Egypt in the Eyes of the Western World- From Colonizing Egypt by Timothy Mitchell

In the book, Colonizing Egypt, Timothy Mitchell analyzed the results of western domination on three separate stages, the world-at-exhibition, the Egyptian City, and the west. I am particularly interested in his arguments about the response of the Egyptian visitors when they saw a replica of their home country in a western land. Mitchell talked about the world-at-exhibition and analyzed how the French exhibit Egypt.  It is interesting to me to read the idea that I never really came about, looking at my own country through the eyes of a foreigner.

This is what Mitchell was explaining when he talked about the shocking response the Egyptians had when they see an exhibition of their country that seemed to be “real”. He said, “Part of the shock of the Egyptians came from just how 'real' the street claimed to be. Not simply that the paint was made dirty, that the donkeys were from Cairo, and that the Egyptian pastries on sale claimed to taste like the real thing. But that one paid for them, as we say, with real money” (10). The fact that the Egyptian sees this replica very similar to the real thing surprised me as there are many aspects of a country that is not really seen by foreigners. However, I would feel that power has a big role in making this happen as these foreigners visit Egypt not only for the purpose that foreigners have when they visit Egypt today.

This was in 1889, the time of colonialism when they have the power to see Egypt inside out. The representations that were created by these French scholars and architects would not be as real if Egypt was never under colonization, as Egypt would not be open to the western world. The fact that Egypt was colonized pushed Egypt towards modernization and created a new Egypt, where trade and culture there was brought to the next level. This is proven by Mitchell’s argument of how, “these symbolic representations of the world's cultural and colonial order, continually encountered and described by visitors to Europe, were the mark of a great historical confidence “(7). He explained how even the most small aspects of the culture was shown, such as “the commercialism of the donkey rides, the bazaar stalls and the dancing girls was no different from the commercialism of the world outside” (10).

It is interesting how Mitchell connected this exhibition of the world to commercialism and how he explained that they symbolize the political and economic transformation that equally effected Egypt. He related the new world of Facades and exhibits, models and stimulations, to the capitalist transformation. In other words, the replica that the French created of the Egypt explains how Egypt is becoming a new world, where commodity becomes an important aspect of their trading system. The exhibits of Egypt that the French create made it more valuable than it actually is. The remarkable realism of such displays made a strange civilization into an object the visitor could almost touch. Yet to the observing eye, surrounded by the display but distinguished from it by the status of visitor, it remained a mere representation, the picture of some strange reality (9).

The exhibition shows how Egypt is becoming civilized and closer to be like the modern world. However, a question that confuses me throughout reading this book is that, “didn’t Egypt civilize before Europe? Why does this explanation seem like saying that Egypt is a new modern world, while it was Egypt that first advanced in trading systems?

Rossa D.

.