This book by Edward Said will open your eyes. I am unfamiliar with many of the authors he quotes. Yet, I could follow the argument. Most of us grew up accustomed to treating Western texts as gospel. These texts influenced generations of people from the Middle East to the Far East.
Reading this book, I realized the need to rethink my concepts and understanding of Western texts. It is difficult for a Westerner to write about 'The Orient.' It is difficult for us to write about 'The Occident.' We bring our prejudices to the table, something I did not fully realize until halfway through the book.
Read the book slowly: it demands patienc ( )

I'm not sure how this wordy book acquired such renown. It would probably be of interest to a college dean trying to design an Eastern or Near Eastern studies curriculum. Anyone else would want something more focused.

The word Orient has never had much specificity and remains vague despite Said's best efforts. Amazingly, he refers to "the Oriental Mind" as having properties, such as vagueness and lack of rigor. And yet much of our mathematics, science, and philosophy were developed in eastern lands. Go figure.

He also admits that the term Occidentalism would serve little function, since there's too much to encompass. Why wouldn't the same be true at this point with Orientalism? Eastern studies are doubtless much more developed now than they were in the late 1970's when Orientalism was first published. The book's relevance now seems questionable. ( )

En estos tiempos en que los medios de comunicación nos inundan y se ven inundados por imágenes y estereotipos que se refieren al Islam y a los musulmanes, Edward W. Said nos ofrece una descripción rigurosa y esclarecedora de la formación y desarrollo de estas «ideas recibidas» o tópicos que muchas veces impiden o sesgan nuestra visión.

En Orientalismo, Edward W. Said nos ofrece una descripción esclarecedora de la formación y desarrollo de los tópicos sobre el islam y los musulmanes, que muchas veces impiden o sesgan nuestra visión. Se nos muestra cómo estos «clichés ideológicos» obedecen a los intereses y estrategias del poder dominante y señala la dificultad para el mundo occidental de pensar sobre Oriente si antes no se logra romper esos prejuicios que distorsionan nuestra lectura. Asimismo nos muestra cómo la relación entre Oriente y Occidente es una relación de poder, construida sobre la subordinación de la idea de Oriente al fuerte imaginario occidental asentado en la superioridad centralista de un «nosotros» enfrentado a un «ellos», lo no europeo, vivido como «lo extraño». ( )

I'll come back to review this one another time. The following excerpt sums up the questions that Orientalism attempted to raise

"How does one represent other cultures? What is another culture? Is the notion of a distinct culture (or race, or religion, or civilization) a useful one, or does it always get involved either in self-congratulation (when one discusses one's own) or hostility and aggression (when one discusses the "other")?
Do cultural, religious, and racial differences matter more; than socio-economic categories, or politicohistorical ones? How do ideas acquire authority, "normality," and even the status of "natural" truth? What is the role of the intellectual? Is he there to validate the culture and state of which he is a part? What importance must he give to an independent critical consciousness, an oppositional critical consciousness?" ( )

Det innledende essay av Berit Thorbjørnsrud legger de klart etterpåkloke premissene for lesningen idet historien før, under og etter Saids bok blir tydeliggjort. Diskurs og pre-vitenskapeilge forutsetinger er noen av tyngdepunktene i Saids diskusjoner, dvs. med filosofen Hans Skjervheims begrep situerthet - hvor står du når du ser? Foucaults diskursbegrep gjennomgås også slik Said bruker det.