David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History and Theory 42 (2):169–195 (2003)
In Orientalism, Edward Said attempts to show that all European discourse about the Orient is the same, and all European scholars of the Orient complicit in the aims of European imperialism. There may be “manifest” differences in discourse, but the underlying “latent” orientalism is “more or less constant.” This does not do justice to the marked differences in approach, attitude, presentation, and conclusions found in the works of various orientalists. I distinguish six different styles of colonial and postcolonial discourse about India , and note the existence of numerous precolonial discourses. I then examine the multiple ways exponents of these styles interact with one another by focusing on the early-twentieth-century nationalist orientalist, Sri Aurobindo. Aurobindo’s thought took form in a colonial framework and has been used in various ways by postcolonial writers. An anti-British nationalist, he was by no means complicit in British imperialism. Neither can it be said, as some Saidians do, that the nationalist style of orientalism was just an imitative indigenous reversal of European discourse, using terms like “Hinduism” that had been invented by Europeans. Five problems that Aurobindo dealt with are still of interest to historians: the significance of the Vedas, the date of the vedic texts, the Aryan invasion theory, the Aryan-Dravidian distinction, and the idea that spirituality is the essence of India. His views on these topics have been criticized by Leftist and Saidian orientalists, and appropriated by reactionary “Hindutva” writers. Such critics concentrate on that portion of Aurobindo’s work which stands in opposition to or supports their own views. A more balanced approach to the nationalist orientalism of Aurobindo and others would take account of their religious and political assumptions, but view their project as an attempt to create an alternative language of discourse. Although in need of criticism in the light of modern scholarship, their work offers a way to recognize cultural particularity while keeping the channels of intercultural dialogue open
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ranjan Ghosh (2007). 5. India, Itihasa, and Inter-Historiographical Discourse. History and Theory 46 (2):210–217.
Meera Nanda (2005). Response to My Critics. Social Epistemology 19 (1):147 – 191.
Andrew Sartori (2010). The Transfiguration of Duty in Aurobindo's Essays on the Gita. Modern Intellectual History 7 (2):319-334.
Similar books and articles
Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, Achim Mittag & Jörn Rüsen (eds.) (2005). Historical Truth, Historical Criticism, and Ideology: Chinese Historiography and Historical Culture From a New Comparative Perspective. Brill.
Gabriella Pigozzi (2005). Two Aggregation Paradoxes in Social Decision Making: The Ostrogorski Paradox and the Discursive Dilemma. Episteme 2 (2):119-128.
Dustin Tucker & Richmond H. Thomason (2011). Paradoxes of Intensionality. Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):394-411.
Daya Krishna (2001). New Perspectives in Indian Philosophy. Rawat Publications.
Eli Franco & Karin Preisendanz (eds.) (2007). Beyond Orientalism: The Work of Wilhelm Halbfass and its Impact on Indian and Cross-Cultural Studies. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
Claire Norton (ed.) (2007). Nationalism, Historiography, and the (Re)Construction of the Past. New Academia Pub..
Felice Aull & Bradley Lewis (2004). Medical Intellectuals: Resisting Medical Orientalism. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Humanities 25 (2):87-108.
Gary Shapiro (2002). Shades and Shining: Thoughts on John Sallis's Shades – of Painting at the Limit. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 35 (1):87-96.
Ronald Edmund Doel & Thomas Söderqvist (eds.) (2006). The Historiography of Contemporary Science, Technology, and Medicine: Writing Recent Science. Routledge.
Alexander Lyon Macfie (2006). The Manifold Paradoxes of Orientalism. In A. L. Macfie (ed.), The Philosophy of History: Talks Given at the Institute of Historical Research, London, 2000-2006. Palgrave Macmillan
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #189,657 of 1,725,168 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,103 of 1,725,168 )
How can I increase my downloads?