Sixteenth International Conference on New Directions in the Humanities

Abstract

“The Coup” is different from Updike’s other novels in that “The Coup” itself was a “coup” for Updike’s literature – its language, subject matter, and style are all novel (Hunt 195). In contrast, however, Islam’s treatment therein remains unchanged and conforms to the same tired stereotypes. This research explores how Islam is abused and misunderstood in the narrative. In “The Coup,” Updike created a country; he created a people; he created a name (Greiner, 29), much like the imperialists who came to Kush from his country. Consequently, he offers the reader a governable imperialist construct in typical Orientalist fashion. In addition, he offers a geography in which to fit that construct. The protagonist stresses this when he says, “I say Kush is a fiction, an evil dream the white man had, and that those who profess to govern her are twisted and bent double.” “The Coup” is a work to which all the dogmas or ideological positions that Edward Said mentioned in Orientalism apply. The first dogma is that the Orient represents what is irrational, undeveloped, inhumane, and inferior, whereas the West is the exact opposite. The second prevailing principle is that traditional texts about the Orient are preferred to realities. The third principle is that the Orient is static and does not change, and incapable of defining itself. The fourth dogma is that the Orient needs to be either feared or controlled (2003, 300-301). These dogmas are embodied in fixed images.