No critique of Orientalism has displaced or surpassed Said’s book

Evidence

These critiques, I think, are a comprehensive and accurate representation of the response to Said’s work. Much of what they deploy is valuable as scholarly engagement, but some is plainly intended to discredit the work on political grounds. Yet, none attempts to provide an account that improves on or displaces Said’s work, much less set new terms for the debate. Indeed, none of these critiques has etched itself in scholarly memory as Said’s Orientalism did. As problematic as it is, the book remains canonic. But canonicity neither excludes the possibility of the work being transcended or supplanted, nor is it an eternal confirmation of the truth of its propositions. Said’s work therefore provides me with the flare, though not the tools, to navigate my seas. If the metaphor is at all apt, I might say that in this work I hijack Said’s ship to reequip it for the exploration of oceans that he could see dimly from afar, if at all. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 22