Key Takeaways

 Edward Said draws this book's epigraph, or introductory quotation, from Joseph
Conrad's short novel Heart of Darkness (1899). Conrad's work is a classic
dramatization of imperialism, featuring the career and death of a cruel, obsessive
ivory trader named Kurtz on the Congo River. The speaker in the passage is the
story's narrator, Marlow. Conrad's anti-imperialist stance is evident, but it is
complicated by the caveat that imperialism may be sanctioned if it exists in the
service of "an idea." Perhaps this idea represents a higher, "civilizing" mission. In
any case, the ambiguity of the quote foreshadows Said's subsequent evaluation
of Conrad and his fiction. Thus, the epigraph sets the tone for Said's book as a
whole by suggesting a major theme: the complexity of imperialism and its
interrelationship with culture.
 The current work is a sequel to the author's landmark book Orientalism (1978). It
also, however, is an attempt to explore new ground, examining how the literary
form of the novel relates to imperialism. Said gives the example of Robinson
Crusoe's creation of his own private "fiefdom" on a non-European island in Daniel
Defoe's pioneering novel of the same name (1719).
 Said defines "culture" two ways. First, it can be defined as a collection of
practices that exist independently from the social, political, and economic sphere
and are often embodied in aesthetic forms that provide pleasure. Second, it can
be defined as an expression of refinement, as exemplified by a famous quotation
of English poet and critic Matthew Arnold (1822–88). Arnold wrote of culture that
it is "the best that has been known and thought," suggesting that culture is in the
possession of the European. The phrase is from Arnold's book of literary criticism
entitled Culture and Anarchy, 1869.
 As an introduction to the effort to link novels and narration to the imperial
process, Said briefly explores two examples. The first is Great Expectations by
Charles Dickens, with the portrayal of the protagonist Pip's relationship to the
older Abel Magwitch. Magwitch prospers after his transportation or deportation to
Australia, where Great Britain has established penal colonies for criminals to
perform labor. The second is the account in Joseph Conrad's Nostromo (1904) of
a fabulous silver mine masterminded by Europeans in Central America.
 Said argues that the "rhetoric of power produces an illusion of benevolence." That
is, imperialists like to cloak their domination in a pretense of benevolence and
altruism. Thus it is not paradoxical that Conrad was both anti-imperialist and
imperialist. He also asserts imperialism paved the way for modern-day
globalization, or the shrinkage of time, communications, and economic linkages
in the present-day world.
 Said's focus in the present work will be the empires created by Britain, France,
and the United States during the period 1700 through the 1990. He remarks
aspirants to global dominion indulged in repeated patterns of behavior and
rhetoric. In addition, Western imperialism has reinforced Third World nationalism,
and vice versa. The roots of us-versus-them thinking go all the way back to
ancient Greece, where city-states fought off marauders who were non-Greek and
thus lacked culture.
 Said introduces the concepts of contrapuntal reading and analysis and hybridity,
which will both be important for his work as a whole. By contrapuntal
analysis Said alludes to counterpoint in music, which is the combination of
different melodic lines. In particular, Said stresses the tension, or conflict,
between imperialist pressures for domination or conquest and the resistance, or
opposition, to imperialism. The two forces, according to Said, go hand in hand.
By hybridity the author refers to heterogeneity (being made up of dissimilar
elements), mutability (changeability), and complexity in human culture.
Culture and Imperialism | Chapter 1,
Part 1 : Empire, Geography, and Culture | Summary
Share
Key Takeaways
 Said begins this section with a quotation from a notable essay by the Anglo-
American poet and literary critic T.S. Eliot. In this essay, entitled "Tradition and
the Individual Talent" (1920), Eliot asserted that no poet or artist ever works
alone, but rather takes his or her place in a succession of predecessors and
successors.
 The past is thus perennially linked to the present. However, interpretations of the
past often differ widely. As an example, Said briefly references two sharply
conflicting views of the Gulf War (1990–91). In that conflict, the United States
battled Iraq over the latter's invasion of Kuwait. In the American view, on the one
hand, the United States was not questing for domination, but rather to right
wrongs in defense of freedom. In the Iraqi view, on the other hand, the
occupation of Kuwait was justified. Iraq aimed to snatch away from the imperialist
West one of its most fruitful sources of profit.
 Said defines imperialism as "thinking about, settling on, controlling land that you
do not possess." He remarks on the formidable disconnections exhibited by those
who indulge in this activity. In the 16th century, for example, the poet and critic
Edmund Spenser (c. 1552–99) seemed oblivious of any inconsistency between his
poetic achievement and his bloodthirsty plans for Ireland. Imperialism, Said
points out, has older roots than many people believe.
 To underline the growth of European imperialism in the 19th and early 20th
centuries, Said cites some telling statistics. In 1800 European nations controlled
about 35% of the world's surface. By 1878 this figure had risen to 67%, and by
1914 it had reached 85%. Perhaps even more remarkably, Europeans were
typically outnumbered on a vast scale by the peoples they dominated. Said gives
the example of the British in India in the 1930s. Then, 300 million Indians were
dominated by 4,000 civil servants supported by a mere 60,000 British soldiers
and 90,000 civilians—most of them businesspeople and clergy.
 Toward the conclusion of this part, Said cites a particularly telling passage from
Charles Dickens's novel Dombey and Son (1848): "The earth was made for
Dombey and Son to trade in, and the sun and moon were made to give them
light."
Culture and Imperialism | Chapter 1, Part 2 :
Images of the Past, Pure and Impure | Summary
Share

Key Takeaways
 Said begins this part by asserting the urge to dominate is universal in all
nationally defined cultures. At the same time, people have become conscious of
the phenomenon of hybridity, or heterogeneity, as never before. Said points to
the large immigrant populations in such European capital cities as London and
Paris as an example. A more complex case is presented by the 19th-century
effort to purge ancient Greek civilization of Egyptian and Semitic influences.
 Stressing the interdependence of world cultures, Said declares that he will bring a
special focus to "the rhetoric and politics of blame."
Detailed Critical Summary and Analysis of Chapter 1, "Empire, Geography, and
Culture" from Culture and Imperialism by Edward Said
Overview
In Chapter 1, Empire, Geography, and Culture, Edward Said explores the relationship
between imperialism and culture, emphasizing how Western cultural productions—
particularly literature—have historically supported and justified imperial domination. The
chapter illustrates how imperial power is not just political or military but also cultural, with
literature and geography acting as instruments to define, organize, and legitimize colonial
power dynamics. Said introduces the idea that imperialism is not just a historical
phenomenon but a pervasive cultural force that continues to shape global relationships.
Main Arguments

1. Culture as a Tool of Imperialism

Said challenges the traditional, idealized view of culture as neutral, apolitical, or
universally humanistic. Instead, he argues that cultural forms in the West—
particularly literature—have often functioned to support and legitimize empire. These
cultural productions (novels, art, philosophy) subtly framed imperialism as a
civilizing mission or an inevitable process. Western authors, poets, and philosophers
(such as those from the Romantic or Victorian periods) frequently romanticized or
obscured the violence and exploitation involved in imperial conquest.

Said states that empire and culture are deeply intertwined, with imperial ideology
woven into the very fabric of cultural output. This relationship is not just one of direct
political support; rather, culture works as an ideological system that rationalizes
empire, offering emotional or intellectual justification for the domination of non-
European peoples.

2. Geography and Mapping as Imperial Tools

One of the key elements Said examines is the use of geography in imperialism.
Geography, as represented by maps and cartography, is shown to be more than just an
objective recording of space. Instead, maps have been used as instruments of empire,
shaping the way people think about and engage with the world. These representations
serve not only to map the physical world but also to render it legible, manageable, and
ultimately conquerable.

Western maps often depicted the colonies as blank spaces in need of European
intervention. The idea of "terra nullius" (land belonging to no one) is a key example
of how geography was used to justify the appropriation of land. Mapping and
geography were integral to empire-building because they gave structure to imperial
ideology, dividing the world into "civilized" and "uncivilized" territories.

3. Literary Representations of Empire

Said critiques the role of literature in imperialism, focusing on how the stories told by
Western authors reflect and support imperial ideologies. Literature is seen as a
mechanism through which imperial power is both enacted and reproduced, offering
both an overt and subtle means of articulating power relations.
 He draws upon examples from canonical texts, such as the works of authors like
Joseph Conrad, who depicted the empire as a force of civilization, bringing
enlightenment to the so-called “savage” lands. However, even authors who criticize
imperialism, such as Conrad in Heart of Darkness, participate in the imperial
discourse by framing the non-Western world as an enigmatic "Other" that must be
understood through Western eyes. In this way, the literature is complicit in presenting
the colonial relationship as one of the "civilized" world over the "uncivilized."

4. Contrapuntal Reading and Critical Engagement

One of Said's significant contributions in this chapter is the method of "contrapuntal
reading." He argues that to understand imperialism fully, one must not only read the
texts of the colonizers but also the voices of the colonized. Contrapuntal reading
involves recognizing the silences and omissions in the imperial narrative, as well as
incorporating the perspectives of those who were colonized. It challenges the
dominant, imperialist narrative and urges a more complex, dual reading of cultural
texts, which can reveal the hidden injustices of empire.

Said’s approach emphasizes the need for scholars and readers to critically engage with
cultural artifacts—not as isolated works of art but as products of specific power
relations. In doing so, readers can uncover how empire is embedded within culture
and how its legacy continues to shape contemporary global inequalities.

5. Cultural Legacy of Empire

Finally, Said emphasizes that imperialism is not a relic of the past but a system whose
cultural legacies continue to shape the modern world. The ways in which empire was
justified in the 19th and early 20th centuries still resonate in contemporary issues of
race, identity, and power. The colonial mindset, with its inherent division between the
“civilized” and the “savage,” persists in modern cultural and political formations.
Post-colonial societies are still impacted by the cultural narratives created by
imperialism, which continue to affect the way former colonies are perceived and
treated in the global order.
Critical Analysis

Strengths of Said's Argument

1. Interdisciplinary Approach
One of the strengths of Said’s chapter is its interdisciplinary nature. By merging
literary analysis with geography and historical context, Said presents a comprehensive
view of how culture and imperialism are deeply entangled. This allows for a nuanced
understanding of how empire is not just a political or economic enterprise but also a
cultural project that continues to shape the global landscape.

2. Deconstruction of Western Cultural Canon

Said successfully challenges the traditional view of Western literature as universal
and neutral, revealing how it has functioned as an ideological apparatus that
reinforces imperial power. His analysis opens up space for critical engagement with
canonical texts, offering readers a way to reconsider familiar works in light of their
colonial implications.
 3. Contrapuntal Reading Method
The concept of contrapuntal reading is a particularly useful methodological tool. It
offers a means to engage critically with cultural texts and offers a richer, more
inclusive understanding of empire. This approach compels scholars and readers to
listen to the voices of the colonized, highlighting the agency and resistance that are
often overlooked in imperial narratives.
4. Relevance to Contemporary Global Power Dynamics
Said’s argument remains highly relevant in the context of modern neocolonialism,
global inequalities, and debates about cultural appropriation. His critique of how
empire continues to influence cultural and political systems helps readers understand
how contemporary global structures still bear the imprints of imperialism.

Critiques of Said's Argument

1. Overgeneralization of Western Culture

One critique of Said’s argument is that he can sometimes overgeneralize the role of
Western culture in sustaining empire. By focusing on canonical Western literature,
Said may overlook the diversity of cultural expressions within the West itself. Not all
Western authors supported imperialism, and many critiqued colonial practices (e.g.,
Charles Dickens, William Blake). Said’s analysis could benefit from further
exploration of the complexity within Western culture, which includes significant
resistance to empire.
2. Limited Focus on Popular Culture
Another limitation is Said’s focus on elite cultural forms, such as literature, while
neglecting the role of popular culture in imperialism. Popular media (e.g., theater,
visual arts, and later film) played a key role in shaping public attitudes toward empire
and colonial subjects. While Said’s focus on high culture is justified in some respects,
a more comprehensive analysis of how mass culture contributed to imperial
ideologies would offer a fuller picture.
3. Ambiguity in the Role of Resistance
While Said’s contrapuntal reading opens up space for the voices of the colonized, he
does not always explore the nuances of resistance within the imperial context.
Resistance is acknowledged, but the variety of forms of opposition, including
complicity within colonized societies, is sometimes not fully explored. A more in-
depth analysis of how colonized peoples both resisted and negotiated their position
within empire could add complexity to the argument.

Conclusion

In Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said offers a compelling analysis of how imperialism is
embedded within cultural forms. His exploration of literature, geography, and cultural
production reveals how empire was justified and maintained not just through political and
military means but through the powerful influence of cultural narratives. Despite some
critiques—particularly regarding the overgeneralization of Western culture and the limited
scope of resistance—Said’s argument remains essential for understanding the continued
legacies of empire in contemporary global systems. His work challenges readers to critically
re-engage with cultural texts and recognize the ideological underpinnings of imperial power,
making Culture and Imperialism a landmark contribution to postcolonial theory.
Detailed Summary and Analysis of Edward Said’s Culture and Imperialism, Chapter 1:
“Images of the Past, Pure and Impure”

In this section of Chapter 1, Edward Said discusses the ways in which historical narratives are
shaped, represented, and often manipulated through cultural productions. He examines the
concept of "pure" and "impure" images of the past, emphasizing how imperialist ideologies
have influenced the construction and interpretation of historical memory. The section
critically engages with how culture operates as a medium for both perpetuating dominant
imperial narratives and resisting them.

Detailed Summary

1. Pure Images of the Past

Said describes "pure" images of the past as those that idealize and romanticize history. These
representations are sanitized, harmonious, and stripped of their complexities or
contradictions. Pure images often serve as tools to glorify specific national or cultural
identities while omitting the more problematic aspects of history. For instance, imperialist
cultures frequently created narratives that celebrated their civilizing missions while ignoring
or erasing the violence, exploitation, and resistance involved in colonization.

Said critiques these pure images for their exclusionary nature. By focusing solely on the
achievements or positive aspects of a culture, these images marginalize the voices and
experiences of colonized peoples, erasing their agency and suffering from the historical
record.

2. Impure Images of the Past

In contrast, "impure" images of the past acknowledge the complexities, contradictions, and
moral ambiguities of historical events. They reveal the darker aspects of history, such as
exploitation, resistance, and cultural destruction. Said highlights the importance of
recognizing these impure images as a means of challenging dominant narratives and fostering
a more honest engagement with history.

Impure images are often found in postcolonial literature and art, where authors and artists
grapple with the legacy of imperialism and the cultural, political, and economic consequences
for colonized peoples. These works seek to restore the voices of the marginalized and provide
a more inclusive and multifaceted view of history.

3. Role of Literature and Art

Said emphasizes how literature and art have played crucial roles in shaping both pure and
impure images of the past. For example, canonical Western literature often contributes to
pure images by presenting empire as a natural or benevolent force. Conversely, postcolonial
works challenge these narratives, exposing the inequalities and violence of imperialism.

He uses examples from authors such as Joseph Conrad and Rudyard Kipling to illustrate how
literature can reinforce imperial ideologies. At the same time, Said points to the works of
postcolonial authors like Chinua Achebe and Salman Rushdie, who provide impure images
by highlighting the perspectives of the colonized.

4. Historical Memory and Power

Said connects the discussion of pure and impure images to the broader theme of historical
memory and power. He argues that the construction of historical narratives is a deeply
political act, influenced by those in power. Imperialist powers have traditionally controlled
the representation of history, ensuring that their narratives dominate while silencing or
marginalizing alternative perspectives.

However, the rise of postcolonial movements and the recovery of subaltern voices have
challenged these dominant narratives, offering impure images that complicate and disrupt the
sanitized versions of the past.

Critical Analysis

Strengths of Said’s Argument

1. Challenging the Dominant Narrative

Said’s distinction between pure and impure images is a powerful framework for
understanding how history is represented. By highlighting the selective nature of
historical memory, Said challenges readers to critically examine the narratives they
have been taught and question the omissions and biases within them.
2. Connection to Imperialism and Culture
Said’s analysis underscores the deep interconnection between imperialism and
cultural production. His exploration of how literature and art reinforce or resist
imperial ideologies provides a compelling lens for analyzing cultural texts. He
effectively demonstrates how cultural representations are not neutral but are deeply
implicated in systems of power.
3. Empowering Marginalized Voices
By advocating for impure images of the past, Said emphasizes the importance of
including marginalized perspectives in historical narratives. His work aligns with
postcolonial efforts to recover the voices and experiences of colonized peoples,
offering a more inclusive and truthful representation of history.

Critiques of Said’s Argument

1. Overemphasis on Literature
While Said’s focus on literature is insightful, it risks overlooking other forms of
cultural production, such as visual arts, music, or oral histories, which also play
significant roles in shaping images of the past. A broader analysis of different cultural
mediums could enhance his argument.
2. Ambiguity of "Impure" Images
While Said champions impure images as a means of challenging dominant narratives,
he does not always address the potential challenges of navigating these complexities.
For instance, how do readers or audiences reconcile the contradictions and
ambiguities inherent in impure images? This question remains underexplored.
 3. Potential Bias Against Western Culture
Said’s critique of Western cultural production sometimes risks appearing overly
critical, potentially overlooking the diversity and resistance within Western traditions.
For instance, some Western authors and artists have also critiqued imperialism and
offered impure images of the past. Incorporating these perspectives could provide a
more balanced view.

Relevance and Contemporary Implications

Said’s discussion of pure and impure images remains highly relevant in contemporary
debates about historical memory, cultural representation, and identity. Issues such as the
removal of colonial statues, the decolonization of education, and the representation of
marginalized communities in media all reflect the ongoing struggle between pure and impure
images of the past. Said’s work provides a critical framework for navigating these debates
and advocating for a more inclusive and honest engagement with history.

Conclusion

In this section of Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said offers a nuanced analysis of how
historical narratives are shaped by cultural production. His distinction between pure and
impure images of the past highlights the selective nature of historical memory and its role in
sustaining or challenging imperial ideologies. By emphasizing the importance of including
marginalized voices and perspectives, Said advocates for a more truthful and inclusive
representation of history. Despite some limitations, his insights remain essential for
understanding the cultural legacies of imperialism and the ongoing contestation of historical
narratives.

Summary
Analysis

Political leaders of underdeveloped countries expect their people to fight colonialism, poverty, and
other devastating conditions, and these newly independent countries have to both contend with this
fighting and manage to keep up with other countries on the world stage. They are told that European
nations became wealthy because of their labor, and that wealth can be obtained by anyone who works
for it. However, posing the problems facing newly independent nations in this way is incorrect and
unreasonable.
Fanon implies that the idea that Europe became wealthy through hard work is ridiculous. Europe
exploited and stole their wealth from the Third World; therefore, it isn’t really theirs. Underdeveloped
countries are still at an incredible disadvantage, even with their freedom. There was nothing fair about
the global distribution of wealth, and now the Third World has to start from scratch.
The national unity of European countries was developed when their bourgeoisies had most of the
wealth. With the exception of England, European nations were in about the same economic position,
and not one was above the other. The building of the nation in an underdeveloped country, on the
other hand, is entirely different. In addition to poverty and little infrastructure, there are no doctors or
engineers. Compared to underdeveloped countries, European nations are lavish. But this “opulence,”
Fanon argues, has been “built on the backs of slaves” and “owes its very existence” to the
underdeveloped world.
Here, Fanon outright says that Europe stole its wealth from the Third World. Fanon later talks about
reparations given to European countries after Nazism destroyed their nations, cultures, and people
during World War II. Attempts were made to make them whole again, but the same attempts are not
made in regard to the Third World. Europe isn’t just doing okay, they live in “opulence” and luxury,
while their victims suffer.

Independence to a colonized country automatically comes with a fair amount of suffering, and some
Third World countries, not wanting to suffer so badly, agree to the terms of the colonial power. Under
the terms of the Cold War, the formerly colonized become economically dependent on the
same colonists who occupied them. The conflict that was colonialism versus anticolonialism has now
turned into capitalism versus socialism.
This is another form of neocolonialism in a sense. Fanon implies that the colonial power is still in
control of the Third World regardless of whether the colonized countries gain independence or not.
Whether it is an outright occupation or economic or political control, even the independent nation is
still held below a European power on some level.

Capitalist exploitation, Fanon says, is the enemy of Third World countries. Conversely, socialism—
which is dedicated to the people and promotes the idea that the people are the most important assets of
a nation—helps underdeveloped nations grow. However, Third World countries need more than
“human investment.” The newly independent will agree to become “slaves of the nation,” but this
cannot be sustained indefinitely. The formerly colonized must keep open the economic channels
created by the colonists, otherwise the results will be disastrous. Developing countries need capital,
and they admit that mere “human investment” is not enough.
Fanon doesn’t advocate for keeping much of the colonial situation after decolonization, but he does
argue that Western channels of economics must remain. The Third World must be able to
manufacture and sell goods in some way. To do so is the very basis of a capitalist society, which,
Fanon argues, the Third World definitely is. Socialism will only turn the people back into “slaves,”
putting them right back where they started.

When Nazism made all of Europe a colony, the governments of European nations demanded
reparations, and “moral reparations” will not suffice for the formerly colonized. The wealth of the
former colonists also belongs to the formerly colonized. Europe was made rich by colonizing Latin
America, China, and Africa, and as such, they have been created by the Third World. Thus, when a
European nation helps a Third World country, they should not respond with gratitude. Such aid should
not be considered “charity.” Rather, it should be part of a “dual consciousness,” Fanon says. The
colonized must recognize that such aid is owed to them, and the capitalist powers must recognize that
they have to pay.
Plainly put, Fanon implies that simply apologizing isn’t sufficient for the Third World. They want to
be properly compensated for what they have lost and not made out to be a charity case when
assistance is needed. After all, they probably wouldn’t need any assistance had their wealth not been
stolen in the first place. Fanon’s use of the phrase “double consciousness” nods to a concept coined by
W. E. B. Du Bois that assumes that black individuals see themselves through the racist eyes of their
society. Fanon turns this concept on its head: his idea of dual consciousness involves both parties
recognizing that the Third World has been wronged, and Europe actually righting that wrong.

Third World countries should not have to beg at the feet of capitalist nations, Fanon argues. The
formerly colonized are strong in the justness of their plight, and it is their responsibility to tell the
capitalist nations that the central issue of the times is not a war between capitalism and socialism.
Instead of fighting the Cold War, all money and efforts should be put into rehabilitating
underdeveloped countries. The Third World does not want to destroy Europe; what it wants is to be
assisted back to economic and social good health by the same countries who kept them as slaves.
Fanon’s argument is again clearly articulated here. For the Third World, it is simple: Europe must
right the wrong of colonialism. Fanon and the Third World believe this deeply, and this is reflected in
Fanon’s repeated mention of it. Decolonization is the most important issue of Fanon’s time, and he
says it every chance he gets. However, the repetition of this message also reflects just how much the
Third World is ignored.