z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
A Fundamental Fear
Author(s) -
Anas Malik
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
american journal of islam and society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2690-3741
pISSN - 2690-3733
DOI - 10.35632/ajis.v22i2.1710
Subject(s) - orientalism , islam , ideology , secularity , philosophy , epistemology , consciousness , religious studies , sociology , literature , politics , theology , law , art , political science
A Fundamental Fear: Eurocentrism and the Emergence of Islamism usescritical theory to examine the Islamists’ political projects and their depictions.Scholars are divided between those who believe in a religious ornational essence to the Muslim community (essentialists) and those whoreject this assumption (anti-essentialists). In regards to a Muslim essence,Sayyid identifies two existing scholarly camps: Orientalists assume an ahistorical,acontextual Islamic essence that drives and shapes Muslim societyand activity through most places and ages. Anti-Orientalists, as manifestedin such writers as Hamid El-Zien, assert that there is not one “Islam,” butonly many “Islams.” According to this view, Islam and indeed all religion cannot exist as an analytic category having a self-sustaining, positive, fixing,universal, and autonomous content; rather, religion is only manifestedthrough particular contexts.While acknowledging an intellectual debt to Edward Said, whose critiquesfed the anti-Orientalist camp, Sayyid argues for a middle pathbetween Orientalist and anti-Orientalist understandings. Orientalists claimthat the relationship between Islam and Islamism is direct, whereas anti-Orientalists claim that the relationship is merely opportunistic – Islam iswhat Marxists might call “superstructural” (a surface action over deeper,more real material contests) and is driven by a false consciousness.Picking theoretical fruit from writers who explored signs, ideas, andlanguage, among them Slavoj Zizek, Roland Barthes, and Jacques Lacan,the author asks Zizek’s general question: “What creates and sustains theidentity of a given ideological field beyond all possible variations of its ideologicalcontent?” (p. 44). Analysts typically find themselves unable toanswer this question without reasserting a new Orientalism. Sayyid assertsthat despite the malleability of Islamic symbols and Islamist programs,Islam has retained its specificity, a term by which he means the traces of itsoriginal meaning articulated at the foundation, traces that have beeninvoked repeatedly. Islam is a crucial nodal point, à la Jacques Lacan, retrospectivelygiving meaning to other elements, be they Sufi discussions,debates on fiqh, or other discourses (p. 45) ...

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here