[TheOtherHobbes]

Considering that all of Africa and parts of the Middle East were partitioned and colonised by the European powers in the late 19th century, and India had been colonised much earlier, and China had been pacified by the Opium Wars (and still hasn't forgiven the UK for those) I'm not sure how you can say there was no interest in settling or taming.

The artistic cliches were froth that made these distant locations somewhat comprehensible to home audiences. Not incidentally, they also sold them as investment opportunities and potential locations for personal commercial and military adventures - and occasionally artistic and erotic adventures too.

[shakow]

Because you're conflating a geopolitical current (colonialism & imperialism) with an artistic one (orientalism) -- in fact, the artistic current actually predates colonialism in the concerned geographical regions, with e.g. Ottoman art becoming fashionable in the 18th century or Antique Egypt fascinating Paris after Napoleon's expedition in the early 19th century.

Just like nowadays, exhibiting a taste for Vietnamese or Bengali culture doesn't imply that you are a staunch supporter of children's slavery, 19th century people fantasizing about lascivious odalisques and fierce Cheikhs or Byron writing about Transoxania doesn't have much to do with the Concessions harbours.

[FooBarBizBazz]

Good distinction. But that conflation is exactly the purpose of contemporary use of the word "orientalism". It makes it impossible for Westerners to engage with these cultures while maintaining social or aesthetic acceptability; intentionally, the only option left open is to sit down and shut up.