The Specter of Orientalism in Europe: From Exotic Other to Stigmatized Brother

Abstract

Everyone has had one's own Orient, pertaining to space and time, most often of (Todorova 1997:12). Revisited Orientalism as critical category was instituted by Edward Said in 1978. For him orientalism is, first of all, set of discursive practices through which West structured imagined East politically, socially, military, ideologically, scientifically and artistically. is also a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between 'the Orient' and...'the Occident' (Said 1978: 2) The Orient as such exists and real people live in region concerned, but European representation of these people is typical cultural creation that enables those powerful to legitimize their domination over those subjugated and conquered. The oriental constitutes alter ego of West and perpetuation of this dichotomy proves that powerful cultural hegemony is still at work. Discursive hardening permits politically stronger groups to define weaker groups. has been received both approvingly and critically. The most important critiques refer to fact that Said's work frequently relapses into essentializing modes it attacks and is ambivalently enmeshed in totalizing habits of western humanism (Clifford 1988:271). Critique notwithstanding, book inspired sequel of works, some of them directly addressing Eastern Europe (Wolff 1994) and Balkans (Todorova 1997; Bakii-Hayden 1995; Bakic-Hayden and Hayden 1992; Hayden 2000). Wolff wrote about invention of Eastern Europe in period of Enlightenment by Western intellectuals, travelers and writers in style similar to Said's. Todorova is more specific. She focuses on Balkans and asserts that in Western eyes this region appears, so to speak, as neither fish, nor fowl, semi-oriental, not fully European, semi-developed, and semi-civilized. Unlike orientalism, which is discourse about imputed opposition, balkanism is discourse about an imputed (Todorova 1997: 17). An ambiguity that raises anxiety. The Balkans emerge as product of attempted Europeanization (westernization, democratization), region that permanently has to shed the last residue of imperial [i.e. Ottoman] legacy (p. 13) by implementing rationalism, secularism, commercial activities and industry. The work in imagology, term she borrows from Milan Kundera, despite being narrowed and redefined, also focuses on way West has created its quasi-colony which has to be dominated and subordinated both politically and intellectually. While discussing orientalism, Said, Wolff and Todorova touch upon several issues vital for today's anthropology that I will partly, although at times only indirectly, address later. All of these revolve around issue of alterity and epistemological validity of concept of Other. Thus, one can recognize that they are concerned with (1) modes by which is created. In anthropology, as well as in works cited, often assumes status of (2) universal cognitive category in factory of social and individual identity that divides universe into us and them. However, it also figures as (3) an analytical concept that enables authors to construct narration and at same time, somehow paradoxically, and in most subtle approaches, to (4) deconstruct category itself. In social life, process of making assumes various forms. Shifts in collective identities and meaning of the Other have become part of transformations in Europe after 1989. There are several factors influencing these alterations, but one among them seems especially salient: restructuring of perception of social inequalities by hegemonic liberal ideology. The degree to which various countries, authorities, social groups and individuals have embraced free market and democracy-always evaluated by those powerful who set rules of game-has become yardstick for classifying different regions, countries and groups as fining more or less into category of us, i. …