As Gabriel noticed in his response journal, Ahab’s madness seems to be piquing in these chapters, which contain the most action and dialogue we’ve seen in perhaps the entire book. We learn a lot about each character, more than we’ve ever learned before. Starbuck, for example, shows the most resistance to Ahab. He seems to be the only one who is questioning Ahab’s iron rule. He even ponders shooting Ahab for the good of the ship which, to me, was a really powerful and interesting scene. Starbuck wonders “Is heaven a murderer when its lightning strikes a would-be murderer in his bed, tindering sheets and skin together?” (387) Another interesting point about character development: where has Ishmael gone? In this reading, the narrator seems to be omniscient, yet part of the crew. It’s amazing how Melville balances those two aspects out, making it seems all-knowing and yet familiar at the same time.
Another thing I noticed about these chapters is that Ahab’s monomania is slowly devolving (or evolving) into a sort of megalomania. His quest for the Great White Whale has gotten him a sort of god complex. Saying things like “There is one God that is Lord over the earth, and one Captain that is lord over the Pequod!” (362), and claiming mastery over the poles, Ahab seems to have promoted his quest from whale domination to world domination.
Melville also reintroduces his theme of the outwardly pleasant, yet inwardly dangerous in these chapters. He writes that “…when beholding the tranquil beauty and brilliancy of the ocean’s skin, one forgets the tiger heart that pants beneath it; and would not willingly remember, that this velvet paw but conceals a remorseless fang.” (372) He uses the metaphor of the tiger again later in the reading to the same effect, when he states that “Warmest climes but nurse the cruelest fangs: the tiger of Bengal crouches in spiced groves of ceaseless verdure.” (379) All of this adds to the extremely ominous tone that Melville sets in these chapters, starting with the Pequod’s encounter with the fortuitous “Bachelor”. Of this encounter, Melville writes, “…while the one ship went cheerily before the breeze, the other stubbornly fought against it.” (375). This once again implies that, in chasing Moby-Dick, Ahab is somehow going against the natural order of things.
Finally, two passages in this reading caught my eye as extremely poignant and well-written:
“…but Death is only a launching into the region of the strange Untried; it is but the first salutation to the possibilities of the immense Remore, the Wild, the Watery, the Unshored…” (369)
“Our souls are like those orphans whose unwedded mothers die in bearing them: the secret of our paternity lies in their grave, and we must there to learn it” (373)
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Response Journal Week 10 - Gabriel
In this segment of reading (Pg. 361-395) there were a lot of dramatic interactions between the characters that are probably leading up to the final, climactic event. When Starbuck tells Ahab to lower the anchor in order to stop the oil from leaking, Ahab pulls out a gun and points it at Starbuck, telling him to leave his cabin. Ahab has been insane throughout the whole novel, however, his insanity is starting to reach new heights, which probably has to do with his getting closer to Moby Dick. What makes Ahab all the more insane is the fact that he ends up listening to Starbuck even though he held a musket to his head. Ahab’s actions are becoming very irrational, yet he is becoming more and more prideful. We see how conceded and self-centered Ahab is in the dubloon chapter when he only sees himself in the dubloon. Then in The Needle, Ahab claims to be the lord of the level loadstone and Melville writes, “you then saw Ahab in all his fatal pride,” (390). Ishmael did intend for Ahab to be modeled after a tragic Greek hero, and sure enough, Ahab is starting to show the tragic flaw of the Greek hero, which is hubris. He thinks that he’s greater than the Gods and that he can stand up to Moby Dick, who has been alluded to as an instrument of God, and this will probably be his downfall.
There were three conversations that I found very interesting in this segment of reading. The first is between Ahab and the Blacksmith on page 370, in which Ahab says something that really struck me. He says, “How can’st though endure without being mad?’ He sees the world differently than a normal human does, and he finds it weird how someone can endure the hardships of the world without going insane. Insanity is a coping mechanism for Ahab and he looks at it as a blessing because he later goes on to ask why the Gods hate the blacksmith for not letting him become mad. The second conversation I’m talking about, which was between Ahab and Fedellah on page 377 was very weird and prophetic. They talk about how Ahab must see two hearses before he dies and how only hemp can kill him. This conversation made me wonder whether Fedallah is a supernatural instrument of God, or just a crazy person. If these prophecies come true I will be pretty sure that Fedallah is some sort of supernatural being. The third conversation I’m talking about is the one between Pip and Ahab, during which they become good friends. They have one of the craziest conversations I’ve ever read. On the post it note I have on page 392 I wrote, Pip + Ahab = Crazy Friends.
I also thought that the chapter about Queequeg in his coffin is hilarious. However, I wasn’t sure if he was just faking being sick or if he actually got better because he chose to get better.
There were three conversations that I found very interesting in this segment of reading. The first is between Ahab and the Blacksmith on page 370, in which Ahab says something that really struck me. He says, “How can’st though endure without being mad?’ He sees the world differently than a normal human does, and he finds it weird how someone can endure the hardships of the world without going insane. Insanity is a coping mechanism for Ahab and he looks at it as a blessing because he later goes on to ask why the Gods hate the blacksmith for not letting him become mad. The second conversation I’m talking about, which was between Ahab and Fedellah on page 377 was very weird and prophetic. They talk about how Ahab must see two hearses before he dies and how only hemp can kill him. This conversation made me wonder whether Fedallah is a supernatural instrument of God, or just a crazy person. If these prophecies come true I will be pretty sure that Fedallah is some sort of supernatural being. The third conversation I’m talking about is the one between Pip and Ahab, during which they become good friends. They have one of the craziest conversations I’ve ever read. On the post it note I have on page 392 I wrote, Pip + Ahab = Crazy Friends.
I also thought that the chapter about Queequeg in his coffin is hilarious. However, I wasn’t sure if he was just faking being sick or if he actually got better because he chose to get better.
Response Journal Week 10-Amani
I enjoyed reading the chapters for this week because they were about Ahab (finally!). Ahab was a prominent character in these chapters. The depth of his insanity, his monomania is revealed. Ahab's obsession with the whale has led to the deterioration of the Pequod and has escalated the crew's frustration with him. Although Ahab has been warned about the consequences of chasing the White Whale, he ignores his fate and assumes it will be postponed. It's interesting that he accepts that he will die soon, but he believes that he will die after his battle with Moby-Dick.
One of the warnings Ahab receives is the storm. Ahab isn’t frightened by it. He says in “The Candles,” “blow out your last fear.” He says that the storm brings them together. Seeing Ahab’s harpoon flickering with fire, Starbuck concluded that God opposes Ahab. Starbuck as well as others on the crew are losing patience with Ahab. Starbuck even debates with himself about whether he should kill Ahab. He is angry about how selfish Ahab is being and with all the reckless decisions he’s made at the expense of the crew.
In “The Log and Line,” Ahab fails. He realizes that he doesn’t have any of his navigational devices. Ahab seeks Pip for help. However, Pip responds with nonsense. Ahab states that Pip can have his cabin because the Pip touches his “inmost center.” Ahab can relate to Pip because they are both crazy. Their insanity is a result of their past struggle’s with the sea and the whale’s that are within it.
One of the warnings Ahab receives is the storm. Ahab isn’t frightened by it. He says in “The Candles,” “blow out your last fear.” He says that the storm brings them together. Seeing Ahab’s harpoon flickering with fire, Starbuck concluded that God opposes Ahab. Starbuck as well as others on the crew are losing patience with Ahab. Starbuck even debates with himself about whether he should kill Ahab. He is angry about how selfish Ahab is being and with all the reckless decisions he’s made at the expense of the crew.
In “The Log and Line,” Ahab fails. He realizes that he doesn’t have any of his navigational devices. Ahab seeks Pip for help. However, Pip responds with nonsense. Ahab states that Pip can have his cabin because the Pip touches his “inmost center.” Ahab can relate to Pip because they are both crazy. Their insanity is a result of their past struggle’s with the sea and the whale’s that are within it.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Response Journal Week 9-Amani
Just from reading the description of the daunting task Matt Kish is in the process of doing, I’m impressed. The text of Moby-Dick is hard enough to read, never mind illustrating each page into a creative piece of art. I wasn't able to attend Matt Kish’s presentation on Monday so I will respond to the few chapters we read this week.
Ishmael's description of the whale in these chapters just reiterates the immensity of whales in Moby-Dick. In "Fossil Whale," Ishmael discusses the the huge mass that a whale possesses. He concludes that the mass of the whale cannot be measured solely with the bones found in the whale's skeleton. The bones of the whale don't account for the flesh and meat that are held on the whale when it is it alive. Therefore, the mass of a whale is unknown to humans. The whale's mass represents it's magnitude and power. Because it's mass can never be discovered by humans, it's power is beyond human comprehension.
In “Does the Whale's Magnitude Diminish?-Will He Perish?,” Ishmael talks about the possibility of the whale becoming extinct. Because it is has been growing larger and larger and is more and more frequently hunted, there are speculations that the whale may die out. Ishmael disagrees. He explains that the population of the whale hasn't decreased. His explanation for this is that they have such a large place to live and move around: the sea. The explanation that Ishmael provides allows for the characterization of the whale as indestructible.
The following chapter “Ahab's Leg” is about Ahab needing a new leg. This could be a seen as a an milestone in Ahab's life. It may be Ahab's point of realization that is necessary in Aristotle's definition of a tragedy. Ahab says that his old leg is worn out and needs to be replaced. Maybe this is the point where Ahab realizes that he is worn out, but he perseveres. Ahab is experiencing hamartia, which means to miss the mark. He has now become out of balance. However, Ahab always seemed to be out of balance. Maybe his point of realization occurred before Ishmael's first encounter with him.
Ishmael's description of the whale in these chapters just reiterates the immensity of whales in Moby-Dick. In "Fossil Whale," Ishmael discusses the the huge mass that a whale possesses. He concludes that the mass of the whale cannot be measured solely with the bones found in the whale's skeleton. The bones of the whale don't account for the flesh and meat that are held on the whale when it is it alive. Therefore, the mass of a whale is unknown to humans. The whale's mass represents it's magnitude and power. Because it's mass can never be discovered by humans, it's power is beyond human comprehension.
In “Does the Whale's Magnitude Diminish?-Will He Perish?,” Ishmael talks about the possibility of the whale becoming extinct. Because it is has been growing larger and larger and is more and more frequently hunted, there are speculations that the whale may die out. Ishmael disagrees. He explains that the population of the whale hasn't decreased. His explanation for this is that they have such a large place to live and move around: the sea. The explanation that Ishmael provides allows for the characterization of the whale as indestructible.
The following chapter “Ahab's Leg” is about Ahab needing a new leg. This could be a seen as a an milestone in Ahab's life. It may be Ahab's point of realization that is necessary in Aristotle's definition of a tragedy. Ahab says that his old leg is worn out and needs to be replaced. Maybe this is the point where Ahab realizes that he is worn out, but he perseveres. Ahab is experiencing hamartia, which means to miss the mark. He has now become out of balance. However, Ahab always seemed to be out of balance. Maybe his point of realization occurred before Ishmael's first encounter with him.
Response Journal Week 9 - Kalil
Kalil Smith-Nuevelle
In this section, Ishmael once again returns to the idea that you cannot accurately portray a whale. The whale, elevated as it is to such a high status in Moby-Dick, cannot be fully represented by mortals. This returns us to the idea of whales as godlike, and Melville does suggest that the whale is “immortal in his species, however perishable in his individuality” (354). To draw a whale, or define a whale would be to make it mortal. However, Matt Kish had no such qualms. His representation of the whale, as well as of every other part of Moby-Dick was far from limiting. Instead, looking at his visual representations, my own understanding was changed to some extent. I was especially drawn to his representation of the various sailors. Each one of them actually looked like a ship (a good deal more modern than the Pequod, but ships nonetheless), which reminded me of our consideration of microcosms within the novel. I also enjoyed his whales, although this was mostly just aesthetic (I loved the way that they looked almost industrial, or manufactured).
This short section returns once again to Ishmael’s vast arrogance, often to the point of stupidity. He claims that he has “undertaken to manhandle this Leviathan,” and strangely refers to his methods as “antedeluvian” which appears rather accurate (349). Instead of calling upon modern science, or even truly accepting his sources (from which some of these chapters are nearly plagiarized), he is weirdly contradictory. He is keenly aware of the challenges presented by attempting to understand the whale through science, when undertaken by other men, writing, “How vain and foolish, then, thought I, for timid untravelled man to try to comprehend aright this wondrous whale, by merely poring over his dead attenuated skeleton, stretched in this peaceful wood” (348). Yet this is the very process he himself undertakes, in his measurement of the whale (apparently his units for mass are “villages of one thousand one hundred inhabitants”) (347). For all of Ishmael’s previous awe of the whale, he has become like Ahab, disregarding its true power. Instead of recognizing it’s gargantuan awesomeness, he notes “that the spine of even the hugest of living things tapers off at last into simple child’s play”. This opinion is also characterized in his disregard for the priests who warn him against measuring the whale. He takes the abstract concept of the whale, and objectifies it through his measurements, though they are bound to be both inaccurate and profane.
In this section, Ishmael once again returns to the idea that you cannot accurately portray a whale. The whale, elevated as it is to such a high status in Moby-Dick, cannot be fully represented by mortals. This returns us to the idea of whales as godlike, and Melville does suggest that the whale is “immortal in his species, however perishable in his individuality” (354). To draw a whale, or define a whale would be to make it mortal. However, Matt Kish had no such qualms. His representation of the whale, as well as of every other part of Moby-Dick was far from limiting. Instead, looking at his visual representations, my own understanding was changed to some extent. I was especially drawn to his representation of the various sailors. Each one of them actually looked like a ship (a good deal more modern than the Pequod, but ships nonetheless), which reminded me of our consideration of microcosms within the novel. I also enjoyed his whales, although this was mostly just aesthetic (I loved the way that they looked almost industrial, or manufactured).
This short section returns once again to Ishmael’s vast arrogance, often to the point of stupidity. He claims that he has “undertaken to manhandle this Leviathan,” and strangely refers to his methods as “antedeluvian” which appears rather accurate (349). Instead of calling upon modern science, or even truly accepting his sources (from which some of these chapters are nearly plagiarized), he is weirdly contradictory. He is keenly aware of the challenges presented by attempting to understand the whale through science, when undertaken by other men, writing, “How vain and foolish, then, thought I, for timid untravelled man to try to comprehend aright this wondrous whale, by merely poring over his dead attenuated skeleton, stretched in this peaceful wood” (348). Yet this is the very process he himself undertakes, in his measurement of the whale (apparently his units for mass are “villages of one thousand one hundred inhabitants”) (347). For all of Ishmael’s previous awe of the whale, he has become like Ahab, disregarding its true power. Instead of recognizing it’s gargantuan awesomeness, he notes “that the spine of even the hugest of living things tapers off at last into simple child’s play”. This opinion is also characterized in his disregard for the priests who warn him against measuring the whale. He takes the abstract concept of the whale, and objectifies it through his measurements, though they are bound to be both inaccurate and profane.
Friday, April 16, 2010
C. L. R. James book
http://www.amazon.com/Mariners-Renegades-Castaways-Reencounters-Colonialism-New/dp/158465094X
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Response Journal Week 8-Amani
I also enjoyed “The Castaway.” Ishmael’s analysis of the character Pip is really interesting. It reiterated the themes of fate and divinity that were discussed by Ishmael in previous chapters. After falling into the sea for the second time, Pip is left there for a long time. When he finally comes out, he appears to be crazy. Pip’s insanity is due to his time in the ocean. The power of the ocean transforms Pip; it overcomes him. Though many of the crew believed Pip was crazy, Ishmael says that he thought he was wise. Pip has fought with the ocean, and survived. Pip’s insanity reminds me of Ahab’s. They both battled with the ocean and the whale (Pip gets tangled in the line used to catch the whale).
“The Doubloon” was also a significant chapter. The chapter includes the characters aboard The Pequod's reactions to a golden coin found on the ship. Many of them find symbolic meaning for the coin. The Manxman predicts that they will see the White Whale in a month and a day. It will be interesting to see if that happens. Pip states that the coin is the ship's "navel"-a navel being what holds the ship together. Could this mean something for the future of The Pequod? This doubloon according to Pip is very significant to the fate of the crew. Maybe it's significance comes from what it symbolizes or what can be depicted from it, for example Manxman's prediction. Stubb interprets the zodiac on the coin as an allegory for life.
"Leg and Arm: The Pequod, of Nantucket, Meets the Samuel Enderby, of London" This chapter showed the encounter between Captain Ahab and Captain Boomer, the captain of Samuel Enderby (which we find out later is the first whaling ship to leave England). Both captains discuss the loss of their limbs at the hand of Moby-Dick. Although Boomer is greatful to have survived and never wants to see the White Whale again, Ahab seeks to know which way the whale went. Captain Boomer leads a much older ship, he knows what he's talking about. Ahab should follow his advice. Ahab's refusal to accept the fate that awaits him when he finds Moby-Dick foreshadows his destruction. The whale/ocean/god whatever that is driving fate, has warned him.
“The Doubloon” was also a significant chapter. The chapter includes the characters aboard The Pequod's reactions to a golden coin found on the ship. Many of them find symbolic meaning for the coin. The Manxman predicts that they will see the White Whale in a month and a day. It will be interesting to see if that happens. Pip states that the coin is the ship's "navel"-a navel being what holds the ship together. Could this mean something for the future of The Pequod? This doubloon according to Pip is very significant to the fate of the crew. Maybe it's significance comes from what it symbolizes or what can be depicted from it, for example Manxman's prediction. Stubb interprets the zodiac on the coin as an allegory for life.
"Leg and Arm: The Pequod, of Nantucket, Meets the Samuel Enderby, of London" This chapter showed the encounter between Captain Ahab and Captain Boomer, the captain of Samuel Enderby (which we find out later is the first whaling ship to leave England). Both captains discuss the loss of their limbs at the hand of Moby-Dick. Although Boomer is greatful to have survived and never wants to see the White Whale again, Ahab seeks to know which way the whale went. Captain Boomer leads a much older ship, he knows what he's talking about. Ahab should follow his advice. Ahab's refusal to accept the fate that awaits him when he finds Moby-Dick foreshadows his destruction. The whale/ocean/god whatever that is driving fate, has warned him.
Response Journal Week 8 - Kalil
At the very start, in chapter 93, we see a tense scene, in which the crew must make a choice between saving Pip, and capturing the whale. After a time, they cut him loose, but grudgingly so. When he returns to the boat, he is greeted with stern words,
“We can’t afford to lose whales by the likes of you; a whale would sell for thirty times what you would, Pip, in Alabama” (321). This serves as a reminder that the ultimate purpose of the whaling voyage is profit, though Ishmael makes Stubb’s statement even grander, claiming that “man is a money-making animal, which propensity too often interferes with his benevolence” (321). In addition to being a reminder of the capitalist nature of the voyage (rather than a voyage in order to kill Moby Dick), it also brings up Pip’s race, and reminds us of the time (as we are apt to forget that slavery was still widely practiced).
Chapter 97, The Lamp, describes the fact that whaling ships are always well lit, for they have an abundance of oil. I assumed that this was a reference to the commonly used metaphor of light for knowledge (illumination), and a suggestion that the whaler lives the enlightened life. However, this chapter also serves to reinforce the romantic side of the coin that we addressed last week. At the very end, Melville writes, “He goes and hunts for his oil, so as to be sure of its freshness and genuineness, even as the traveller on the prairie hunts up his own supper of game” (329) This shows the whaler as in touch with nature, and pure, much in the way that the romantics idealized.
Another extremely interesting scene was the point where each character looks at the doubloon. Every character has an extremely different interpretation of the coin, which shows how important perspective and point of view are. Especially interesting was Flask’s interpretation, in which the coin was just a coin. This goes back to the suggestion that men are ultimately motivated by wealth.
Chapter 97, The Lamp, describes the fact that whaling ships are always well lit, for they have an abundance of oil. I assumed that this was a reference to the commonly used metaphor of light for knowledge (illumination), and a suggestion that the whaler lives the enlightened life. However, this chapter also serves to reinforce the romantic side of the coin that we addressed last week. At the very end, Melville writes, “He goes and hunts for his oil, so as to be sure of its freshness and genuineness, even as the traveller on the prairie hunts up his own supper of game” (329) This shows the whaler as in touch with nature, and pure, much in the way that the romantics idealized.
Another extremely interesting scene was the point where each character looks at the doubloon. Every character has an extremely different interpretation of the coin, which shows how important perspective and point of view are. Especially interesting was Flask’s interpretation, in which the coin was just a coin. This goes back to the suggestion that men are ultimately motivated by wealth.
Response Journal Week 8 - Mayumi
This week’s Melville reading began with a chapter rich in themes, especially in those identified by Mathiesson. Melville begins by claiming that Pip, the black ship-keeper, is the physical counterpart to the white Dough-Boy. This, in it of itself, is very socially progressive: Melville is comparing, even equating, a white man to a black man. Then Melville shows further examples of his forward thinking when he writes that Pip had a much greater intellect than the Dough-Boy, who by nature was very “dull and torpid” (319). However, despite Pip’s superior intellect, he is still a savage as he is part of a tribe and loves life so much that his passion overpowers his brilliancy and ultimately is the cause of his downfall. As Mathiesson points out, Melville treats many savage characters in this way: he brings to light a human aspect of theirs, but ultimately this human aspect is overpowered by their defining savage characteristic. Emerson as quoted by Mathiesson describes this situation of simultaneous savagery and humanity very well: “In history the great moment is when the savage is just ceasing to be savage…that moment of transition, - the foam hangs but a moment on the wave…” (373).
Pip continues to lose his humanity in the rest of the chapter, showing childlike qualities in his nervous decisions of jumping off the boat twice. The chapter is also written around the character Pip. What I mean by this is, for the descriptive writer we are well aware that Melville is, he hardly spends a word elaborating on Pip’s thoughts or reasons for his actions. Pip does not even speak a word of dialogue; Stubb has the only dialogue in the entire chapter. Pip becomes one dimensional and is used as the vehicle for Melville’s philosophical and theological reflections. Pip’s life at the end of the chapter is not even worth much. Melville even gives Stubb a disclaimer and augments the situation in his favor: “do not blame Stubb too hardly. The thing is common in that fishery; and in the sequel of the narrative, it will then be seen what like abandonment befell myself.” (322). Melville even puts a nice spin on Pip’s death, describing it as the infinite drowning of his soul instead of his finite body (321). Pip, in his infinite drowning, is allowed to see the fantastic, Godly shapes and images at the bottom of the sea.
Then I began to wonder if the freedom of Pip’s soul was worth the sacrifice of his life. Pip, once in a role of servitude, now has access to the amazing natural wonders of God. In this later life he transcends social hierarchy and does not have to answer to anyone but himself, a man filled with intellect, as Melville first claimed. What remains problematic, though, is that Pip was left in the ocean once he jumped from fear. Pip, as far as I know, never chose to drown in the open sea. Despite Melville’s slightly blasé last comment towards the end, I think that Stubb is most certainly at fault here, even if he did think that another boat might save Pip.
Pip continues to lose his humanity in the rest of the chapter, showing childlike qualities in his nervous decisions of jumping off the boat twice. The chapter is also written around the character Pip. What I mean by this is, for the descriptive writer we are well aware that Melville is, he hardly spends a word elaborating on Pip’s thoughts or reasons for his actions. Pip does not even speak a word of dialogue; Stubb has the only dialogue in the entire chapter. Pip becomes one dimensional and is used as the vehicle for Melville’s philosophical and theological reflections. Pip’s life at the end of the chapter is not even worth much. Melville even gives Stubb a disclaimer and augments the situation in his favor: “do not blame Stubb too hardly. The thing is common in that fishery; and in the sequel of the narrative, it will then be seen what like abandonment befell myself.” (322). Melville even puts a nice spin on Pip’s death, describing it as the infinite drowning of his soul instead of his finite body (321). Pip, in his infinite drowning, is allowed to see the fantastic, Godly shapes and images at the bottom of the sea.
Then I began to wonder if the freedom of Pip’s soul was worth the sacrifice of his life. Pip, once in a role of servitude, now has access to the amazing natural wonders of God. In this later life he transcends social hierarchy and does not have to answer to anyone but himself, a man filled with intellect, as Melville first claimed. What remains problematic, though, is that Pip was left in the ocean once he jumped from fear. Pip, as far as I know, never chose to drown in the open sea. Despite Melville’s slightly blasé last comment towards the end, I think that Stubb is most certainly at fault here, even if he did think that another boat might save Pip.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Response Journal Week 8- Caleb
Though this might seem trivial, I’ve noticed that Melville has started using the work predestinated an awful lot. This adds to Melville’s idea of fate, which he is constantly returning to throughout the novel. Another short point: after reading Stubb’s advice to Pip to “Stick to the boat” (320), I couldn’t help but remember the similar advice given in “Apocalypse Now”. Here’s a link to that scene.
The “stay on the boat” mentality is especially resonant for the novel. Taken metaphorically, it can be seen as monomaniac’s mantra. If, as Melville often does, we see the boat as a metaphor for a human life, Stubb’s advice is particularly useful for keeping sane in the face of insanity (something which the crew of the Pequod deals with a lot).
Again, we see another Transcendental allusion, which metaphorically links the ocean to God, when Pip is left behind in the water. “The sea had jeeringly kept his finite body up, but drowned the infinite of his soul,” (321) Melville writes of post-abandonment Pip, who catatonically paces the deck. Melville explains that “Pip saw the multitudinous, God-omnipresent, coral insects that out of the firmament of waters heaved the colossal orbs.” (321). This passage returns to Melville’s differentiation between the body and the soul, a theme which he stresses throughout the novel. It also makes the transcendentalist connection between nature and man, allowing the ocean to function once again as a metaphor for life, death, and the infinite. One thing Matthiesson points out, however, is Melville’s divergence from Emersonian and Thoreauean (that’s a lot of vowels) Transcendentalism. “He agreed that spirit is substance, but when he contemplated the mystery of the unseen, he began to diverge from the transcendental conclusion that its effect on man was necessarily beneficient” (405). Matthiesson argues that this is what sets Melville’s philosophy apart from other philosophers from the era. Melville recognizes “the demonic element in the unseen” (406)--- that “beautiful fins were part of cruel form”, not just believing in the inspirational value of nature.
“The Doubloon” chapter was also extremely interesting. Each character, when observing Ahab’s reward doubloon, interprets it differently. Pip, although he’s become insane, recognizes this, and states, “I look, you look, he looks; we look, ye look, they look.” (335), which Stubb takes as nonsense. Stubb makes a similar comment when referring to his book: “Book! You lie there; the face is, you books must know your places. You’ll do to give us the bare words and facts, but we come in to supply the thoughts” (333). Here, Melville is expressing the nature of art; that the words on the page of a book have different meanings from person to person. Additionally, Melville writes about the inverse—the art of nature--- in the same way. In Matthiesson, Melville writes, “Saw what some poets will, Nature is not so much her own ever-sweet interpreter, as the mere supplier of that cunning alphabet, whereby selective and combining as he pleases, each man reads his own peculiar lesson…” (406)
The “stay on the boat” mentality is especially resonant for the novel. Taken metaphorically, it can be seen as monomaniac’s mantra. If, as Melville often does, we see the boat as a metaphor for a human life, Stubb’s advice is particularly useful for keeping sane in the face of insanity (something which the crew of the Pequod deals with a lot).
Again, we see another Transcendental allusion, which metaphorically links the ocean to God, when Pip is left behind in the water. “The sea had jeeringly kept his finite body up, but drowned the infinite of his soul,” (321) Melville writes of post-abandonment Pip, who catatonically paces the deck. Melville explains that “Pip saw the multitudinous, God-omnipresent, coral insects that out of the firmament of waters heaved the colossal orbs.” (321). This passage returns to Melville’s differentiation between the body and the soul, a theme which he stresses throughout the novel. It also makes the transcendentalist connection between nature and man, allowing the ocean to function once again as a metaphor for life, death, and the infinite. One thing Matthiesson points out, however, is Melville’s divergence from Emersonian and Thoreauean (that’s a lot of vowels) Transcendentalism. “He agreed that spirit is substance, but when he contemplated the mystery of the unseen, he began to diverge from the transcendental conclusion that its effect on man was necessarily beneficient” (405). Matthiesson argues that this is what sets Melville’s philosophy apart from other philosophers from the era. Melville recognizes “the demonic element in the unseen” (406)--- that “beautiful fins were part of cruel form”, not just believing in the inspirational value of nature.
“The Doubloon” chapter was also extremely interesting. Each character, when observing Ahab’s reward doubloon, interprets it differently. Pip, although he’s become insane, recognizes this, and states, “I look, you look, he looks; we look, ye look, they look.” (335), which Stubb takes as nonsense. Stubb makes a similar comment when referring to his book: “Book! You lie there; the face is, you books must know your places. You’ll do to give us the bare words and facts, but we come in to supply the thoughts” (333). Here, Melville is expressing the nature of art; that the words on the page of a book have different meanings from person to person. Additionally, Melville writes about the inverse—the art of nature--- in the same way. In Matthiesson, Melville writes, “Saw what some poets will, Nature is not so much her own ever-sweet interpreter, as the mere supplier of that cunning alphabet, whereby selective and combining as he pleases, each man reads his own peculiar lesson…” (406)
Response Journal Week 8- Gabriel
I just read up to page 347 and I read Structure and The Levels Beyond from The Mathiesen handout. I would like to start out by writing about the chapter from Moby Dick titled Castaway. In this chapter Pip becomes a replacement oarsmen for one of the harpooning vessel, and he falls out of the boat and Stubb leaves him stranded. The Pequod luckily picks him up after a great amount of time elapses. This chapter really shows the grim side of whaling and Melville gives a really grim, tragic view of human nature. Throughout Moby Dick, it seems as if there is a certain camaraderie between crewmembers, and we even get to see a close brotherly bond formed between Queequeg and Ishmael. For the most part, I got the feeling that Melville viewed humans rather positively, however, in Castaway we see Stubb acting unforgivably. It is true that Pip was warned that he wouldn’t be saved if he jumped out of the ship, but, regardless of this, Stubb shows a dark side. Melville writes “Stubb indirectly hinted, that though man loves his fellow, yet man is a money-making animal, which propensity too often interferes with his benevolence” (321). Stubb decided to go after a whale and make money rather than save a fellow human being. He assumed that another boat would eventually pick Pip up, but that was not a safe assumption to make. After this incident Pip becomes scarred, and it becomes evident that Stubb has affected his mental health. The worst part is that Stubb doesn’t seem to feel any remorse. I’m not sure if this is because Pip is a lowly black crewmember or if Stubb is actually a sociopath.
I also just wanted to point out the line on 327 having to do with the fire of the try-works because it’s a great line. Melville writes, “Then the rushing Pequod, freighted with savages, and laden with fire, and burning a corpse, and plunging into that blackness of darkness, seemed the material counterpart of her monomaniac commander’s soul’ (327). I just loved the description of the boat, and the descriptions really help create a sense of the atmosphere on the ship. I thought the description gave off a very intense yet hypnotic vibe. This description reminds of the description of the ship when Ahab first reveals his intentions of killing Moby Dick to the crewmembers, because there was a similar hypnotic atmosphere.
I really enjoyed reading The Level Beyond because it talks about some of Melville’s methods of portraying things. Mathiesen first talks about how Melville always compares Moby Dick and Ahab to something greater than themselves. He compares them to grand things, making them seem very magnified. In this chapter Mathiesen also talks about how Melville saw a connection between beauty and strength and how Melville mastered how to make beauty out of natural strength. I didn’t quite understand what this meant however. Mathiesen also talks about how Melville is very Shakespearean, Homeric, and biblical, but that he is in fact more Homeric and biblical than he is Shakespearean. I had noticed connections between Shakespeare, Homer, and Melville, and I think it’s especially cool because I have read both Shakespeare and Homer this year in school.
I also just wanted to point out the line on 327 having to do with the fire of the try-works because it’s a great line. Melville writes, “Then the rushing Pequod, freighted with savages, and laden with fire, and burning a corpse, and plunging into that blackness of darkness, seemed the material counterpart of her monomaniac commander’s soul’ (327). I just loved the description of the boat, and the descriptions really help create a sense of the atmosphere on the ship. I thought the description gave off a very intense yet hypnotic vibe. This description reminds of the description of the ship when Ahab first reveals his intentions of killing Moby Dick to the crewmembers, because there was a similar hypnotic atmosphere.
I really enjoyed reading The Level Beyond because it talks about some of Melville’s methods of portraying things. Mathiesen first talks about how Melville always compares Moby Dick and Ahab to something greater than themselves. He compares them to grand things, making them seem very magnified. In this chapter Mathiesen also talks about how Melville saw a connection between beauty and strength and how Melville mastered how to make beauty out of natural strength. I didn’t quite understand what this meant however. Mathiesen also talks about how Melville is very Shakespearean, Homeric, and biblical, but that he is in fact more Homeric and biblical than he is Shakespearean. I had noticed connections between Shakespeare, Homer, and Melville, and I think it’s especially cool because I have read both Shakespeare and Homer this year in school.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
The Not-So Glorious Side of Whaling
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/08/whalings-gruesome-catch-p_n_523757.html
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Response Journal Week 7- Gabriel
>
I have now read through page 319 in Moby Dick and I have read parts of the Mathiesen handout. I want to start out by talking about the first chapter in the Mathiesen handout, ‘out of unhandselled savage nature’. I really liked reading this chapter because it gave me a lot of insight about Herman Melville’s background as well as background information about other writers of Melville’s time. Mathiesen starts out by writing about how the American became a writer by accident. He then specifically writes about how Melville’s background wasn’t in writing and that he in fact started his writing career when he started recording experiences in his life. This struck me because I’ve read some of the early literary criticisms in the back of Moby Dick, and most of the criticisms basically say that the book has no structure and that Melville’s writing style doesn’t follow the rules that writers are supposed to stick by. I always assumed that Melville was just a free spirit, who purposely broke the rules of writing because he felt like it, and this could very well be true; however, after reading about Melville’s lack of a literary background, I started to wonder if Melville’s writing style was so untraditional because he didn’t know how to write traditionally.
I also found the last paragraph on page 375, which continues onto page 376 to be interesting because Mathiesen writes about Melville’s scrutiny of the difference between savages and civilized people. This theme constantly comes up in Moby Dick, and Melville seems to be as much of a champion of savagery as anyone in the 1860’s was, because he finds fault in western civilization and religion, and he seems to be tolerant and accepting of “savages” such as Queequeg and Daggoo.
I also wanted to talk about the laws concerning fast-fish and loose-fish because I wasn’t aware that whalemen had concrete laws that they abided by at sea. I also wasn’t aware that whalemen went to court over disputes at sea. I really enjoyed reading the court room scene and I thought Melville’s comparison of disputes over fast-fish and loose-fish to lots of other disputes found throughout the world to be interesting.
Response Journal Week 6- Mayumi
Response Journal 6
At the very beginning of Chapter 61, Melville dives into an existentialist reflection on the masthead (of course). Melville writes: “No resolution could withstand it; in that dreamy mood losing all consciousness, at last my soul went out of my body; though my body still continued to sway as a pendulum will, long after the power which first moved it is withdrawn” (230). This is not the first time Melville has slipped into a spiritual state of mind, however it is the first time he explicitly states the occurrence of something out of the ordinary: his soul leaving his body. This doesn’t faze him; rather, it seems to be a natural process and commonplace with the presence of the sea. His soul is almost in tune with the waves, swaying like a pendulum, and he can even sense the presence of a Sperm Whale when he feels bubbles under his eyelids. Is this yet another of the sea’s powers – to separate a soul from its body without harm? And where did his soul go? Did it become part of the sea?
Also in Chapter 61 were the battle cries that accompany the tumultuous whale hunt. Each major character involved in the hunt, the three mates and three harpooners, each has a distinct battle cry or approach to inspiring the rest of the boat to row faster and with more zeal. What I noticed though was how each harpooner had short, two-syllable war cries, which were incomprehensible and not very intimidating (“kee-hee!”), while the mates inspired the crew with longer shouts of instruction or lamentation. This is a good example of what Mathiesson wrote on page 374 concerning Melville’s belief of his innate connection to savagery, yet in many ways he is clearly not. Each ‘savage’ character is developed enough to his own version of a nonsensical war cry, yet all the war cries are simple variations of one another and are all in the same format.
At the end of Chapter 65, we again encounter Melville’s conflict of savagery, this time showing the savagery revealed in the so-called civilized man, Stubb. Melville asks a series of rhetorical answers leading up to the conclusion that we are all hypocrites when it comes to civilized society and that we are truly savage when our habits are examined closely. Melville points out that Stubb is actually eating a whale steak with a utensil made of oxbone and picking his teeth with a feather from the same fowl he was eating.
Chapter 72 “The Monkey-rope,” also fits in with the theme of savagery. In this chapter, Ishmael is tied to Queequeg by a canvas rope, virtually marrying them together. Each person’s fate relies on the position of the other- if one falls, so does the other. Although Ishmael believes that he and Queequeg are equals at this point because their fates rely on each other’s, their physical positions indicate otherwise. Ishmael is standing high and dry on deck while Queequeg is standing on a dead whale trying to cut its blubber off with sharks at his feet. Ishmael even thinks that it’s funny to jerk Queequeg around so that he would fall close to the bloodthirsty sharks. Not to mention that Queequeg is also in danger of having his leg cut off since Tashtego and Daggoo have very poor aim. All of this (differences in positions) seems to indicate that Queequeg’s life actually lies in Ishmael’s hands; Ishmael holds the power.
After reading so much about the technical differences between whales, the functional uses of whale parts, and such, I began to wonder why Melville deemed such dry technical prose necessary to the novel. I then realized that Melville is fascinated by the technical and mechanical details because he is trying to reconcile every technical aspect with its philosophical meaning. The novel is a philosophical exploration of every technical detail. This can get tiresome at times, but I must remind myself to continue searching for the philosophical counterpart to every technical description. To Be Continued…
At the very beginning of Chapter 61, Melville dives into an existentialist reflection on the masthead (of course). Melville writes: “No resolution could withstand it; in that dreamy mood losing all consciousness, at last my soul went out of my body; though my body still continued to sway as a pendulum will, long after the power which first moved it is withdrawn” (230). This is not the first time Melville has slipped into a spiritual state of mind, however it is the first time he explicitly states the occurrence of something out of the ordinary: his soul leaving his body. This doesn’t faze him; rather, it seems to be a natural process and commonplace with the presence of the sea. His soul is almost in tune with the waves, swaying like a pendulum, and he can even sense the presence of a Sperm Whale when he feels bubbles under his eyelids. Is this yet another of the sea’s powers – to separate a soul from its body without harm? And where did his soul go? Did it become part of the sea?
Also in Chapter 61 were the battle cries that accompany the tumultuous whale hunt. Each major character involved in the hunt, the three mates and three harpooners, each has a distinct battle cry or approach to inspiring the rest of the boat to row faster and with more zeal. What I noticed though was how each harpooner had short, two-syllable war cries, which were incomprehensible and not very intimidating (“kee-hee!”), while the mates inspired the crew with longer shouts of instruction or lamentation. This is a good example of what Mathiesson wrote on page 374 concerning Melville’s belief of his innate connection to savagery, yet in many ways he is clearly not. Each ‘savage’ character is developed enough to his own version of a nonsensical war cry, yet all the war cries are simple variations of one another and are all in the same format.
At the end of Chapter 65, we again encounter Melville’s conflict of savagery, this time showing the savagery revealed in the so-called civilized man, Stubb. Melville asks a series of rhetorical answers leading up to the conclusion that we are all hypocrites when it comes to civilized society and that we are truly savage when our habits are examined closely. Melville points out that Stubb is actually eating a whale steak with a utensil made of oxbone and picking his teeth with a feather from the same fowl he was eating.
Chapter 72 “The Monkey-rope,” also fits in with the theme of savagery. In this chapter, Ishmael is tied to Queequeg by a canvas rope, virtually marrying them together. Each person’s fate relies on the position of the other- if one falls, so does the other. Although Ishmael believes that he and Queequeg are equals at this point because their fates rely on each other’s, their physical positions indicate otherwise. Ishmael is standing high and dry on deck while Queequeg is standing on a dead whale trying to cut its blubber off with sharks at his feet. Ishmael even thinks that it’s funny to jerk Queequeg around so that he would fall close to the bloodthirsty sharks. Not to mention that Queequeg is also in danger of having his leg cut off since Tashtego and Daggoo have very poor aim. All of this (differences in positions) seems to indicate that Queequeg’s life actually lies in Ishmael’s hands; Ishmael holds the power.
After reading so much about the technical differences between whales, the functional uses of whale parts, and such, I began to wonder why Melville deemed such dry technical prose necessary to the novel. I then realized that Melville is fascinated by the technical and mechanical details because he is trying to reconcile every technical aspect with its philosophical meaning. The novel is a philosophical exploration of every technical detail. This can get tiresome at times, but I must remind myself to continue searching for the philosophical counterpart to every technical description. To Be Continued…
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Response Journal Week 6/7 - Gabi
I want to break this response into two distinct sections, each one relating to a theme I found relevant in F. O. Matthiessen’s work.
1) Melville incorporates nature into Moby Dick in a very consistent way. His manner of doing so however is varied. Sometimes he seems to work with the traditional manner of evoking feelings of the sublime (pgs 19, 133, the whole of Chapter 17, “The Tail” etc.). He also, using his scientific knowledge, attempts to impart awe in the reader. He goes on and on about the magnificence of the whale, its spout, its tail, and about the glory of the ocean among other things. Matthiessen maintains that while Melville does to some extent praise the wonders of nature he “was never stirred by the advantages of living with animals.” (Matthiessen, 407). Taken literally this doesn’t make much sense. In Romantic Movement (which sort of overlaps with the period during which Melville was most active), the idea existed that going back to nature was ideal for man. This idea intersected with primitivism but in a gentler way. Within this context, it becomes relevant to compare Melville’s writing about nature and the idea of the sublime to a Romantic ideal of “living with animals” and the like. Matthiessen doesn’t connect Melville’s rejection of this ideal to the Romanticism or even the Romantic ideal as directly as I do, but I think a connection is definitely apparent. He argues that Melville sees this slight tendency towards primitivism as “a denial of the mind, and consequently... a regression to an immature state.” (Matthiessen, 407). In order to counter balance this tendency, Melville brings the reader back to 'intellectual civilization' with the bits of science that he intersperses throughout the novel. Not only does he use science, but he also uses very careful, observations about the physical appearances of things to the same effect. These more technical and/or physical observations are a one of the multiple mediums (along with, for example, more obvious philosophical rants) that Melville uses in order to arrive at the larger questions that interest him. At one point in the supplementary reading, Matthiessen addresses the issue of theater and how the medium itself was unappealing to Melville, who apparently greatly preferred the novel form. The novel form, combined with his scientific interjections (regardless of their periodic inaccuracy), along with the philosophical ramblings that the characters sometimes engage in, along with the plot line itself, all come together as a function of Melville’s search for certain truths about mankind. The idea of nature as sublime comes through in all of these particles. His bits of science and technical explanation (like for example Chapter 86, “The Tail” in particular) are intended to encourage his reader to be awed by the complexity of the whale, the ocean, and other natural components of his book. The philosophical ramblings are often in some way or another linked to nature or how a character’s immediate environment makes them feel. Lastly, the impressiveness of nature as handled in the plot should be pretty obvious.
2) Matthiessen compares Melville’s work, specifically Moby Dick to Shakespeare’s work. He does this in a few different capacities. Specifically, at one point he focuses on Shakespeare’s use of theater as an artistic medium. The theater necessitated a distinct treatment of the audience (this was in fact one of the reasons that Melville supposedly disdained of the theater form) which shaped the way Shakespeare’s works were written. Most people who have passed through even the most basic class on Shakespeare’s work are familiar with distinction between the portions of the play that were intended for the groundlings and those that were intended for the ‘more cultured’ upper class. Some jokes could be shared by all members of the audience, but some deeper commentaries were exclusively directed to an ‘elite.’ Matthiessen introduces the idea that Melville was so deeply influenced by Shakespeare’s form (a product of W.S.’s time and his medium) that he subconsciously imitated it to a degree. His more basic plot was intended for the ‘groundlings’ in his literary audience, and the deeper philosophical messages were intended to reach the more intellectually articulate members of the audience(Matthiessen, 415-416).While Matthiessen’s contention is interesting and even makes logical sense, it seems to contradict the actual work. To Matthiessen’s credit, the form of Melville’s novel makes any logical analysis of the work extremely challenging to formulate. However, the book is so epic in proportion that it is hard to imagine that any part of it would be formulated (whether consciously or not) to cater to a specific audience. The purely fictional element of the novel is so fundamentally integrated with it’s philosophical and ideological premise that the two are impossible to break apart—even with regards to accessibility. For example, Chapter 85 “The Fountain” is a combination of facts about the whale’s spout as well as a sort of poetic elegy to the whale. This chapter comes quite a bit after Chapter 62 “Stubb Kills a Whale,” but they are definitively interlinked. Towards the end of the earlier chapter, Melville describes the gory mess that Stubb makes in his hunt, “At last, gush after gush of clotted red gore, as if it had been the purple lees of red wine, shot into the frighted air...” (Melville, 233). At the beginning of the chapter Melville (or Ishmael) carefully described the puffs that came out of the whale’s spout. The hunting scene much earlier sets the stage for “The Fountain.” The chapters in which Melville becomes more ‘scientific’ work collaboratively with the rest of the narrative. If one attempts to break the novel into distinct pieces, one intended for a certain crowd and another intended for someone else, the book immediately falls apart. This is particularly interesting considering how jagged the narrative sometimes seems to be. Melville inserts often seemingly random chapters into an otherwise ‘smooth’ story-line. His style (at least in Moby Dick) is one of the things that makes his writing most unique. The chapters and different portions subsequently fall into place, like pieces in a puzzle (or at least this seemed to be Melville’s intention). Matthiessen mentions the idea of levels, specifically the levels into which Shakespeare’s theatrical works were divided (reflecting a split in the audience), but Moby Dick seems to be devoid of any distinct levels. There is no single part of the novel that is simply narrative or simply humor or simply philosophy or science. The components all bleed into each other.
1) Melville incorporates nature into Moby Dick in a very consistent way. His manner of doing so however is varied. Sometimes he seems to work with the traditional manner of evoking feelings of the sublime (pgs 19, 133, the whole of Chapter 17, “The Tail” etc.). He also, using his scientific knowledge, attempts to impart awe in the reader. He goes on and on about the magnificence of the whale, its spout, its tail, and about the glory of the ocean among other things. Matthiessen maintains that while Melville does to some extent praise the wonders of nature he “was never stirred by the advantages of living with animals.” (Matthiessen, 407). Taken literally this doesn’t make much sense. In Romantic Movement (which sort of overlaps with the period during which Melville was most active), the idea existed that going back to nature was ideal for man. This idea intersected with primitivism but in a gentler way. Within this context, it becomes relevant to compare Melville’s writing about nature and the idea of the sublime to a Romantic ideal of “living with animals” and the like. Matthiessen doesn’t connect Melville’s rejection of this ideal to the Romanticism or even the Romantic ideal as directly as I do, but I think a connection is definitely apparent. He argues that Melville sees this slight tendency towards primitivism as “a denial of the mind, and consequently... a regression to an immature state.” (Matthiessen, 407). In order to counter balance this tendency, Melville brings the reader back to 'intellectual civilization' with the bits of science that he intersperses throughout the novel. Not only does he use science, but he also uses very careful, observations about the physical appearances of things to the same effect. These more technical and/or physical observations are a one of the multiple mediums (along with, for example, more obvious philosophical rants) that Melville uses in order to arrive at the larger questions that interest him. At one point in the supplementary reading, Matthiessen addresses the issue of theater and how the medium itself was unappealing to Melville, who apparently greatly preferred the novel form. The novel form, combined with his scientific interjections (regardless of their periodic inaccuracy), along with the philosophical ramblings that the characters sometimes engage in, along with the plot line itself, all come together as a function of Melville’s search for certain truths about mankind. The idea of nature as sublime comes through in all of these particles. His bits of science and technical explanation (like for example Chapter 86, “The Tail” in particular) are intended to encourage his reader to be awed by the complexity of the whale, the ocean, and other natural components of his book. The philosophical ramblings are often in some way or another linked to nature or how a character’s immediate environment makes them feel. Lastly, the impressiveness of nature as handled in the plot should be pretty obvious.
2) Matthiessen compares Melville’s work, specifically Moby Dick to Shakespeare’s work. He does this in a few different capacities. Specifically, at one point he focuses on Shakespeare’s use of theater as an artistic medium. The theater necessitated a distinct treatment of the audience (this was in fact one of the reasons that Melville supposedly disdained of the theater form) which shaped the way Shakespeare’s works were written. Most people who have passed through even the most basic class on Shakespeare’s work are familiar with distinction between the portions of the play that were intended for the groundlings and those that were intended for the ‘more cultured’ upper class. Some jokes could be shared by all members of the audience, but some deeper commentaries were exclusively directed to an ‘elite.’ Matthiessen introduces the idea that Melville was so deeply influenced by Shakespeare’s form (a product of W.S.’s time and his medium) that he subconsciously imitated it to a degree. His more basic plot was intended for the ‘groundlings’ in his literary audience, and the deeper philosophical messages were intended to reach the more intellectually articulate members of the audience(Matthiessen, 415-416).While Matthiessen’s contention is interesting and even makes logical sense, it seems to contradict the actual work. To Matthiessen’s credit, the form of Melville’s novel makes any logical analysis of the work extremely challenging to formulate. However, the book is so epic in proportion that it is hard to imagine that any part of it would be formulated (whether consciously or not) to cater to a specific audience. The purely fictional element of the novel is so fundamentally integrated with it’s philosophical and ideological premise that the two are impossible to break apart—even with regards to accessibility. For example, Chapter 85 “The Fountain” is a combination of facts about the whale’s spout as well as a sort of poetic elegy to the whale. This chapter comes quite a bit after Chapter 62 “Stubb Kills a Whale,” but they are definitively interlinked. Towards the end of the earlier chapter, Melville describes the gory mess that Stubb makes in his hunt, “At last, gush after gush of clotted red gore, as if it had been the purple lees of red wine, shot into the frighted air...” (Melville, 233). At the beginning of the chapter Melville (or Ishmael) carefully described the puffs that came out of the whale’s spout. The hunting scene much earlier sets the stage for “The Fountain.” The chapters in which Melville becomes more ‘scientific’ work collaboratively with the rest of the narrative. If one attempts to break the novel into distinct pieces, one intended for a certain crowd and another intended for someone else, the book immediately falls apart. This is particularly interesting considering how jagged the narrative sometimes seems to be. Melville inserts often seemingly random chapters into an otherwise ‘smooth’ story-line. His style (at least in Moby Dick) is one of the things that makes his writing most unique. The chapters and different portions subsequently fall into place, like pieces in a puzzle (or at least this seemed to be Melville’s intention). Matthiessen mentions the idea of levels, specifically the levels into which Shakespeare’s theatrical works were divided (reflecting a split in the audience), but Moby Dick seems to be devoid of any distinct levels. There is no single part of the novel that is simply narrative or simply humor or simply philosophy or science. The components all bleed into each other.
Response Journal Week 6/7-Amani
In the many chapters that we read over the last few weeks, I noticed that Ishmael focuses on his philosophical thoughts in the midst of the action that is occurring in the book. At many instances, Ishmael interludes a scene of action, despite the rarity of one, to reflect his abstract theories of the action taking place. Perhaps this is because Ishmael is not a skillful whaler but an intellectual seeking to share his thoughts. Or maybe it’s because Melville is using Ishmael to display his understanding of whaling that wouldn’t necessarily be considered by an actual whaler.
One of Ishmael’s ideas that seems to be reoccurring is his immense respect for the whale. With all the processes the crew goes through of catching the whale, cutting the whale etc., Ishmael finds an underlying symbolic meaning. Ishmael dedicates entire chapters to this creature that demonstrate the extraordinary power the whale holds. In Chapter 69 “The Funeral,” Ishmael describes the whale’s “funeral” as “mocking” and a dishonor to the whale. He describes the whale’s dominance after death. “Thus while in life the great whale’s body may have been a real terror to his foes, in his death his ghost becomes powerless panic to the world” (248). This idea ties in with the theological aspect of Moby-Dick. Ishmael continuously references religion and philosophies in the text. He mentions Judaism in both Chapter 67 and Chapter 70 by referring to their Saturday night as “Sabbath” and discussing the Jewish heroine, Judith. Ishmael believes the whale has godly powers and that it should be feared as any deity would. The whale is driven by fate and carries out what is predestined. In “The Prairie,” Ishmael uses physiognomy (the art of judging human character from facial features) and phrenology (the study of the shape of the skull, based on the belief that it reveals character and mental capacity) to study the whale. He comments that the brow of the whale indicates it godly characteristics. Ishmael believes that the measure of intelligence should not be measured by a creature’s brain size but it’s spinal cord size. He points in “The Nute” that although the whale’s brain is very small, it’s spinal cord is very long therefore demonstrating it’s power.
In “The Fate of the Ungodly God-Like Man,” Ahab is analyzed. Matthiessen claims that Ahab is the central character in the book. He asserts that Ahab is a tragic hero and compares him to a character that many consider to be a tragic hero, who is also vengeful: Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Melville admired Shakespeare for making Hamlet the pivotal role in his story, as Melville does with Ahab. Melville states, “‘for much the same reason that there is but one planet to one orbit, so can there be but one such original character to work one invention.’” (447). Ahab is both separated from his surroundings while still maintaining control over everyone’s actions. Matthiessen’s comparison between Ahab and Hamlet makes me wonder whether Ahab’s madness is an act as well; an act to get his crew to corporate so that he can achieve his vengeance of the White Whale. However, like all tragic heros, Ahab’s defiance of fate leads to his doom.
Despite Ahab’s isolation, I noticed that dependency is necessary aboard the Pequod. In “Stubb’s Supper,” Ishmael depicts the teamwork that is exhibited on the ship: “And now, as we eighteen men with our thirty-six arms, and one hundred and eighty thumbs and fingers, slowly toiled hour after hour upon that inert, sluggish corpses in the sea;...” (235). This may be why we found the whalers were very open-minded and lacked the racist and discriminating qualities we assumed, living then, they would have had. When Stubb argues with the old, black cook, initially, I thought he was being racist. However, considering Stubb’s respect for Queequeg (who is a whaler of color), I concluded that he was being rude to the cook because of his rank on the ship. The men on the ship are judged by their skill and ability, not by their race or their social class off of the ship. This attitude displayed by Melville is significant because it presents a message of tolerance. A message that needed to be understood by both the people living during Melville’s time and people today.
Moby Dick Music - Gabi
http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/yradish/43192/songs-inspired-by-herman-melvilles-moby-dick/
listen to the songs when you scroll down
listen to the songs when you scroll down
Response Journal Week 6-7
Though Mathiesson’s examination of Moby Dick breaks from the traditions of the new critics, his use of biographical information is very helpful for understanding some phenomena that we have noticed in Moby Dick. For example, Mathiesson points out that everything that Melville wrote previously had simply been “narratives of travel” (Mathiesson 371). When written, Moby Dick was the farthest Melville had ever strayed from the personal, for he followed the old adage, “write what you know.” This preference for autobiographical non-fiction shows through constantly. Often he bases his characters’ experiences and histories upon his own life (schoolteacher, cannibals etc.), yet at the same time, Melville never went whaling, and thus the entire premise of the novel is outside of his realm of experience. His preference for reality also shows through in his frequent digressions into extremely (pseudo)scientific examinations of the whale, and whaling itself.
Mathiesson makes note of the fact that Melville’s primary goal is to write a tragedy, and thus compares him to Shakespeare. He claims that, “Shakespeare’s phrasing had so hynotized [sic] him that often he seems to have reproduced it involuntarily, even when there was no point to the allusion” (Mathiesson 424). However, his plagiarism, whether deliberate or not, does help him break free from the world of travel logs. The allusion to Shakespeare alone serves to suggest that it is a tragedy, but Mathiesson also suggests that, “The most important effect of Shakespeare’s use of language was to give Melville a range of vocabulary for expressing passion far beyond any that he had previously possessed” (425). However, in all seriousness, this makes me question Melville as an author. Mathiesson opens by stating that Melville was barely educated, and had barely any writing background. If anything, he attributes his success to luck. How, then, can we praise Melville, if he was incapable of expressing the emotions that are crucial to a tragedy without taking the language of Shakespeare? This question extends even farther, for many sections of the book have notes which list where Melville took a character or a scene from. Large parts of it were hardly written by him; they were simply lifted from other authors. However, these notes do not accuse him of plagiarism, they merely give his “source” as though it was a piece of non-fiction. Perhaps we ought to praise Melville for his choice of “sources”, or for the way he incorporated them into one novel, but it seems almost wrong to love him for his writing.
A common theme that has run through the novel is that of escaping one’s fate, and relatedly, elevating oneself above god. As Mathiesson points out, Ahab is the ultimate embodiment of this. However, Ahab is also the ultimate contradiction; he is “a grand, ungodly, god-like man.” Though he is god-like, he is also ungodly in his humanity and imperfection. Though Ahab admits that he is a slave to his destiny, he does not allow this to prevent him from attempting to shape what little he can. According to Mathiesson, this echoed a common sentiment and transformation at the time. He writes, “Anyone concerned with orthodoxy holds that the spiritual decadence of the nineteenth century can be measured according to the alteration in the object of its belief from God-Man to Man-God, and to the corresponding shift in emphasis from Incarnation to Deification.” Rather than imagining that all good must come from a higher being, or that humans are naturally worthless, people were instead worshipped as they could become god. This is an almost Nietzschean perspective, in that humans are placed at the forefront, and capable of determining their own morality.
Mathiesson makes note of the fact that Melville’s primary goal is to write a tragedy, and thus compares him to Shakespeare. He claims that, “Shakespeare’s phrasing had so hynotized [sic] him that often he seems to have reproduced it involuntarily, even when there was no point to the allusion” (Mathiesson 424). However, his plagiarism, whether deliberate or not, does help him break free from the world of travel logs. The allusion to Shakespeare alone serves to suggest that it is a tragedy, but Mathiesson also suggests that, “The most important effect of Shakespeare’s use of language was to give Melville a range of vocabulary for expressing passion far beyond any that he had previously possessed” (425). However, in all seriousness, this makes me question Melville as an author. Mathiesson opens by stating that Melville was barely educated, and had barely any writing background. If anything, he attributes his success to luck. How, then, can we praise Melville, if he was incapable of expressing the emotions that are crucial to a tragedy without taking the language of Shakespeare? This question extends even farther, for many sections of the book have notes which list where Melville took a character or a scene from. Large parts of it were hardly written by him; they were simply lifted from other authors. However, these notes do not accuse him of plagiarism, they merely give his “source” as though it was a piece of non-fiction. Perhaps we ought to praise Melville for his choice of “sources”, or for the way he incorporated them into one novel, but it seems almost wrong to love him for his writing.
A common theme that has run through the novel is that of escaping one’s fate, and relatedly, elevating oneself above god. As Mathiesson points out, Ahab is the ultimate embodiment of this. However, Ahab is also the ultimate contradiction; he is “a grand, ungodly, god-like man.” Though he is god-like, he is also ungodly in his humanity and imperfection. Though Ahab admits that he is a slave to his destiny, he does not allow this to prevent him from attempting to shape what little he can. According to Mathiesson, this echoed a common sentiment and transformation at the time. He writes, “Anyone concerned with orthodoxy holds that the spiritual decadence of the nineteenth century can be measured according to the alteration in the object of its belief from God-Man to Man-God, and to the corresponding shift in emphasis from Incarnation to Deification.” Rather than imagining that all good must come from a higher being, or that humans are naturally worthless, people were instead worshipped as they could become god. This is an almost Nietzschean perspective, in that humans are placed at the forefront, and capable of determining their own morality.
Response Journal Week 6 and 7 - Caleb
In this rather large reading, from chapter 61-89, I noticed that, despite its bulk, not much action takes place in this reading. Of these 29 chapters, 23 are what I call ‘documentary chapters’, which have little significance to the actual storyline, instead explaining a certain aspect of whaling or describing a concept or object (viz. ‘Cutting In’, ‘Fast Fish and Loose Fish’, ‘The Right Whale’s Head’). Though this can be extremely frustrating, I kept noticing the same confrontation-exploration-frustration form that Hayford illustrated in his essay on “Loomings”, especially the final stage of frustration. Though he starts them by asserting his factual and practical intention (“Now comes the Baling of the Case” (268), “Let us, then, look at this matter, along with some interesting items contingent” (290), etc,) Melville often ends these documentary chapters with open-ended question (Chs. 65, 69, 75, 76, 78, 79, 82, 86, 89, 92), which have no empirical answer. The chapter “The Tail” illustrates this ending best. It starts out with the intention to explain the titular tail of the whale. However, typically of Melville, it ends with frustration. “The more I consider this mighty tail,” writes Melville, “the more do I deplore deeply my inability to express it… dissect him how I may, then, I but go skin deep; I know him not, and never will” (296). It is this procession from empirical knowledge to abstract philosophy which gives the book form and purpose, and allows Melville to use these documentary chapters without the reader feeling that his or her time was completely wasted. It is a perfect example of using what you know (whaling) to explore what you don’t.
This process is what F. O. Matthiessen calls “nailing… drama to actuality” (416). Matthiessen asserts that “it prevents the drama from gliding off into a world to which we would feel no normal tie whatever.” (416) Thus, every supernatural or incredible phenomenon in “Moby-Dick” is tied to a physical sensory object, or rational explanation. For example, the phenomenal ubiquity of the Great White Whale is explained by several obscure mythological passageways. Writes Melville, “these fabulous narrations are almost fully equaled by the realities of the whaleman” (155). Even Fedallah’s appearance has both a phenomenal and realistic explanation. Stubb opines, “…I take that Fedallah to be the devil in disguise. Do you believe that cock and bull story about his having been stowed away in board ship?” (259). In this case, the lines between rational and fantastical are blurred: Stubb believes the rational explanation to be fantastical, and the fantastical explanation to be rational. In the same way, Melville gives us many situations (the phantom spout, the circling schools of whales, the fields of brit, etc.) with both a fantastical, or otherworldly explanation, and a rational, scientific explanation.
Another aspect of the novel that supports this tension between the fantastical and the rational is Melville’s constant anthropomorphization of animals, and his constant comparisons of creatures to people. “In man or fish,” writes Melville, “wriggling is a sign of inferiority” (294). He is constantly giving human traits and feelings to whales (such as, on pg. 306, where he writes about the ‘Lothario whale’, or Melville’s “And what are you, reader, but a Loose-Fish and a Fast Fish, too?” (310)). Fleece says, of Stubb, “I’m bressed if he ain’t more of a shark dan Massa Shark hisself” (240), which is almost the opposite of anthropomorphizing, giving animal characteristics to humans (antianthropomorphization?).
Melville not only compares humans to whales, but encourages us to act more like them (“Oh man! Admire and model thyself after the whale! (247), “Has the Sperm Whale ever written a book, spoken a speech? No, his great genius is declared in his doing nothing particular to prove it” (274)). He not only exhorts man to be more like whale, but chides man in his inability to be as great as the natural world: “…there is no folly of the beasts of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of men” (300). Among these is the poetic analogy of the whale’s fountain to the human mind. Melville writes, “For, d’ye see, rainbows do not visit the clear air; they only irradiate vapor. And so, through all the thick mists of the dim doubts in my mind, divine intuitions now and then shoot, enkindling my fog with a heavenly ray” (293).
In addition to comparing and equating humans with beasts, Melville goes even further to connect man with nature, specifically the sea. Writes Melville, “…amid the tornadoed Atlantic of my being, do I myself still for ever centrally disport in mute calm; and while ponderous planets of unwaning woe revolve round me, deep down and deep inland there I still bathe me in eternal mildness of joy” (303). Ishmael often becomes one with nature while on board the Pequod. Earlier in the novel, Ishmael says that he is “…lulled into such an opium-like listlessness of vacant, unconscious reverie is this absent-minded youth by the blending cadence of waves with thoughts, that at last he loses his identity; takes the mystic ocean at his feet for the visible imagine of that deep, blue, bottomless soul, pervading mankind and nature; and every… dimly-discovered, uprising fin of some indiscernible form, seems to him the embodiment of those elusive thoughts…” (136) Ishmael also describes a similar period at sea more spiritually, declaring that “…at last my soul went out of my body; though my body continued to sway as a pendulum will, long after the power which first moved it is withdrawn” (230). Ahab too picks up on this transcendentalist connection. In chapter 71, he opines, “O Nature, and O soul of man! How far beyond all utterance are your linked analogies! Not the smallest atom stirs or lives in matter, but has its cunning duplicate in mind.” This “duplicate” could account for the dual-explanations prevalent throughout the book, the fantastical and the rational.
Also having to do with this connection between whale and man, and the impossibility of knowing them both, is the facial “hieroglyphics” we see throughout the novel. In addition to Queequeg’s mysterious facial tattoos, the whale itself has a hieroglyphic face (246), and Fedallah’s tusk is “’sort of carved into a snake’s head’” (259).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)