Klicka på en bild för att gå till Google Book Search.
|
Laddar... For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and their Enemiesav Robert Irwin
   Ingen/inga Det finns inga diskussioner på LibraryThing om den här boken.  Jakujin | Sep 29, 2016 |   While Irwin (far from the first to do so) criticizes Said's Orientalism for lacking or contradicting the actual facts about Orientalist academics and their work, Dangerous Knowledge suffers in some respects from a complementary difficulty. It is decidedly more trees than forest, and by emphasizing the many and admittedly interestingly various individuals and details, it may leave the reader groping for a "big picture." The effect is somewhat paradoxical: Irwin is obviously opinionated, and clearly loyal to what he sees as the valuable elements of the Orientalist tradition, but the stress on objective, heterogeneous fact almost conveys a sense of dispassion. The prose style is accessible, and not encumbered with academicisms; anyone with an interest in the subject matter should find the book enjoyable and worthwhile. 6  paradoxosalpha | May 17, 2014 |  ) Dettingmeijer | Oct 26, 2009 | )1 drneutron | Sep 15, 2009 | This is not to suggest the book is without value. He helpfully notes the importance of The Sectarian Milieu: Content And Composition of Islamic Salvation History by John Wansbrough, and, Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation by John Wansbrough. "Noting that none of the Arabic sources for the life of Muhammed are contemporary ones, Wansbrough argued that the final text of the Qur'an was put together some two hundred years after its supposed revelation" (p. 269). In fact, most of the book was collected in a polemic against Judaism and Christianity. The Qur'an and related materials "are not straightforward historical sources and were never intended to be" (p. 269). gmicksmith | Jul 27, 2008 |
 Robert Irwin pursues two goals in his book [Dangerous Knowledge]: first, to convey the intricacies of Orientalist scholarship from antiquity to the present; and thereby defend academic Orientalism; and second, to unmask Edward Said's Orientalism as "a work of malignant charlatanry" (Irwin 2006:4). The direct attack on Said's theories is confined to one long chapter near the end of the book, and so the greater part of Irwin's study is a gallery of portraits of both obscure and well-known Islam scholars, from St. John of Damascus (d.749) to Bernard Lewis. Although Irwin may recognize that 'Orientalism' can be applied to the study of all Asian cultures, his principal focus (like that of Said) is on Islam and Arabic, and thus not on e.g. Turkish, Persian, or Sanskrit.... ...[Irwin] also reminds us that Germany's academic supremacy [in Orientalist studies in the 19th and early 20th centuries] counters Said's argument that Orientalism was "the product of the three great empires--British, French, American": Germany was not in possession of any Oriental colonies. In fact, Irwin's disparate band of learned and eccentric academicians, with their widely different visions of Arab culture and Islamic religion, demonstrates the absurdity of the idea that they all could have been motivated by subliminal imperialism. Irwin acknowledges that the study of Orientalism was always an arena in which prejudices and agendas were pursued, from Christian evangelism to racism (e.g. Ernest Renan [1823-92] and Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau [1816-82] [Irwin 2006:166-74]). But from the mid-nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, in his view, Orientalism became the discipline in which extraordinarily gifted scholars did make major contributions to learning--these persons were the true 'Orientalists', those "...who made a special study of Asian (and North African) languages and cultures" (Irwin 2006:6). Är ett svar på
"What is Orientalism, who were the Orientalists, and how did Western scholars of Islamic culture come to be vilified as insidious agents of European imperialism? In Robert Irwin's groundbreaking new history, he answers this question with a detailed and colorful story of the motley crew of intellectuals and eccentrics who brought an understanding of the Islamic world to the West. In a narrative that ranges from an analysis of Ancient Greek perceptions of the Persians to a portrait of the first Western European translators of Arabic to the contemporary Muslim world's perceptions of the Western study of Islam, Irwin affirms the value of the Orientalists' legacy: not only for the contemporary scholars who have disowned it, but also for anyone committed to fostering the cross-cultural understanding which could bridge the real or imagined gulf between Islamic and Western civilization."--BOOK JACKET. Inga biblioteksbeskrivningar kunde hittas. |
Pågående diskussionerIngen/ingaPopulära omslag
 Google Books — Laddar...GenrerMelvil Decimal System (DDC)303.48Social sciences Social Sciences; Sociology and anthropology Social Processes Social change Causes of changeKlassifikation enligt LCBetygMedelbetyg: (3.83)
Är det här du? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1
But this one is a tirade. And as another reviewer says, he misses the point. He thinks Said says quite other things than what Said said. If you like scholarship as combat you might enjoy this bout. But he excuses himself that Said got personal first, and at least in Orientalism, Said didn’t. Irwin sees no virtue whatsoever in Said's book, which he regards as a polemic (it isn't. On the other hand...) In brief, defensive.
I can’t star this one, I’m afraid. It wouldn’t be pretty.