misspalah's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
Significantly, these things also make it evident that covering Islam from the United States, the last superpower, is not interpretation in the genuine sense but an assertion of power. The media say what they wish about Islam because they can, with the result that Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism and "good" Muslims (in Bosnia, for instance) dominate the scene indiscriminately; little else is covered because anything falling outside the consensus definition of what is important is considered irrelevant to United States interests and to the media's definition of a good story. The academic community, on the other hand, responds to what it construes as national and corporate needs, with the result that suitable Islamic topics are hewn out of an enormous mass of Islamic details, and these topics (extremism, violence, and so forth) define both Islam and the proper study of Islam so as to exclude everything not fitting neatly between them. Even when on occasion the government or one of the university Middle East departments or one of the foundations organizes a conference to deal with the future of Middle East studies (which is usually a euphemism for "What are we going to do about the Islamic world?"), the same battery of concepts and goals keeps turning up. Little is changed.
- Knowledge and Power - Covering Islam : How the Media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world by Edward Said
.
This is by far one of the most enlightening read this year. I am not going to pretend that i can summarise every single thing that has been unpacked and discussed in the book - i will even admit that i wish i have time to re-read and even buddy read again with anyone who wanted to experience this level of “eyes wide open, mind was blown” in the most academical sense. My goodness, why do i put this book in my shelves for 1 year before i decided to read it. Here’s why you should read this book (And please do because i can’t describe much on his wisdom. The level of knowledge and insight is beyond my comprehension capacity).
- First, this book was written more than 40 years ago. The book is published in 1981 and updated again in 1997. We are looking at the timeline before Aggression and Assault on Islam and Muslim Countries even started and before islamophobia is rampant in western countries. We are looking at the two Gulf wars, 9/11, Israeli Attack on Lebanon, The Afghan War, The formation of Islamic States, The Civil wars happening across Syrian, Yemen and Libyan and even the time before the end of the Iran-Iraq War. How come Edward Said has been stating the truth nothing but the truth all along? The fact that world hasn’t learned anything is frustrating.
- Second, to simplify what he wanted to say is if its not your religion, your culture, your faith and not even your goddamn country - stay out of it. Islam is not a monolithic entity. Edward Said came with the most satisfying replies to the list of these so called scholars and experts in The USA that did not even understand the language, history and people to literally feed the media with the most ridiculous statements that exhibited their ignorance. What’s more laughable that this kind of blanket statement was accepted and did not even being considered prejudice towards more than 20% of the world's population.
- Third, Edward Said also pointed out to the readers how this manufactured content in the media regarding misconceptions of Islam which best described either by CBS, FOX, ABC or or even CNN. In Fact majority of USA news outlet sort of produced their content with this archaic formula : Islam = Arab = Jihad = Terrorism and it persisted until now. The slanderous stereotypes and the ongoing falsehoods against Islam and Arab in the mainstream media is not being objected or criticised , let alone being defended of. Reading this book, i do think that Edward Said wanted fellow Americans to not 100% depended to the ideas and opinions expressed by so many of misinformed journalists and the media that they represented when it comes to its coverage of Islam in the middle east.
- Fourth, Edward Said highlighted how the nature of "Western-Islamic relations" is considered a problematic term and this overgeneralisation used in the radio, television and even newspaper do a disservice of understanding that from Islam itself, varieties of cultures, customs, language, practices, nuances and even interpretations from countries that impossible to be understood in one’s lifetime.
- Fifth, this a truly a thought-provoking book that pushed us to challenge, seek more answers , to unlearn, learn and relearn our perceptions and thoughts based on news that is reported war torn countries. What Edward Said done with this book is to demonstrate a series of observation particularly on how problematic it was when The West (specifically USA although some European Media is mentioned) started to cover on Islam. This bad analysis mixed with shock value on how Islam supposed to look like or be like reeked sort of imperialism subtleties and when you connect it to their nosey foreign policy (obviously for oil), did in fact exposed the hypocrisy of their media.
.
P/s : Before some of you come and said that Edward Said is not even Arab. He is an Arab and he was born in Palestine. Before some of you said Edward Said is over sympathetic towards Muslim and accused him of being Muslim, he is not. He is a christian. Before some of you called him anti-semitic mentioning Israel and its war crimes, he has seen countless of Israel’s atrocities upon his homeland.
.
Memorable Quotes :
- "I am not saying that Muslims have not attacked and injured Israelis and Westerners in the name of Islam. But I am saying that much of what one reads and sees in the media about Islam represents the aggression as coming from Islam because that is what "Islam" is. Local and concrete circumstances are thus obliterated. In other words, covering Islam is one-sided activity that obscures what "we" do, and highlights instead what Muslim and Arabs by their very flawed nature are."
- No expert, media personality, or government official seemed to wonder what might have happened it a small traction of the time spent on isolating, dramatizing, and covering the unlawful embassy seizure and the hostage return had been spent exposing oppression and brutality during the ex-shah's regime. Was there no limit to the idea of using the vast information-gathering apparatus to inform the justifiably anxious public about what was really taking place in Iran? Did the alternatives have to be limited either to stirring up patriotic feelings or to fueling a kind of mass anger at crazy Iran? These are not idle questions, now that this lamentably exaggerated episode is over. It will be beneficial as well as practical for Americans in particular, Westerners in general, to puzzle out the changing configurations in world politics. Is "Islam" going to be confined to the role of terroristic oil-supplier? Are journals and investigations to focus on "who lost Iran," or will debate and reflection be better employed around topics more suited to world community and peaceful development?
- 'At present, "Islam" and "the West" have taken on a powerful new urgency everywhere. An we must note immediately that it is always the West, and not Christianity, that seems pitted against Islam. Why? Because the assumption is that whereas "the West" is greater than and has surpassed the stage of Christianity, its principle religion, the world of Islam-its varied societies, histories, and languages notwithstanding-is still mired in religion, primitivity, and backwardness."
- There is no longer much excuse for bewailing the hostility of "the West" towards the Arabs and Islam and then sitting back in outraged righteousness. When the reasons for this hostility and those aspects of "the West" that encourage it are fearlessly analyzed, an important step has been taken toward changing it, but that is by no means the whole way: something must be put in its place if a new mass of anti-Islamic propaganda is not to result. Certainly there are great dangers today in actually following, actually fulfilling, the prevailing hostile image of Islam, though that has thus far only been the doing of some Muslims and some Arabs and some black Africans. But such fulfillments underline the importance of what still has to be done. In the great rush to industrialize, modernize, and develop them-selves, many Muslim countries have sometimes been too compli-ant, I think, about turning themselves into consumer markets. To dispel the myths and stereotypes of Orientalism, the world as a whole has to be given an opportunity, by the media and by Muslims themselves, to see Muslims and Orientals producing and, more im-portant, diffusing a different form of history, a new kind of sociology, a new cultural awareness: in short, Muslims need to emphasize the goal of living a new form of history.
- "It is only a slight overstatement to say that Muslims and Arabs are essentially covered, discussed, and apprehended either as oil suppliers or as potential terrorists. Very little of the detail, the human density, the passion of Arab-Muslim life has entered the awareness of even those people whose profession it is to report the Islamic world. What we have instead is a limited series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world presented in such a way as, among other things, to make that world vulnerable to military aggression."
literary_hazelnut's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
a_sullivan16's review
5.0
"But underlying in every interpretation of other cultures - especially of Islam - is the choice facing the individual scholar or intellectual: whether to put intellect at the service of power or at the service of criticism, community, dialogue, and moral sense" (172).
I don't think I could have read this book at a better time. This is my first individual exposure to Said and I'm truly grateful for it. Him being a comparative literature professor makes SO much sense, and I think the very last chapter should be standard reading for literary postcolonial studies. So inspired by the work in this book.
I don't think I could have read this book at a better time. This is my first individual exposure to Said and I'm truly grateful for it. Him being a comparative literature professor makes SO much sense, and I think the very last chapter should be standard reading for literary postcolonial studies. So inspired by the work in this book.
spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
3.0
عندما جعل علي شريعتي هجرة النبي محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم من مكه إلى المدينة ،فجعلها تنطبق على وضع الإنسان ذاته باعتباره اختياراً وكفاحا وصيروره متواصله ،إنه هجره لانهائية ،هجرة داخل نفسه من الصلصال إلى الإله ،إنه مهاجر داخل روحه نفسها.يجب أن ننتبه فوراً إلى أنّ الغرب، لا المسيحية، هو دائماً في موضع التنافس والعداء ضد الإسلام. لماذا؟ يكمن السبب في افتراض أنّ "الغرب" أكبر من المسيحية، دينه الرئيسي، وقد تجاوز مرحلتها. أمّا عالم الإسلام -على ما فيه من غنى وتعدد وتنوع في تاريخه ومجتمعاته ولغاته - فيقول الافتراض إنه ما يزال غارقاً في الدين والبدائية والتخلف.
مطلبي هو الإحترام الواجب للتفاصيل الملموسة للخبرة البشرية، والتفهم النابع من النظر إلى "الآخر" نظرة ود وتراحم؛ والمعرفة التي تُكتسب وتُنشر بأمانة أخلاقية وفكرية؛ فهذه بالتأكيد أهداف أفضل وإن لم تكن أيسر تحقيقا في الوقت الحاضر من المواجهة والعداء الذي يختزل الخصوم ويحقّرهم.
لم أستطع أن أكتشف فترة في التاريخ الأوروبي أو التاريخ الأمريكي منذ العصور الوسطى ناقش أحد فيها الإسلام أو فكر فيه خارج إطارٍ صاغته العاطفة المشبوبة، والتعصب، والمصالح السياسية. وقد لا يبدو ذلك اكتشافًا يدعو إلى الدهشة، ولكنه يضم في ثناياه جميع ألوان المباحث العلمية والأكاديمية التي كانت منذ مطلع القرن الثامن عشر تطلق على نفسها اسمًا كُلّيًا هو مبحث الاستشراق أو كانت تحاول، بانتظام، دراسة الشرق. ولن يختلف أحد مع القول بأن أوائل الذين علّقوا لى الإسلام، مثل بطرس المبجل، وبارتليمي دربيلو، قد اتخذوا موقف المجادلة المسيحية المشبوبة فيما قالوه. ولكنّ أمامنا افتراضًا لم ينظر أحد في صحته يقول إنه حين تقدمت أوروبا والغرب فاتخذت خطواتها في العصر العلمي الحديث، وحررت نفسها من الخرافة والجهل، كانت مسيرتها بالضرورة تتضمن الاستشراق. أليس صحيحًا أن سلفستر دي ساسي، وإدوارد لين، وإرنست رينان، وهاملتون جِبْ، ولويس ماسينيون، كانوا من الباحثين والعلماء الموضوعيين، وأليس صحيحًا أن من آثار التقدم الذي شهده القرن العشرون بشتى ألوانه في علم الاجتماع والأنثروبولوجيا واللغويات والتاريخ أن أصبح الباحثون الأمريكيون الذين يقومون بتدريس الشرق الأوسط والإسسلام في جامعات كبرى مثل برنستون وهارفارد وشيكافو، بالضرورة، غير منحازين ولا يمارسون الدعوة إلى شئ فيما يفعلونه؟ أما الإجابة عندي فهي بالنفي. وليس ذلك لأن الاستشراق أكثر تحيّزًا من العلوم الاجماعية والإنسانية الأخرى؛ لكنه وحسب، مثل غيره من المباحث المذكورة، له سماته الأيديولوجية ويتأثر مثلها بالعالم من حوله. أما الفارق الأوحد فهو أن باحثي الاستشراق يبادرون باستخدام مواقعهم، باعتبارهم خبراء، في إنكار (وأحيانًا حتى في إخفاء) مشاعرهم العميقة تجاه الإسلام بلغة الثقات التي تهدف إلى الشهادة "بموضوعيتهم" وكذلك "بحيادهم العلمي".
classicapricot's review against another edition
4.0
This is a good companion to his other work 'Orientalism' as it explores in depth an example of modern day Orientalism which is the relationship between the West and Islam, as Westerners view of Islam is far from what is actually is true, mainly due to outdated stereotypes and archetypes that permeate society.
It is also an interesting exploration of how truth and fact is formed as often it comes from other people and not from an individual finding out things for themselves.
It is also an interesting exploration of how truth and fact is formed as often it comes from other people and not from an individual finding out things for themselves.
jenny44indy's review against another edition
4.0
This was a difficult, but important book to read. Difficult, because it's level of scholarship and vocabulary far exceed my current capabilities.
Important, because it is good to challenge and stretch one's own boundaries, and because it questions the American media portrayal of 'Islam' and the 'Middle East' as far too narrowed and in its own interest. Say whatever you will about the matter, the fact is, American knowledge in this area is skewed for political policy, or simply because of a shortage of trained linguists and especially scholars that are not tied by some sort of business, policy, or educational endowment interest. And while this is the case for many academic disciplines, it is especially true for this area of study. Studying Islam is not just about studying Islam as the west sees it, it cannot be reduced to the study of the region in its entirety. It should be broken down into its diverse languages, diverse groups within Islam, the non-religious aspects of those societies, and for the sake of study as opposed to the sake of how to interact in business and politics. That is a very idealistic and tall order, but we can surely do better. This book was written in 1981 and updated in 1997. The way the trends the author discusses have changed, and, unfortunately, gotten worse as he warned about is frightening though in hindsight, and with Sept 11 2001 in mind, not very surprising.
But it saddens me, to see this state of things. His final pages resonated with me very well, especially just in that every scholar, every bit of research is not done in a vacuum and that those variables of human social tendency must not be discounted - I think this observation holds across many disciplines and situations regardless of cross-cultural dialogues. It holds true within a culture, within a small situation - like your every day working and social life.
I will leave a quote from the last page I found particularly useful:
Page 171: "It is certainly true that the Islamic world as a whole is neither completely anti-American and anti-West nor unified and predictable in its actions. Without trying to give an exhaustive account of these changes, I have been saying that this has meant the emergence of new and irregular realities in the Islamic world; it is no less true that similar irregularities, disturbing the calm theoretical descriptions of earlier years, have emerged in other parts of the post-colonial world. Merely to reassert the old formulas about "underdevelopment" and "the Afro-Asian mentality" is foolish enough; but to connect these casually with notions about the sad decline of the West, the unfortunate end of colonialism, and the regrettable diminishment of American power is, I must say as strongly as possible, rank folly. There is simply no way in which socieites thousands of miles away from the Atlantic world in both space and identity can be made to conform to what we want of them. One can consider this a neutral fact without also regarding it (as I happen to) as a good thing."
This book stirs up many thoughts, much reflection. I recommend it, even it if took me months to get through it and patience with a dictionary. Even though it is dated, its message rings clearer now than before, I think.
Important, because it is good to challenge and stretch one's own boundaries, and because it questions the American media portrayal of 'Islam' and the 'Middle East' as far too narrowed and in its own interest. Say whatever you will about the matter, the fact is, American knowledge in this area is skewed for political policy, or simply because of a shortage of trained linguists and especially scholars that are not tied by some sort of business, policy, or educational endowment interest. And while this is the case for many academic disciplines, it is especially true for this area of study. Studying Islam is not just about studying Islam as the west sees it, it cannot be reduced to the study of the region in its entirety. It should be broken down into its diverse languages, diverse groups within Islam, the non-religious aspects of those societies, and for the sake of study as opposed to the sake of how to interact in business and politics. That is a very idealistic and tall order, but we can surely do better. This book was written in 1981 and updated in 1997. The way the trends the author discusses have changed, and, unfortunately, gotten worse as he warned about is frightening though in hindsight, and with Sept 11 2001 in mind, not very surprising.
But it saddens me, to see this state of things. His final pages resonated with me very well, especially just in that every scholar, every bit of research is not done in a vacuum and that those variables of human social tendency must not be discounted - I think this observation holds across many disciplines and situations regardless of cross-cultural dialogues. It holds true within a culture, within a small situation - like your every day working and social life.
I will leave a quote from the last page I found particularly useful:
Page 171: "It is certainly true that the Islamic world as a whole is neither completely anti-American and anti-West nor unified and predictable in its actions. Without trying to give an exhaustive account of these changes, I have been saying that this has meant the emergence of new and irregular realities in the Islamic world; it is no less true that similar irregularities, disturbing the calm theoretical descriptions of earlier years, have emerged in other parts of the post-colonial world. Merely to reassert the old formulas about "underdevelopment" and "the Afro-Asian mentality" is foolish enough; but to connect these casually with notions about the sad decline of the West, the unfortunate end of colonialism, and the regrettable diminishment of American power is, I must say as strongly as possible, rank folly. There is simply no way in which socieites thousands of miles away from the Atlantic world in both space and identity can be made to conform to what we want of them. One can consider this a neutral fact without also regarding it (as I happen to) as a good thing."
This book stirs up many thoughts, much reflection. I recommend it, even it if took me months to get through it and patience with a dictionary. Even though it is dated, its message rings clearer now than before, I think.