The Idea
Arkoun criticizes Orientalist historians because they marginalize the marvelous and the imaginary, literary dimension in texts and events. He sees this marginalization as producing an incomplete picture, since religious and cultural experience cannot be reduced to hard facts alone. The marvelous and the imaginary are not marginal decoration, but part of the way meaning is constructed in memory, narrative, and representation.
Concise Formulation
Orientalist historians: neutralize: the marvelous and the imaginary, literary dimension
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This idea lies at the heart of Arkoun’s objection to certain modern reading methods when they treat texts as neutral raw material. It serves the book’s broader argument that understanding Islam requires attention to its symbolic and linguistic layers, not only to its documentary dimension. Excluding the literary leads to a pallid picture of religion and history.
Why It Matters
This idea gains its importance because it opens the way to understanding Arkoun as a critic of simplification, not of history alone. He reminds us that the religious human being does not live by facts alone, but by images, representations, and narratives as well. Without this dimension, much of the meaning that drives culture and shapes its relation to the sacred is lost.
Brief Evidence
Arkoun criticizes Orientalist historians because they marginalize the marvelous and the imaginary, literary dimension in texts and events. He sees this marginalization as making the picture incomplete, since religious and cultural experience cannot be reduced to hard facts alone. The marvelous and the imaginary are part of the way meaning is built in memory, narrative, and reception.
Reading Questions
- Why does ignoring the marvelous count as a deficiency in understanding religious and historical texts?
- How does the literary dimension help enable a deeper reading of religious experience?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.