As a primer for the thousands of En -glish majors who pack our survey courses each year, The Norton An-thology of English Literature is a testament to this discomfort: medievalhagiography and martyrology, the most popular literary genres of thelate Middle Ages, are not represented. F

This question did I never ask, but in deed they asked it of me, whereunto I made them no answer, but smiled.

But if we have offended God, we must sorrowfully acknowledge it before him—And98 he (saith Saint John, 1 Johan. 1)99 hath faithfully promised to forgive us our sins, if we so do, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If the law of truth be in the priest’s mouth, he is to be sought unto for godly counsel, Mala. 2.100 But if he be a blasphemous hypocrite or superstitious fool, he is to be shourned101 as a most pestilent poison.

nto Judas entered Satan, after the sop was given him, Joan. 13.94 where as the other Apostles received the body and blood of Christ. The table was all one to them both, so was the bread which their mouths received. The inward receivings then in Peter and in Judas made all the diversity, which was belief and unbelief, or faith and unfaithfulness, as Christ largely declareth in the 6 of Johan, where as he showed afore hand, the full doctrine of that mystical supper. Only he that believeth, hath there the promise of the life everlasting, and not he that eateth the material bread. Of God are they taught, and not of men, which truly understand this doctrine.9

A sacrament (saith Saint Augustine) is a sign, shape, or similitude of that it representeth, and no God nor yet thing represented. This word real or really is not of belief,73 for it is not in all the sacred scriptures. Only is it sophistically74 borrowed of the pagans’ learning by Winchester and his fellows, to corrupt our Christian faith.

Now concerning that blessed woman Anne Askew, which lately suffered the tyranny of this world for righteousness’ sake

In most terrible persecutions of the primitive church were the examinations and answers, torments and deaths of the constant martyrs written, and sent abroad all the whole world over, as testifieth Eusebius Cesariensis in his ecclesiastic history.

ierre Delooz, drawing our attention to the sociologicalconstruction of saints’ lives, suggests that[a]ll saints are more or lessconstructedin that, being necessarily saintsfor other people,theyare remodelled in the collective representation which is made of them. It often happens,even, that they are so remodelled that nothing of the real original is left, and, ultimately,some saints are solelyconstructedsaints simply because nothing is known about them his-torically: everything, including their existence, is a product of collective representation

Indeed, when religion became myth, historybecame our metaphysics—what Le ́vi-Strauss called ‘the myth of the West.

It is precisely the (permeable) boundary between realityand what we human beings, caught in the throes of memory and desire,conscious and unconscious or subconscious imagining, knowledge andexperience, and so on, that is the ‘topic’ of Virginia Woolf’s great book. HerLondon, or rather the part of it which Woolf’s heroine symbolizes, is fullyrecognizable as a realistic image of what London ‘must have been like’ in oraround 1920.

In fact, the field of biblical archaeology was originally developed as a way to confirm the veracity of the Bible by searching for independent archaeological evidence of biblical figures and events. But these archaeologists had little success in confirming the historicity of major events such as the great flood described in Genesis, and more and more biblical archaeology concerns itself with uncovering details about the social and cultural history of biblical peoples rather than with proving that the Bible is historically accurate.

ach of these kinds of historical writings has a different way of being  accurate, or true. There are also good reasons for why these writings might not be objectively accurate, which is not necessarily a reason to reject the Bible’s authority outright.

Authentic experiences and events surely underlie many biblical narratives. Archaeology may call the historicity of some texts into question, but it can also indicate the general veracity of others.

the shapers of biblical narratives were not concerned with getting it factually right; rather, their aim was to make an important point.

They are interpretive statements, not historical reports.

The growth of information about biblical languages and literary features led to the realization that biblical narratives about ancient Israel reached their final form many centuries after the events they describe. The narrators were not eyewitnesses to events they recount. Rather, they drew upon a variety of legends, traditions, folktales, and other materials that can no longer be identified; but few of these sources can be considered factual.

Geological evidence rules out the possibility, suggested in Gen 6-9, that the entire earth was covered with water in the eons since human life began.

But since the nineteenth century, and even earlier, biblical scholars have identified pervasive problems with this understanding of the relationship between the Bible and history.

Most scholars use a combination of these methods, as each reveals different aspects of the text, whether historical, cultural, sociological, literary, or theological. And when scholars of different backgrounds, faiths, and cultures weigh in, they bring their own unique experiences and questions to the text. Some scholars discuss literary approaches as though they are completely separate from historical-critical ones, but in fact the two overlap in significant ways. The fullest understanding of the biblical text is gained by trying to see the text from as many perspectives as possible

When Canada advanced its“diversity paradigm”in the 1960s and1970s, Quebec“abandoned homogeneity for duality”(Bouchard,2011:443) and subsequently adoptedinterculturalisme,an“intercultural”approach (Bouchard,2015). This minority nation’s response to its ethnicminorities has thus both deviated from the rest of Canada and changedover time

représentation politique des femmes au Québec a été et continue d'être médiatisée essentiellement via les actions du mouvement des femmes

rte que les stratégies donnent de la visibilité aux actions : pour que ça soit efficace, on croit que le groupe doit être visible. Les commentaires recueillis nous ont amenée à nuancer notre approche; plusieurs répondantes nous ont en effet expliqué qu'il était impossible d'isoler leur action et d'en mesurer l'impact lorsque cette action se situait à l'intérieur d'une stratégie plus large où plusieurs groupes étaient impliqués et où l'opinion publique était mobilisée. Ce

observation à faire : la spécialisation des groupes de femmes est une donnée relativement récente, correspondant pour l'essentiel aux groupes mis sur pied à partir des années '80, alors que les groupes des années '60 et '70 se donnaient des missions beaucoup plus larges, dans une volonté d'englober tous les aspects de la condition féminine.

hose pour la Voix des femmes, créée en 1960, et qui n'utilisait pas la terminologie féministe à ce moment-là. Quant à NAC, dont la création remonte aussi aux années '60, on répond que certains objectifs sont restés les mêmes, s'inscrivant dans la poursuite de l'égalité de droit et de fait pour les femmes en tout dans notre société. Mais à ces objectifs premiers s'ajoutent aujourd'hui la reconnaissance de la diversité des femmes et la pertinence d'avoir des analyses qui incluent cette diversité de situation des femmes. Au

plusieurs féministes, la théorie est une sphère de réflexion qui exclut, qui divise les universitaires des praticiennes qui travaillent à la base du mouvement13.

Tout d'abord, un premier constat : parmi les femmes rencontrées, certaines ne sont pas très à l'aise avec le terme féministe et ne se définissent pas comme féministes. L'une d'entre elles a horreur du mot, précisant qu'elle aime travailler avec les hommes. Ses propos reflètent néanmoins une adhésion au principe de l'égalité des sexes : « Avant de penser femme, il faut penser humain, parce que ça peut nous jouer des tours de toujours penser femme. Je ne suis pas féministe, mais je suis pour l'égalité des femmes, par exemple. Notre groupe, s'il était féministe, je ne sais pas si je serais devenue membre. »

stionne la possibilité même d'une condition féminine universelle, d'un récit unique de l'oppression et que les accusations de racisme et d'exclusion pleuvent dans la littérature féministe d'influence américaine

semble se dessiner une sorte de conflit des générations entre féministes : les plus vieilles qui refusent de penser autrement qu'en utilisant la lorgnette et les termes d'il y a trente ans, et qui ne cessent de rappeler aux jeunes femmes qu'elles sont aussi des victimes qui devraient craindre la perte de droits acquis et le retour en arrière, alors que les plus jeunes cherchent à reproblématiser les enjeux sous des angles différents, révisent les analyses qui ont prévalu dans le passé et refusent souvent la mobilisation collective comme forme personnelle d'engagement au profit d'actions à petite échelle ou davantage inscrites sur le territoire de la vie privée. À c

On observe donc un ecart significatifentre les opinions des candidates et celles des candidats quant a leur fagon de concevoir le role politique des femmes par rapport a la population feminine, les candidates se recon- naissant la responsabilite de representer leurs semblables, alors qu'un peu moins du tiers des repondants approuve

f. Les efforts en vue de changer et d'ameliorer le statut social des femmes, de meme que les actions du mouvement feministe pour y parvenir regoivent ainsi un appui largement majoritaire tant de la part des femmes que des hommes politiques. Notons qu'une majorit6 des candidates d6clarent etre membres d'un groupe de femmes, ou l'avoir ete au cours des cinq dernieres ann6es (comme 1'AFEAS, la FFQ et FRAPPE)

nnies. L'un de ces agents de changement est le mouvement feministe, qui fait reference aux dis- cours, aux pratiques et aux organisations qui proposent de nouveaux modeles de rapports sociopolitiques entre les sexes, inspires d'ideaux 6galitaires et autonomi

Methodol

Les partis politiques etant les produits de leur environnement,13 ils different dans leur organisation et leurs propositions programmatiques selon leur prise en consideration des interets des divers groupes sociaux. Au Canada, les partis politiques ne font pas exception puisqu'ils se demar- quent d'un point de vue ideologique.14 En raison de son orientation social-democrate, le Nouveau Parti democratique (NPD) est plus favo- rable aux mesures destinees a promouvoir l'egalite entre les Cana- diennes et les Canadiens, au moins en ce qui a trait a l'avortement15 et a l'action positive.16 Dans la population, le NPD est egalement perqu comme etant plus favorable aux dossiers touchant les femmes que le Parti conservateur (PC) et le Parti liberal du Canada (PLC).17 Au Que- bec, plusieurs auteurs montrent que le Parti liberal du Quebec (PLQ) est plus a droite que le Parti quebecois (pQ).

representent-elles leurs semblables (ce raisonnement vaut 6galement pour d'autres minorites)? Lorsqu'on envisage la question sous l'angle de la representation acting for, d'autres interrogations emergent: si l'on tient compte des conditions de vie fort variees que connaissent les femmes, selon quel critere peut-on les conceptualiser comme un groupe uni par des interets politiquem

e les femmes constituent un groupe social qui partage des interets communs par lesquels le pouvoir politique peut les apprehend

De ce phenomene pourrait decouler une meilleure representation de la population f6mi- nine, d'abord parce que, lorsqu'une minorite croit en importance, elle devient plus active,6 ensuite parce que l'experience d'activites non traditionnelles et la confrontation a la discrimination favorisent le deve- loppement d'une conscience feminis

”; “the art of subterfuge is highly developed in Arab life, as well as in Isl

After this auspicious start, we are told that Arabs stress conformity; that Arabs inhabit a shame culture whose “prestige system’.” involves the ability to attract followers and clients (as an aside we are told that “Arab society is and always has been based on a system of client-patron relationships”); that Arabs can function only in conflict situations; that prestige is based solely on the ability to dominate others; that a shame culture-and therefore Islam itself -makes a virtue of reven

Kissinger’s method in the essay proceeds according to what linguists call binary opposition: that is, he shows that there are two styles in foreign policy (the prophetic and the political), two types of technique, two periods, an

Can one divide human reality, as indeed human reality seems to be, genuinely divided, into clearly different cultures, histories, traditions, societies, even races, and survive the consequences humanly? By surviving the consequences humanly, I mean to ask whether Oere is any way of avoiding the hostility expressed by the division, say, of men into “us” (Westerners) and “they” (Orientals

sion. My argument takes it that the Orientalist reality is both antihuman and persistent. Its scope, as much as its institutions and all-pervasive influence, lasts up to the present.

Orientalism imposed limits upon thought about the Orie

But like any set of durable ideas, Orientalist notions influenced the people who were called Orientals as well as those called Occidental, European, or Western; in short, Orientalism is better grasped as a set of constraints upon and limitations of thought than it is simply as a positive doctrine. If the essence of Orientalism is the ineradicable distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority, then we must be prepared to note how in its development and subsequent history Orientalism deepened and even hardened the

. But it was in the Near Orient, the lands of the Arab Near East, where Islam was supposed to define teal and racial characteristics, that the British and the French countered each other and “the Orient” with the greatest intensity, familiarity, and com

Yet Orientalism reinforced, and was reinforced by, the certain knowledge that Europe or the West literally commanded the vastly greater part of the earth’s surface

Knowledge of the Orient, because generated out of strength, in a sense creates the Orient, the Oriental, and his world

The Oriental is irrational, depraved (fallen), childlike, “different”; thus the European is rational, virtuous, mature, “norma

The other feature of Oriental-European relations was that Europe was always in a position of strength, not to say domination. There is no way of putting this euphemistically. True, the relationship of strong to weak could be disguised or mitigated, as when Balfour acknowledged the “greatness” of Oriental civilizations. But the essential relationship, on political, cultural, and even religious grounds, was seen-in the West, which is what concerns us hereto be one between a strong and a weak partner

Orientals or Arabs are thereafter shown to be gullible, “devoid of energy and initiative,” much given to “fulsome flattery,” intrigue, cunning, and unkindness to animals; Orientals cannot walk on either a road or a pavement (their disordered minds fail to understand what the clever European grasps immediately, that roads and pavements are made for walking); Orientals are inveterate liars, they are “lethargic and suspicious,” and in everything oppose the clarity, directness, and nobility of the Anglo-Saxon race

d.” Lurking everywhere behind the pacification of the subject race is imperial might, more effective for its refined understanding and infrequent use than for its soldiers, brutal tax gatherers, and incontinent force

grasp. There are Westerners, and there are Orientals. The former dominate; the latter must be dominated, which usually means having their land occupied, their internal affairs rigidly controlled, their blood and treasure put at the disposal of one or another Western pow

If he does not speak directly for the Orientals, it is because they after all speak another language; yet he knows how they feel since he knows their history, their reliance upon such as he, and their expectations. Still, he does speak for them in the sense that what they might have to say, were they to be asked and might they be able to answer, would somewhat uselessly confirm what is already evident: that they are a subject race, dominated by a race that knows them and what is good for them better than they could possibly know them

. England knows Egypt; Egypt is what England knows; England knows that Egypt cannot have self-government; England confirms that by occupying Egypt; for the Egyptians, Egypt is what England has occupied and now governs; foreign occupation therefore becomes “the very basis” of contemporary Egyptian civilization; Egypt requires,indeed insists upon, British occupation

Two great themes dominate his remarks here and in what will follow: knowledge and power, the Baconian themes

atly indebted, I do believe in the determining imprint of individual writers upon the otherwise anonymous collective body of texts constituting a discursive formation like Orienta

at 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 Orientvisible, clear, “there” in discourse about it

The value, efficacy, strength, apparent veracity of a written statement about the Orient therefore relies very little, and cannot instrumentally depend, on the Orient as such. On the contrary, the written statement is a presence to the reader by virtue of its having excluded, displaced made supererogatory any such real thing as “the Orient.

the Orient. This evidence is found just as prominently in the so-called truthful text (histories, philological analyses, political treatises) as in the avowedly artistic (i.e., openly imaginative) tex

indistinguishable from certain ideas it dignifies as true, and from traditions, perceptions, and judgments it forms, transmits, reproduces. Above all, authority can, indeed must, be analyzed. All these attributes of authority apply to Orientalism, and much of what I do in this study is to describe both the historical authority in and the personal authorities of Orientalism

individual authors and the large political concerns shaped by the three great empires -British French, American-in whose intellectual and imaginativeterritory the writing was produced

s concerned. In the first place, nearly every nineteenth-century writer (and the same is true enough of writers in earlier periods) was extraordinarily well aware of the fact of empir

. Here too a considerable degree of nuance and elaboration can be seen working as between the broad superstructural pressures and the details of composition, the facts of text

ic. No one has ever devised a method for detaching the scholar from the circumstances of life, from the fact of his involvement (conscious or unconscious) with a class, a set of beliefs, a social position, or from the mere activity of being a member of a soci

. Orientalism is never far from what Denys Hay has called the idea of Europe,3a collective notion identifying “us” Europeans as against all “those” non-Europeans, and indeed it can be argued that the major component in European culture is precisely what made that culture hegemonic both in and outside Europe: the idea of European identiy as a superior one in comparison with all the non-European peoples and cultures.

consent. In any society not totalitarian, then, certain cultural forms predominate over others, just as certain ideas are more in-fluential than others; the form of this cultural leadership is what Gramsci has identified as hegemony, an indispensable concept for any understanding of cultural life in the industrial West. It is hegemony, or rather the result of cultural hegemony at work, that gives Orientalism the durability and the strength I have been speaking about so fa

There is very little consent to be found, for example, in the fact that Flau-bert’sencounter with an Egyptian courtesan produced a widely in fluential model of the Oriental woman; she never spoke of herself, she never represented her emotions, presence, or history. He spoke for and represented her. He was foreign, comparatively wealthy,male, and these were historical facts of domination that allowed him not only to possess Kuchuk Hanem physically but to speak for her and tell his readers in what way she was “typically Oriental.” My argument is that Flaubert’s situation of strength in relation to Kuchuk Hanem was not an isolated instance. It fairly stands for the pattern of relative strength between East and West, and the discourse about the Orient that it enabled.

s. The relationship between Occident and Orientis a relationship of power, of domination, of varying degrees of a compex hegemony an is quite accurately indicated in the title of K. M. Panikkar’s classic Asia and Western Dominanc

for the West. The two geographical entities thus support and to an extent reflect each other.

My point is that Orientalism derives from a particular closeness experienced between Britain and France and the Orient, which until the early nineteenth century had really meant only India and the Bible lands.

In brief, because of Orientalism the Orient was not (and is not) a free subject of thought or action. This is not to say that Orientalism unilaterally determines what can be said about the Orient, but that it is the-whole network of interests inevitably brought to bear on (and therefore always involved) any occasion when that peculiar entity “the Orient” is in question. How this happens is what this book tries to demonstrate. It also tries to show that European culture gained in strength and identity by setting itself off against the Orient as a sort of surrogate an even underground self.

o. Taking the late eighteenth century as a very roughly defined starting point Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient-dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating restructuring, and having authority over the Orient.

Anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient-and this applies whether the person is an anthropologist, sociologist, historian, or philologist-either in its specific or its general aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism.

The Orient is not only adjacent to Europe; it is also the place of Europe’s greatest and richest and oldest colonies, the source of its civilizations and languages, its cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most recurring images of the other. In addition, the Orient has helped to define Europe (or the West

ed. 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 w

read the great canonical texts, and perhaps the entire archive of modern and pre-modern European and American culture, with an effort to draw out, extend, give emphasis and voice to what is silent or marginally present or ideologically represented

Said’s notion of contrapuntal reading is particularly suggestive. Borrowing the concept of counterpoint from music, Said (who also wrote on music) describes a strategy for reading that exposes the colonial discourses hidden within a text. Contrapuntal reading not only unveils the colonial perspective, but it also tries to read for nuances of resistance (counterpoints) that may also be lurking within the narrative

perialism is embedded in colonial discourse and serves as an important tool for creating the colonized subject. Said argues that any discourse that comments on a colonized culture cannot remain neutral or stand outside a consideration of imperialism because all such discourses are invested in how the view of the other is constructed.

aid points out that Orientalist discourse has the pernicious effect of treating the colonized as if they were all the same. Thus “Orientals” are perceived not as freely choosing, autonomous individuals, but rather as homogeneous, faceless peoples who are known by their commonality of values, emotions, and personality traits. They are, in effect, essentialized to a few stereotypical—and often negative—characteristics and rendered as lacking individual personalities

Said’s analysis focuses especially on the Middle East as “Orient,” but his thesis can be extended to other cultural contexts where colonization occurred (and is still occurring).

Postcolonial theory refutes this universalist impulse and instead seeks to give voice to local practices, ideas, and values.

One goal of postcolonial theory is to question universal, humanist claims that cultural products can contain timeless and culturally transcendent ideas and values.

Indeed, Said’s work on Orientalism cannot be understood without framing it within the larger concept of postcolonialism and the postcolonial theory that examines it.

Western discourse about the East that engenders the oppressor-oppressed relationship pertaining between colonizer and colonized (see especially Orientalism and Culture and Imperialism). Said focuses on the ways in which discursive formations about the “Orient” exert power and control over those subjected to them

In any cultural setting, there are dominant groups that establish what can and cannot be said and done by others on the basis of the discursive knowledge they impose on others—the dominated. In the end, both dominant and dominated are made into subjects of this knowledge and live within the parameters that the discursive knowledge allows. This knowledge attains the status or appearance of an independent reality, and its origins as a social construction are forgotten. Discursive knowledge is also invariably connected to power. Those in control of a particular discourse have control over what can be known and, hence, have power over others.

It is through different discourses that we know about and categorize the world.

systems of linguistic usage and codes—discursive formations, whether written or spoken—that produce knowledge and practice about particular conceptual fields, demarcating what can be known, said, or enacted in relation to this body of knowledge

he discourse through which colonizer/colonized subject positions are constructed

articularly concerned with issues of discourse and representation in relation to the history of Western colonialism

His studies on Orientalism expressly address this complex of issues. This work has arguably the deepest resonance for religious studies, especially for those dealing with non-Western religions or for those involved in research on Western views of non-Western religions. The history of Christian missionary activity, for instance, is largely implicated in Said’s critique.

Born in Jerusalem in 1935, Said’s Palestinian family became refugees in 1948 and moved to Egypt, where he attended British schools. He also spent time during his youth in Lebanon and Jordan before immigrating to the United States.

On the one hand, he is well known for his engagements with literary criticism and postcolonial theory, often drawing from theoretical perspectives and methods developed by Michel FOUCAULT

Power relations, relationships of communication, and objective capacities should not therefore be confused. This is not to say that there is a question of three separate domains. Nor that there is on one hand the field of things, of perfected technique, work, and the transformation of the real; on the other that of signs, communication, reciprocity, and the production of meaning; and finally, that of the domination of the

THIS TEXT and leave an annotation

lick the 'Client area'.

ANNOTATE THIS PHRASE