> And the use of the term ‘expedition’ carries orientalist associations
?
?
What I suppose they're driving at when they say that "expedition" carries "orientalist associations" is that describing a trip to post-Soviet states in today's world as "an expedition" is reductionist in that it implies those places are akin to the savage frontier into which Europeans and Americans ventured in search of land to appropriate from the indigenous populations.
Now, I'm sympathetic to the idea that a Dagestan native might take umbrage at a trip to their home being referred to as an expedition, as if Dagestan is wild and untamed frontier ripe for staking land claims and colonization. It's somebody's home, hypothetically.
But considering the author is a Russian who probably speaks English as an nth language, I'm not so sure that I'd agree with the TFArticle's characterization of the term "expedition". I speak French and my command of the vocabulary is not nearly as good as in English for me. Words have subtext and nuance, and unless you master a language you're bound to choose inapt words that might give off the wrong connotation inadvertently.
It reads like virtue-signalling to me on the part of Valeria Costa-Kostritsky.
Somewhat ironically, the "Orientalism" you are referring to is an American-centric interpretation, which doesn't really have global acceptance as a theory. Orientalism was attempted to be redefined single handedly redefined in 1978 by an American professor (Edward Said with a book of the same name).
Notably, America is pretty unique in considering "oriental" an offensive term - Europe & elsewhere use the term freely without any negative connotations.
You are wrong, some do, some don't. I would debate that its reduction is usage is because of the negative connotations, but let's leave it at that.
Edward Said has been hugely influential also in Europe's academia and intellectual discourse. I would also be astonished if there had been no influence in "the orient".
I'm betting that the "offensiveness" of the term, if it ever takes root here, would likely be a invasive American import than homegrown.
that's not true - a friend of mine, an European academic in (east) Asian studies - told me the whole academic field in Europe considers the term outdated and incorrect.
That's an interpretation I never heard. Here in France (and in Europe as far as I know), Orientalism is an artistic current from the 18th to the early 20th focused on taking inspiration from the faraway, exotic, attractive Eastern cultures. To make a crude comparison, it would be much closer to “weeaboos” (albeit larger in scope, ranging from Maghreb to Afghanistan) than to the White Man Burden.
Although there were a lot of cliches born there (the Turkish harems, the Arabian cheikhs, the wild and free Bedouins, the proud and fierce Afghan warrior, etc.), there was definitely no feeling of need of settling or taming, as the whole point was the fascination for these cultures that hadn't really seeped through Europe until then.
> Orientalism is an artistic current from the 18th to the early 20th focused on taking inspiration from the faraway, exotic, attractive Eastern cultures.
You’re not wrong, but Said’s work really changed the way that movement is generally understood.
With all due respect to Said, I'm not yet willing to accept the complete redefinition of a term well-anchored in European art history for over two centuries on the basis of a book by a single American scholar -- book which is, moreover, highly debated by other academics of the field.
Your original response to parent was “I haven’t heard this before, so it must be wrong”. That’s a very boring way to approach the world.
Now you’ve pivoted from saying the usage is unfamiliar to dismissing it as “highly debated by other academics in the field”, implying that you are familiar with it after all! Okay.
Anyway, what a weird hill to die on.
It's rather that all of the definitions of orientalism I have been taught both at home, at school, and in the literature revolve about culture, all the uses of it I have witnessed talk about culture, I have read Salambo, Zadig, and other classics, I have visited museum filled to brim with European paintings from the period depicting odalisques, harems, bedouins, tuaregs, mosques, fantasia, Turkish baths, city drooling of sun on the Mediterranean, I have assisted to Les Indes Galantes, Der Entführung aus dem Serail and the Italian in Algiers, and the only mention I heard of Orientalism being used in this meaning comes from a few Americans, and a mention in the US wiki stating “Since the publication of Edward Said's Orientalism in 1978, much academic discourse has begun to use the term "Orientalism" to refer to a general patronizing Western attitude towards Middle Eastern, Asian, and North African societies”. So no, I don't intend, for now, to replace the semantic of this centennial word because of a controversial publication.
> implying that you are familiar with it after all!
Familiar with it, as “I just read the wiki page of the author, which is extremely critical against the book”.
The artistic cliches were froth that made these distant locations somewhat comprehensible to home audiences. Not incidentally, they also sold them as investment opportunities and potential locations for personal commercial and military adventures - and occasionally artistic and erotic adventures too.
Just like nowadays, exhibiting a taste for Vietnamese or Bengali culture doesn't imply that you are a staunch supporter of children's slavery, 19th century people fantasizing about lascivious odalisques and fierce Cheikhs or Byron writing about Transoxania doesn't have much to do with the Concessions harbours.