Ziauddin Sardar's "Orientalism"

Sardar describes Orientalism as Europe's surrogate intellectual field for self-definition, along with a will not to know the truth about the "orient" so that it can remain the mythical place where fantasies concerning the European self can be played out. Dating orientalism further back than Said does, he shows that orientalist accounts are deeply intermingled with anti-Islamic sentiment. Said also sees this thread, however, because his reading remains secular (by necessity) Said remains closed to some aspects of orientalism, indeed, because the responses to orientalism have usually come from religious scholars, Said does not find them interesting, and as a result, a whole set of scholarship remains closed to him- and he cannot come up with instances that respond to orientalism critically, which is the main criticism that he gets from not just Islamic but also secular writers. So Sardar's contribution is best when he does provide the genealogy of these Islamic responses to orientalism, and indeed, responding himself, especially to Satanic Verses, revealing that Rushdie takes crusade romances as his model, as revealed in his choice of moniker for Muhammad "Mahound", the name used in chanson de gestes. Thus does the orientalist tie himself to a tradition of orientalism, which has roots in crusader mentality. However, in parts the slim volume falls short, and you get the sense that Sardar is being superficial for the sake of brevity, to produce this slim volume. Good effort, leaves you wanting more.