles and commonly shared values prevailing in the society.” (Inglis as cited in Dijkstra S., et al. 2001: 56)
Firstly, multiculturalism is inextricably linked with global and local processes. This essay aims to discuss the consequences multiculturalism carries for the local level in the form of citizenship and the global nation-state, both with respect to and to that of cultural identity. Post-national citizenship will be explored as a possible anti-thesis to the multiculturalism with emphasis on the simultaneous processes of deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation involved with the decline of multiculturalism. A vivid example of the decline of multiculturalism in the face of post-national identity is evident in the European Union and the dissolution of national borders both as physical restraints in regards to people’s ability to cross them as well as the metaphorical borders of identity and citizenship.
Inda and Rosaldo present a case for the deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation of culture early in their argument for the effect of globalised multiculturalism on world cultures. The definition of deterritorialisation is given by Inda and Rosaldo as;
“[A] term [which] captures at once the lifting of cultural subjects and objects from fixed
spatial locations...”

The lesser known term ‘reterritorialisation’, is also defined within the same sentence as;
                “[And] their relocation in new cultural settings.” (Inda and Rosaldo 2008:14)
Stressing that the two processes do not follow each other in cyclic fashion, Inda and Rosaldo make it clear that deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation are simultaneously linked and inevitably reliant on each other for the total effect of globalised multiculturalism to be complete and stable.
To consider the practical application of these processes, one must comprehend how society is constructed with a multitude of social links between human elements which differ from each another. Each of these links contributes histories, routines, customs, cultural expectations and specific attributes to the overall society. Though these links are intertwined and generally dependent on each other for their co-ordinated existence, such a dependency which is centred on difference does not automatically lead to a bond between different social patterns let alone separate ethnic identities. Nation-state mechanisms including education, public administration, law and defence departments make up the social diversity of these cultures. The emergence of multicultural nation-states coincided with efforts to increase cultural identity to achieve broader international expertise. Introducing the post-national identity deconstructs the native social identity but retains the cultural diversity of post-national states – or does it?
Firstly, one should consider the manner in which the ‘culture’ of multiculturalism has been deterritorialised and thereby no longer attached to a particular terrain; especially in that it is not a passive process. The momentum required to deterritorialise an indigenous culture thereby allowing the reinscription (Inda and Rosaldo 2008:14) of another is usually dramatic and at times can be violent. Cultural deterritorialisation is not an ‘ethereal’ transition (Inda and Rosaldo 2008:14), meaning that culture simply does not float from a ‘cultured place’ to an empty space to ‘cultural-ise’ that space.
This is regarded by Inda and Rosaldo as being a pivotal point to understanding the paradigm of culture and the place it occupies in regards to the effects that multiculturalisation (a process as opposed to multiculturalism which alludes to a policy of favourable inter-ethnic affairs) has on the culture it encroaches upon.
Reterritorialisation on the other hand is not a case of an empty space being re-filled by a cultural entity, but rather it is the instantaneous result of deterritorialisation. In other words, as a culture is displaced its existence is not nullified or made redundant but rather it survives in some capacity within the original spatial confines of its native source, and even outside these confines through cultural flows and exchanges. Reinscription is what allows cross-cultural contact and is an anti-thesis to the idea of homogenous multiculturalism or any form of uniformity found after the permeation of a culture by globalising forces. If we consider the effects of cultural deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation, how can one position the remaining identity of a de/reterritorialised people if their place is constantly shifted, re-arranged, erased and re-drawn?
We turn to a relatively recent rendition of a post-national condition; an entity such as this has been capable of binding peoples of different races, traditions and customs with each other both at the local and international stages. The European Union is faced with a dilemma of identity. A problem it encounters year after year as more European countries apply to join the union and thus conflate the already vague notion of self-identity the European Union has of itself (Liebert U., 2005:94). On its Eastern margins, the European Union is required to adjust fledgling governments with their post imperial conflicts and instabilities – radiating results from the dissolution of the Soviet Union. 
Confronted with Western European power shifts, the European Union is constantly expected to battle evolving from a hegemonic European conglomerate into an imperial actor with little sensitivity to the individual interests and ideas of its European members.
 A porous relationship between transatlantic allies such as the European Union and the United States magnifies new tensions as the European Union struggles to redefine itself in the post-communist era; this will be discussed in depth later in the essay. Policies of multiculturalism which are direct reactions to migratory globalisation lead many people to revert to what they consider their own ethnic identity; invoking traditions and a history which they sometimes manipulate to promote cultural group interests. In other words, increasing policies of multiculturalism foster favourable conditions for ethno-social fragmentation – this allows for multiple cultures to co-exist but is not evidence of underlying multiculturalism. In the European Union’s case, post-national citizenship is no longer a futuristic goal but has rather become the normative for almost half a billion union citizens.  Sharing the same indigo hue on their passports and yet continue to differ in their nationalities. (Maastricht Treaty as cited in Liebert U., 2005:95)
Deflem and Pampel were almost prophesising the current division of identity experienced within the European Union;
“...(the) realisation of Europe's unification may create an unprecedented challenge, for citizens and scholars of Europe alike, to make sense of an expression that hitherto referred to a continent composed of nation-states that were geographically, economically, and to some extent politically connected but nonetheless sovereign.” (Deflem M. and Pampel F. C., 1996:119)
If one considers European integration (as a prodigy of post-national discourse), it is evident that the process is highly formulated and unnatural. Post-nationalism is a phenomenon observable with the formation of the ‘Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe (TEU) whereby European heads of state and government officials formally signed off to transform the Union of states into a Union of citizens and states; this was achieved by utilising a charter of fundamental rights as an expanded legal basis of citizenship.

On one hand, re-appropriation of the European image is hampered by contending forces ranging from attempted European homogeneity to an ethnic unity through cultural diversity. On the other hand, the construction of a European citizenship faces immense local challenges if it aims at a post-national citizenship. As a result of the interaction between local and global elements and mechanisms, new multiple and varying identities of citizenship emerge. These identities are no longer confined to a specific area as they have been deterritorialised reterritorialised in the guise of a European ‘union’. Consequently, transformation of the nation-state occurs with the gradual dissolution of territory, culture, and identity – thereby the nation-state loses its “naturalness” (Dijkstra S., et al. 2001: 61) as it becomes a constructed, socially generated and politically enforced cosmopolitan citizenship.
Cosmopolitan European citizenship is conceived as an alternative to traditional national citizenship and European nationalism (both having inherent inequalities) and more so as a bastion for multicultural discourse. In this vantage, the novelty of "citizenship in the Union" is its commitment to acknowledging the diversity of national citizenship identities while promoting universal rights, including gender equality, non-discrimination, social inclusion and economic development. (Liebert U., 2005:103).  Special focus on minority and marginalized groups aims at a new form of multi-layered, borderless membership.

“Yet, the cosmopolitan vision of a European citizenship lacks a deeper reflection on Europe's position in a world of porous regions and its special transatlantic relationship.” (Liebert U., 2005:103)

The notable irony of the European Union (whereby its inception was hailed as a possible solution for inter-European conflict) versus its need for unique identification renders its existence almost self-faulting as it incites differences of identity as its members grapple to maintain cultural autonomy.

As previously mentioned, the relationship between Europe (in its Western power formation – England, France and Germany) and the United States has been variable and often masked in intense political and bureaucratic jargon. This lack of clarity between the two contemporary heavy-weights of the international stage is further compounded with the formation of the European Union. Whereas the United States had formerly dealt and maintained diplomatic relations with the European states on an individual basis, the existence of the European Union renders a further dimension to this relationship than what had previously occurred.

Any European multicultural discourse is counter-balanced with the transatlantic multiethnic position. Exemplifying this contrast in multi-national approach between the transatlantic behemoths is how they maintain their Muslim populations. Beyer (1999) observes Muslim migrants to Europe and North America as an example of region’s adaptability in that individuals of such a religious congregation will take up multifunctional roles differing immensely from the institution’s manifestation found where it originates. Such a phenomenon is not entirely due to how the individual operates within their newfound homeland but rather their capabilities are channelled by the policies and attitudes to citizens of multicultural heritage by the country they dwell in.

When comparing the United States and the European Union, (as representative of the transatlantic partner for the US) it is evident that multiculturalism in the former is still in operation – albeit dysfunctional whilst the latter has developed a policy of post-nationalism as the ultimate tool by which it can eliminate conflicts. Liebert (2005:104) supports this argument;

“...by introducing monetary union and Union citizenship, the EU has ventured "into a new political frontier, with far-reaching consequences for the future of the human race.”

Regarding its position on the world stage, the weakness of the European Union is based on naked power. This mainly refers to the global community being made aware of the silent, though greatly strengthened European presence, be it military or otherwise. Though it is not likely to venture into all parts of the world for expansionary purposes, the deployment of all its civilian resources to effectively secure European political values, such as rationality, justice, democracy, individual freedom, secularism, and tolerance are seen to be just as menacing. (Liebert U., 2005:95) We finally arrive at the catalyst for a global socio-cultural shift. On one hand we have the United States with its entire ‘Americana’ repertoire and respective connotations representing the final stages of multicultural cosmopolitanism, whilst on the other hand the European Union is on the avant-garde as it were regarding post-national citizenship and intended ‘unity through diversity’. Without entering into an in-depth comparison, it suffices to say that the aforementioned approaches will indirectly clash as their respective citizens are expected to deal with the other.
 
A critical dialogue is necessary for reflecting upon the comparative vices and virtues of the differing but inextricably linked European and American representations of post-nationalism and multiculturalism respectively. The values, identities, and practices of both will be tested over the coming decades as the European Union faces economic strife while the ethnic minorities in the United States wrestle strongholds from previously traditional hands. In a post-national context where political, ideological, religious or cultural trends that originally appear to be connected with a specific region, culture or period are being echoed in larger parts of the European Union – multiculturalism stands little chance of survival.




Reference List
Deflem M. and Pampel F. C. The Myth of Post national Identity: Popular Support for European Unification. Social Forces, Vol. 75, No. 1 (1996) University of North Carolina Press
Dijkstra S., Geuijen K., & de Ruijter A. Multiculturalism and Social Integration in Europe. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale de science politique, Vol. 22, No. 1, Management of Social Transformations. Gestion des transformations sociales (2001) Sage Publications
Inda J. X. and Rosaldo R. Tracking Global Flows. The Anthropology of Globalisation (2008) Blackwell Publishers
Liebert U. What It Means to Be (come) a Transatlantic Citizen: Rethinking Postnational Citizenship. New German Critique, No. 95, (2005) New German Critique

Further Reading
Arce A. and Long N., Anthropology, Development and Modernities: Exploring discourses, counter-tendencies and violence. (2000) Routledge: London
Hoerder D. Cultures in Contact: World Migrations in the Second Millennium (2002) Duke University Press: London

As written for ANTH223 - Semester One 2010 - Macquarie University, Sydney

Orientalism and Islam

Iconoclastic is the status Orientalism has attained since its hallowed inception – a text which spelt death for the traditional genre of ‘Oriental Studies’ and hailed the creation of an academic focus based on differences and contrasts. Some would argue that such an interpretation renders Edward Said’s controversial text (Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient) as an amplified amalgamation of colonial facts encompassing the effect of imperialism on culture within a broad ethnographic analysis heavily based on literary sources. Whilst the aforementioned elements are present in the text, one must constantly avert away from the temptation of performing a historical analysis on Said’s work; and instead focus on the postmodern interpretation of Orientalism. This essay seeks to comparatively review Said’s theoretical basis for Orientalism; henceforth named ‘Said’an Orientalism’ with the manifestations of the same subject matter in the ‘post-Orientalism’ period (extending from the publication of the text until the present).

Written in 1978, Orientalism is a book surmising the broad theoretical reasoning behind the discourse of the modern Middle East. It draws upon classical literature, anthropological as well as sociological sources to validate the history of the Orient as ‘other’. The title of the book itself testifies to an underlying negativity by referring to the knowledge of the Orient as being of ‘conceptual’ value; hence the understandable animosity against the text by former ‘Orientalists’ who could have easily been accused of performing vital roles in the subjection of the Orient at the hands of an Occident, in which they were and continue to be institutionalised within.

Though the text is so readily accepted amongst students and academics ranging across multiple disciplines, one must admit that it is not the most accessible text on the relationship the Orient has with the colonial and modern worlds respectively. Understanding Said’an Orientalism often requires multiple secondary sources in the hopes of not misconstruing Said’s discourse. The reasons for this difficulty will be explored in detail using both the core text and commentaries written about Said’an Orientalism.
Said situates Orientalism for the audience albeit in rather obscure terms by stating that, ‘it (the subject matter of Orientalism) is rather a distribution of geopolitical awareness into aesthetic, scholarly, economic, sociological, historical and philological texts...’

An initial reading of such a composed definition renders the subject matter as being one which permeates many areas of academic thought - aesthetic, scholarly, sociological and so forth; but is not entirely anchored in any one discipline. Such a subject matter is therefore impossible to tackle from a single, commonly held angle as its focus is not a single or common topic. Ning explains this by situating Said’an Orientalism as an image portrayed in the mind of an Occidental; such an image dissipates when the Occidental individual or institution stops observing the ‘Orient’.

In simple terms, Said’an Orientalism exists only in the presence of the Occidental gaze. One can ascertain from this relationship that the Occident requires the Orient as a point of reference, a point of balancing opposition and the perfect ‘other’. Not only is this relationship voyeuristic towards the Orient, but it performs a purpose of double backing – a sort of reflective mirror in which the Occident can view its differences from the Orient whilst still surveying the Orient from a position of power.

Ning’s explanation of the ‘other’ as a theoretic balance to ‘us’ (Orient and Occident respectively) is wholly supported by Said as he regards the two entities as reflections and historical supports for each other. This reflection requires further elaboration when dealing with Orientalism as it is inextricably linked with the lack of representation of the Orient in and around the Occidental presence. Said assists to edge the audience into a categorical viewpoint by emphasising that ‘...[his] real argument is that Orientalism is – and does not simply represent – a considerable dimension of modern political-intellectual culture, and as such has less to do with the Orient than it does with 'our' world.’

This leads one to believe that although Said’an Orientalism may present as a physical manifestation in the contemporary world, its theoretical anatomy is heavily based in colonial and the immediate post-colonial eras and therefore hearken back to a period no longer relative in the modern age. Following the common Marxist quote to be found early in Orientalism, Said reminds us of the purpose of Oriental Studies within the colonial timeframe; ‘They cannot represent themselves; they must be represented.’ The European representation of the Orient through literature, art, photography as well as imaginary depictions formed a Western dominance over the Orient.
The thematic lack of representation is an omnipresent feature of Said’an Orientalism whereby he maintains a Marxist explanation whereby the Orient was and to an extent is unable to represent itself. In other words, Orientalism was and continues to be an institutionalised discipline whose authority arises from the descriptive and analytical practices that projected constructions of the Orient in political, socio-economic, militaristic and imaginative terms.
One’s understanding of the Orient (specifically from the Occident’s viewpoint) is introduced and directed through a single word Said utilises in his reconsideration of Orientalism written seven years after the original text; this word being ‘interlocutor’ ties in heavily with the aforementioned Marxist concept of representation. The lens in which Said’an Orientalism is positioned performs the role of an ‘interlocutor’, a middle-man of sorts who aims to bring about dialogue between two distant entities. Is Said’an Orientalism therefore a case of conversation ‘lost in translation’ between East and West – Orient and Occident respectively?

Habib harshly denounces and even challenges Said’an Orientalism and its relative discourse to the point of the latter’s credibility. A pre-Said Orientalist discourse would have entailed the ‘Orientalist’ as being of western origin and education ; such an individual was not likely to have been well travelled or have lived in the Orient they were so zealously writing about.
Said himself being an American of Palestinian heritage undoubtedly suffers from a cultural distance he cannot bridge no matter how much he learns the Arabic language,‘...(his) concept of ‘orientalism’ is both far too general and far too restricted...the limits of his definitions so set...his conclusions are thereby simply pre-determined.’
Habib continues to deconstruct Said’an Orientalism by stating that the ‘lack of representation’ seen to be the main reason behind Said’s effect of colonialism in the oriental sphere is in fact based on Marx’s commentary regarding the French peasantry throughout the mid nineteenth century. Whether the re-appropriation of this Marxist view is relevant or even acceptable when referring to an eastern discourse is a questionable practise Said knowingly or unknowingly limited himself to.

Such ‘pre-determined’ outcomes of which Said is writes of on Oriental discourse (according to Habib) directly situate Said’an Orientalism as guilty of the Western gaze it so vehemently accuses of being responsible for the plight of the Orient.
Said’an Orientalism and the discourse it bears are so far immersed in the intricate details between national and historical conflict rather than the sociological or ethnographic analysis required to properly communicate the subject matter. Is the identity of Said’an Orientalism obscured by its own vindication to identify the western conception of the orient?
Consolidating the definition of the socially constructed identity is an aspect Hughes–Warrington (2007) explores as the, ‘...moral, religious, public political, professional, family and gender discourses... (all) may foster competing notions of self identity’.

In writing Orientalism, Said further moulded and directed the identity of Orientalism towards main stream knowledge. Such an unprecedented attempt at identifying the main factors whose presence created the ‘Orient’ had a profound effect on the history and understanding of the colonies and protectorates formerly under French and British control.
These aspects in due course transcended time and have still tainted the identity of the modern ‘oriental’ individual. Prime examples of ‘Orientals’ who were seen to be central to the formulation of the colonial sovereignty were the Egyptians who were considered as the midpoint between historical memory and modern actuality. Their future was no longer theirs, but rather they belonged to the aspiring European powers.
Said emphasises further that Egypt’s status as the birthplace of the arts, sciences and government inevitably caused it to become the prime target as the ‘plot of land’ for European advancement.
This in itself could be regarded as the nexus point for the East’s dissolution as a modern power – one would not however agree with Said that this is solely the Occident’s fault; but rather it seems that victimising the East has only furthered their demise. By repetitively calling an entity weak, you demoralise and lower the propensity for this entity to advance on its own accord.
Halliday’s valuable advice is immensely welcome when tackling Said’an discourse; he speaks of ‘an element of distance (being), all the more advisable’. This distance is problematic nonetheless as it bears a dual-edged feature; on one hand the distance allows for a greater breadth of knowledge and collection of contextual evidence however it lacks the ethnographic ‘grassroots’ approach vital to properly understanding, presenting and representing the Orient.

Though he does not attack Said’an Orientalism and its evident discourse like Habib or Ning, Halliday willingly rebukes Said for the lack of ethnological basis upon which the latter’s ground-breaking text is not built around.
Halliday writes in 1993 and is therefore privy to the experience of the newly emerged ‘Islamic’ other (immediately during the aftermath of the first Gulf War). For one to understand the Orient in its modern context, the experience must comprise of both first-hand confrontation augmented by proper induction into the Oriental sphere.
Mere knowledge of the Arabic language and its tenets (being a prime root of Islamic culture) within the scope of Orientalism is simply not enough to draw conclusions in regards to such a complex and multi-layered entity spanning North Africa, Asia Minor and to an extent South Asia and the Far East.
It is however the language of the Orient which Said hails from that one must master before hoping to properly comprehend the persona of the subject matter in its totality. Firstly, those of Arabic extraction will know that their native language has many words for the same ‘thing’; it is the context which alters meaning and not the word.

Phrases such as ‘umma’ originate from ‘um’ which means ‘mother’. The Western academic would be easily forgiven for assuming that ‘umma’ could be suitably aligned with the English cognate: ‘motherland’. The word ‘umma’ however is rarely used to denote a secular concept of nation for the Arabic speaker, rather it is most commonly used to introduce an Islamic element; hence ‘el umma al-islamia’ which is to say the Islamic mother-nation. Unlike a Tsarist concept of ‘motherland’, the Islamic concept of nation is borderless due to its reliance on common religion rather than secular agreement of nation-states. Sounds awfully similar to the Holy Roman Empire and its reliance on Catholicism as a binding force to control multiple states – why then is the Islamic ‘Umma’ so misunderstood even when comparisons to the Medieval Roman Empire are so clear?
Re-appropriation is common in Arabic as can be witnessed by the word ‘dawla’ – originating from the Turkish ‘davli’. Ottoman occupation of Egypt and the Levant (Syria and Lebanon) allowed for word borrowing; the words themselves however were utilised in very different contexts. The English cognate for the Arabic word could be likened to ‘nation-state’ whereas the English equivalent to the Turkish is similar to ‘governing body’. The use of either word in their social contexts would certainly be different. From this we note that Western scholars may unknowingly translate original texts without first consulting the contextual evidence for the use of that particular word.


Halliday outlines an interesting point in that an Iranian-Islamic like Khomeini is as much an Orientalist as the French and British imperialists . Khomeini envisioned an Islamic state, an entity unto itself void of outside influence – a concept familiar to Orientalism as was thought of Egypt by any of Bonaparte’s entourage in the Egyptian campaigns preceding the Iranian revolution by almost exactly two hundred years.
Said’s book is rarely read from beginning to conclusion; rather both students and scholars are attracted to particular sections of the text and as Varisco states, ‘Most of the early reviews focused on those parts of the book the reviewer knew something about. Only a few of these reviewers took the time to actually read the sources cited, and at times misquoted by Said.’
As was aforementioned, the breadth Said’s text encompasses is mammoth enough to inadvertently suffer from a sort of dilution of ideas. His attempt to cover all the aspects relevant to the Oriental discourse forces the reader to focus on what they can both relate to and understand. Experiencing this whilst reading Said’s text, one like many others studying Orientalism felt constantly torn between agreeing and disagreeing with Said’an Orientalism; particularly in how it sought to identify its subject matter.

Complicating this flaw in identity, Said’s speaking for such a broad field of ethnicities unfortunately let down each of those he mentioned in the text. Simply put, there was not and will never be a way to lump together the Far Eastern identities such as the Japanese, Chinese and Koreans with the South Asians of whom Cambodians, Vietnamese and Laotians are representative; these can neither be reconciled with the Middle Eastern personas of Jordanians, Kuwaitis, Iraqis, Saudi Arabians and citizens of the United Arab Emirates.
Adding to an already complex set of amalgamated identities, the role of Persians (Iranians), Indians, Egyptians and the Turks is varied and subject to the era in which one studies each society – none of which however, can be ‘fitted’ in the Far East, Middle East or Asia Minor Orient.

The limitation of Said’an Orientalism lays in what Thomas refers to as ‘the novelty of its project’, one where ‘homogenisation of the object of study was almost inevitable.’ One can only conclude that revisiting the Orient and separating the behemoth geographic expanse is required to properly re-asses the unique cultural identities with an ethnological and ethnographic purpose; to lump these societies together under the banner of ‘Orientals’ whereby the study of the subject is deemed ‘Orientalism’ renders no practical or positive outcome in a contemporary world. It is the dissolution of boundaries as explained by Prakash which has caused the extra-ordinary effect Orientalism has on the study of the Orient as separate human entity. It is these very boundaries which are necessary in the effort to sustain the cultural comparisons and contrasts of each ‘Oriental’ nation’s identity; perhaps removing the boundaries has caused less globalisation within the Oriental sphere and more discord and confusion.




Reference List
1. Burke E. and Prochaska D., Genealogies of Orientalism: History, Theory, Politics. (2008) University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln.
2. Habib I., In Defence of Orientalism: Critical Notes on Edward Said. Social Scientist, Vol. 33, No.1 (2005), pp. 40 – 46
3. Halliday F., 'Orientalism' and Its Critics. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2 (1993), pp. 145-163
4. Hughes-Warrington M., History Goes to the Movies: Studying History on Film (2007) Routledge: New York.
5. Ning W., Orientalism versus Occidentalism? New Literary History, Vol. 28, No. 1, Cultural Studies: China and the West (1997), pp. 57 – 67
6. Prakash G., Orientalism Now. History and Theory, Vol. 34, No. 3 (1995), pp. 199 – 212
7. Roberts M. And Beaulieu J., Orientalism’s Interlocutors: Painting, Architecture, Photography. (2002) Duke University Press: Durham.
8. Said E. W., Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. (1995) Clays Ltd: London.
9. Said E. W., Orientalism Reconsidered. Cultural Critique, No. 1 (1985), pp. 89 – 107
10. Sturken M. and Cartwright L., Practices of Looking: An introduction to Visual Culture (2001). Oxford University Press: New York.
11. Thomas N., Anthropology and Orientalism. Anthropology Today, Vol. 7, No. 2 (1991)pp.4 – 7
12. Varisco D. M., Reading Orientalism: Said and the Unsaid. (2007) University of Washington Press: Seattle.

As written for ANTH365 - Semester Two 2009 - Macquarie University, Sydney