Said tries to evoke the readers of the mistaken term

historical significance that the Orient possessed showed the variety of definitions it had. Said
tries to evoke the readers of the mistaken term due to different occasions that illustrated the false
interpretation of Orientalism. It is evident that the “Orient” was a “European representation”
(Said, p.1). Where the meaning presents the images, ideas, and personalities of the Other. It
presents that the purpose of the Orient was to define the West (p.1). In other words, The Orient

was a "material civilization and culture” (p.2). of the European. By material civilization, he
refers to the cultural and ideological mode of discourse with the support of the institutions and
colonial styles.(p.2). Said mentions that there is more than a study of the Orient. Moreover,
Said’s definition of Orientalism was the “Western style for dominating, restructuring and having
authority over the Orient” (p.3). For Edwards Said, Orientalism is the power that the Western had
over the Orient. He justified his idea exemplifying that the relationship between the both
referring as “a relationship of power, of domination, of varying degrees of a complex hegemony”
(p.5). By its generalization, Said denotes the superiority and power of the West possess over the
Orient.
Said analyzes the historical context of Orientalism, embodies with the theories of Michel
Foucault. The concept of discourse and the knowledge of power demonstrate the supremacy of