Orientalism is a corporate discourse that produces the Orient

Evidence

Taking the late eighteenth century as a very roughly defined starting point Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient—dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient. — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 55

Categorization

• DEFINE: The third, material meaning of Orientalism as an institutional apparatus, distinct from the academic and imaginative senses.
• XREF: Directly scaffolds the Islamophobia readings’ use of discourse analysis — this is the definition to carry forward. — connects to: The Orientalist’s constructed Orient displaced the actual Orient in European discourse; Nineteenth-century Orientalism created a professional terminology that dominated all discourse on the Orient — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 399; Orientalism turned scattered testimony into a domesticated, categorical simulacrum of the Orient (+5 more)
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 55

Broader Connections

• Orientalism reflects the producing culture rather than its putative object #expands (0.92) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 91
• Orientalism is knowledge that disciplines its object through dominating frameworks #expands (0.90)
• Orientalism fixed the Orient as uniform, undeveloped, and incapable of self-definition #expands (0.85) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 188
• Orientalist writings assumed the Orient was inferior and childlike #expands (0.80) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 206