With the release of Edward Said's "Orientalism" in
1978, the predominant discourse on global development issues underwent a
significant shift. Previously centered on economic considerations and
exploitation in the Marxist sense, the focus transitioned to the ideological
conditions shaping the production of knowledge. Drawing on literary theory and
Foucault's 'archaeology of knowledge,' Said contended that the 'Orient' had
been systematically misrepresented by European Orientalists, particularly those
from France and England. He analyzed this hegemony as a severe form of mental
colonization.
The impact of Said's influential, albeit now dated, work
cannot be overstated. Over the past decade, there has been an abundance of
critical postcolonial literature inspired by Said, Derrida, and Foucault. Like
Said, these works scrutinize (mis-)representations and propose alternative
perspectives on East-West and North-South relations. In response, there has
been a continuous stream of both critical and apologetic statements either
defending colonial accounts of 'the Other' or cautioning against the relativism
and potential nihilism inherent in Said's perspective on knowledge and history.
Some critics argue that anti-Orientalists have themselves succumbed to a form
of blatant Occidentalism, presenting simplistic and disparaging accounts of
Western scholarship.
Bryan S. Turner's recent essay collection breaks away from
this pattern. Turner engages with ongoing debates on Orientalism and
(post-)modernity in a variety of ways, providing a critical yet not hostile
perspective on the postcolonial intellectual landscape. He expresses sympathy
for the postcolonial project of deconstructing Orientalism but perceives its
anti-essentialist or anti-foundationalist epistemology as an impediment to
grasping the 'real Orient.' Within the vaguely deconstructivist ambiance of
these discussions, every phenomenon is seen as a discourse, and its connection
to reality is deemed tenuous. In the latter part of the book, Turner extends
the discussion of epistemological challenges related to representation,
interpretation, and reliability to non-Islamic ('Western') societies.
The book is organized into five parts, each addressing
different aspects of the Orientalism critique and related issues. In the first
part, which centers on religion with a particular focus on Islam, Turner
challenges the perspective, advocated by scholars like Ernest Gellner, that
beliefs are adopted based on logical consistency. Instead, he argues that people
embrace beliefs because they help them navigate the challenges of everyday
life. Turner also contests the notion of a lack of civil society in Asian
states, asserting that this perception is more connected to the domestic
discourse on monarchy and democracy since the 17th century than to Asia itself.
This section delves into the Orientalism critique, highlighting its potential
pitfalls, such as replacing one hegemonic discourse with another and grappling
with the challenges of cultural translation.
The second part of the book offers an even-handed assessment
of the accomplishments of two prominent Orientalists, Marshall Hodgson and
Gustave von Grünenbaum. Turner, in critiquing these scholars, underscores his
view that religion is primarily intertwined with everyday practices rather than
lofty belief systems. The third part, titled 'Globalism,' explores issues
related to globalization and relativism, with a specific focus on revitalistic
and politicized Islam. Contrasting individualism with Islamism (or 'Fundamentalism'),
Turner provides a nuanced perspective on Islam's fate in the postmodern age.
Here, he argues for a sophisticated understanding of Islam, rejecting attempts
by both Orientalists and anti-Orientalists to depict the 'true nature of Islam'
in simplistic terms. Turner emphasizes the need for nuanced interpretations
given the complex reality of Islam's responses to postmodernity, an era when
grand narratives are no longer considered credible.
In the fourth part of the book, Turner directs his attention
to a direct confrontation with the relationship between postmodernity,
enlightenment ideas, and the role of intellectuals. He critiques elitist
perspectives on mass culture, highlighting a strong implicit nostalgia in
'critical theory,' particularly in the works of thinkers like Marcuse. Arguing
alongside Nietzsche, Turner asserts that "the world should not be
bifurcated into a world of superior intellectual values and inferior everyday
values." The analysis becomes particularly intriguing when discussing
Pierre Bourdieu's "Distinction" and the author's steadfast belief in
the existence of hegemonic discourses. Turner, throughout, demonstrates a
profound sensitivity to the multiple strategies employed by agents in the
contemporary pluralistic, or some would say postmodern, context where
overarching symbolic hierarchies are lacking.
The subsequent essay on cosmopolitanism and nationalism in
sociology serves as a splendid illustration of the problems tackled throughout
the volume — issues of generalization, comparison, translation, and ultimately,
the challenge of relativism. These concerns are addressed more concretely in
the essay on the relationship of English intellectuals to the wider world.
The fifth and final part of the book offers enlightening
essays on the moral and political predicaments of the contemporary age. Topics
include the transition from order to risk (as discussed by Beck), ontological
insecurity (Giddens), ambivalence (Bauman), and the reflexive construction of
the self. While not entirely persuaded by arguments positing this era as one of
radicalized modernity, particularly in terms of periodization, Turner accepts
the central tenets of such 'theories of high or late modernity.' He connects
these ideas to his analysis of Islam in the conclusion of the book.
No comments:
Post a Comment