“Orientalism - Western Conceptions of the Orient”
“Orientalism - Western Conceptions of the Orient”
复制标题
《东方主义——西方对东方的看法》
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Alan Malek
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Said den Ursprüngen;Richard Dähler;Alan Malek
第41节从1815年到1914年，欧洲的直接殖民地自治领从占地球表面的35%左右扩大到85%左右。在世纪的大部分时间里，正如索尔兹伯里勋爵（Lord Salisbury）在1881年所说的那样，对东方的法国和英国的共同看法是：“如果你执意要干涉一个你非常感兴趣的国家--你有三条路可走。你可以放弃或垄断或分享。放弃将意味着法国人将穿过我们通往印度的道路。垄断几乎有引发战争的危险。所以我们决定分享。然而，他们分享的不仅仅是土地、利润或统治，而是我一直称之为东方主义的那种知识力量。[42]如果东方主义的本质是西方的优越性和东方的低劣性之间根深蒂固的区别，那么我们必须准备注意到，在其发展和随后的历史中，东方主义是如何加深甚至强化这种区别的。[108]安瓦尔·阿卜杜勒·马利克（Anwar Abdel Malek）所称的“占有少数民族的霸权主义”以及与欧洲中心主义结盟的欧洲中心主义，在今天没有比这更好的例子了：一个白色中产阶级的西方人认为，他的人类特权不仅是管理非白色世界，而且也是拥有它，仅仅因为从定义上讲，“它”不像“我们”那样是人类。没有比这更纯粹的非人性化思想的例子了。
Seite 41 From 1815 to 1914 European direct colonial dominion expanded from about 35 percent of the earth’s surface to about 85 percent of it. For much of the nineteenth Century, as Lord Salisbury put it in 1881, the common view of France and England of the Orient was was : “if you are bent on meddling in a country in which you are deeply interested —you have three courses open to you. You may renounce—or monopolize—or share. Renouncing would have been to place the French across our road to India. Monopolizing would have been near the risk of war. So we resolved to share.“ What they shared, however, was not only land or profit or rule; it was the kind of intellectual power I have been calling Orientalism. 42 If the essence of Orientalism is the ineradicable distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority, then we must be prepared to note how in its development and subsequent history, Orientalism deepened and even hardened the distinction. 108 No better instance exists today of what Anwar Abdel Malek calls „the hegemonism of possessing minorities“ and anthropocentrism allied with Europocentrism: a white middle-class Westerner believes it his human prerogative not only to manage the nonwhite world but also to own it, just because by definition „it“ is not quite as human as „we“ are. There is no purer example than this of dehumanized thought.