1.  Perez underscores an important point made more quietly by Said in Orientalism, namely that Western or American imaginaries of the rest of the world do not only feature a kind of "knowledge" presented as objective, but they also feature a kind of morality presented as benevolent.  How does metaphor -- his main focus of analysis -- contribute to what Perez calls "the moral logic of power" in particular?  Why, moreover, does the moral dimension seem so important to those who exercise power?

2.  McAlister rejects the notion of a single "orientalism" pervading an entire culture, in favor of multiple "orientalisms," each preferred and enacted by different social constituencies.  This is one of her criticisms of Said; another is his failure to tie imaginaries of the rest of the world to specific but also varied domestic interests in a country like the United States.  According to McAlister, what were those four contending interests in the latter 20th-century history of the United States, and how were their imaginaries about the Middle East different from each other?