An important and recurring element of Oriental analysis is its constant confirmation
of the thesis that the Oriental is primitive, barbaric, and incapable of rational selfgovernment.
Such a discursive regularity or persistence exists in the discursive processes
of Orientalist writers and scholars and as shall be seen, contrary to the claims of critics,
Robert Southey is no exception. In this article, an analysis of his two major Oriental
works, Thalaba the Destroyer and Roderick, Last of the Goths will reveal that despite
claims made by Sharafuddin, Southey is unable to move beyond the dominant discursive
practices of his era. In Orientalist texts such as Southey’s, while the relationship between
East and West can assume highly dissimilar manifestations, the Westerner rarely loses
the upper hand. This flexible positional superiority bolsters the assertion that Orientalism
is an ideologically loaded discourse with severely bounded boarders, which regularly
influences contemporary critics. However, it is not the purpose of this article either to
posit a single, objective West which constructs ‘the Other’, even though constructions of
‘the Other’ are in certain significant ways not notably heterogeneous. The concept that an
Orient and Occident actually exist and divide humanity into two distinct oceans, however
influential, seems clearly to be a fictitious ideological construct.