Encounters with Islam in German Literature and Culture (review)

The title of this volume overwhelms through the sheer breadth of its promise. The editors state that the goal of the book is not to "consider European, or, specifically, German representations of Islam solely as by-products of a larger Orientalist project," but rather to attempt to "enter into dialogue with Muslims and to afford them communicative rights of their own" (13). They insist that they do not "seek to open out a theoretical meta-debate," nor "to forge some spurious ideological or methodological unity" between the fourteen chapters of the volume (13). Consequently, it has proven particularly challenging for this reader to discover some coherence that unites these fourteen contributions in one volume. Despite protestations to the contrary, there appears to be a tacit admission that Edward Said's theories remain a useful conceptual tool throughout the volume (13). Nine of the contributors directly refer to Said's work. If Saidean Orientalism is indeed a sub-text, the inclusion of texts written earlier than the European post-Enlightenment adds yet another challenge to comprehensibility. Thus, this reader assumes the presence of a less contoured "Other" as providing a unifying element.

Timothy Jackson describes how Christianity in the Middle Ages constructs an Islamic "Other" in order to protect its own belief system. Cyril Edwards reads Wolfram as an example of tolerance toward Islam. Silke Falkner's contribution brings greater awareness to the ways in which early-modern turcica helped construct the antagonistic "Other." Daniel Wilson confronts Said and asks whether the latter presents "an accurate portrayal of German encounters with Islam." He discusses Meiners and Herder as two men of the Enlightenment who are nevertheless implicated in Orientalist discourse.

Yomb May's analysis attempts to unsettle the recognition of Goethe as a mediator between East and West. His defines an Orientalist "as a scholar researching Middle Eastern culture" and remains within traditional perceptions of the Orientalist as an unbiased, altruistic scholar whose only interest is in acquiring knowledge for its own sake (97). Said's definition of Orientalism is conceptually broad but historically specific (as Jennifer Jenkins points out in her article "German Orientalism: An Introduction"). The relationship between Occident and Orient can be only a relationship of power, of domination. However, May criticizes Anil Bhatti in his contribution to this volume for the latter's attempt to present Goethe as an impartial thinker (103). Although Bhatti senses Goethe's unwillingness to accept the absolute dichotomy of the relationship between East and West, he cautions against an all-too-uncritical appreciation of Goethe as introducing a counter-hegemonic discourse. James Hodkinson's discussion of Islam within German Romanticism convincingly shows how Novalis uses a Muslim woman (Zulima) to debunk stereotypes about women and Muslims as irrational (119). Hodkinson thus reveals a moment of willingness on the part of the Orientalist to engage in dialogue.

Jeff Morrison discusses a German travelogue writer and a Swiss adventurer and their encounters with Islam. Whereas the Swiss, Burckhardt, affects an insider status, Riedesel insists on being an outsider, although, as Morrison convincingly argues, there are slippages in these roles. The special value of Morrison's contribution lies in his emphasis on the unstable period of German/Swiss cultural development around 1800. Rachel MagShamhráin criticizes Said for his monolithic approach, and wishes to provide a "multidirectional" approach. She uses Sheldon Pollock's use of the term "eastern Orientalism" in order to accuse Turkey of Orientalist ambitions. In his discussion of "deep Orientalism," Pollock looks at pre-colonialist structures of domination within the Indian social fabric and suggests that these were easily co-opted by the British: The "[German use of British forms of domination] may suggest a sort of eastern Orientalism, in the service of a pre-colonial colonialism" (196, my emphasis). Consequently, MagShamhráin's view of the Ottoman Empire as the victim of Western Orientalist discourses is problematic. Realpolitik dictated that the Ottoman Empire, like other European powers, forge alliances. It...