Phd thesis on v s naipaul

These are not idle, foolish, or intemperate questions, even if they are sometimes put in unnecessarily truculent terms. With bogus learning, Lewis parades meanings of thawra acquired from a superifical survey of sources. In addition—and this is what Lewis neither can nor will deal with—there is a remarkable (but nonetheless intelligible) coincidence between the rise of modern Orientalist scholarship and the acquisition of vast Eastern empires by Britain and France. It would be foolish to explain contemporary France in the terms of the passage from the Romanesque to the Gothic, yet this is precisely what is consistently done in dealing with the Muslim world. Let me add that I would not regard it as shameful to have done any of these things—unless of course I had given bad advice. G. I accused Mr. If the Committee or other Jewish organizations had complained about the treatment of Hebraic and research proposal phd computer science Judaic subjects by Christian and other non-Jewish scholars, there might have been some parallel. In short, the relationship between Islamic or Arab Orientalism and modern European culture can be studied without at the same time describing every Orientalist who ever lived, every Orientalist tradition, or everything written by Orientalists. But in fact I did none of them. The lesson to be drawn from this debate perhaps should be that orientalists as well as anti-orientalists must define more sharply than they have done so far the exact limits of their competence on the one hand and of the questions they ask, on the other. Not content with pretending that he is a defender of the Arabs, Lewis insinuates that as a Christian Arab I must be perceived as demonstrating the insecure minority status I feel as a non-Muslim within the Islamic world. And I believe it is extremely important to understand the fact that the reason why Orientalism is opposed by so many thoughtful Arabs and phd thesis on v s naipaul Muslims is that its modern discourse is correctly perceived as a discourse of power. , a camel. In short, while Professor Lewis is entirely right in pointing out the scholarly achievements and, in many ways, the intellectual probity and generosity of what we call orientalism, he may have given short shrift to the anxiety, the fears, the how can we improve education expectations of the contemporary Muslim world which are also genuine and respectable feelings, even if expressed at times in sadly and unnecessarily angry terms. There are strong affiliations between Orientalism and, for example, the literary imagination as well as the imperial consciousness. In fact the standard Arabic dictionaries do not all use the camel example, and when they do (e. Said’s implication about “State Department missions” is equally baseless. In this discourse, based mainly upon the assumption that Islam is monolithic and unchanging and phd thesis on v s naipaul therefore marketable by “experts’ for powerful domestic political interests, neither Muslims nor Arabs recognize themselves as human beings or their observers as simple scholars. Most Arabs and Muslims today would consider Lewis as their ideological and political enemy. Is there something fundamentally Islamic about the past which can be expressed in contemporary terms? One of his examples is that thawra is associated with the act of rising up, after which Lewis affixes to “rising up” a parenthetical instance, “e. Then there is the meaning of thawra, the common modern Arabic term for revolution, and Lewis’s description of it. Is it a legitimate cause for resentment when interpretations of Islamic forms are based on Western criteria? Page has written and co-authored a total of 35 books on leisure and tourism since 1994 and is ranked as one of the top tourism academics in the UK based on publications and citations for a 5 year period (2003–2008). Said is generous in alluding to me as a specialist “in the history of medieval Islamic guilds. I pointed out that Said had made a wholly false statement about the Princeton seminar on slavery, with which incidentally I was in no way concerned and at which I was not present. ” As a defense of Orientalism then what he says must be judged on the political grounds which his rhetoric has insufficiently hidden. G. That Geertz should also writing recommendation letters for students pair me off with Elie Kedourie, whom he describes as a right-wing Iraqi Jew, merely underlines the racist Orientalist habit of reducing the intellectual positions of wogs to their ethnic genealogy, then pairing them off like matched fighting-cocks. Said of having libeled Silvestre de Sacy by saying that he had “doctored” his texts. His Orientalist account of the word has very little to do with what it means in contemporary usage; thus his method of proceeding is peculiar to a field that studiously places a greater value on what European scholars thought and said than on what users of a language thought and said. ” I did indeed once write an article on this subject—my very first. In my own field of art and architecture, acute questions have arisen. Said tries to meet my point about the uniqueness of the Arab response to Orientalism by looking, not at India or China, but at the American Jewish Committee. I had assumed that “doctoring” texts was a bad thing, and that to say that a scholar had done so was a very serious charge, in Sacy’s case totally without foundation. Said. More correct than rising up is the association between thawra and anger as a cause for the movement of armies, people, etc. Aside from giving no proof that he knows the spoken or written how to write a literary essay language of that market place, Geertz affixes twenty-eight pages of double-columned footnotes in extremely fine print as bibliographical and critical support for his description of a Moroccan souk. Said, as inspired the other translations, along with the laudatory prefaces, favorable reviews, and academic honors. Why have buildings in phd thesis on v s naipaul the contemporary International Style been imposed so easily on the traditional Islamic architecture of so many cities? In fact they have not. On the other hand it is rank hypocrisy to suppress the cultural, political, ideological, and institutional contexts in which people write, think, and talk about the Orient, whether they are scholars or not. Said replies by referring to other phrases in which he described the “man’s enormous efforts and influence. I noted doctoral dissertation help citation apa that while Said condemns British and French scholars for their lack of respect for Islam and links their efforts to imperial domination, he has nothing to say about Soviet scholars who are far worse offenders in this respect and who, phd thesis on v s naipaul one might add, unlike the British and French, are the servants of a state which has not relinquished its Muslim domains but is on the contrary adding to them. In contrast Mr. Said prefers to change the subject. Said’s reply is that the Russians also attack Christianity and Judaism—presumably this justifies them, though not Ernest Renan, one of his favorite targets, and gives them license both to insult the Prophet and to conquer Afghanistan. ” This is neither a compliment nor an answer. Prof. E. In none of this is there any mention of Arab scholarship, much less of Arabic literature, anthropological observation, or history. , Lisan al Arab of Ibn Manzur, Tahdhib al lugha by al-Azhari, which are among the very earliest dictionaries) the camel is an insignificant illustration, usually given one or two inconspicuous lines out of a total of several pages. So sloppy a performance somewhat undermines Lewis’s claims to “scholarly validity” and “intellectual precision. His discussion of thawra incidentally is one of two occasions in an enormous article in which Lewis reveals that he is writing not just as a defender of Orientalism, but as someone I had criticized in two of my books. Most importantly, Professor Lewis is absolutely right in emphasizing the point that there is a level of scholarly accomplishment which knows no ideological, ethnic, national, or cultural frontiers, even if individual practitioners are occasionally guilty of the narrowest prejudices or of misplaced intellectual allegiances. Mr. His declaration of interest, as so often, is extremely discreet. Their concern has been about the effect on contemporary Middle Eastern studies in the universities of the kind of political warfare exemplified by Mr. He also accuses me of red-baiting, a term sometimes used to claim virtual immunity from criticism for the Soviets, their friends, and those to whom they extend their protection. In this charged atmosphere of today, this may not be a lesson we can easily act upon, but, if there is a strength to traditional scholarship, it is precisely that it can know its limits. That his books have been translated into Arabic is as much a sign of his popularity among Arabs and Muslims as the Hebrew translation of my book The Question of Palestine is a sign of my popularity in Israel. Mr. As a perfect instance of what I mean there is Clifford Geertz’s study of a Moroccan market. ) Mr. It is, of course, wrong to seek these answers in orientalism, but orientalists have, more frequently than is justified, intimated that they possess these answers. (Would it be regarded as within the limits of polemical etiquette were I similarly to comment upon the ethnic origins of my assailants? I have little quarrel with Professor Bernard Lewis’s article on “The Question of Orientalism. A very important dictionary, Zamakhshiri’s eleventh-century Assas al Balagha, doesn’t even mention the rising camel. When he claims that my views about Arab scholars show contempt for them he clumsily misses the point I was making, that Western Orientalists don’t feel they have to read Arab journals as much as Arabs feel they must read Western journals; this is the context of my remark about the absence of a “major” Arab journal. ” Both in his rebuttals of specific points raised by anti-orientalists and in his general elaboration of the numerous and complex accomplishments of scholars proud to be called orientalists, he is right on nearly every point, inasmuch as he freely acknowledges the unavoidable and human prejudices of some otherwise excellent scholars as well as arbitrary and at times anachronistically silly use of certain labels like Arabist or in fact Orientalist. The attacks on orientalism are in large part the result of the frustration which has arisen in the failure of orientalism to provide answers for contemporary issues. They are genuine searches for a self-identity in the contemporary world which are thwarted by an interpretation of the Muslim tradition based on the past. All the references are essentially to European and American sources. In so doing of course phd thesis on v s naipaul he scants actual usage, the elucidation of which is presumably why he wrote the article. I have not returned to the subject since then—apart from providing a fuller version for an Iraqi professor who was anxious to translate and publish this article in an Arabic journal, no doubt in the same spirit of hostility, according to Mr. Most of all they see in the discourse of modern Orientalism a chronic tendency phd thesis on v s naipaul to deny, suppress or distort the cultural context of Orientalism in order to maintain the fiction of its dobson and homework on the weekends scholarly disinterest. It is idiotic to say that Orientalism is a conspiracy or to suggest that “the West” is evil: both are among the egregious fatuities that Lewis has the gall to ascribe to me. , a native speaker, would find the rising camel of any relevance. It is precisely this tendency that Lewis’s rejoinder to me exemplifies. Dr Stephen Page is Professor in the School of Tourism at Bournemouth University in England. Lewis’s master in this procedure is Renan whose hatred of Arabs and Jews was customarily laced with instances revealing the primitive arrested mentality of desert dwellers lurking beneath a superficially modern exterior. In neither committee did I discuss, let alone recommend, the sending of arms to Israel or anywhere else. ” This he says in his defense follows “the standard classical Arabic dictionaries, and would have been immediately recognized by anyone familiar with Arabic lexicography. ” Arabic lexicography isn’t the issue here: the real issue is whether Lewis is right to associate rising camels with the contemporary meaning of the term thawra, and whether anyone using the term in Arabic, i. The most interesting problems about Islamic or Arabic Orientalism are, first, the forms taken by the medieval vestiges persisting in it so tenaciously, and, second, the whole history and sociology of connections between it and the societies that produced it. Geertz openly says the same thing, having the bad taste to explain me as a leftwing Christian Palestinian in an omnibus review of several books that makes a point of not saying anything about the racial origins of authors with whose views he is evidently in political and intellectual agreement. He is on editorial boards of many of the key academic journals in tourism and has edited and commissioned many of the leading research monographs in tourism published by Elsevier and Routledge. So we see that Lewis deliberately chooses an unimportant example first how to write a letter of application for college in order to indulge the well-known Orientalist prejudice that all Semitic languages ought to be understood with reference to concrete or desert usages, and second, to score a point against the modern Arabs whose use of thawra is undercut by the word’s phd thesis on v s naipaul undignified origins. Mr. At no time has the State Department sent me on any mission for any purpose whatsoever, nor have I briefed “area embassies” on US security interests or any other topic. What is therefore striking about many periods of European history is the traffic between what scholars and specialists wrote and what poets, novelists, politicans, and journalists then wrote about Islam. He replies with further misrepresentations and unattributed and unidentified quotations about that seminar, and adds others about a different seminar held two years later. It phd thesis on v s naipaul is done by non-Muslims as well as by Muslims, in a pattern of mutual influences which may have something to do with the orientalist’s fascination with and knowledge of the past. The rest is pure imagination.