Said held that Orientalism cannot be corrected by factual research because it is power.

Evidence

Said understands Orientalism as a discourse in a Foucauldian manner. Orientalism is a particular system of meaning with its own rules, truth claims, and premises, derived from the power that Western nations wielded or aspired to wield over the Orient. Orientalism is part of the power and hegemony exercised by the West over the Orient. This is not to say that Orientalism is a collection of lies, falsehoods, or myths that one can eradicate by doing one’s homework on the “real” Orient. Said insists that Orientalism is too formidable to be dispelled in this way — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 205

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes Said’s discourse view from a simple ‘lies vs. truth’ reading — the point that Orientalism’s power cannot be undone by better scholarship.
• XREF: connects to: Bantu ontology cannot answer a condition that is political, not ontological.; Orientalism’s ontological rigidity makes its fantasies nearly impossible to dismantle; Romanticism projected an exotic Orientalist fantasy rather than accurate knowledge — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 89 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Orientalism’s ontological rigidity makes its fantasies nearly impossible to dismantle #expands (0.75)
• Romanticism projected an exotic Orientalist fantasy rather than accurate knowledge #exemplifies (0.60) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 89
• Fantasy tropes shaped how Orientalism constructed Jewish and Muslim men #exemplifies (0.55)