Authors

Discussion

The paper argues that, contrary to the classic model of Orientalist relations between the West and the East as described by Said, which serves for the self-assertion of the former, Orientalism tends to take specific shapes in the Eastern European context: firstly, Eastern Europe embraces Orientalism to protect its Europeanness; secondly, it rejects the classic Saidian Orientalism by affiliating itself with the East through the concepts of Turanism and Pan-Slavism; thirdly, it itself is, to a degree, the Orient, the subaltern Other devised by the West. Therefore, Orientalism in Eastern Europe combines often contradictory traits on the spectrum from self-affirmation and self-aggrandizement to self-critique and self-deprecation. Applying the methodology of content analysis, the author explores a body of fin de siècle narrative sources belonging to Czech and Hungarian cultures (selected as having a substantial narrative heritage required for the purposes of the chosen methodology). Analysis of works by Dvořák, Hašek, Kafka, Musil, Gárdonyi, Bartók and Kalman prompts a conclusion about substantial differences between Czech and Hungarian Orientalisms arising from their differing historical, regional and linguistics experiences. It is assumed that the employed methodology and the proposed spectral typology are optimal as the tools of the internal differentiation of Eastern European subtypes of Orientalism and can be further applied to materials from other historical periods.