Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Covering Islam

By: Edward Said

Explored by:

GuidanceHD

Although most of the “stuff” we study in the culture course at college is flat,
Edward Said’s philosophy is the only one that caught my attention, because he has
precisely analysed the stereotypical thinking of the West about the Orient;
especially Muslims and Islam. His philosophy is still applicable today in a most
astonishing manner that show how people’s lives may progress or advance with
their minds static and stagnant. (Note: the passages with $ mark are my comments
not the Author’s)

Page 1 of 5
“Covering Islam” is the third in a series of books by Edward Said tackling the
relationship between the Orient and the West. There is a pun in the title. In one
sense, all Western media began launching a hectic “coverage” of Islam all of a
sudden. On the other hand, with applying Said’s philosophy of generalizing and
totalising, the reality of Islam is being covered as well. It is the lack of objectivity
and the clinging to ragged stereotypes that acquits Christianity and Judaism and
incriminates Islam and the Muslim world, where the West’s oil supplies and
colonial aspirations happen to exist! Before exploring the main issues of the book,
this is a brief explanation of the Said’s philosophy of stereotyping the other:

The process of stereotyping is assigning certain oversimplified features to a


certain category and insisting that all members of that category must necessarily
have those features. Therefore, stereotyping implies repetition and generalizing. It
also overlooks individual and even collected differences: type, race, gender, origin,
class, status, or generation. The process of stereotyping is static, unchanging,
innate and inborn, as those assigned features become part of the essence of those
being stereotyped, which Said defines as essentialism. By time, this inaccurate
generalization gains power through repetition. For instance, judging the Orient as
generally despotic is necessary to define the West as democratic. This is the need
for the other to strengthen our own identity which rests on negativity and
oppositeness.

The author begins the problematic issue of the media that “covers” Islam:
reporters cover a great deal “of what [they] know nothing about.” Instead of first-
hand experience and trying to discern the truth, they mould their pre-conceived
notions they were brought up to into the usual clichés their readers expect to find in
their writings (like, for instance, connecting Islam to terrorism). Thereby, the only
serve as stereotype-generating machines, adding to the heaps of illusions their
nations labour under.
Page 2 of 5
On the other hand, this process is based on the authority of previous texts.
The other has certain ideas in mind meeting his cultural expectations of the
investigated matter rather than trying to find out the truth. Writers, historians or
any of the humanists come to study a certain society with preconceived ideas from
their culture. They try to find examples that reinforce their preconceptions, and
they do find because these preconceptions are not necessarily false, but not
necessarily general either. In such process, they overlook any opposition to their
pre-set expectations or stigmatized categories.

The colonial tendency in the West is brought into light by citing a quote for
J.B. Kelly, a “one-time adviser to Sheikh Zayid of Abu Dhabi,” which blatantly
demonstrates “sheer desires of imperial conquest and barely concealed racial
attitudes.” (I believe they still exist today but in a more blatantly concealed way).
To begin with, Kelly views the East as the “inheritance” of the West. At the time of
Western colonialism, “tranquillity reigned,” but as the West withdrew its forces,
that tranquillity crumbled into “fragile peace [that] cannot last.” Kelly applies the
overused stereotypes of Asia as despotic and Africa as barbaric. He believes that the
peoples there have not changed and are even likely to relapse into their “old habits”
once the West takes its hands off them. Kelly calls on the West to “have the
boldness” to claim their “inheritance,” save the “fragile peace,” and eternalise
“ephemeral calm”!

$ The American and European troops distributed in Arab and Islamic

countries prove that that colonial tendency still exists; even more striking is that
they use Kelly’s same retrograded logic and lame justifications of peace and
security. The only forces that threaten and demolish any prospects of either are
them themselves. What is most teasing are “blanket solutions” aired every day.
Western leaders suggest waxy solutions that have no substance. They recommend
Page 3 of 5
full action against something neither fully understood nor well defined. No wonder
we cannot have an exact definition of the terrorism they are fighting, or rather
creating. They gloss over the unrest they have produced without defining a way out
or in.

Said then proceeds to discuss the misconception of “Islamic behaviour.”


Religion cannot be blamed for the behavioural patterns of its followers, bearing in
mind those who claim to follow rather than really do. Many like to coat their cakes
with a cream topping; that is, religion may well be manipulated as a cover for
hidden agendas and mischievous ends. The infamous Crusades and the Inquisition
Tribunals in Andalusia both hid behind the curtains of Christianity that had
nothing to do with their heinous deeds. In the same manner, there is a discrepancy
between the conceived image of Islam and what it really is. This is what Said calls:
“scapegoat theory.” Although little is known about Islam, it has become a universal
truth” (quoting Jane Austin) that it stands for “everything we do not happen to
like.” Edward Said is not being defensive of Islam, as he states, but his point is that:
“Islam is doctrinally as blameless in this regard as any other of the great universal
religions.”

The lack of objectivity in covering Islam is brought to the surface again when
Said states that “objectivity is assumed to inhere” in the studies of Islam rather
than be truly inherent. This is because most “experts” on Islam were employees of
the government. That is, they were affiliated to their interests, and therefore,
blinded by the pre-set misconceptions. Accordingly, “truths” about Islam are
relative to who produces them rather than to Islam itself.

$ This lack of objectivity or, as I believe, duplicity and double standards are
crystal clear in the political arena today. The country that holds the largest supply
of destructive nuclear power is the same country that calls for nuclear-free,
Page 4 of 5
peaceful world. It happens that the other entity that supports this “peaceful”
attitude is the same destructive one that used the phosphorous weapons prohibited
by international law against millions of armless, defenceless civilians. Those two
“Super” powers did use their nuclear supply more than once, yet the sanctions are
drawn against the “Islamic” country that is trying to build a defence against their
colonial ambitions and have not used it offensively so far.

Said ends with stating the aim of his book. He wants people to stop relying on
their misconceptions and cease to live in cocoons of pre-set, dictated notions. If
they want to reach a “realistic” understanding of the Muslim world, they should try
to probe into the real motives behind actions rather than ascribing everything to
Islam. This has been more of a hindrance than a help in understanding Islamic
societies and agonies. The West should try o ask “the right answer” and expect
pertinent answers” rather than stereotypical clichés. It is at that point that they
may reach the objective truth and see the situation in its true colours.

http://muslimapen.wordpress.com

Page 5 of 5

Вам также может понравиться