3
very well the history, cultures and societies of the East. Therefore, the
‘Orientalist’ as a title was not easy to obtain and was a source of pride.
However, in the mid 20
th
century, after the end of World War II, research
over Eastern societies by Western scholars brought with it micro-level
studies rather than macro-level and the broad meaning of ‘Orientalism’ was
narrowed down. Oriental studies were divided into various sub-fields such as
Central Asia, Middle East, Near East, China, Korea, Japan and took such
names as Central Asian Studies and Middle East studies. As a result, this
development which brought Orientalism or oriental studies into debate, have
taken solely negative meanings as also argued by Edward Said in
Orientalism. Said, relating Orientalist information to imperialist economic
and political powers, depicts Orientalism as an instrument of exploitation
used by the Western imperialism:
“
The Orient is not only adjacent to Europe; it is also the place of Europe’s
greatest and richest and oldest colonies, the source of its civilizations and
languages, its cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most recurring
images of the Other. In addition, the Orient has helped to define Europe (or
the West) as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience. Yet none of
this Orient is merely imaginative. The Orient is an integral part of European
material civilization and culture. Orientalism expresses and represents that
part culturally and even ideologically as a mode of discourse with supporting
institutions, vocabulary, scholarship, imagery, doctrines, even colonial
bureaucracies and colonial styles.
”
8
As Said has also included the academicians in his definition of
Orientalism, this has attracted serious opposition and criticism from the
Orientalist academicians claiming ‘scientific objectivity’.
9
Therefore such a
8
Said, op. cit., in note 6, pp. 1-2.
9
Yücel Bulut. Oryantalizmin Eleştirel Kısa Tarihi. stanbul: Yöneliş Yay., 2002,
p.15.
4
reaction had also an impact on the terms ‘Orientalism’ and ‘Orientalist’. That
is why, at the 29
th
International Congress of Orientalists, it is no surprise
that a decision was taken not to use the term any more and even change
the name of the congress. .
10
John MacKenzie, criticizing the negative meaning of orientalism after
Edward Said, argues:
“
The word (Orientalism) originally had a wholly sympathetic ring: the study
of languages, literature, religions, thought, arts and social life of the East in
order to make them available to the West, even in order to protect them
from occidental cultural arrogance in the age of imperialism. For Edward
Said, in his highly influential book Orientalism of 1978, far from protecting
oriental cultures from overwhelming imperial power, far from permitting
eastern cultural forms to survive, Orientalist studies became themselves an
expression of intellectual and technical dominance and a means to the
extension of political, military and economic supremacy. Orientalism came to
represent a construct, not a reality, an emblem of domination and a weapon
of power. It lost its status as a sympathetic concept, a product of scholarly
admiration for diverse and exotic cultures, and became the literary means of
creating a stereotypical and mythic East through which European rule could
be more readily asserted.
”
11
It is also important that Turkish terms “Şarkiyatçılık” or “Müsteşrik or
Şarkiyatçı” very well correspond to Russian “Vostokovedenie” and
“Vostokoved” without carrying any of the negative connotations associated
with “Orientalism” and “Orientalist”. In Russian, Orientalism and Orientalist
are also referred as “Orientalistika” and “Orientalist”
12
and the scholars
10
Bernard Lewis. "The Question of Orientalism." New York Review of Books 29, no.
11 (1982), p. 50.
11
MacKenzie, David and Curran Michael W. A History of Russia, the Soviet Union,
and Beyond. Stamford: Wadsworth, 2002, p. xii.
12
Slovar Inostrannykh Slov. Moskva: Russkiy Yazyk, 1980, p. 359.
5
working on the East were named as “Vostokoved”. By this way in the
Russian academia calling someone as “Vostokoved” does not necessarily
mean that this scholar is Orientalist in the negative meaning of the term as
it has been in the Western scholarship.
It is not the aim of this thesis to study the oriental studies in Russia or
Russian relations with the East as put forth by Edward Said. When Said’s
work is analysed, it can be seen that there are a few references to Russia.
However, to a certain extent Said has considered Russia in the same way as
French or British scholarship did.
13
However, Said also mentions that
Russian imperialism is different than French or British:
“
Russia, however, acquired its imperial territories almost exclusively by
adjacency. Unlike Britain or France, which jumped thousands of miles beyond their
own borders to other continents, Russia moved to swallow whatever land or peoples
stood next to its borders, which in the process kept moving farther and farther east
and south.
”
14
One may contend that it is doubtful to claim that Russian imperialism
is different than the Western due solely to this was in its close proximity.
Adeeb Khalid underlines nevertheless that these exclusions are important for
Said as they strengthen his arguments. So, it seems Said is also aware that
the way Orientalism has developed in Russia is different than that of in
Western Europe. However, it is obvious that there are many evidences in
13
Said, op. cit., in note 6, p.1.
14
http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/barsaid.htm
Dostları ilə paylaş: |