Orientalism versus Occidentalism?

New Literary History, The University of Virginia. All rights reserved.

New Literary History 28.1 (1997) 57-67

Wang Ning

Postcolonialism, an original theoretical concept in Western critical discourse, actually contains two
aspects: postcolonial literature and postcolonial theory. But although generated in Western cultural
soil, it has come to have more and more appeal to Third-World intellectuals both within and outside
of the Western empire. In recent years, it has been frequently discussed among Chinese scholars and
cultural critics in the mainland, Hong Kong, and Taiwan as well as in overseas Chinese critical circles.
Writings counter to this concept are called "Post-Orientalism" (hou dongfangzhuyi). 1 Inside China,
some scholars or critics attack film directors Zhang Yimou and Chen Kaige whose successes in various
international film festivals depend largely upon their being recognized by Western scholars and critics
because their films are regarded as a version of Orientalism, or more exactly, as images made
exclusively for a Western audience. 2 Meanwhile, overseas Chinese scholars view this attack on Zhang
and Chen as a kind of Occidentalism. But to advocate an opposition between Orientalism and
Occidentalism at the present time seems inappropriate. It is no easy job, however, to refute these ideas.
I would like first of all to reexamine the construction and interpretation of the concept of Orientalism
described by Edward Said, then question the so-called "Occidentalism," and finally, try to prove that
in the current era, the main tendency is cultural dialogue rather than cultural opposition.

Questioning Said's "Orientalism"

Obviously, postcolonialism as a theoretical concept is not monolithic, but pluralistic. It takes at least
three forms: the one constructed by Gayatri C. Spivak and characterized by Third-World feminism and
deconstructive thought and writing; the one practiced by Homi Bhabha and marked by strong Third-
Worldist cultural critique and postmodern parody always producing ambiguity; and the one
constructed and theorized by Edward Said and characterized by his description and construction of
Orientalism. In the current debate on East-West cultural relations, his writings are most influential and
even most quoted or [End Page 57] discussed in the Oriental or Third-World countries. Since the
publication of his Orientalism, the concept has been one of the major theoretical issues attracting the
attention of both Eastern and Western scholars. According to Said, "Orientalism is not a mere political

1
subject matter or field that is reflected passively by culture, scholarship, or institutions; nor is it a large
and diffuse collection of texts about the Orient; nor is it representative and expressive of some
nefarious 'Western' imperialist plot to hold down the 'Oriental' world. . . . Indeed, my real argument is
that Orientalism is--and does not simply represent--a considerable dimension of modern political-
intellectual culture, and as such has less to do with the Orient than it does with 'our' world." 3

Said here clearly illustrates that the logical theorizing perspective from which to construct Orientalism
is not that of the "Orient" but that of its opposite side--the "Occident." That is, the "Orient" is merely
what exists in the eyes of certain Western people. It is constructed as an "other" opposed to the
Occident. If the Occident is both geographically and culturally speaking at the very center of the world,
the Orient is undoubtedly at its periphery, subject to the power of this center. According to Said,
Orientalism contains at least the following connotations: First, it refers to a mode of thinking based on
the difference in ontology and epistemology between the Orient and the Occident. The Orient and
Occident are in separate hemispheres on earth, opposing each other in many respects due to their
striking differences, politically, economically, and even linguistically. Second, it refers to a way of
dominance of the powerful West over the weak East and its oppression of the latter. On the basis of
such an unequal relationship, "Orientalism" has become a kind of "Oriental myth" invented and
appreciated by Westerners who have little actual knowledge of the Orient and the Third World, but
have some prejudice against and curiosity about the latter. As far as the connotation of Orientalism is
concerned, Said further points out that it overlaps three fields: the history of cultural relations between
the East and the West which has lasted for over four thousand years; a discipline in which one
generation after another of scholars dealing with Oriental languages and cultures are trained; and an
image of the "other" created by generations of Westerners about the Orient. For a long period of time,
the Oriental in the eyes of Westerners has been both "stupid" and "lazy" on the one hand, but on the
other hand, the Orient itself is certainly somewhat "mysterious" and attractive for its being far from
the imperial center and the metropolitan countries (see O 1-28). Since the Occident is already the
"other" to the Oriental, the "Orient" in the eyes of Westerners is just an "other" of this "other." In this
way, Said argues, Orientalism, among its other connotations, is a deep-rooted episteme of Westerners
about the Orient that has always [End Page 58] functioned as part and parcel of Euro-American
colonialist ideology. 4 Since the concept of Orientalism is created by Westerners as a "myth" or a false
image, it is problematic and illusive. What then is Said's own attitude? This is the starting point for the
present essay that attempts to question his "Orientalism." It is a question that I, as a scholar from the
Orient, find provocative.

2
We should first of all recognize that Said's book has indeed opened up for scholars of comparative
literature and cultural studies a new theoretic horizon, which enables us to explore a "marginalized"
sphere which has long been neglected and even deliberately overlooked by mainstream Western
academic circles. The Orient geographically exists separately from the Western world, but the "Orient"
does not merely refer to a geographical location. It also has a very profound political and cultural
connotation. This "Orient" has become the "other" of the West, from which perspective Western people
reflect its world. Thus it is absolutely necessary for them to have such an "other." Just as Said writes
in his "Introduction," "The Orient was almost a European invention, and had been since antiquity a
place of romance, exotic beings, haunting memories and landscapes, remarkable experiences. Now it
was disappearing; in a sense it had happened, its time was over" (O 1). Said expresses here his
somewhat implicit and ambivalent attitude: on the one hand, as an Oriental descendent, he has all the
time been recollecting the once-powerful Orient in history, feeling sad about its disappearance; on the
other hand, as a high-ranking scholar in the West, he cannot help feeling proud of himself, especially
qualified to deal with the "Orient" as an "other" which is unfamiliar to mainstream Western scholarship
but with which he has countless ties. Due to his dislike for Western imperialist hegemony, Said starts
with his critique of the Western empires by pointing out the axiomatic historical fact of Western
dominance over the Orient. "From the beginning of the nineteenth century until the end of World War
II France and Britain dominated the Orient and Orientalism; since World War II America has
dominated the Orient, and approaches it as France and Britain once did" (O 4). Not only should the
Eastern political system model itself on the American one, and its economy keep up with the Western
developed countries, with the United States as their center, but Oriental culture should be reframed in
Western discourse in order to become significant. In such Oriental countries as China, India, and Japan,
to be modernized simply means to be Westernized. Especially in current China, to realize
modernization in an all-around way is almost equal to being Westernized in an all-around way.
Thousands of Oriental students have tried their best to obtain a degree in the department of Oriental
languages and cultures in a Western university and then redoubled their efforts to get a green [End
Page 59] card in the West. All this cannot but imply the natural superiority of the West to the East. In
contrast, the Orient is nothing but an "other" far from the imperial center, which could be used to
reflect on its culture only when the West has begun to be on the decline. If we refer to the unequal
East-West cultural relations, I think Said is absolutely correct. In this respect, Said's book is significant
because it encourages mainstream Western scholarship to shift its attention to the Orient with a stress
on the "anticolonialist" factor.

3
What Said has attempted is a certain sense of "decentralization" and "deconstruction," actually
anticipating the "demarginalizing" and "recentralizing" tendency after the decline of the international
postmodernism debate. We probably notice that one of the important reading strategies of
deconstructive criticism is to undermine from within Western culture the so-called "logocentrism." As
one of the important members of American deconstructive circles in the 1960s and 1970s, Said's
special contribution lies in his Oriental extraction which offers him a unique perspective of observation
and critique: from the perspective of the "other" (Orient) to criticize the long-standing political and
cultural "Eurocentrism" or "West-centrism," or more specifically, moving from the periphery to the
center and finally deconstructing the sense of the "center." It is where the positive significance of his
construction of "Orientalism" lies. His "Oriental" perspective, however, is merely a provisional
strategy for deconstructing the center. In discussing the "otherness" of Orientalism, Said points out:
"Thus all of Orientalism stands forth and away from the Orient: that Orientalism makes sense at all
depends more on the West than on the Orient, and this sense is directly indebted to various Western
techniques of representation that make the Orient visible, clear, 'there' in discourse about it" (O 21-
22).

This profound insight into and strong critique of the unequal relationship between the East and the
West certainly anticipates his later comprehensive attack on and criticism of imperialism and cultural
5
hegemony. But just as the plurality-oriented tendency is one of the important strategies of
deconstructive criticism, "Orientalism" constructed by Westerners is to Said not at all a totality, but
rather a series of multiple connotations and orientations. He concludes that there is a linguistic Orient,
a Freudian Orient, a Spenglerian Orient, a Darwinian Orient, a racist Orient, and so forth. But there is
no Orient or Orientalism constructed according to a "pure" Oriental understanding of it without
preconditions. So "West-centrism" still haunts him in dealing with this problem. The so-called Orient
or Orientalism is nothing but an empty shell on which "West-centrism" functions. Thus Said's critique
again shows his "anticolonialism" to some extent. [End Page 60]

As quite a few Eastern and Western scholars have already noticed, however, the "Orient" and
"Orientalism" constructed by Said have their inevitable limitations, which lie chiefly in their
geographical, cultural, and literary aspects. It is these limitations that provide us Third World scholars
and critics with a theoretical basis on which to question and reconsider his Orientalism.

First, we should point out its geographical limitation, which is restricted by his family background, as
well as his scope of knowledge and learning. As is well known, the "Orient," geographically speaking,
covers at least the wide areas of Asia, Africa, and Australia, but in Said's book, the boundary line stops

4
at the Near East and Middle East. Such regions as Southeast Asia and such important Oriental countries
as China, India, and Japan are seldom touched upon; they pose a serious limitation to his theory
although he has added certain corrective analyses in his new book Culture and Imperialism.

Second, his "Orient" or "Orientalism" also has its ideological and cultural limitations. As far as its
ideological and cultural significance is concerned, the "Western" idea or culture that we usually deal
with in effect refers to the ideology or cultural concepts based on the bourgeois value standard
prevailing in Western Europe and North America, while those contrary to them are normally regarded
as the "Oriental" concepts. It is on the basis of this striking difference in ideology and culture that the
East and the West were in a state of opposition during the cold-war period after World War II; with
the end of the cold war, East-West relations have entered a post-cold war period, during which,
according to Samuel Huntington, "The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source
of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the
principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations.
6
The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics." Among Oriental cultures, the "most
prominent form of this cooperation is the Confucian-Islamic connection that has emerged to challenge
Western interests, values and power" (45). Huntington has here correctly grasped the two origins of
Oriental cultures, the Arab countries and China, which have, especially the latter, been overlooked by
Said.

Moreover, due to the limitations of other geographical and ideological factors, Said's Orientalism, in
the sense of Oriental studies, naturally leads to his limitation in comparative literature studies: the texts
he discusses are mostly from the English or english -speaking world rather than from the non-English-
speaking or other Third-World countries, while comparative literature is not only cross-national and
interdisciplinary but also cross-cultural and cross-linguistic. In this way, the limitations of his research
as well as that of all the postcolonial academic [End Page 61] studies are obviously discernible. It is
true that to conduct comparative literature studies from the postcolonial perspective could break
through the boundary line of geography and disciplines, but cannot break through the boundary line
of languages, which is the very problem that we Oriental scholars of comparative literature and cultural
studies must solve in our research.

"Occidentalism":
A Unique Postcolonial Strategy of the Third World

5
As I have discussed above, the concept of Orientalism constructed by Said is in the final analysis an
indeterminate or problematic one although it has indeed been theoretically discussed and academically
observed by both Western and Eastern scholars. In contrast, "Occidentalism" as its assumed
counterpart is an all the more indeterminate and problematic "quasi-theoretical" concept; I have not
yet read a specialized work on it, although the concept has already permeated some people's
consciousness and even subconscious. 7 But it has not yet become an independent discipline like that
of Oriental studies in the West. Said concludes his Orientalism with the statement, "I hope to have
shown my reader that the answer to Orientalism is not Occidentalism" (O 328). He is certainly quite
right in pointing out the indeterminacy of the proposed "Occidentalism" in the Oriental or Third-World
countries. But unfortunately, Occidentalism, like a ghost, has already been haunting such Oriental
countries as the Arab countries, India, and China, which all have long cultural traditions, spreading its
seeds in each appropriate soil, climate, and environment. These countries or regions have gradually
developed oppositional forms to Orientalism in the eyes of Westerners. Undoubtedly, the rise of
Occidentalism has more or less formed a challenge to those Western hegemonists who have always
had a bias against the Orient. This must call forth the attention of every one of us who is engaged in
dealing with the cultural relations between the East and the West and who sincerely advocates
academic exchange and theoretical dialogue between the East and the West.

Like its counterpart, Occidentalism in different places manifests itself in different forms: In the Middle
East and the Arab countries where Islamic culture is dominant, Occidentalism manifests itself as an
antagonistic form that strongly opposes Western hegemonism represented by the United States, and
sometimes even evolves into large-scale armed clashes. For example, the Libyan-American
antagonism several years ago, the blood-shedding conflict between the Iraqi and the Allied Army [End
Page 62] and the Iranian-American conflict are the most evident cases. In these cases, "Occident" is
also constructed as an "other," and the Occidentalism in the eyes of the Oriental is obviously
characterized by the Third World's anticolonialist and antihegemonic tendency. In those countries or
regions characterized by evident "postcoloniality," such as India, the English which refers to the
language used in Britain has varied into the english which is marked with indigenous dialects and
pronunciation, and english cultures and literatures have thus been marked with "postcoloniality."
Therefore, Occidentalism as opposed to Orientalism has at one time been regarded as a "decolonizing"
and even anti-colonialist strategy of discourse getting along with the local decolonizing movement.
Even in such a developed Oriental country as Japan which apparently belongs among the developed
group in its economic sense, Occidentalism has its own unique manifestation: on the one hand, Japan
always views Europe and America as its economic rivals; therefore the West actually refers to the

6
geographically Western countries. On the other hand, Japan has gradually realized its double cultural
coloniality, namely, it was influenced by China before the nineteenth century and penetrated and
influenced by the West after the latter part of the nineteenth century, and it was actually colonized after
World War II. So it is not surprising that Occidentalism in Japanese culture manifests itself as a
"decolonizing" tendency and a drive to reconstruct Japanese culture, which found particular
embodiment in the organizing of the thirteenth International Comparative Literature Congress in 1991.
8

As a postcolonialist strategy of discourse in the Oriental and Third-World countries, 9 Occidentalism

has indeed been in the minds of many people although it has not yet become a theoretical topic. It
every now and then manipulates our research on East-West cultural relations, sometimes playing a role
of intensifying the East-West opposition rather than establishing communication and dialogue.
Undoubtedly, in some sense it lends support to our struggle against Western cultural hegemony. It
could sometimes even help to give full play to a certain national spirit and national pride to more or
less contain Western hegemony. But meanwhile, we must confront the fact that, in the current age
characterized by cultural pluralism and different forces coexisting with and complementing each other,
cultural relativism has once again attracted people's attention. It has revealed an attitude different from
the old cultural relativism--that is, any culture, be it Eastern or Western, simply exists in relation to
another culture with its superiority and inferiority varying. No one culture can replace another even if
it were extremely powerful. Since national coexistence and cultural dialogue have become irresistible
historical trends, any overemphasis on the superiority of a national or regional culture might well lead
to new cultural oppositions [End Page 63] or clashes. Thus, in my view, advocating Occidentalism
and looking upon it as a counterpart to Orientalism is undesirable at present.

It should be admitted, however, that the presence of Occidentalism in China is not strange at all. It has
been in the collective unconscious of modern Chinese people ever since the aggression and penetration
made by Western powers in China during the Opium War in 1840. When Chinese people drove these
powers out of China and founded our People's Republic in 1949, it was pushed to an extreme,
manipulating the thinking of the Chinese people and their political, economic, and cultural strategies
during the cold-war period. Undoubtedly, in the struggle against imperialism and hegemonism
immediately after the founding of the People's Republic, Occidentalism did play a certain positive role
in establishing China's position in the world and breaking through its isolation and economic sanction
issued by the Western clique. But if we still go to that extreme as practiced forty years ago, it would
put China into a new state of isolation, which would repeat the bitter lesson of the past. In those years

7
before China's openness to the outside world and economic reform, Occidentalism manifested itself in
different forms during different periods, but its fundamental tone was hostile to the West, especially
the U.S. imperialists, and sometimes even the Soviet social imperialists. In China today, due to the
flood of various Western theories, trends, and values into China since the beginning of the 1980s, the
10
Chinese people's original protective mechanism has collapsed, and their view of the West has
changed dramatically. To some people, the plentiful and prosperous Western material civilization and
its culture are considered superior to Oriental culture; to them the Western world is a heaven. They
seek an opportunity to pay respects to it or enjoy themselves there. But to other people, at least in their
subconscious, because of the education they have received, the West, and the U.S. in particular, has
always been our enemy, oppressing us, invading our motherland, and even killing our countrymen. To
these people, the West is in decline, its outward prosperity merely a false mask through which we can
see its implied crisis; to them the twenty-first century will surely be the century of China or the Orient,
and Oriental culture is superior to Western culture and is bound to dominate the world. 11 In short, the
West to these people is nothing but a hell and even an evil spirit. Obviously, the two attitudes show
that if we could have dialogue with the West, this kind of dialogue is by no means equal: either Chinese
culture dominates or is dominated. Will there be no other way out of these simple modes of thinking
characterized by binary opposition?

In literature and artwork in current China, Occidentalism chiefly manifests itself as a will to success
in overseas Chinese competition with [End Page 64] Westerners: in the West, the Chinese usually
work hard to succeed in entering the mainstream Western world of culture. This view finds
embodiment in the protagonists of such nonfiction as Manhadun de Zhongguo nüren (A Chinese
Woman in Manhattan, 1993) by Zhou Li and such a novelette as Bolin de tiaozao (Fleas in Berlin,
1993) by Yu Heizi, or they plunge themselves into a Chinese restaurant in Chinatown seeking by hard
work to have a plentiful and quiet life far from the homeland, which is reflected in Beijingren zai
niuyue (A Native of Beijing in New York, 1994) by Cao Guilin, 12 or to defeat their rivals in a drastic
competition and fix their position in a Western venture, such as in the TV series Yanghang li de
Zhongguo xiaojie (Chinese Girls in Foreign Firms, 1995), and so on. In all these texts and art, an old
theme frequently appears: to succeed in the West, a non-Westerner should first of all identify
himself/herself as a Westerner at the expense of his/her own national and cultural identity. But after
success, one cannot but think of seeking his/her native country and cultural identity. This is vividly
represented in many narratives of Chinese Americans who have achieved success through hard work
and bitter struggle. In literary study or criticism, some scholars try to resist Western influence by giving
full play to the essence of Chinese culture, which finds particular embodiment in the so-called "hou

8
guoxue" (Post-Chinese-Studies). These aim to prevent Western critical concepts and discourses from
entering Chinese critical circles, or try to trace the possible influence of Chinese literature on Western
literature in comparative literature studies, and so forth.

In short, Occidentalism has indeed entered our discourse of comparative culture, literature studies, and
literary criticism although few have realized it. On some occasions Occidentalism has been pushed to
an extreme, hindering us from carrying on an equal dialogue with Western and international
scholarship. Although it has not been institutionalized as a discipline, its social influence should not
be neglected. In today's context of East-West cultural and academic dialogue, this phenomenon should
call forth our vigilance. So I will anatomize its inadequacy and try to deconstruct the artificial
opposition between the East and the West.

A Tentative Conclusion:
Dialogue and the Deconstruction of the Binary Opposition

People might well be puzzled as to why the Huntington essay "The Clash of Civilizations?" roused
such strong response and reaction from the overseas Chinese circles. One vital reason is that the essay
overemphasizes the future tendency of culture; it places Muslim culture and Confucian culture among
the most dangerous enemies of the West and [End Page 65] anticipates that the clash of civilizations
or cultures will dominate the future development of mankind. It seems somewhat threatening although
the threat has not yet been realized by most people. In contrast, those who advocate cultural relativism
or do not share this view maintain a cultural dialogue by emphasizing the relative significance and
unique value of each culture so that each culture possesses its own value and space of function. I think
this view actually represents the greatest interests and basic requirements of the majority of people in
the world today. Moreover their idea is reasonable and possible.

The Orientalism described by Said has undergone a long period of development and become a
relatively mature body of theory and a critical discourse apart from its existence as an academic
discipline in many Western universities. Its existence is still possible although the concept itself is
becoming problematic and indeterminate along with the rediscovery of the real Orient by more and
more Western people in this age of information. But compared with Orientalism, the so-called
"Occidentalism" is all the more illusive and problematic. Apart from its immaturity, its connotation
can hardly form a kind of binary opposition with the former. Occidentalism only manifests itself, at
least in the current stage, as a prevailing social and cultural trend and a state of mind of certain people,
or a strategy of discourse opposed to Western cultural hegemonism, or an ideological force challenging

9
the Western power, and so forth. It is far from a full-fledged episteme covering such a wide range of
learning and representation as Orientalism, nor has it become a discipline. As far as the learning dealing
with Western languages and cultures in China is concerned, I would rather call it "Western studies" in
order to differentiate it from Occidentalism and the research field of "non-Western studies" in the
West. In view of its striking ideological critique, "Occidentalism" obviously runs counter to the current
historical trend. It may well do harm to our cultural communication and academic exchange with
Western and international scholarship rather than vice versa. But on the other hand, since it is still
prevalent in present-day China and some other Oriental countries, it deserves study and analysis. In
this respect, the present essay is just a beginning.

Peking University

Wang Ning is Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Peking University and Director of
the Research Institute for Postmodern Studies. He is the author of Comparative Literature and
Contemporary Chinese Literature (1992), Depth Psychology and Literary Criticism (1992), and
Studies of 20th Century Western Literature (1993), all of which were written in Chinese. He is
currently working on a book (in English) concerning postcolonialism and cultural studies.

Notes
1. The "Post-Orientalism" I mention here refers to some overseas Chinese scholars' ideas contrary to those of
Orientalism. They include Zhang Longxi, Henry Y. H. Zhao, Xiaomei Chen, and Rey Chow, although there are some
differences and debates among them.
2. In this respect, one of the earlier essays was written by Wang Gan, an avant-garde critic, entitled "Da hong denglong
wei shui gua?" (For Whom is the Red Lantern Raised?), Wenhui bao (Wenhui Daily), October 14, 1992. Since its first
appearance, it has been quoted and discussed and even criticized by many other critics in China.
3. Edward Said, Orientalism (New York, 1978), p. 12; hereafter cited in text as O.
4. In this respect, see my essay in Chinese, "Dongfangzhuyi, houzhiminzhuyi he wenhua baquanzhuyi pipan: saiyide de
houzhiminzhuyi lilun pouxi" (Orientalism, Postcolonialism and the Critique of Cultural Hegemonism: A Theoretical
Anatomy of Edward Said's Postcolonial Theory), Beijingdaxue xuebao (Journal of Peking University), 2 (1995), 57.
5. Edward Said, Culture and Imperialism (London, 1993), p. 292.
6. See Samuel Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs, 72, no. 3 (1993), p. 22; hereafter cited in text.
7. Although I am informed that Xiaomei Chen has written a book about Occidentalism which has already been published
in English, I have not yet read it.
8. As far as its scale is concerned, Japan invited quite a few Oriental or Third-World scholars, including over thirty
Chinese (mainland) scholars, to participate in the Congress out of its powerful economic strength. Thus scholars from the
East and those from the West are close in number, which is obviously marked with an Oriental tendency with the
Japanese language used as the third working language during the ICLA Congress. This sharply contrasts with the 14th
ICLA Congress held in Edmonton where few scholars were from the East.
9. In view of the duplicity and ambiguous significance of postcolonialism, I adopt only its anticolonialist aspect and leave
aside its neocolonialist one.
10. See Wang Ning, "Confronting Western Influence: Rethinking Chinese Literature of the New Period," New Literary
History, 24 (1993), 905.

10
11. One of the typical examples is the Orientalist Ji Xianlin, whose recent essays and speeches in Chinese always affirm
this idea: "Sanshi nian he dong, sanshi nian he xi" (meaning "In the past, the West is strong, but now vice versa").
12. A TV series with the same title was extremely popular in 1994 in (mainland) China, and some Chinese parents could
not help making long distance calls to their children urging them to come back home as early as possible. Others just say
that they will never let their children go abroad.

11