Edward Said's Orientalism and the Power of Technology
Podcast:
I will use Edward Said's book Orientalism in light of Johnson's article "Refiguring the End of Technology." I will show how these two texts urge to be cognizant of the power of technology, not only how technological advances affect our relationships with other nations but also how we "represent" these relationships.
(19 votes)
Comments
Is it a two way street?
I appreciate your application of Johnson's thoughts on the power technology and language have on creating the reality they participate in. Your analysis of Said's understanding of Orientalism makes the concept of accessible. I wonder, though, if the problem that you assert Said raises, that the idea of Orientalism is an artificially created concept, isn't it equally true in reverse? While we in the West clearly did and continue to view the world through our technology-dominated point of view, isn't it also true that the peoples of the East, or any "other-than-Western" people for that matter, were and are equally influenced by their own technological point of view in building an equally artificial image of the West? Technology is a defining cultural given, no matter what culture one considers home.
It seems to me that building an artificial concept of the “Other” is an inevitable consequence of cross-cultural interaction. We use what we know to hang constructs on pegs and make sense out of the world as we move through it. That’s what conscious beings do. Unfortunately some technologies and points of view prove more dominating than others.
I second your concern that we critically attend to the responsibilities that accompany the power technology provides, whether it be the accessibility and democratizing influence of alphabetical writing, the destabilizing, but indeed liberating impact of smart-phone capabilities in fluid political conditions, or the dangerous implications of advanced weaponry in combat. Often, the most subtle and impossibly unforeseeable implications of a technological point of view turn out to be the most explosive.
Thank you for your comments;
Thank you for your comments; however, I want to add a few points for clarity. I do think that it’s a two-way street, as you point out. Actually, I would say that it’s more than a two-way street, because a two-way street would imply that there is only two points of reference: Eastern and Western. I think that there is a myriad of different manners in which both the East and West has view one another, and it’s an interesting study to explore in literature.
While I agree with your contention that the East can, indeed, create its own perception of the West through literature, I think that your astute observation benefits my point. Countries – especially those in power – must be cognizant of how technological advancements affect their relationship to other countries, especially those countries that aren’t in the position of power. Moreover, countries must, I find, be aware of how they represent these relationships, as history has continually shown that misrepresentations of other countries has been detrimental, for both countries
My use of Said is to merely show how Western powers have misrepresented – and by extension, dominated – the East. Said is critically aware how the West’s “rhetoric” has created an alternative reality to East. But you are correct, I think, that this is a two-way street, and powers must be ethically responsible in an age of technological advancements.
Technology Changes But Never Leaves
Hey Steve,
I quite enjoyed your podcast in part because in my own course of study postcolonial themes and literature are a focus I persue. I was quite interested in the way you tied together Said's piece, written when the technologies we have now had not even been contemplated, and the newer pieces that take these technologies as granted.
As you point out, one main theme of postcolonial thought revolves around who has the right to speak for and/or represent those who are, or have been, colonized. One aspect of this issue is the language that is to be used in this representation. As you also note, many of our articles thus far this semester have asserted the idea of technology as a language, as well as the inverse, language as a technology. Since language is seen as a seat of power, political and otherwise, then technology, by default, also is a means of power.
What interests me most about your discussion is your question of what responsability technologically advanced nations have to those less technologically advanced. It seems to me that technology has always played a role in colonization: the British and other Europeans had guns, cannons, ships, horses etc. and the military stratagies to utilize these technologies to the fullest. Thus technology has always played a prominent part in the subjectification of colonized peoples.
What strikes me as interesting is that the very 'East' that Said deals with is now advancing past the 'West' in terms of many technologies and their applications. India immediately comes to mind, as well as, China whose government attempts to exercise extreme control over the internet access of its population. Yet this same population uses technology such as email, twitter and portable devices such as smart phones, to undermine the very government that attempts to block its desired access. These same types of 'smart mobs' can be seen acting all over the world in places like Egypt, Russia and Iran to demonstrate against and even overthrow governments they see as tyrannical. The question becomes: if Indians had iPhones when the British showed up, would the Raj have ever existed?
Nice Job,
Nate