Edward Said (1935-2003) has been widely praised as a leading thinker of post-colonialism
and even as one of its founding figures. Moreover, he “became one of the most widely known,
and controversial, intellectuals in the world during his lifetime” (Ashcroft 2009, 1). His best
known book, Orientalism (1978), is a milestone in post-colonial theory and was one of the
first examples for combining French critical theory with Anglophone cultural and textual
tradition (cf. Castro Varela 2005, 31). It actually paved the way for differentiating critical
Postcolonial Studies from the earlier Commonwealth Literary Studies with their uncritical
continuation of colonial prejudices (cf. ibid, 23). Even Daniel Varisco (2007), who argues for
a rather critical view of Said’s work, concedes that “Said’s book stimulated a necessary and
valuable debate among scholars who study the Middle East, Islam, and colonial history.”
(Varisco 2007, XII).
Since a 10-page term paper could never do justice to a literary and scientific masterpiece like
Orientalism, this paper picks out just a small detail of its rich content: In the third and last
chapter of Orientalism, Said introduces a distinction between two forms of Orientalism,
latent and manifest. The meaning of this dichotomy does not reveal its full significance at
first reading. What exactly did Said have in mind by using this terminology – perhaps
unconsciously in addition to what he writes about it on some 20 pages of his book?
Several scholars have commented on this distinction and its significance for Said’s work. This
paper will build on that material and attempt to analyze and summarize what can be found
out about the dichotomy. Particular interest will be devoted to the philosophical roots Said
was referring to when writing about latent and manifest Orientalism.
• Was he influenced by Arab Philosophy in using the dichotomy?
• Did he use the terms in the psychoanalytical sense introduced by Sigmund Freud and
also used by Jacques Lacan?
• How do some of Said’s critics, like Maria do Mar Castro Varela, Daniel Martin Varisco
or John McLeod interpret and evaluate the distinction?
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Edward Said on Latent and Manifest Orientalism
3. The philosophical Roots of Latent and Manifest
4. Said’s Critics on Latent and Manifest Orientalism
5. Final Remarks
6. Bibliography
Research Objectives and Core Themes
The primary objective of this paper is to examine and clarify the dichotomy between "latent" and "manifest" Orientalism as introduced by Edward Said in his seminal work, *Orientalism*. The paper investigates the philosophical roots of these terms—specifically exploring potential links to psychoanalytic theory and Arab philosophy—while critically evaluating how Said’s methodology and this specific conceptual distinction have been perceived and challenged by contemporary scholars.
- The conceptual distinction between latent and manifest Orientalism in Edward Said's theory.
- Philosophical and psychoanalytic influences on Said’s terminology (Freud, Lacan).
- Methodological critique of Said’s use of inductive reasoning.
- Evaluation of academic responses and critiques by scholars like Daniel Varisco and Maria do Mar Castro Varela.
Excerpt from the Book
Edward Said on Latent and Manifest Orientalism
Said begins the chapter titled “Latent and Manifest Orientalism” with some philosophizing about meaning and truth in language, quoting a famous dictum by Friedrich Nietzsche: “truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that this is what they are” (Said 1995, 203)1. This complements quite well his theory that Orientalism can be regarded “as a manner of regularized (or Orientalized) writing, vision, and study, dominated by imperatives, perspectives, and ideological biases ostensibly suited to the Orient.” (ibid, 202). It eventually leads to Said’s conviction that in the 19th century “every European, in what he could say about the Orient, was [...] a racist, an imperialist, and almost totally ethnocentric” (ibid, 204). He contends that “Orientalism is fundamentally a political doctrine willed over the Orient because the Orient was weaker than the West, which elided the Orient’s difference with its weakness” (ibid, 204).
Then he formulates the distinction he wants to introduce: The distinction I am making is really between an almost unconscious (and certainly an untouchable) positivity, which I shall call latent Orientalism, and the various stated views about Oriental society, languages, literatures, history, sociology, and so forth, which I shall call manifest Orientalism. (Said 1995, 206).
To pin it down, latent Orientalism is an unconscious positivity and manifest Orientalism consists of stated views about Oriental phenomena. The first definition, latent Orientalism, is of central importance to Said’s work and very well explicated many times in the book. But what kind of “stated views” does Said have in mind with the second definition, manifest Orientalism? Stated views of European Orientalists? Or stated views of Orientals? Or does he mean all kinds of stated views concerning the Orient? On the 24 pages of the chapter Said does not put forward any further definition or explanation of the dichotomy. However, a number of clues are provided, as excerpted in the following passages (cf. Said 1995, 206-225).
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter introduces Edward Said as a central figure in post-colonial studies and outlines the focus of the paper regarding his dichotomy of Orientalism.
Edward Said on Latent and Manifest Orientalism: This chapter analyzes Said's own definitions and introduces the key distinction between latent (unconscious) and manifest (stated) Orientalism.
The philosophical Roots of Latent and Manifest: This chapter explores the intellectual background of Said’s terminology, drawing comparisons to Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytic concepts and Arab philosophy.
Said’s Critics on Latent and Manifest Orientalism: This chapter presents the arguments of scholars who have criticized Said's methodology, particularly his use of inductive reasoning and the clarity of his dichotomy.
Final Remarks: This chapter summarizes the paper's findings, reiterating the relevance of the latent/manifest distinction in the context of Said's broader academic project.
Bibliography: This section provides a list of all academic sources cited within the term paper.
Keywords
Edward Said, Orientalism, Latent Orientalism, Manifest Orientalism, Post-colonialism, Psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, Jacques Lacan, Daniel Varisco, Inductive Reasoning, Cultural Theory, Ideology, Imperialism, Epistemology, Discourse Analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this term paper?
The paper examines the specific dichotomy of "latent" and "manifest" Orientalism as defined by Edward Said, analyzing its theoretical meaning and its practical application in his work.
What are the primary fields of study addressed in the text?
The work sits at the intersection of Post-colonial Theory, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis, while also incorporating elements of literary and critical history.
What is the main research question or goal?
The goal is to determine the exact meaning of Said's dichotomy, identify its intellectual origins, and assess the validity of critical arguments raised against Said's methodology regarding these terms.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author uses a comparative and critical literature analysis, contrasting Said's claims with those of his critics and investigating historical and philosophical references.
What does the main body of the work cover?
It covers Said’s initial conceptualization, an exploration of potential Freudian and Lacanian influences, and a detailed look at critiques provided by authors like Daniel Varisco and Maria do Mar Castro Varela.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is best characterized by terms such as Orientalism, Latent/Manifest dichotomy, Post-colonial theory, Edward Said, and ideological critique.
Did Edward Said explicitly acknowledge the influence of Freud on his terminology?
The paper suggests that while Said was familiar with Freudian terminology, his specific adaptation and the extent to which he explicitly relied on psychoanalytic roots remains a subject of investigation within the text.
How does Daniel Varisco critique Said’s use of the dichotomy?
Varisco argues that Said’s definition is often vague and that his use of inductive reasoning leads to a theory that is difficult to falsify and potentially based on selective evidence.
What is the distinction between "latent" and "manifest" in Said’s own words?
Said describes latent Orientalism as an "unconscious positivity" regarding the Orient, whereas manifest Orientalism consists of the "stated views" about Oriental phenomena.
- Quote paper
- Dkfm., BA Karl-Heinz Mayer (Author), 2012, Latent and Manifest Orientalism as Seen by Edward Said and his Critics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/273351
