Identity is an idiosyncratic definition of a person that can be constructed through many variables: race, gender, social class and culture, to name a few. Letters from the Turkish Embassy come with a pre-constructed orientalist ideal of the Orient, where identity is entirely constructed on race and culture. It is therefore imperative that this story be presented from a female perspective. If viewed through male eyes, the women Lady Mary Wortley Montagu interacted with would have been seen as submissive and oppressed by their own culture, embodying the trope of the "damsel in distress." Instead, Lady Montagu is able to examine gender as a concept that not only influences identity, but is completely distinct from it. It is from this feminine perspective that Lady Montagu is able to explore gender oppression as a universal phenomenon. An Orientalist approach would view the West and its people as “free,” and the East as oppressed by its reserved culture and strict religion. Yet the English protagonist is able to see that Turkish women can, in fact, be liberated through the anonymity of their veil. Lady Montagu is therefore able to redefine “freedom” in this orientalist perspective, and also to free the Turks from this label of “other”. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The identification of the Turk in the Turkish embassy letters is constructed not through what the East was, but primarily through what the West was not. This “otherness” is underlined by a comparison with England and its “friendly relations with men of letters and taste”. Identity, and therefore a person's reputation in English society, depends on education. The concept of “taste” – extremely important in a critical 18th-century society – is directly associated with “letters”, suggesting that education and refinement are interdependent. It is evident that Montagu is unable to escape the indoctrinated class system of his home country. His endorsement of "kind" social circles is subtle but important, while the use of the term "connections" suggests an inner upper-class society, closed to the lower hierarchies of the class spectrum. Even in this examination of identity, gender is inseparable. Lady Montagu defines "men" as those who are worthy of both education and good taste; even as a woman, there is a widespread belief that men are privileged by nature. This praise of English customs is structurally placed directly after a graphic description of Turkish barbarism. It is by design that a comparison of the two cultures is automatically imposed. Therefore, the individuals depicted in both narratives become representative of each culture as a whole, made all the more poignant because it includes the actions of a Turkish prince. He attempted to crush an uprising “by strangling several people who were the objects of his royal suspicions.” The lack of identity of "people" not only shows the lower classes as lacking this privileged voice, but it also suggests a disgusting and disposable element in human life. In contrast to men “of letters and taste”, the violence of the “barbaric spectacle” despises classes; identity is lost as everyone is reduced to corpses. Furthermore, this comparison induces an immediate judgment, both on the part of the story and the reader. Yet there is a feelingof unavoidable irony. The English are judged by their manners, their "veins of wit" and their "elegant conversation", and the Turks by their laws of punishment. Therefore, when examined, the identity of Turks is constructed in a method that is both biased and unbalanced. They are considered “the others” in relation to English society, which notoriously judges on superficiality. To fully understand Turkish identity, it must be seen as a distinct culture and not in association with another. It is only through the physical distance from English society that Lady Montagu can observe as an outsider and not conform to this perspective of judgment, as if she were not part of either culture. As a novel written from a female perspective, with access to exclusively female domains, there is no denying what gender will be examined. This comparison between English and Turkish, which was previously seen as based on sensitivity, becomes how each culture defines women's freedom and oppression. Teresa Heffernan presents the 18th-century vision of the Turkish “veiled woman” from whom “she can only be “saved” from her culture or “submitted to it.”[1] Lady Montagu, on the contrary, sees the veil as a protection against patriarchy. , rather than alienation from an oppressive culture. The author is almost admiring for their “methods of escape and disguise very favorable to gallantry”. This sense of disguise is particularly important in Turkish or English society. Being a woman meant perpetual judgment on one's appearance, actions, and morality. In a superficial society this is inevitable. The veil allows the Lady and the servant to appear identical; not only the flesh, but also the social class are “disguised” through this “perpetual masquerade” (Montagu, p. 71). Thus, freedom is obtained through anonymity and the inability to judge, the very aspect that Western man would assume is oppression. Lady Montagu then compares this existence to her experience as a woman in England. Similar to the alleged oppression of the Turks, English women are “sold like slaves” (Montagu, p.xi) through the traditions of marriage and dowry. Additionally, this idea of ​​“gallantry” may be related in this comparison. Culture and gender policies are defined “as different in different climates as morality and religion”. Yet the struggle for the elimination of oppression is independent of all culture and race; Bravery in gender politics is universal across cultures, particularly poignant within the confines of the 18th century. In this examination of gender, there is also an aspect of class. The author is a lady, but she appreciates the freedom that “even the bosom of bondage” offers. Even with such status, Lady Montagu remains impartial and refuses to include the course in her gender examinations. Gender is therefore examined here separately from other identity markers. “Freedom” as a woman is defined differently depending on culture, location, and social class. Yet all of this is considered separately, as Lady Montagu simply observes and celebrates the freedom of the Turks, rather than seeing their actions as "other" to England. So far, the identity of the two Turkish individuals, and their culture as a whole, has been examined. Yet these observations were presented to the reader through writing, and it is important to consider the importance of the physical act of writing and perspective. Lady Montagu's point of view and her letters as a point of information become problematic. In the 18th century, travel writers made numerous claims about their discoveries. Therefore, gender can elicit, 2012)