Vijay Prashad at Fordham University
Join a discussion of Vijay Prashad’s entry on “Orientalism.” Prashad will be speaking at Fordham University on Thursday, March 27, 2008 as part of a series of events related to Jhumpa Lahiri’s novel The Namesake. Whether you’re attending the talk or not, read the entry, and respond to it here. Prashad himself will occasionally check in and reply to comments that appear in the discussion forum.
January 28th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
After reading your explanation of the term “Orientalism,” I am under the impression that “Orientalism” used to refer to most of the Asian countries. Is it acceptable, in today’s day, to refer to an Asian person as an Oriental person? Or does this have a different conotation now?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Thanks, Eliane, for being the brave person who posted the first response in this blog! I’ll leave your comment directly about “Orientalism”–possibly including Professor Prashad–to respond to. But I will suggest that you may get some help with your question about appropriate ways of referring to people by reading the entry in the Keywords book on “Asian,” which comments directly on that issue.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Sorry, that second sentence was supposed to read “I’ll leave your comment directly about ‘Orientalism’ for others–possibly including Professor Prashad–to respond to.” In other words, I’m trying to get the discussion going!
March 6th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
I read the “Asian” keyword essay in KFACs and have decided that I do not think it is politically correct to say “Oriental” when one means “Asian.” Throughout the beginning of the essay, John Kuo Wei Tchen refers to “the Orient,” but when he discusses the recent meanings of the word “Oriental” he does not link them to the word “Asian.” Therefore, I hypothesize that the answer to my question is: No, it is not acceptable.
March 10th, 2008 at 9:12 am
In the “Orientalism” keyword entry, I found the following point particularly interesting:
“The point they made was simple: the world had to be sundered between the East and West. The former once had a great history, but had since descended into timelessness and stasis; the later remained dynamic and cultivated wisdom.”
Specifically, I found that the dichotomy of “static” and “cultivation” strongly typifies the stereotype held about Asian society in comparison with western society. While “Oriental” is associated with rigidity, custom, close-mindedness and little deviance from historical precedent, other western people (like “Americans”) are associated with being progressive, open minded and totally defying from all historical precedent.
It is easy to argue that combining these two attitudes is the ideal identity. However, I feel these labels are large generalizations as there are many, many examples of current leaders from the east and west that defy these stereotypical labels. I also feel these labels pose identity problems when applied to the concept of U.S. orientalism (the east meets west identity situation). The essay’s label of U.S. orientalism as “inherently ambiguous and heterogeneous,” as it struggles to combine this classical stasis with cultivation and progression into the future, seems very correct.
March 24th, 2008 at 9:19 am
i totally agree with what amanda said about orientals vs. americans. the words used do describe people who are classified under each label, but the question arises when you have someone who can be a comination of both. an asian born in america? how would they be classified and do they usually have a choice about how they want to be classified?
March 24th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
The term “Oriental” is way to general of a word to be of reference to Asian society as a whole. The term is politically incorrect in that it takes way the specificity of a certain dynamic race by realistically referring to a much broader range of people.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I would like to give an answer to Eliane’s blog comment from january. Just to say that i feel that the word “oriental” definatly has a different connotation then just “asian.” In addition, it sems to me to be an out-of-date word for ‘of the Eastern World’, or the region of the world that was found by early European explorers who circled Africa.
Even Random House’s Guide to Sensitive Language states “Other words (e.g., Oriental, colored) are outdated or inaccurate.” This Guide to Sensitive Language suggests the use of “Asian or more specific designation such as Pacific Islander, Chinese American, Korean.”Merriam-Webster describes the term as “sometimes offensive.”
March 25th, 2008 at 8:05 am
I would like to spotlight the bit about the ‘West’ being masculine, strong, and essentially “better,” while the ‘East’ is considered feminine and weak. Not only do I personally disagree with this steriotype, but it is plain wrong. Most technological advances have come from the ‘East’, so how are they “lesser” than the ‘West’? I thought this was kind of humorous because it is completely incorrect.
In addition, I agree with what Ethan said about the dictionary entry. I also looked up the word and ‘Oriental’ is outdated. Meanings usually change over time, and I can see how it could be offensive to some people.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Prashad emphasizes the use of not only words but imagery when speaking about the racism that was targeted at Asians. Though it was not public policy, the media and military often used these two tactics to garner racism throughout several wars that he lists.
It is very interesting that even the media and military used these two tactics to nurture racism against Asians. This was done, I suppose, in an effort to increase nationalism and unite against a common enemy. This is not a very civil or humanitarian way of acting though, and it puts America in a poor light.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:24 am
After reading the piece on the keyword “orientalism” I remembered a time when one of my teachers had a discussion with my class about appropriate language and offensive language, specifically when using the word “oriental”. At the time I did not comprehend why he had gotten so upset at the use of the word.Now i can fully understand what he was talking about when refering to the word “oriental” as offensive especially when considering the historical meaning of this word.
I think that because of the racial tensions experienced by Asian Americans in American society it is not acceptable to use the word “oriental.” I feel as if the experience is the same when similar words are used to describe any other minority group. To be given a name that takes away your individual culture or cultural background in order to make you seem like you are inferior is definately offensive. I feel as if even the word “asian” is conflicting in that it includes such a variety of people with very different cultures that it is ambiguous.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:31 am
In response to both Eliane’s comment as well as Ethan’s comment, “oriental” has a different connotation that “asian.” Even the term “asian” has its own connotation. In my experiences, “asian” is a general term used to describe people of Chinese, Korean, etc. and sometimes Japanese decent. This completely leaves out Indian people, who also live in Asia. I just think connotations of certain terms will always have different meanings to different people. It is more of a question of racial discrimination, perhaps?
March 25th, 2008 at 11:07 am
I agree with Ethan. I also feel that the quote from Henry david Thoreau in Prashad’s article is important in the understanding of deep seeded societal divisions that make assimilation so difficult for many people who were not born in the United States. By placing cultural divisions in place before hand, there is little chance that one can overcome the divisions in enough time to be a true “American” by their death in a new country. I can see where these ideas have come from; however, I feel that in today’s society, the process of grouping large numbers of people together and calling them by a name that is outdated, inaccurate, and in some cases, derogatory, is unnecessary. More specific terms need to be used in order for society to function as the “melting pot” it is portrayed as.
March 25th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I very much enjoyed Prashad’s article. I really enjoyed the bit about how Asian racism kind of went unnoticed. In addition, how much racism existed when America was at war with an Asian people. It is really shameful to think of how some of our cherished leaders, referred to Asian people in these demeaning ways.
In response to Diana’s comment regarding the word “asian” and its relation to racial discrimination, I do not think it is racial discrimination. Rather it is just a term that has been used to describe those certain people for years, and it is just a term that people have grown up using. There is no intent of racism when someone uses it in a casual conversation.
Interestingly, I have heard people from India be referred to as “Indians” or “Hindus.” Which, if either, is the proper term?
March 25th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I like Prashad’s distinction between bindis and people who wear bindis on a regular basis. I think that is an important point to remember. Americans know and realize that immigrants are a vital part of keeping our society going, and it is hypocritical of Americans to expect all immigrants to drop their old customs immediately upon arriving here. All white Americans were immigrants to America somewhere along the line, and many American customs have been simply adopted from other cultures. New immigrants and cultural diffusion are important to keep the society evolving.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Vijay Prashad’s “Orientalism” is very well explained and gives the reader a clear understanding of the term. One specific sentence that I found rather interesting is “The concept of Orientalism also suffers from an overly general application. ” When reading “Orientalism” I was thinking in the back of my head that this is completely true because it categorizes alot. Like Diane, I also found the descriptions of the west and the east interesting because it is very stereotypical. lastly, I found the connections between the words feminine and childlike and masculine and adult interesting because how could you describe different areas by these names?
March 25th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
I personally think grouping people in such groups as “Asian” and “American” is wrong. It’s inaccurate. What happens to American born Asians? I mean there is a difference between Asian-Asians and American-Asians but also between American-Asians and Americans. And in this sense, I don’t think anyone is really open minded. And no not even the West. The saddest part is, this stereotypical grouping of people will always exist unless all cultures interwind and start breeding mixed genes. And yes I have to agree with Diana- the words “slothful” and “static” to describe the East nowadays is completely outdated. Perhaps these words were more fitting in the past, but definitely not anymore.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Today, there are not many names for people, outside of calling everybody “american”, that are acceptable in public opinion. I have many friends of Asian heritage who I have personally seen get offended from being called “asian”, as well as “oriental”. They can both be seen as discriminating depending on the context they are used in. And in response to Hilarie I do not believe that more specific terms are necessary for our “melting pot” of a country. We have plenty of terms used commonly and some people agree with them, while others do not. It is just inevitable that all of society will never agree on this subject.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Today, there are not many names for people, outside of calling everybody “american”, that are acceptable in public opinion. I have many friends of Asian heritage who I have personally seen get offended from being called “asian”, as well as “oriental”. They can both be seen as discriminating depending on the context they are used in. And in response to Hilarie I do not believe that more specific terms are necessary for our “melting pot” of a country. We have plenty of terms used commonly and some people agree with them, while others do not. It is just inevitable that all of society will never agree on this subject.
March 25th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
The one thing that shocked me the most about this article is that my father has told me this repeatedly (with less eloquence).
I remember reading about imperialism briefly in an US History course a few years ago, but this piece allows me to get a deeper understanding of what was briefly mentioned in my history book back in high school. I especially liked how Mr. Prashad spoke of the continuing contradiction in the concept of “Orientalism.” What struck me the most was the quote, near the end, “The urge to liberate is as fundamental as the requirement to subordinate.” It really makes sense.
Being a South Asian myself, it makes me wonder what my own government sees me and my family as.
March 25th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I very much agree with what has been said. Grouping together people as “Oriental” is both irresponsible and in a sense degrading. People from the “West” used this term in order to classify people that were different then them in their ever expanding world. With the world as globally connected as it is now though, using Oriental as opposed to the country a person comes from makes you sound silly.
March 25th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
While reading the article I was reminded of a past study of west european history where I became acquainted with the european invasion of lands in Africa and Asia for sake of achieving riches and glory for under the name of a nation. The method of creating a category to accommodate a large nation and several cultures seems since it basically implies that two people who speak different languages and practice different customs, but who live in the same region of east Asia share the same purpose of being. It is particularly unjust to refer to a set of cultures as a deteriorating world without value when both the west and east have presented prosperous civilizations that have fallen and been rebuilt as new societies. I agree with Hilary that the past separation of cultures into categories of better and worse have left America with a noticeable barrier between foreigners and alleged natives. Those descended from nations labeled as orient have unfortunately inherited a feeling of inferiority for having little knowledge of the country they wish to build within a new life.
March 25th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I also agree with what was said by Mike… His point about how globally connected the world is these days, the world is smaller and the counties that used to be so far away are not as unfamiliar to the general public as they were before the age of technology. It is disrespectful and no longer excusable, by the unavailability of information, to automatically associate, for example, a Chinese person with a Japanese person, or a Japanese person with a South Korean, or even a South Korean with a North Korean. The information is available and this type of racial and cultural generalization is now an unacceptable reference to the citizens of Asian countries.
March 25th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
At this point in time, the term Oriental is very outdated. This would entail classifying people from Iraq and Iran with those from North Korea and China. The “West” liberating the “East” also is outdated at this point as well. United States, The European Union, China, and Japan are all very influential in today’s global economy and politics.
I agree with Alex in that using the term Asian or Middle-eastern has no racial discrimination behind it. Simply put, I can not tell the difference between someone who is Korean, Japanese, or Chinese. Likewise I cannot tell the difference between someone who is Persian or someone who is Lebanese, so I would refer to them as Middle-Eastern. Is this necessarily the best thing? No. However, it is no different then labeling someone from England, France, or Ireland as white.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
After reading this piece on “Orientalism”, I feel that my previous definition for orientalism has changed. The article states that Orientalist discourse can be summed up in two steps: one to sunder the world into West and East and the next to give it attributes, the West being adult and masculine, while the East is childlike and feminine. I never thought of orientalism in such a way but unfortunately this has already happened in our world. America (West) is said to be the strongest and/or wealthiest nation of all and that it has dominance over the rest. This is true but giving a race/country a name like orientals is degrading and offensive, especially when so many of these people live with us in the same land. It makes Americans sound like hypocrites because they(we) have to realize that some of the advances that we have accomplished in this nation is partly due to these people who we foolishly call orientals.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
LOL
March 25th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
I agree with what Chris said earlier about the difference between bindis and people who wear bindis on a regular basis. I think it is absurd that if “those who would wear bindis choose not to, and simply work hard, they then become acceptable.” They should not have to hide thier cultural identity to be accepted in America. I also agree with Chris in that diversity is important for a society to evolve. Without this diversity individuality would become less recognizable, and the population would not change but instead becpme static.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
At risk of myself being pigeonholed, I am going to take a fervent stance against this article. First, it assumes many ideas that pervade the world and people’s minds without any statistical or quotable backing. Take for example, “Today U.S. Orientalism… posits that Asians are both required and repellent.” No backing for this generalization exists within the paper. Second, let us assume that the generalizations made throughout the paper are true, then the article is an articulate whine. It in its essence says that the dominant cultures (i.e. America and Western Europe) are cruel and malevolently assuming of all Asians. Wonderful, but unfortunately no effort is given to change this problem. Perhaps if someone cried about it long enough the problem would fix itself. Finally, these notions of condescension from the West to the East are not the problem, but rather an example of the problem. Every culture feels that it is the best; if it did not then people would not be apart of that culture. Therefore, when a person from one culture encounters another from a different culture, it is very hard to see eye to eye. Thus, where there is no harmony there is discord. Add to that the feeling of correctness that being in the majority lends, and it is inevitable that the dominant culture will look down on the non-dominate culture. So while yes, this is a problem and sympathy is given to those who do not benefit from and may in fact be harmed by the majority, to change human nature, so I hear, is a difficult thing to do.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I agree with what Chris said earlier about the difference between bindis and people who wear bindis on a regular basis. I think it is absurd that if “those who would wear bindis choose not to, and simply work hard, they then become acceptable.” They should not have to hide their cultural identity to be accepted in America. I also agree with Chris in that diversity is important for a society to evolve. Without this diversity individuality would become less recognizable, and the population would not change but instead become static.
March 25th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
I agree with what Mike Diamente said.
March 25th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I really enjoyed reading Vijay Prashad’s article, “Orientalism”. While reading i realized how improper and insulting it is to refer to anyone as an “oriental”. It is very stereotypical and sets way too many people under the same category. In addition, I certainly do agree with Diane. How is that the ‘east’ is stronger than ‘west’ but yet relies heavily on them for technological advances?
March 25th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
I feel that Professor Vijay Prashad effectively defends his argument about the categorical term “orientalism.” His utilization of Henry David Thoreau in the beginning of the essay is also significant because it provides for an excellent starting point for his argument. I do agree that discrimination towards people from the East (which includes the Asian Sub-Continent and Continent) by those from the West (which includes Western Europe and North America) is unfair and unjust. Many people that have been placed in the category of U.S. Orientalism deserve compensation and sincere apology from our government. One such example is the Japanese Asian-Americans that were placed in concentration camps in California during World War II. This was a direct violation of human rights built around fear and racism. Only many years after has any apology to the families been received. I am in agreement with what both Mike and Jordan have said about global markets in this day and age. We are all globally interdependent upon each-other, so we must learn to set aside our differences so that trade and commerce will continue to grow and prosper throughout our Earth. We, as Westerners, need to be more conscientious and open so that the acceptance of Asian and Indian cultures may occur.
March 25th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
I agree with Jordan and Mike
March 25th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Although Mr. Prashad’s point of Asian people being forever-ostracized to a certain degree is well elucidated, I think his specificity is what waters-down an otherwise valid point. After witnessing America’s bureaucracy value people’s existences based on they’re “[necessariness] to the economy” I undoubtedly agree with Mr. Prashad’s analysis over the discrimination and unequal treatment that Asians have felt at the hands of the American government (and society for that matter) in years past. However, this immovable barrier that shields Asians from receiving equality in America is evident in demographics of people much closer to home than the “Far East.”
The racial propaganda, slanted tax systems, unfair laws, etc. that occur at the flick of a switch by the government is bound to restrict nearly everyone– that is everyone other than a powerful elite. C. Wright Mills’ concept is evident in capitalist America, and leaves not only Asians out to dry, but practically anyone else not holding a seat in office.
It is not that I disagree with Mr. Prashad’s thesis that “Orientalism” plagues and aids American culture, rather, I feel that in his defaming of America’s previous judgements he could have included the plights of any other minority group (which doesn’t entail that all whites are exempt) as well– which would broaden his definition but certainly not subtract from its profoundness.
March 25th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I believe that distinguishing terms will always exist, whether they be general such as the word “Oriental” or more specific. I also believe that stereotypical groupings will never cease to exist because we are all ethoncentric, meaning that we jugde other cultures based on our own. Although this could have positive consequences, it most likely results in a negative evaluation of another culture’s values. I like when Mr. Prashad says that “Bindis and temporary tattoos are easier to accept than are those who wear bindis on a regualr basis.” I agree with Chris’s comment above about cultural diffusion. America wouldn’t have been the country it is today if it wasn’t for its cultural mesh.
March 25th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
What I forgot to emphasize in my previous post was that the inequality that so many Americans experience at the hands of the government is predicated on a sense of disposability from those making the laws. The power elite passes bills at mostly their own discretion (look at oil companies and taxes) and practically everyone is subject to their judgement. This helplessness that unfortunately groups together most Americans is what makes “Orientalism’s” definition potentially much more inclusive to others.
March 25th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
In accordance with your excerpt, you accredit American racism to the long string of international wars and perceptions created by the media. Today, America faces a similar problem that has been brewing since the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center. Are the Arabs destined to be the “weak” people of the 21st century in American’s eyes? I’m curious to see how people feel about Arabs in 60 years even with anti-racism laws enacted in today’s society. Unfortunately, I am led to feel that American’s will not move past Arab racism as they still have not with “Orientals.”
March 25th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
I noticed that Vijay Prashad does not mention the efforts of the East to isolate itself from the West. He focuses on America’s efforts to alienate the East and its immigrants to America. However, at the same time, the Asian countries also worked to distance themselves from the West, likely exacerbating the difficulties of integration into Western society. The Eastern resistance to the West shows that the blame for these problems should not be placed entirely on Western culture.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I think it’s notable that Vijay Prashad does not consider the Eastern response to the West. While he focuses on American perception and reception of the Asian culture, he does not note that at the same time, the East has historically sought to differentiate itself from the West. While the East’s attitude cannot fully explain away America’s inability to fully integrate Asian-Americans into its culture, I think it’s an important point to consider. Maybe the blame does not fully belong with the West.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
I feel that many of Professor Prashad’s arguments are supported by a vast amount of credibility. I do agree with Matt that throughout human history, society has inevitably placed certain categorical differences upon different social groups, and that the “melting pot” depiction of U.S. society (discussed by Hilarie) is certainly true in our society. Professor Prashad utilizes the words of Henry David Thoreau with eloquent form in the beginning of his essay on Orientalism. Western society needs to be more accepting of Indian and Asian culture. Professor Prashad challenges society to stop U.S. Orientalism. I also agree with Jordan because I feel the world is now more globally interdependent than ever before.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
I believe that distinguishing terms will always exist, whether they are general such as the word “Oriental” or more specific. I also believe that stereotypical groupings will never cease to exist because we are all ethnocentric, meaning that we judge other cultures based on our own. Although this could have positive consequences, it most likely results in a negative evaluation of another culture’s values. I like when Mr. Prashad says that “Bindis and temporary tattoos are easier to accept than are those who wear bindis on a regular basis.” I agree with Chris’s comment above about cultural diffusion. America wouldn’t have been the country it is today if it wasn’t for its cultural mesh.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
We as individuals of the new millennium carry a responsibility. It is our job to reverse many of the offensive and ignorant terminology that our relatives and ancestors have created. I do not blame them however, considering it is mostly an environment which shapes our views. An older term like “oriental” was probably considered normal fifty years ago. It was socially acceptable to classify people by their skin color, appearance and location many years ago. However it is not acceptable for today’s standards. We are far to bright and well informed as a young generation to be picking up old racial habits. But is a truly non-racial united world actually obtainable?
March 25th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
After reading Vijay Prashad’s “Oriental,” my previous meaning for the term oriental has changed. I have known the word to refer to somebody who is foreign. I never once thought it was a degrading word used to refer to chinese people. Professor Prashad’s explanation of the word and his telling of its history clarified it for me.
I feel that Americans are hypocrites when they use a word. It is true that America(The West) is one of the most wealthy nations in the world but regardless one should not refer or look down to any person of any race and call them by a name which is demeaning and degrading. Again, Americans are hypocritical when they use this word because they(we) live in the same land and also this nation has become very advanced partly due to the help we receive from this remarkable race of people.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
I want to point out that there are two different tendencies in the comments so far. Both raise interesting issues, but I think it’s important to recognize the differences between them. One tendency focuses on the appropriateness of individuals using certain words to describe other individuals. The other focuses on the more basic assumptions behind the words, the way the very idea of “East” and “West” presume a fundamental division in the world, the larger national and imperial practices that enforce that division. Both are important and worthwhile for discussion, but I’d say that Prashad’s essay is more about the second than the first (which is why it’s called “Orientalism” and not “Oriental”).
I’ve referred to them as separate tendencies, but of course they are connected. There’s nothing inherently wrong with any word in itself, out of context. But in the context of the long history that Prashad tells very concisely–a history in which the concept of “the oriental” has been used to exclude migrants, invade countries, and slaughter millions–it seems important to me to understand the role of these words, and the larger forces that give them meaning, in this history. In other words, the words do matter, both at the individual level _and_ at the larger, political level. Do you see what I’m trying to say?
March 25th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Overall, I agree with the previous statements. Taking a group of people who are in a sense “different”, and generalizing them with a specific term, is very degrading. For example, people tend to make up terms for people of different heritages. Many times, these terms are disrespectful and outright demoralizing.
For the statement regarding that the East is considered feminine and weak, I this it to be very wrong. Parts of the East happen to be very technologically advanced. How can any advancement dealing with technology be “lesser” than the next?
March 25th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I found the article an illuminating perspective on the shortcomings of multiculturalism in America and the legacy of prejudice still very much a part of our political perspective. I did, however, disagree with Mr. Prashad’s example of U.S. military wartime propaganda representing racist tendencies in America. During World War II there were, as Mr. Prashad stated, many instances of racist portrayals of the Japanese in the American media and military. What Mr. Prashad ignores, however, is that the same portrayal was delivered to the “Krauts” of Germany and the Italians. Similarly, propaganda against the Chinese during the Cold War should not be separated from similarly racist propaganda aimed towards the Russians. Certainly the Japanese-American internment camps of the Second World War represent one of the darkest chapters of race in America, but the use of jingoistic and often racist stereotypes during wartime existed long before the American military, and even long before America. As a German-American should I feel offended and betrayed by my country because they depict me with a Pith Helmet, ludicrous underbite and toothbrush mustache? Certainly the practice of degrading one’s enemies, be it during warfare or even as it is currently practiced today in sports cannot be taken to represent the opinion of an entire nation all of the time?
Furthermore, to respond to the use of the label Asian or Asian-American as offensive, I view it as referring to someone descended from one of the many distinct peoples of the Asian continent. As an Anglo-German American should I be offended to be referred to as a European-American because it does not specifically cite my exact background? At what point does one person become part of one country? National boundaries are drawn and redrawn throughout history, is only the current incarnation of national borders the acceptable way to specifically refer to someone’s race? Or maybe is this henpecking getting in the way of accepting and celebrating all of our backgrounds, both generally and specifically.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Vijay Prashad says, “It posits that Asians are both required and repellent, both necessary to the economy and a danger to society.” I have to disagree with the view that Europeans and West (especially U.S.) look on ” Orientals” (not only Asians) as benefit to the economy because of their wisdom and knowlege, while on the other hand, as dangerous and “repellent” to society. I think that people from such countries as China, India Iran ,etc. are respected for their achievements and contributions in the world, but as any type of foreigners with very distinct and traditional culture they might not be accepted completely into our society, same as we to theirs. Prashad suggests that Oriental ideology could be “rooted in the very psyche of European thought”, but i think that such ideology is rooted into psyche of every human being in the West or in the East.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
In response to Pat’s post, I too, felt quite disturbed to learn of the American gov’t and military’s anti-Asian propaganda tactics during WWII, the Korean War and Vietnam War. I agree with Prashad that these tactics were relatively successful as they created more racist attitudes towards the various Asian peoples and cultures.
On another note, I would like to add some more thoughts, in addition to the previous posts that discuss the inappropriateness of the term “Oriental.” As an Asian-American, I feel it is most appropriate and respectful to take the time to find out more information about an individual’s ethnicity before applying the super-generalized labels “Asian” or “Orient” to an individual. For example, it could be rude to some if one simply classified a person as just “white” or “Caucasian,” in contrast to Italian, Irish, Germany, etc. The same can be applied to finding out whether someone is Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
There are several risqué statements Prashad makes in “Orientalism.” According to Prashad, American imperialist believe that America is superior and better than other nations. American “liberators” believe that it is their duty to improve and liberate “supine” nations. I agree with Prashad’s assessment of American imperialism. American “liberators” feel that because other nations are different they can impose radical changes in those nations. An example Prashad uses is with the Iraqi war. America has troops in Iraq enforcing changes in their government. At the same time, America is also creating markets for global corporations. The reason why America is in Iraq is because of our nation’s ethnocentrism. American imperialist believe that Iraq and Afghanistan are subordinate and thus need “liberators” to improve them.
March 25th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
In a country claimed to be a “melting pot” there is much self-division that is completely counteractive to the claim that America is a country for anyone. The terms “oriental” and “occidental”, “east” and “west”, are obsolete and no longer are required in an interconnected, global market where the cultures are no longer distinct but are instead part of a global culture. Also, the differences are arbitrary when people do not deal directly but instead interact through electronic media where physical differences are secondary.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:52 am
Professor Vijay Prashad made a strong point by using Thoreau’s definition of “Orientals”. This was a term used to group all the Asians. I find this extremely degrading. Just because India, China, Korea, etc. are all part of Asia does not make them all the same. Also, the stereotypical description of the West as “productive” and “masculine” while the East as “slothful” and “feminine” was probably true back then. Nowadays, these terms no longer apply but this view definitely still exist.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:54 am
All nations are at some level ethnocentric and will uphold their own culture and ideals as superior and more morally correct than those of other cultures.
I have to disagree that this imperialist opinions are not adherent and practiced only in the West, but it is rather an implementation of the power of the dominant group. During the past two centuries we have seen a socioeconomic and socio political “Western” dominance in the East. Driven
by their Imperialistic doctrines and ambitions, European nations and latter the United States coerced the East into a submissive position because both had the economic power, military prowess, and political stability and unity needed for such an endeavor. If the nations in the East shared these aspects of imperialism they as well would have practiced their own form of “orientalism”, or rather “westernism.”
However these feelings of “ethnocentrism” are still apparent in the West today. This is especially true in the United States, which is the dominant global power at the moment. Prashad’s and Armstrong’s “The Iraqis and Afghans cannot liberate themselves, the logic goes, because they are supine, so the GIs must liberate them, especially Iraqi and Afghan women” is a direct interference with another culture, because the dominant one believes its better, and wants to push its ideals on the weaker. The American psyche is fundamentally different from that of the Afghans and Iraqis. The cultures of these countries are very different as well. Thus America as the dominant power will try to spread its cultural beliefs and moral beliefs.
As for the “the army secures raw materials and creates markets for global corporations and for the dynamic of advanced capitalist states,” its a nation setting up new economic possibilities for itself. This in itself is a continuation of the Western imperialistic tradition. In the past it was Japan who spread its borders, its economy and forced its culture upon other Eastern Nations. Now its China’s turn, as can be observed through China’s growing dominance in the regions politics. China has “absorbed” Tibet and has cast its eye upon Taiwan and has strained relations with Japan, a key power in the region. However the American and Chinese political systems are completely different, thus the on take of imperialist is different as well.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:45 am
After reading “Orientalism”, My view on American still has not changed. Prashad is definitely right when he says that people in American soceity are Grouping Asians all the same just because we are from Asia. Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Koreans, Arabs etc. are all different cultures. That is saying like Canadians and Americans, or Mexicans are from America because they are from North America. The racist remarks and slang is still going on today and he Prashad makes a good point about the Asian jokes and the way military officers group their soldiers.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:56 am
Prashad’s “Orientalism” displays the idea that Western culture does act with superiority to Eastern cultures. Prashad presents a clear separatation between east and west, especially in the terms of colonialism and imperialism; the West (Europe and America) concentrate more on expanding, while a lot of countries in the east focus on preserving tradition. This idea or view is not too popular in the U.S, since we are too preoccupied with innovation, which causes a divide within Western and Asian cultures.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Prashad’s discussion in “Orientalism” is very interesting and certainly a topic I agree with. The issue of the racist remarks is one that many do not pay mind to at this stage in life, yet it is still something that continues to occur in life. I must say that I agree with Newlyn with his statements of America. In America a lot of cultures are criticized without the recognition of the importance of that culture and the influence its had on America. The path that Prashad took with this idea I must say is a very impressing.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Grouping all Asians under the term “Oriental” is degrading. There are many different sub-cultures inside the Asian community, that it doesn’t make sense to label all Asian people to be the same. In a modern society today where so many people are of mixed race, I find it surprising that people are still stereotyping Asians. As our society globalizes people of all races should be accepted as a part of the whole community, not to be criticized.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Prashad’s point about accepting those who don’t wear bindis rather than those who do struck me. While I agree with what others have said, that this is wrong and people shouldn’t have to hide their cultural identity in fear of not being accepted, it is not limited to those who celebrate their culture openly. Just the color of skin or different facial characteristics is enough to bring about intolerance.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:28 am
I agree with previous postings that claim that the term “oriental” is too vague of a term to classify a group of people. There are various stereotypes that are apparent in the “Orientalism”, especially the part about the West being masculine/strong and the Esat being weak/feminine. One might be offended at the fact that weak has been associated with feminine. That assertion gives off the impression that the West is superior to the East, which I strongly disagree with.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:10 am
I really think Mr. Prashad’s best point was made in a sidebar about what he calls “colorblind racism, where the rhetorics of economic efficiency and cultural difference [mask] claims about racial inferiority.” Though post-civil rights America fancies itself free from racism, it exists in the very fibers of many opinions surrounding wealth distribution in America. Many consider economics to be a cut and dry, pragmatic, and objective subject, but our cultural biases are thrown into it whether we know it or not. The underlying sentiment for many white Americans is that minorities simply aren’t as “economically efficient” as their well-educated white countrymen. It is ludicrous to think that the pattern of minorities becoming stuck in the lower class and in poverty is the result of racial inferiority, and yet this idea bleeds into the brains of the privileged and the disillusioned, who need only to justify the unfair social structures they’ve set up in our country. And, indeed, racial and social prejudice have become one and the same in the suburban comfort of American dinner-table political discourse. Supposedly, minorities are poor because they are inferior, and will stay poor until they “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” (which is a veiled way of saying ‘if minorities were capable of escaping poverty, they would’). Everyone needs to be alert to Prashad’s idea of “colorblind racism,” because it is currently the most prevalent and backhanded form of racism.
I realize that it seems I’ve ignored Prashad’s main point about “Orientalism.” However, his sidebar about economic masks for racism is a prime example of his wider point about the prejudice that still exists in the subtext of our language.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Mr. Prashad’s post on Oriental was educational and accurately described the racism that the West has for the East. One of his points that really struck me for personal reasons, was his point that the world only became aware that racism was bad after the Holocaust. I am very disappointed in my country and the world that up until this point, some people were treated differently because of their skin or religion. How can a human being treat another human so badly. A human life is sacred and special, and most importantly it is finite. Subjecting a human to servitude in the form of slavery in a horrifying idea.
Another point that Prashad talked about, although he didn’t seem to stress it, was the story of the military leader pointing to an American who happened to be Asian, and told his unit that is what the enemy looks like. That is disturbing in many ways. First, if an American no matter his color, education, social status, age, etc. decides to risk his life to fight for America, the least a person could do is show him some respect. I found this example to be very embarrassing and made me want to apologize to this man. Overall Prashad’s article was a good read and really helped me understand the conflict between the East and West.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
After reading Prashad’s “Orientalism,” I am not too surprised to learn that the West categorized the East as “Oriental.” Even as an Asian currently living in the United States, I still feel this sort of West superiority-East inferiority relationship. Therefore, I understand this sort of racism perfectly. Only until recently that my ethnic country, China, is growing and becoming as successful as the Western countries do I feel this “difference” slowly disappearing, with fewer Westerners calling Asians as the “yellow bastards […] with slanted eyes.” Overall, Prashad’s “Orientalism” was a great read, and an excellent way to convey this “contradiction of [Western] Orientalism.”
March 26th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
I agree with what Georgia stated about how these classifications will always exist. Although people who make these classifications can be seen as ignorant and disrespectful, it is inevitable for the classifications to exist. Personally, I do not agree with grouping people together such as this because of how degrading it can be for the people of those groups.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Dear Friends,
Thanks for the very useful interventions on my brief essay. Glenn rightly summarized the two directions, the nominal one and the epistemological one. It is not simply a question of naming, but of how a way of seeing the world is produced by certain powerful interests. Obviously a similar exercise could be done to show how German Americans and Italian Americans had to confront the problem of the “enemy as a race” in the 1940s, although it is striking how quickly Americanism of the 1950s and 1960s was able to draw in sections of German Americans and Italian Americans into the fold, not, of course, without contradictions. Who becomes “white” is so important to this discussion.
I was struck by how powerful Barack Obama’s speech on race was, even as it reduced racism to prejudice and obscured the systematic or institutional form that racism takes, which is more consequential. The power of the speech comes from its honesty more than anything else. That’s the kind of spirit I’m happy to see when we discuss racism and other forms of related intolerance. No-one gets pigeon-holed for their opinions. Let a hundred flowers bloom and contend. Not bloom alone, but be struggled with. Looking forward to struggling with you tomorrow.
Vijay.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:28 am
I feel that the term “Oriental” is way too general to be of reference to Asian people as a whole. It is politically incorrect in that it takes away the specificity of a certain dynamic race by referring to a broader range of people.
March 27th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Sadly, I must agree with Kevin in that racism will always be a pressing issue between cultures. However, a frightening fact is that it wasn’t until 1948 until the international community recognized the common occurrence of racism. The threat of racism was acknowledged, yet the United States ignored or even circumvented the laws of morality. A prime example is the treatment of an American soldier by an officer. Of all places, the army is where racism should be eliminated, however it seems much of a country’s racism stems from war itself. The norms that are presented during wartime resonate throughout time, and it is truly unfortunate that the native “Orient” must loose their cultural ties through acts of supremacy and liberation.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Personally I agree with Tommy Ye, because like him, I am an Asian growing up in America. I was born and grew up in New York, where it was culturally diverse, but even here I can see the West superiority-East inferiority relationship. I’ve personally experienced it first hand, with trick-or-treated in the upper east side. Racism is still prevelent in even the most diverse places. But I do have to disagree with Tommy’s idea of the loss of the “difference”, if anything the rise of China will raise more racism. On the trains I’ve overheard the clash of how Americans feel about Asians. They see us as a predator taking their money and their jobs, and wih the rise of China, I can forsee more racism to Asians as a whole.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
I have to agree with Kevin and Andrew in saying that racism is always going to be an issue in our society. As unfortunate as it is, racism is something that always as existed and sadly I believe always will in some form. Although many people strongly disagree with it, including me, it is the result of people as a whole being ignorant and misunderstanding. I have always found it very disturbing that ethnic groups have to give up aspects of their culture and work hard to ignore those aspects in order to be accepted.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
It is difficult to believe that this article between the East and West has lead to an attempt to choose which side has become superior. Obviously, the purpose of this essay is to relate to the themes in The Namesake of acceptance and losing the outsider title, however; in today’s society, it is almost impossible to say that either the East or West are inferior to one another on any level.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
I have to agree with Johnny for the fact that although most people disagree with the idea of racism, it will always be a part of our culture. I think most racism in our world occurs in the act of just being ignorant people. Most Americans today think immigrants must learn our customs and forget there own. The thing people forget about is that this country was created from a mixture of different customs that blended together. These blended customs created our great nation that we live in today and just because more people want to immigrate into America to have a better life, I think for us to prohibit them from doing this would be unethically.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
The concept of racism exists, in part, do to the extreme lack of outside pressures on some areas of humanity from sources other than itself. This coupled with differing standard of livings around the globe leads to the hatred of those that men deem in either inferior or superior living conditions. Unfair kings and princes were loathed for their wealth and America is viewed much in the same way. US foreign policy has led to the stripping of foreign resources similar which some American policy makers have rationalized as progress in the past. Until countries no longer fend for themselves people will continue to be racist in that each country must focus on supporting it’s own people before it looks to further the causes of those others around the globe. This division between the successful and rich countries will ultimately lead to hatred of those from other places whether they be more or less successful. It will take a much more powerful International Government in order to relieve the human race of its racist problem by equalizing the opportunities granted around the globe and eliminating the governmental divisions of today.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Growing up, I was told that “The Orient” was dubbed so because of the knowledge that was aquired from that region. I enjoyed the way Professor Prashad distinguishes the “lonely scholar” from the “public imperialist”, the two ways in which an entire group of people were and are viewed. For me, professor Prashad’s essay provided a fine example of how people use language to their advantage, and how events such as World War II, ad the Cold War can not only change the was people act and think, but the way that they speak. Ultimately, every individual will think of themselves in a different manner, everyone will have a different name for themselves. I can only speak for myself, but what I saw from Professor Prashad’s essay was that there is a difference between a society’s identification of another group and their acceptance of that group. When identification is used for negative propaganda, acceptance becomes that much harder.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I thought that the idea of the East and West being so divided was extremely interesting. The thought that Westerners came to the Orient looking to get knowledge was another fascinating point, especially since they though of Oriental people as lesser than themselves.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I have to agree with both Kevin, Andrew, and Johnny that racism will always be an issue in our society. However, it is important not to let this racism be the deciding factor in the opinions of future generations. It is critical that every individual forms an opinion himself, and that we in society continue in increasing the level of acceptance of others to make this possible. Professor Prashad’s essay demonstrated that this is what must occur before this can be possible.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I feel that we as a society should be ready to move away from coming up with words to classify people who have been oppressed in history.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I for one am in agreement with the term “oriental.” In the present day, the “occidental” regions Prashad regards to are the more powerful and the more dynamic. There are governments in the east who allow their people’s human rights and workers’ rights to be taken advantage of. Asian women and children are forced to work for very low wages and very unsanitary conditions–these which were regulated in the West many decades ago. In another example of an “occidental” nation inferior and static is Iraq, which now are in dependence of United States armies for liberation. There is a clear distinction between Eastern and Western civilizations, and the terms “Oriental” and “Occidental” are able to sum those up.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:10 am
I believe that some forms of racism exists in America today, however in a less obvious yet still powerful way than a few decades ago. “Orriental” and “Asian” is a very broad name to give the many cultures that are present in Asia. Although racism is not as evident as it was years ago, I believe that America has become an imperialist society. Many Americans believe that if a person wants to become completly “American” one must forget about his/her past and adobt the ways of the American culture. This does not create a more accepting society, but rather promotes a more racist society towards those who do not adabt to the “American” culture.