Seminar paper from the year 2012 in the subject Philosophy - Philosophy Beyond Occidental Tradition, grade: 1.0, University of Vienna (Institut für Philosophie), course: Seminar Texte zur postkolonialen Theorie, language: English, abstract: 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 Saids work, concedes that Saids book stimulated a necessary and

valuable debate among scholars who study the Middle East, Islam, and colonial history.

(Varisco 2007, XII).

Since a 10page 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 Saids 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 Saids critics, like Maria do Mar Castro Varela, Daniel Martin Varisco

or John McLeod interpret and evaluate the distinction?