Orientalism

It seems that Orientalism, according to Said's perspective, bares a close resemblance to Freud's "lacking" and the concept of "othering" that has been prevalent in many of the texts studied in this course. Just like Freud's "other" or "lacking" is defined by the subject, the male, the possessor of the phallus, Orientalism is defined by and for the subject, the omnipotent West. The Western conception of the Orient seems to justify imperialism, as well as perpetuate the power structure in which the West dominates the East. Therefore, cruel acts of imperialism are not merely accepted, but viewed as the means of "civilizing" an inferior culture. Additionally, because these definitions are provided by the West, the object, the Orient serves a subject, a bystander, in the conception of its own reality. It seems, as Said explains, "the Orientalist is outside the Orient" (21), those who explain and define the culture of the Orient are Westerners, the Orient does not play any role in defining itself. Likewise, Teresa de Lauretis discusses this same idea, Freud's question, "What is femininity?" is asked by a man, Freud himself, answered again by Freud and his answer, revolves around the man, the phallus. In both cases, it appears, the dominate group is defining its object of domination as an "other," inherently inferior in order to perpetuate its dominance.