Hegemonic discourse contains internal play, variability, and affective force

Evidence

The interest I took in Orientalism as a cultural phenomenon (like the culture of imperialism I talk about in Culture and Imperialism, its 1993 sequel) derives from its variability and unpredictability, both qualities that give writers like Massignon and Burton their surprising force, and even attractiveness. What I tried to preserve in what I analyzed of Orientalism was its combination of consistency and inconsistency, its play, so to speak, which can only be rendered by preserving for oneself as writer and critic the right to some emotional force, the right to be moved, angered, surprised, and even delighted. — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 855

Categorization

• DEFINE: Key nuance for the toolkit: Orientalism-as-system is not monolithic but carries consistency and inconsistency together — variability is what gives individual orientalists their surprising force.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 855
• XREF: connects to: Understanding a discourse’s coherence explains its force without justifying it; Discourse produces knowledge that shapes perceptions and enacts power — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity…, 687; The same literary form can either contest or reinforce hegemonic narratives — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 18 (+2 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Understanding a discourse’s coherence explains its force without justifying it; Discourse produces knowledge that shapes perceptions and enacts power — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity…, 687; The same literary form can either contest or reinforce hegemonic narratives — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 18 (+2 more)