Orientalism’s cult following grew among nonspecialists despite no corrections to its errors

Evidence

But slowly the book acquired a cult status, particularly among people who were not Orientalists and who had no special knowledge of the field. Though specialists in the field listed its errors and misrepresentations, subsequent editions of the book were published with no corrections or retractions whatsoever. — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 539

Categorization

• XREF: Reinforces the recurring theme of this book — the layering of reputation over evidentiary substance.

Related

• Said never corrected factual errors in Orientalism and refused to concede points (similarity 0.84)
• Orientalism changed no scholarly practices and disturbed no imperialists (similarity 0.84)
• Orientalist training typically converted initial fascination into a debunking project (similarity 0.83)
• Orientalism is only the visible tip of a larger modern structure. (similarity 0.83)
• Academic Orientalist expertise legitimizes rather than corrects crude stereotypes (similarity 0.83)
• Orientalism’s power lies in its practitioners’ ignorance of what they are doing. (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalism is studied via its internal consistency, not its correspondence to a real Orient (similarity 0.82)
• Even modernists drawn to Eastern wisdom retained Orientalist mistrust (similarity 0.82)
• Said invented a nonexistent school of Cluniac Orientalists (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalism functions as a self-enclosed Western text rather than knowledge of an actual Orient. (similarity 0.81)
• Orientalism is chiefly a British and French cultural enterprise (similarity 0.81)
• Anti-Orientalist critics ignored the actual scholarly merits of Orientalist findings (similarity 0.81)
• The Orientalist expert becomes the representative Oriental himself (similarity 0.81)
• The general Oriental category precedes and constrains any specific individual instance. (similarity 0.81)
• Orientalist scholarship confirms rather than unsettles existing ideas about the Orient. (similarity 0.81)