Orientalism

出版者:Penguin Classics

作者:Edward W. Said

页数:432

出版时间:2007-6

价格:GBP 10.99

装帧:Paperback

isbn号码:9780141187426

具体描述

Said is best known for describing and critiquing "Orientalism", which he perceived as a constellation of false assumptions underlying Western attitudes toward the East. In Orientalism (1978), Said described the "subtle and persistent Eurocentric prejudice against Arabo-Islamic peoples and their culture."[12] He argued that a long tradition of false and romanticized images of Asia and the Middle East in Western culture had served as an implicit justification for Europe and America's colonial and imperial ambitions. Just as fiercely, he denounced the practice of Arab elites who internalized the American and British orientalists' ideas of Arabic culture.

In 1980 Said criticized what he regarded as poor understanding of the Arab culture in the West:

“ So far as the United States seems to be concerned, it is only a slight overstatement to say that Moslems and Arabs are essentially seen as either oil suppliers or potential terrorists. Very little of the detail, the human density, the passion of Arab-Moslem life has entered the awareness of even those people whose profession it is to report the Arab world. What we have instead is a series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world presented in such a way as to make that world vulnerable to military aggression.[13] ”

[edit] The argument

Orientalism has had a significant impact on the fields of literary theory, cultural studies and human geography, and to a lesser extent on those of history and oriental studies. Taking his cue from the work of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, and from earlier critics of western Orientalism such as A. L. Tibawi,[14] Anouar Abdel-Malek,[15] Maxime Rodinson,[16] and Richard William Southern,[17] Said argued that Western writings on the Orient, and the perceptions of the East purveyed in them, are suspect, and cannot be taken at face value. According to Said, the history of European colonial rule and political domination over the East distorts the writings of even the most knowledgeable, well-meaning and sympathetic Western ‘Orientalists’ (a term that he transformed into a pejorative):

“ I doubt if it is controversial, for example, to say that an Englishman in India or Egypt in the later nineteenth century took an interest in those countries which was never far from their status in his mind as British colonies. To say this may seem quite different from saying that all academic knowledge about India and Egypt is somehow tinged and impressed with, violated by, the gross political fact – and yet that is what I am saying in this study of Orientalism. (Said, Orientalism 11) ”

Said contended that Europe had dominated Asia politically so completely for so long that even the most outwardly objective Western texts on the East were permeated with a bias that even most Western scholars could not recognise. His contention was not only that the West has conquered the East politically but also that Western scholars have appropriated the exploration and interpretation of the Orient’s languages, history and culture for themselves. They have written Asia’s past and constructed its modern identities from a perspective that takes Europe as the norm, from which the "exotic", "inscrutable" Orient deviates.

Said concludes that Western writings about the Orient depict it as an irrational, weak, feminised "Other", contrasted with the rational, strong, masculine West, a contrast he suggests derives from the need to create "difference" between West and East that can be attributed to immutable "essences" in the Oriental make-up. In 1978, when the book was first published, with memories of the Yom Kippur war and the OPEC crisis still fresh, Said argued that these attitudes still permeated the Western media and academia. After stating the central thesis, Orientalism consists mainly of supporting examples from Western texts.

作者简介

Edward Wadie Saïd (Arabic: إدوارد وديع سعيد‎, transliteration: Edwārd Wadīʿ Saʿīd; 1 November 1935 – 25 September 2003) was an Arab Palestinian literary theorist, cultural critic, political activist, and an outspoken advocate of Palestinian rights. He was University Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University, and is regarded as a founding figure in postcolonial theory.

Saïd was born in Jerusalem (then in the British Mandate of Palestine) on November 1, 1935. His father was a wealthy Protestant Palestinian businessman and an American citizen who had served under General Pershing in World War I, while his mother was born in Nazareth also of Christian Palestinian descent.[2] His sister was the historian and writer Rosemarie Said Zahlan. He referred to himself as a "Christian wrapped in a Muslim culture". Said experienced much confusion growing up and was quoted as saying that with an unexceptionally Arab family name like Said connected to an improbably British first name (my mother much admired the Prince of Wales in 1935, the year of my birth), I was an uncomfortably anomalous student all through my early years: a Palestinian going to school in Egypt, with an English first name, an American passport and no certain identity at all.[3] According to Saïd's autobiographical memoir, Out of Place[4], Saïd lived "between worlds" in both Cairo and Jerusalem until the age of 12. In 1947, he attended the Anglican St. George's Academy when he was in Jerusalem, but his extended family became refugees in 1948 during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War when their neighborhood of Talbiya was captured by Jewish militia groups, along with the western part of Jerusalem, which became part of the State of Israel:

“ I was born in Jerusalem and had spent most of my formative years there and, after 1948, when my entire family became refugees, in Egypt. All my early education had, however, been in élite colonial schools, English public schools designed by the British to bring up a generation of Arabs with natural ties to Britain. The last one I went to before I left the Middle East to go to the United States was Victoria College in Alexandria, a school in effect created to educate those ruling-class Arabs and Levantines who were going to take over after the British left. My contemporaries and classmates included King Hussein of Jordan, several Jordanian, Egyptian, Syrian and Saudi boys who were to become ministers, prime ministers and leading businessmen, as well as such glamorous figures as Michel Shalhoub, head prefect of the school and chief tormentor when I was a relatively junior boy, whom everyone has seen on screen as Omar Sharif.[4] ”

In the year 1951 Said was expelled from Victoria College for being a "troublemaker"[5], and was consequently sent by his parents to Mount Hermon School, a private college preparatory school in Massachusetts, where he recalls a "miserable" year feeling "out of place".[4] Said later reflected that the decision to send him so far away was heavily influenced by the 'the prospects of deracinated people like us being so uncertain that it would be best to send me as far away as possible'.[6] Despite feeling out of place Said did well at the Massachusetts boarding school often 'achieving the rank of either first or second in a class of about a hundred and sixty'[7]

Said earned an A.B. (1957) from Princeton University and an M.A. (1960) and a Ph.D. (1964) from Harvard University, where he won the Bowdoin Prize. He joined the faculty of Columbia University in 1963 and served as Professor of English and Comparative Literature for several decades. In 1977 Said became the Parr Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia and subsequently became the Old Dominion Foundation Professor in the Humanities. In 1992 he attained the rank of University Professor, Columbia's most prestigious academic position. Professor Said also taught at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and Yale universities. He was fluent in English, French, and Arabic.[citation needed] In 1999, after his earlier election to second vice president and following its succession policy, Said served as president of the Modern Language Association.

Said was bestowed with numerous honorary doctorates from universities around the world and twice received Columbia's Trilling Award and the Wellek Prize of the American Comparative Literature Association. His autobiographical memoir Out of Place won the 1999 New Yorker Prize for non-fiction. He was also a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Letters, the Royal Society of Literature, and the American Philosophical Society.[8]

Said's writing regularly appeared in The Nation, The Guardian, the London Review of Books, Le Monde Diplomatique, Counterpunch, Al Ahram, and the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. He gave interviews alongside his good friend, fellow political activist, and colleague Noam Chomsky regarding U.S. foreign policy for various independent radio programs.

Said also contributed music criticism to The Nation for many years. In 1999, he jointly founded the West-East Divan Orchestra with the Argentine-Israeli conductor and close friend Daniel Barenboim.

Edward Said died at the age of 67 in the early morning of September 25, 2003, in New York City, after a decade-long battle with chronic myelogenous leukemia.[9]

In November 2004, Birzeit University renamed its music school as the Edward Said National Conservatory of Music in his honor.[10]

In January 2006, anthropologist David Price obtained 147 pages of Said's 238-page FBI file through a Freedom of Information Act request. The records reveal that Said was under surveillance starting in 1971. Most of his records are marked as related to "IS Middle East" ("IS" = Israel) and significant portions remain "Classified Secrets."[11]

读后感

恐惧下的学科——萨义德《东方学》读书笔记 “……现代东方学自身已经带有欧洲对伊斯兰巨大恐惧之印记……”——《东方学》P324 用了几乎半年，拉锯战般地，才将洋洋洒洒的厚度达到400页的《东方学》读了大半。恨是不敢下笔，因为甚至作者的很多论点都没有了解透彻，便胆大妄为...  

“……现代东方学自身已经带有欧洲对伊斯兰巨大恐惧之印记……”——《东方学》P324 Orientalism是什么？ Orientalism一词一般有三个方面的含义： 一种学术研究学科；一种思维方式；一种权力话语方式。实际上这三个方面是相互紧密的相连的。 萨达尔的《东方主义》中有这么一段...  

http://www.tudou.com/playlist/id/6215861/ 有兴趣的可以去看看  

用户评价

这本书的题目，Orientalism，让我立刻联想到那些充满异域风情的油画和文学作品，但同时也让我对其中蕴含的复杂历史和权力关系产生了浓厚的好奇。我期待，作者能够深入剖析“东方主义”这一概念的起源、发展以及其背后深刻的文化和政治含义。我猜测，书中会通过大量的历史文献、艺术品和文学作品的分析，来揭示“东方主义”是如何构建出一个特定的“东方”形象的。我尤其想知道，这种“东方”形象是如何被描绘得既充满吸引力，又带有潜在的危险性，从而迎合了西方观众的某种心理需求和文化偏好。我希望这本书能够让我理解，“东方主义”不仅仅是一种对异域文化的描绘，更是一种权力运作的机制，它如何通过将“东方”“他者化”，来巩固西方的优越感和进行文化、政治上的干预。这种“他者化”，是否忽视了东方内部的丰富性和复杂性，也剥夺了东方人自身的话语权？我期待，阅读这本书能够帮助我更加批判性地审视我们对“东方”的理解，辨别出哪些是真实的东方，哪些是受到了“东方主义”影响而产生的刻板印象。

当我看到“Orientalism”这个书名时，立刻感到一股历史的召唤，让我对西方如何看待和描绘“东方”产生了极大的兴趣。我期待，这本书能够深入挖掘“东方主义”这一概念的形成过程，以及它在西方文化、艺术、文学和政治中的具体体现。我很好奇，作者是如何通过分析大量的历史文献和艺术作品，来揭示“东方主义”是如何建构出一个充满异域情调、神秘性感、甚至是被视为落后和危险的“东方”形象的。我尤其想了解，“东方主义”是如何将一个真实、多元的东方世界，简化为一个被动的、刻板的“他者”，从而满足了西方自身的文化需求和权力诉求。这种简化，是否忽视了东方内部的丰富性和复杂性，也剥夺了东方人自身的话语权？我希望这本书能够让我理解，“东方主义”不仅仅是一种审美现象，更是一种权力话语，它如何通过塑造“东方”的形象，来巩固西方的优越感和进行文化、政治上的干预。我期待，阅读这本书能够帮助我更加清晰地辨认出，在各种关于东方的论述中，哪些是基于事实的客观描述，哪些是受到了“东方主义”这一历史视角影响而产生的片面解读，从而建立起更为独立和批判性的认知。

这本书的名字，Orientalism，让我联想到一个宏大的文化与权力叙事。我猜测，它不会仅仅停留在对艺术和文学作品的表面分析，而是会深入探讨“东方主义”作为一种知识体系，如何被构建、传播和维系。我期待作者能够解释，为何西方对东方的关注会如此强烈，以及这种关注是如何在不同历史时期演变的。书中是否会讨论启蒙运动、殖民扩张、以及工业革命等重大历史事件，对“东方主义”的形成和发展所起的作用？我想象着，作者会像一个历史侦探，追溯“东方主义”思想的源头，分析它如何从早期的地理探索、博物学研究，逐渐演变成一种带有强烈意识形态色彩的学科。我尤其好奇，书中是否会探讨“东方主义”是如何将广阔而多样的东方世界，简化为一个单一的、同质化的“东方”形象的？这种简化，是否掩盖了东方内部的丰富性和复杂性？我期待，通过这本书，我能够理解“东方主义”是如何在学术界、政治界和大众文化中形成一套自我强化的逻辑，使得“东方”始终被置于一个被动的、次等的位置。它可能揭示出，当西方在谈论“东方”时，他们实际上可能更多的是在谈论他们自己关于“东方”的想象和需求。这本书，我预感，将是一次对西方中心主义的深刻反思，一次对知识权力运作机制的有力揭露。

当我看到“Orientalism”这个书名时，脑海中立刻浮现出各种关于东方的艺术作品、电影场景以及旅行经历。我迫不及待地想知道，这本书是如何从更深层次的角度来解读这些表象的。我期待，作者能够深入挖掘“东方主义”这个概念背后的历史根源和文化逻辑，而不是仅仅停留在对其视觉和文学呈现的描述。我好奇，书中是否会探讨，西方世界是如何在特定历史时期，发展出对“东方”的特殊兴趣和构建模式的？这种兴趣，是源于对异域的好奇，还是有更复杂的政治和经济驱动？我尤其想了解，在“东方主义”的视角下，东方是如何被“他者化”的？它是否被描绘成一个与西方截然不同的、充满神秘和危险的世界，从而为西方的优越感和干预行为提供了合理性？我希望这本书能够揭示，“东方主义”是如何通过语言、图像和思想，将一个多元且复杂的东方世界，简化为一个单一的、被动的、等待被西方改造的客体的。我期待，通过阅读这本书，我能够更清晰地辨认出，在各种关于东方的论述中，哪些是基于事实的客观描述，哪些是受到了“东方主义”视角的影响而产生的片面解读。它可能是一次对我们固有认知模式的深刻反思，帮助我们摆脱被动接受的视角，建立起更为独立和批判性的思维。

“Orientalism”这个书名本身就充满了吸引力，它勾勒出一个古老而神秘的文化图景。我迫不及待地想知道，这本书将如何深入剖析“东方主义”这一复杂的概念。我期待，作者能够带领我穿越历史的长河，去探究“东方主义”是如何在西方文化中诞生的，又是如何随着时间的推移而演变的。我很好奇，书中是否会详细分析那些经典的西方艺术作品、文学叙事，甚至旅行游记，是如何塑造了西方人对“东方”的认知和想象的。我尤其想了解，“东方主义”是如何将一个真实、多元的东方世界，简化为一个充满异域情调、神秘性感、甚至是落后愚昧的刻板形象的。这种刻板化，是否忽视了东方内部的复杂性和多样性，也剥夺了东方人自身的话语权？我希望这本书能够揭示，“东方主义”不仅仅是一种审美偏好，更是一种权力运作的机制，它如何通过构建“他者”形象，来巩固自身的优越感和进行文化、政治上的干预。我期待，通过阅读这本书，我能够更加敏锐地识别出，在各种关于东方的论述中，哪些是基于事实的客观描述，哪些是受到了“东方主义”这一历史视角的影响而产生的片面解读。

这本书的名字，“Orientalism”，唤起了我内心深处对历史与文化交织的复杂性的好奇。我期待，作者能够深入剖析“东方主义”这一概念的形成过程，以及它如何在西方世界中演变和发展。我猜测，书中会涉及大量的历史文献、艺术作品和文学叙事，来阐释“东方主义”是如何构建出一个特定的“东方”形象的。我尤其想了解，这种“东方”形象是如何被塑造得既充满吸引力又带有潜在的危险性，从而迎合了西方观众的某种心理需求。我期待，作者能够揭示，“东方主义”是如何将一个真实、多元的东方世界，简化为一个被动的、刻板的、甚至是被动等待被西方征服的“他者”。这种简化，是否掩盖了东方内部的丰富性和复杂性，也剥夺了东方人自身的话语权？我希望这本书能够让我理解，当西方谈论“东方”时，他们实际上是在谈论什么——是关于真实的东方，还是关于他们自己关于东方的想象、欲望和权力诉求？这本书，我预感，将是一次对我们固有认知模式的挑战，它会促使我去审视自己对“东方”的理解，是否也受到了历史形成的“东方主义”视角的影响。我期待它能帮助我培养一种更为批判性的思维，去辨别那些被精心建构的表象之下的真实。

这本书的题目，Orientalism，在我脑海中勾勒出一幅充满异域风情的画面，但同时也伴随着一种挥之不去的历史阴影。我很好奇，作者是如何将这种“东方主义”的视角与权力、知识和身份认同这些更深层次的概念联系起来的。我期待，书中不仅仅是描述“东方主义”的表象，而是去解构它，探究它为何会形成，以及它对东方和西方自身都产生了怎样的影响。我猜测，作者会运用大量的历史文献、哲学理论，甚至社会学分析，来阐释“东方主义”是如何构建出一种“东方”的知识体系，并且这种知识体系是如何被用来管理、控制和统治东方世界的。我尤其想了解，在“东方主义”的框架下，东方人是如何被呈现的？是神秘的、性感的、懒惰的、还是野蛮的？这些刻板印象是如何被固化的，又如何被传播到全球的？我希望这本书能够告诉我，当西方人谈论“东方”时，他们实际上在谈论什么？是否是他们内心深处的恐惧、渴望，或者他们自身文化发展所需要的“他者”？这本书，我预感，将是一次对我们认知世界的底层逻辑的挑战，它会迫使我去审视自己对“东方”以及其他“他者”的理解，是否也受到这种历史形成的视角的影响。我期待它能帮助我辨别，哪些是我们真实接触到的东方，哪些是被“东方主义”过滤和塑造的东方。

这本书名本身就充满了神秘和历史的厚重感，让我充满期待。我第一次接触“东方主义”这个概念，正是通过阅读与这本书相关的评论和介绍。它似乎触及了西方对东方，特别是中东和亚洲地区长久以来的一种视角，一种建构，一种想象。我迫不及待地想了解，这种“东方主义”究竟是如何形成的？它在历史的长河中扮演了怎样的角色？是简单的文化交流，还是更为复杂的权力关系和意识形态的产物？我尤其好奇，作者是如何剖析这种视角下的东方形象的，它是否被简化、被刻板化，甚至被歪曲？书中对艺术、文学、旅行叙事中的东方描绘会不会有深入的探讨？我想象着，这本书可能会像一把钥匙，打开我对西方如何认识、定义和描绘“他者”的深层理解。我希望能在这本书中找到对那些耳熟能详的东方意象（如异域风情、神秘宗教、奢华宫殿、危险的异教徒等）的溯源和解读，理解它们是如何被西方文化所吸纳、改造并反哺回东方本身的。这本书不仅仅是对一个概念的探讨，更像是对人类认知模式、文化偏见以及权力运作机制的一次深度扫描。它的存在本身，就暗示着一种对主流叙事的挑战，对既定事实的质疑。我深信，阅读这本书将是一次思维上的远征，一次对自身认知盲区的自我拷问。我期待它能给予我新的视角，去重新审视那些我以为早已熟悉的东方图景，去发现那些被隐藏在表象之下的深层逻辑。这本书的名字，Orientalism，就像一个古老的咒语，召唤着我进入一个充满想象与现实交织的复杂世界，我已准备好踏上这段探索之旅。

当我第一次看到“Orientalism”这个书名的时候，就立刻感受到了一种历史的厚重感和文化张力。我猜想，这本书并非仅仅是对“东方主义”的简单定义或描述，而是会对这一概念进行深度的挖掘和批判性的审视。我非常好奇，作者是如何将“东方主义”与权力、知识、身份认同这些更宏大的议题联系起来的。我期待，书中会详细阐述“东方主义”是如何在西方思想史、艺术史和社会文化中形成的，以及它在不同历史时期所扮演的角色。我尤其想了解，“东方主义”是如何构建出一种“他者”的形象，并且这种形象又是如何被用来巩固西方的优越感和进行文化、政治上的干预的。书中是否会分析，那些经典的西方艺术作品和文学叙事，是如何通过对“东方”的描绘，来满足西方观众的某种想象和期待？我希望这本书能够揭示，“东方主义”是如何将一个丰富、多元、且充满活力的东方世界，简化为一个刻板的、被动的、甚至是被描绘成危险的“他者”。这种简化，是否忽视了东方内部的复杂性和多样性，也剥夺了东方人自身的话语权？我期待，阅读这本书能够帮助我更加清晰地认识到，我们今天对“东方”的许多理解，都可能受到了“东方主义”这一历史视角的深刻影响。

当我翻开这本书，仿佛置身于一个巨大的历史画廊，里面陈列着无数西方艺术家、作家和旅行者笔下的“东方”。他们用油画、文字、甚至诗歌，为我们描绘了一个既熟悉又陌生的东方世界。我好奇，这些描绘背后隐藏着怎样的动机？是纯粹的艺术创作，还是殖民主义的先声？书中的案例分析，是否会像剥洋葱一样，层层揭开这些作品背后的权力运作和意识形态渗透？我想象着，作者可能会引用大量经典的西方艺术作品，比如德拉克洛瓦的《阿尔及利亚女人》或让-莱昂·热罗姆的东方主义画作，来解析它们是如何构建出一个充满异域情调、却又迎合西方观众想象的东方形象的。文字方面，也许会涉及拜伦、歌德、爱德华·萨义德（尽管我还没读到他，但这个名字总与东方主义联系在一起）等人的作品，分析他们如何通过文学语言来塑造“东方”。我特别想知道，这些作品中的“东方”是否总是被描绘成一个被动的、等待被征服的客体，而西方则是主动的、文明的观察者和塑造者？这本书是否会探讨，这种视觉和文本上的建构，是如何为后来的政治和经济殖民铺平道路的？我期待，通过对这些具体艺术作品和文学文本的分析，我能够更清晰地理解“东方主义”并非只是一个抽象的学术概念，而是实实在在地存在于西方文化生产的各个角落，并对东方产生了深远的影响。它可能揭示出，我们今天对“东方”的许多理解，都深受这些历史悠久的描绘方式的影响。

买了平装的……印刷和排版都很差T_T。以后有钱再收个hardcover吧。

See James Clifford's remarkable comments on Orientalism in "19th C. Predicament"

书本身内容很不错 但是企鹅的装潢太差啦TAT 字好小 看着难受

学者真的是猫占鹰位，西方很尴尬，也很幼稚，至少从现在的来说，我们需要自己从事自己的母语

太废话了