Re-orientalism
Robert Irwin has a new book out. It is provocatively titled For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies. Since I list him as one of my Livejournal interests, I shall expound further.
Robert Irwin is a multi-faceted character: scholar, novelist, occultist and blader. I first heard of him through my undergraduate tutor, Dr David Morgan; they were fellow graduate students at SOAS sometime in the early 1970s, and have remained friends since. About the time I finished my BA, Irwin was having his (then) latest book published - Satan Wants Me, a thinly-disguised novelisation of his experiences of occultism in late-1960s Notting Hill (rather akin to Performance).
Truth be told, Irwin has earnt his crust mainly as a scholar of Islam or the Middle East, highly respected without actually being attached to any particular instituition (though he has, on occasion, held the post of 'visiting research fellow' or somesuch at SOAS). As such, For Lust of Knowing ... (after James Elroy Flecker) follows in the footsteps of tomes on Islamic art and early Arabic literature.
In the meantime, he has pursued a parallel career as an author of Gothic literature, often with a Middle Eastern theme (Vathek, by William Beckford, is the most obvious comparison). The Arabian Nightmare and Prayer Cushions of the Flesh are the two I've read, and both are well worth reading. Irwin is often cited as a 'favourite' of better-known writers; mostly, I think, because he is bolder than the kind of writer who has an eye on the 3-for-the-price-of-2 piles at High St bookshops.
As may already have been guessed, Irwin's latest publication is a defence of the academic discipline disparaged (wrongly, in his eyes) by the late Edward Said; here's what he says, by way of defence:
"Orientalism was a work of misdirected spleen, written in anger and in haste. Had Said restricted himself to attacking the way Islam and Arabs have been portrayed in novels, films and popular journalism, this would have been a worthwhile enterprise. Better yet, he might have attacked Israeli generals, Washington lobbyists, British arms dealers and right-wing newspaper columnists. Instead, he chose to concentrate his wrath on academics, serious novelists and a miscellaneous assortment of other writers. Most of the people he chose to vilify were actual enthusiasts for Arab culture and admirers of Islam."
It will be interesting to see how Said's acolytes react to Irwin's spirited counter-attack.
(Oh, the bit about roller-blading? s'true.)
Robert Irwin is a multi-faceted character: scholar, novelist, occultist and blader. I first heard of him through my undergraduate tutor, Dr David Morgan; they were fellow graduate students at SOAS sometime in the early 1970s, and have remained friends since. About the time I finished my BA, Irwin was having his (then) latest book published - Satan Wants Me, a thinly-disguised novelisation of his experiences of occultism in late-1960s Notting Hill (rather akin to Performance).
Truth be told, Irwin has earnt his crust mainly as a scholar of Islam or the Middle East, highly respected without actually being attached to any particular instituition (though he has, on occasion, held the post of 'visiting research fellow' or somesuch at SOAS). As such, For Lust of Knowing ... (after James Elroy Flecker) follows in the footsteps of tomes on Islamic art and early Arabic literature.
In the meantime, he has pursued a parallel career as an author of Gothic literature, often with a Middle Eastern theme (Vathek, by William Beckford, is the most obvious comparison). The Arabian Nightmare and Prayer Cushions of the Flesh are the two I've read, and both are well worth reading. Irwin is often cited as a 'favourite' of better-known writers; mostly, I think, because he is bolder than the kind of writer who has an eye on the 3-for-the-price-of-2 piles at High St bookshops.
As may already have been guessed, Irwin's latest publication is a defence of the academic discipline disparaged (wrongly, in his eyes) by the late Edward Said; here's what he says, by way of defence:
"Orientalism was a work of misdirected spleen, written in anger and in haste. Had Said restricted himself to attacking the way Islam and Arabs have been portrayed in novels, films and popular journalism, this would have been a worthwhile enterprise. Better yet, he might have attacked Israeli generals, Washington lobbyists, British arms dealers and right-wing newspaper columnists. Instead, he chose to concentrate his wrath on academics, serious novelists and a miscellaneous assortment of other writers. Most of the people he chose to vilify were actual enthusiasts for Arab culture and admirers of Islam."
It will be interesting to see how Said's acolytes react to Irwin's spirited counter-attack.
(Oh, the bit about roller-blading? s'true.)