Orientalism, stereotypes and disidentification

[cathy_ndiaye2]

When Edward Said writes that ‘’ the Orient has helped to define Europe (or the West) as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience’’. It makes me think of when Munoz, in Feeling Brown writes that ‘’Once we look at whiteness from a racialized perspective, like that of Latinos, it begins to appear to be flat and impoverished. At this moment in history it seems especially important to position whiteness as lack...’’ Both ideas were presented in two different contexts, but they are similar.

What tropes and stereotypes of the "Oriental" can be seen in the practices Bald describes?

• The Hindu Fakir, we see it in children's movies sometimes
• The magician
• Oriental mysticism

What were the purposes of such stereotypes?
Stereotypes are sometimes used unwillingly/unconsciously by our minds because they   ‘’help us’’ process and understand the world and the people around us more easily. Stereotypes are generalizations of a group according to one image or representation we have. Stereotypes can be positive, negative, or neither, but they represent generalizations that are not always applicable to the person/situation in front of us. Stereotypes are like ‘’shortcuts’’ that the mind uses to avoid seeing individuals and situations in all their complexity.
In the case of the stereotypes of South Asians that are presented in Bald’s work, I think that they are used by people of colour to represent and use to their advantage the idea that white people might have of communities from eastern regions (here I use eastern in opposition with western). Vivek Bald writes that ‘’ In this daily act, they validated and accentuated the ideas that Americans associated with “India” and “the East” and in so doing gave authenticity and value to the goods they sold.’’ Those stereotypes mainly come from Orientalism and movies and white people had the credulity to believe that South Asians (and Easterners, more largely) actually lived that way. Some white people might have seen it as entertainment and also as ‘’proof’’ that as they thought, colored people were less intelligent and ‘’civilized’’.

In my opinion, in the context that is described in chapter 2 of Bengali Harlem, some people of colour specifically used stereotypes that are related to entertainment (magicians, fakir, costumes) because it was something that white people were impressed by. It was seen as weird and exotic. Also, for me, the choice of bringing those stereotypes to life is an example of disidentification. From my understanding, Munoz explains that disidentification is a strategy to not openly support the dominant discourse, but at the same time, this dominant discourse is not visibly opposed. Hence, disidentification is a strategy to survive in the social world.

In many examples of the people of colour presented in this chapter, whether they were African Americans who were impersonating South Asians or South Asians who would bring to life these ‘’oriental’’ stereotypes, it is exactly the purpose it had. Sometimes, those strategies were literally what allowed them to be able to have a job and provide for themselves.

Could Black or brown folks use Orientalism to their advantage?
In the 2nd chapter of Bengali Harlem we see many ways of how Black and Brown people took advantage of the stereotype of the Indian/south Asian/Middle Eastern caricature. One of the examples that is given is that some people of African descent would pretend to be South Asian because even though some South Asians had darker skin, they were sometimes less discriminated against than African Americans. The author describes that ‘’ … individuals who had successfully passed as white to access better jobs and accommodations, but for those who were darker skinned, posing as a “Hindu” or “East Indian” was a recurring and prominent theme. ‘’ ‘’ denigrated to an exotic otherness, from an unacceptable to a nominally acceptable blackness...’’
 South Asians were seen as exotic, some would disguise as fakirs and wear costumes, take a particular accent etc. They were purposely acting like the stereotypical image of the oriental because they knew they could take advantage of these stereotypes.

I think for white people South Asians were more acceptable than black people (despite the dark skin they sometimes both shared) because for white people this ‘’show’’ was seen as entertainment and they thought it gave them access to exotic products which they enjoyed. Furthermore, for people of colour, this ‘’ role-paying’’ facilitated/made possible moving around states and having a place to live despite the racist and segragational  Jim Crow laws.

What does it take to make a home in whitened space?
Personally, I think that we need to be able to do as coloured people did in chapter 2 of Bengali Harlem! What I mean by that is that as visible minorities (ethnic or/and religious), sometimes (when the situation does not cause us prejudice) we need to let white people (or the dominant group) with their assumptions of us. If they believe in white supremacy and think that everything that is not white is uncivilized or backward let them think that. The most important is that you as an individual stay true to your beliefs and your identity, that you know what you are capable of, that you work hard for what you want, that you help your community etc.

[pashamkhan]

Yes, disidentification is absolutely a strategy to survive when surrounded by the overwhelming power of a majority. The minoritised person has to be clever. Great post as usual @cathy_ndiaye2