Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:10:24.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dilemmas of cultural legality: a comment on Roger Cotterrell’s ‘The struggle for law’ and a criticism of the House of Lords’ opinions in Begum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

John Mikhail*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University Law Center

Abstract

In Orientalism, Edward Said’s seminal critique of Western discourse on the Arab and Islamic world, Said begins with an epigram from Karl Marx: ’They cannot represent themselves; they must be represented‘ (Said, 1979, p. xiii, quoting Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte). Said then argues that Marx’s statement captures a basic reality about Western representations of ’Oriental‘ societies, which is that they often rest on a pattern of cultural hegemony. The dominance of European colonial powers, primarily Great Britain and France, over their subjugated populations is what allowed the latter to be depicted in a way that reinforced ‘the idea of European [superiority] in comparison with. . .non-European peoples and cultures’ (p. 7). For example, in Gustave Flaubert’s popular novels, ‘Flaubert’s encounter with an Egyptian courtesan produced a. . .model of the Oriental woman. . .[who] never spoke of herself. . .[and] never represented her emotions, presence or history. He spoke for and represented her. . .telling his readers in what way she was typically Oriental’ (p. 6, emphasis original). Moreover, Flaubert’s superiority in relation to her ‘was not an isolated instance. It fairly stands for the pattern of relative strength between East and West, and the discourse about the Orient that it enabled’ (p. 6).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bainton, Roland H. (1963) The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Cotterrell, Roger (2008) ‘The Struggle for Law: Some Dilemmas of Cultural Legality’, International Journal of Law in Context 4(4): 373–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Gareth (2006) ‘(Not Yet) Taking Rights Seriously: The House of Lords in Begum v. Headteacher and Governors of Denbigh High School’, Human Rights & Human Welfare Working Papers No. 37, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=945319 [last accessed 11 November 2008].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnis, John (2008) ‘Endorsing Discrimination Between Faiths: A Case of Extreme Speech?’, University of Oxford Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 09/2008, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1101522 [last accessed 11 November 2008].Google Scholar
Matsuda, Mari J. (1987) ‘Looking to the Bottom: CLS and Reparations’, Harvard Civil Rights–Civil Liberties Law Review 22: 323–99.Google Scholar
Mikhail, John (2006) ‘The Free Exercise of Religion: An American Perspective,’ in Mahlmann, M. and Rottleuthner, H. (eds) Ein neur Kampf der Religionen? Staat, Recht und religiöse Toleranz. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt, 271–88.Google Scholar
Said, Edward W. (1979) Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Williams, Patricia J. (1987) ‘Alchemical Notes: Reconstructing Ideals from Deconstructed Rights’, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 22: 401–33.Google Scholar