The Girl with No Shadow

[chrispedersen]

The writer of Chocolat has released a book "The Girl with No Shadow" - set in Paris it nonetheless incorporates flavors from the Mezo American mythologies. People like Smoking Mirror, Tlechpueli etc receive mention.

So, if you like Mictlan as I do, you might find it a good read.

[Endoperez]

You meant Chocolat without 'e'.

[Agema]

Not a bad idea: if you like Mictlan and want some more flavour sure as hell it's not a great idea seeing the sites in Mexico at the moment.

[Omnirizon]

As a fervent subscriber to postcolonial theory, I have to mention this book is Orientalism

so typical of the French...

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

As a fervent subscriber to postcolonial theory, I have to mention this book is Orientalism

so typical of the French...

So is:..."so typical of the French"

vis-a-vis Anglo-Saxon modalities vs romance or more specifically Gaulist ones.

In fact if you are sufficiently fervent its difficult to comment on any other culture except to grovel at its superiority in every fashion to ones own.

Which renders it rather puerile doesn't it? Said himself said Shakespeare was the same (orientalism) - yet even were it so (and I disagree) its as if saying Shakespeare was devoid of merit because he told a story from a certain point of view. Neglecting the validity of that view, the power of the prose, the compelling nature of the story.

*Every* author brings preconceived notions and points of view. Focusing every discourse through the prism of a politically correct prism is rather like interjecting discussion about ones medical ailments into a dinner party.

Finally, I've always been slightly offended by labelling especially when the point is to prevent expression or prejudice acceptance. Putting it succinctly: Ok - the book may present a story from the point of view of the french..

So what?

Why is a *french* or occidental, or ulan batorian mindset inferior to any other, or make the book anything less of a good read?

The idea of Orientalism, itself suffers from several criticisms. Borrowing from Wiki:
a). Langer: 'Orientalism assumes that Western imperialism, Western psychological projection, "and its harmful political consequences are something that only the West does to the East rather than something all societies do to one another." '
b. Langer again paraphrased: How useful is Said's "dramatic assertion that no European or American scholar could `know` the Orient."
c. 'Ibn Warraq complains Said's belief that all truth was relative undermined his credibility'
d. Said] finally admitted that he had "no interest in, much less capacity for, showing what the true Orient and Islam really are.

[Omnirizon]

i didn't make value judgments, just stated that it is. The problem with Orientalism is that everyone and everything is to some degree Orientalist (and Edward Said got this position of authority where he got to claim what was good Orientalism and bad Orientalism).

It probably wouldn't take much argument for most people to reasonably agree that something like Bogarus could be classified as Orientalism; nobody really thinks of it that way though because Russia was never really colonized.

A primary application of Orientalism today is cultural education. Young children in Western schools don't make paper mache Coats of Arms as a part of learning European history, but they might make Native American headresses by gluing together a bunch of feathers and cardboard as a part of cultural education on Native Americans. What if Cub Scouts were based on Mexican heritage and the scouts regularly wore ten gallon hats and danced to mariachi music as part of honoring Mexican culture? It would seem a little silly.

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

i didn't make value judgments, just stated that it is.

But even claiming that it *is* orientalist demonstrates a value judgement. Its as if you had sneered.. oh its just another ill informed occidental book.

We agree that young children today might make indian headdresses. Just as they have thanksgiving pagents, european cultural exchanges, and diversity encouraged in higher centers of learning such as Harvard.

We disagree on whether Orienalism is a valid criticism - aka whether it exists at all as Said posited it did; and if it exists whether indian headdresses are an example of it; and whether or not its a bad thing.

If you've ever watched Mexican TV: how often is the Yankii stereotyped as prototypical bad guy.

Exposure to and participation in other people's cultures is neither necessarily bad nor cultural hegemonism.

Quite the contrary: Part of the american experience is adoption of ideas, phrases, technology - the adoption of good ideas from whatever their source.

[Omnirizon]

it wasn't a sneer because I put a smiley face after it. it is unedited (if it were, the time of edit would show), so look again.


see? how can that be a sneer?

[Agema]

I think it's fair to say that whenever a culture interprets another the representation of it will be somewhat skewed. Naturally there may be a tendency to demean other cultures because each culture would like to imagine it's the best, and the protrayal will be much more negative when antagonism also exists between the cultures. There's an even an assumption people within cultures know their own: but ask people what makes their culture and you'll find a wide range of answers many of which may be contradictory.

Said was making a complaint about Western behaviour when he termed Orientalism, but a more impartial view I think should accept that the reverse also exists, and indeed Occidentalism has also been coined. Hence I'd argue "Orientalism" is a specific form of a much wider truth and in that sense it's not special, nor possibly even a useful term.

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Agema

Said was making a complaint about Western behaviour when he termed Orientalism, but a more impartial view I think should accept that the reverse also exists, and indeed Occidentalism has also been coined. Hence I'd argue "Orientalism" is a specific form of a much wider truth and in that sense it's not special, nor possibly even a useful term.

Yep, pretty much I'm saying the same thing. I'd take it a step farther however: because it was specifically developed against the west it was an ideological weapon against the west - and this is how it was used from africa to iran.

Even today this idea reverberates - not too long ago I often discussed things with an Omani: we differed on the question of Palestine. Unable to factually defeat a position she retreated to - you can't understand - you're not Omani.

The truth I think of the matter rests in Said's final admission that he had no interest in an accurate portrayal of the east or islam. If we remove that fig leaf, then the real purpose of Said's work is criticism of the West.

Its why I have a hard time reconciling fervent post colonialism in occidental countries with patriotism. If you are fervently critical why not go somewhere where post colonialism and patriotism can coincide.