Moby Dick

The Epilogue to Moby Dick provides the reader a chance to psychoanalyze Ishmael. At this point at the end of the novel the reader is now intimately familiar with Ishmael and comes to expect a certain kind of commentary from him on significant events. I argue however that there is nothing unexpected in the Epilogue, and instead Ishmael responds in the exact way that we as readers should expect him to.

Notice Ishmael’s cold and detached tone when describing the apocalyptic scene around him. This might seem surprising to some, however we have read the novel, and as such we as readers wouldn’t expect anything to make Ishmael jump out of his seat in a show of extraversion. This is not to say that Ishmael does not understand the severity of the situation he has found himself in, but instead Ishmael simply continues to be himself and describes the scene in the same way he has described everything else in the novel that he narrated regardless of how epic. I feel like we would have much more to talk about if Ishmael suddenly sounded like an Old Testament prophet proclaiming the woes of his plight, now that would have been strange! So while yes, we do expect to hear Ishmael end his moments of narration with some sort of philosophic insight on the matter at hand, I believe it is quite understandable why on the surface it seems that Ishmael does not comment on the significance of his situation. Most notably is the fact that this Epilogue seems to be coming from a time that is somewhat removed from the events of the rest of the novel. As a result Ishmael would be of the mindset that he had just explained the significance of his story for roughly 500 pages and in the Epilogue there is nothing to say except “The End”.

There is no need for one final philosophic statement at the end of the Epilogue because the purpose of “Moby Dick” as a whole would have been to help Ishmael sort out his understanding of all of the events that led to his being the sole survivor of the tragedy. Additionally, if Ishmael were to make an insightful statement here, it arguably would lessen some of the beauty that is Melville’s vision for the novel. It is astounding how many valid readings there are to take from the novel, and Melville likely understood that his symbolism could be interpreted many different ways. Honestly, had Ishmael concluded the Epilogue by saying “And now I know that man can not defeated God” I would have felt rather let down. Wouldn’t a clear statement about the macro intention of the work have belittled each wonderfully crafted statement along the way? We know how Ishmael feels about Moby Dick, Ahab, Queequeg, and all of the other people and things mentioned in the story, great literature does not need an Aesop-esque moral at the end.

The Epilogue is not without its symbolism or meaning; it is quite possible for one to spend a very long time thinking about the significance of Ishmael being saved by Queequeg’s coffin, or what it means for Ishmael to have been the rescued orphan of the Rachel, but when discussing matters of narrator and narration through a psychoanalytical lens it becomes far more important that we recognize why it is that Ishmael seemingly chooses to ignore this symbolism that at other times in the novel he would’ve been all over. Ishmael believes his work is done at this point in the novel, and it is now up to the reader to think through this symbolism without Ishmael, or Melville for that matter, holding their hand.

I find myself very interested in thinking about the purpose of the chapter “Cetology”. Considered problematic at the time of publication, the Cetology chapter has been puzzling to many readers and has posed problems for some of the critical readings that scholars have brought to the table in order to analyze the novel. I believe however that the Cetology chapter is an important part of the early stages of the novel and I do not feel that its inclusion is problematic. If one looks at this chapter as a strong display of Ishmael’s voice in the text then one can draw a few possible conclusions about Ishmael and hopefully understand him better.

Ishmael seems to have a case of “whale-mania”, and nowhere is this more evident than in the Cetology chapter. The reader is given a very accurate look at the inner workings of Ishmael’s mind. I feel as if the Cetology chapter is a strong example of Ishmael’s depression. I would wager that classifying whales in a self-created taxonomy was a pastime as infrequent at the time of the novel’s publication as it is today! Ishmael is not your average man; he has strange pastimes and an obsession with whales that is almost psychotic. Could Ishmael be drowning his sorrow in scientific thinking? This certainly seems plausible seeing as he was looking for a whaling vessel so that he could escape the depression he found on land. Ishmael’s Cetology could easily be an avenue for escaping thinking about his life on land, acting as a vehicle to escaping his introspective thoughts.

But does Ishmael do a good job of escaping his introspection by thinking of nothing but whales? The answer seems to be a resounding “no”. Ishmael’s most insightful philosophic moments come when describing whaling, an activity that he supposedly is doing to avoid his introspection. Arguably the chapters that anthropomorphize whales are actually the moments in the novel most telling about how Ishmael feels about people. This is not to say that Ishmael is putting on an act when he says he is going to talk to us about whales and whales alone, but it is definitely an indicator that try as he might Ishmael can not avoid thinking about the relations of people with each other, their government, and with their God regardless of where he is located.

The fact that Ishmael has put as much thought into whale classification as he has does suggest that he is a somewhat learned person, and I feel that this is another contributing factor to his depression. Think for a moment of the restricting force that is determinism. If Ishmael is going through the motions in a preordained life he has many things to be troubled by. Is his intelligence his own? Is his depression a punishment from God because he is damned? Is it possible for him to escape that depression by sailing on a ship? Jonah set sail in an attempt to escape the destiny that God had given him, but of course as any New England Protestant would know, you cannot sail away from an omnipresent God.

Ishmael certainly reflects Jonah in this early stage of the novel, and the Cetology chapter definitely suggests that Ishmael is trying his very best to not think about the possible predestination that God has in store for him. Again, Ishmael seems to be no good at escaping these thoughts as all of his talk about whales and whaling amounts to philosophic monologues on the human experience, but the reader could’ve called this given the story of Jonah now, couldn’t they?

“The Forge” makes for an intriguing chapter regardless of the critical lens being used to analyze the text. When thinking about the narration in the story it is important to pay very careful attention to Melville’s choice of words as this gives us insight into how the given narrative voice feels about the scene. Through this, if the reader takes the description of the scene in “The Forge” seriously and analyzes specific word choices there can be seen indicators of where Melville intends to take the plot of the story and how he feels about the characters involved.

It is interesting to note the adjectives Ahab uses to describe the intended quality of this harpoon. Ahab wants to “…make the barbs sharp as the needle-sleet of the icy sea”, which conjures up interesting images. Though the scene of the forge is fiery and dark, the weapon itself is to be forged to be as powerful as the cold. I feel that in this word choice Melville is hinting at many possible conclusions to be drawn about the text. In Dante’s “Inferno” Satan himself sits in the lowest circle of hell encased not in flames like the rest of hell, but instead in ice. It is possible that Melville is hinting at the fact that Moby Dick is Satan himself because he resides in the icy sea, and Ahab’s madness has caused him to sell his soul and is using the power of evil in an attempt to fight another evil. Equally likely, and just as ominous, is that Ahab is actually intended to be the personification of Satan, and through the use of his cold weaponry he intends to do battle with God, Moby Dick.

When the reader takes into consideration that there is a quote from Paradise Lost inserted into the novel by Melville it makes the possibility of Ahab being linked to Satan even more likely. But then what can the reader make of the harpooners’ involvement in the scene? We have no reason to think that Queequeg is satanic, and even though he clearly does not follow the church Melville goes out of his way to present Queequeg in such a positive way throughout the whole novel that one should certainly be more inclined to associate him with the holy than the satanic. In light of this I would like to make a claim that I understand will be rather controversial. I believe that Melville inserted the harpooners into the scene to show that their association with Paganism did not make them unholy, but instead to show that a faith other than Christian Protestantism lends itself to having a greater chance of unintentional corruption. Notice that Ahab offers a benediction over the baptized harpoon in Latin, a language associated with Catholicism as opposed to Protestantism. This action seems to “other” the people involved in the scene by showing that while those involved may be similar to the others on the ship, gathered in this room are the people that reject determinism. Dagoo, Tashtego, Queequeg, Ahab, and Pip. While these characters all fall on different ends of the “good and evil” spectrum it is undeniable that there is something not Protestant about all of them for their own unique reasons.

I am fascinated by the possibility of this being Melville’s intent in writing this section of “The Forge”. What could this possibly mean for the rest of the novel? I frankly can not sort out in my mind what Melville is trying to say about determinism when we see both good and evil characters coming together sharing in this aspect of non-protestant faith. Perhaps this is what Melville wants the reaction of the reader to be. After all, is determinism a good thing or a bad thing? Free will is kind of a burden isn’t it? Would a loving God place the weight of free will on the shoulders of believers? That is definitely something I can’t answer in two pages!

This post does not really fit under “Characters and Characterization,” yet it relates to an earlier post I made in that section.  However, I think it relates more to the narrator, so I will classify it as such.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Ishmael is somewhat invisible as a character.  However, throughout the book, especially in later chapters, the reader gets glimpses of him.  One thing I’ve noted is his opinions on the work he has undertaken; this novel.  He seems to think rather highly of it, and see it as some sort of noble work. In chapter 104, The Fossil Whale, Ishmael states

For in the mere act of penning my thoughts of this Leviathan, they weary me, and make me faint with their outstretching comprehensiveness of sweep, as if to include the whole circle of the sciences, and all the generations of whales, and men, and mastodons, past, present, and to come, with all the revolving panoramas of empire on earth, and throughout the whole universe, not excluding its suburbs.  Such, and so magnifying, is the virtue of a large and liberal theme!  We expand to its bulk.  To produce a mighty book, you must choose a mighty theme.

In saying this, Ishmael connects this work to large themes of the universe.  He seems to be claiming that this book is mighty, as it deals with such a mighty theme.  More than that, it is so important as to weaken him, as he struggles with the meaning of the universe.  This fits in with what we discussed in the first class, how some people hate this book, but some think it holds all the answers to life.  Ishmael appears to be in the latter camp.

Of course, this begs the ever present question:  how separate are Ishmael and Melville?  Does Melville see his work this way?  I would argue yes, as he constantly inserts massive life morals and questions into the work.  To him, it is not just a book about a whale.  Did this make him more upset when  the critics slammed this work, or shelved it under “cetology?”  Or did he laugh at their folly, knowing the deep truths were there, and they just couldn’t see?

A close reading of the chapter “The Spirit Spout” betrays certain aspects of generally more understated functions of Melville’s narrative voice. Though the central aspect of this chapter is the “Spirit Spout” itself, there is an equally intriguing, if as of yet under discussed, part at the end of the chapter where Starbuck finds Ahab asleep in his cabin in a position that indicates that Ahab has been obsessively watching the direction of the ship’s course. I find this an interesting part of the narrative because the careful choice of language, along with the fact that Ishmael has been privy to the “spirit spout” in the earlier paragraphs of this chapter indicate that we are being talked to by Ishmael, but at the end of the chapter we see a sudden switch to a situation that Ishmael would have no way of commenting on. This shift in narrative voice in combination with continuity of tone indicate that Melville wants to tell us something of a philosophic nature about the scene in Ahab’s cabin. Certain aspects of the scene stand out, and individual words cannot be ignored because of the care and attention that was put into this chapter.

Never could Starbuck forget the old man’s aspect, when one night going down into the cabin to mark how the barometer stood…

This quote in particular seems very important. The narrator is saying that Starbuck is descending into the realm of Ahab. I do not feel like I am reading too much into the action of “Descending” when I say that the reader can conjure up images of the underworld or hell from hearing this seemingly simple sentence. I believe that the narrator wants to inform the reader’s interpretation of the “spirit spout” by showing that Ahab is chasing it down even in his sleep, as he is seen to be asleep while facing the compass. The crew has many different interpretations of what the spout might be or what it could signify, so by affirming Ahab’s obsession with it in proving that he is hoping to follow the direction of the spout we see that those that think there is something demonic about the spout may very well be in the right.

It also cannot be ignored that the narrator provides us with an interesting side note at the end of the chapter. In reference to the hanging compass we are told specifically that…

The cabin-compass is called the tell-tale, because without going to the compass at the helm, the captain, while below, can inform himself of the course of the ship.

Regardless of whether or not it is significant that “The Tell-Tale Heart” was published eight years prior to Moby Dick, the wording “Tell-Tale” carries the same ominous meaning. The narrator clearly finds it important to bring the reader out of the flow of the text so as to tell them that the tool Ahab is using to keep track of the direction of the ship is something that is ominous, and as a result the task that is being carried out with its aid is likely equally dark.

I for one feel that it is extremely important that we look this closely at this specific section of the story because through this scene we are able to see many things that will be mainstays throughout the book. Ahab’s obsession, Ahab’s madness, Starbuck’s questioning of Ahab’s ability to lead, the crew’s belief that Moby Dick is something more than whale, and Ahab’s connection with evil. All of these things are incredibly important aspects of the plot and as such it is no surprise that they are represented so strongly, and all at once, in this very significant part of the story.

For this post I figured I’d tackle the most subtle, perplexing aspect of Ishmael’s narration: the foot note. What is the purpose of the footnote in Moby Dick? What are these pesky, little creatures that pop up at the bottom of the sea?

Since nobody else has the time and patience, I did an exhaustive search of the book and counted a total of 17 footnotes (if anyone wants to challenge me on this matter please go ahead).*

Footnotes typically belong to the phylum of non-fiction, in which case they are added by the author, or in an antiquated or translated work of fiction, in which they are added by an editor or translator, like in my Norton ed. of The Brothers Karamazov.

So does Meville revolutionize the footnote by employing it in Moby Dick?

At first glance, they seem to be nothing out of the ordinary, often giving the appearance of explaining dry, technical details. In fact, this could have added to the early mis-categorization of the book as a novel about cetology. In the chapters Cetology and The Right Whale’s Head, they are used to give further insight on the categorization and anatomy of whales, backing up the perception that the book is primarily about whales. However, as often with Melville, this soon proves not to be the case. In the chapter The Whiteness of the Whale, the footnote recalls personal observations and memories, giving the appearance of a travel narrative.  Others explain the meaning of mariner terms and other aspects of whaling life to land-locked, tight-lipped readers, in which case they could also be a satire for the travel narrative he felt he had outgrown. Melville certainly takes as much creative license with footnotes as he does with other narrative and stylistic forms in Moby Dick.

There are many other types of footnotes in Moby Dick:

Humorous footnotes that give color to the text:

The monkey-rope is found in all whalers; but it was only in the Pequod that the monkey and his holder were ever tied together. This improvement upon original usage was introduced by no less a man than Stubb, in order to afford the imperilled harpooner the strongest possible guarantee for the faithfulness and vigilance of his monkey-rope holder. (Signet, 311)

Feminist-footnotes:

When by chance these precious parts in a nursing whale are cut by the hunter’s lance, the mother’s pouring milk and blood rivallingly discolor the sea for rods. The milk is very sweet and rich; it has been tasted by man; it might do well with strawberries. (376)

Elitist footnotes:

But as these pig-fish are a noisy, contemptible set, mostly lurking in the mouths of rivers, and feeding on wet hay, and especially as they do not spout, I deny their credentials as whales; and have presented them with their passports to quit the Kingdom of Cetology. (128)

Abuse of footnotes:

(See The Whiteness of the Whale)

Whatever you may make of them, or even if you skip over them, these footnotes leave us a footprint of Melville’s thought.

So, next time you stumble upon a footnote in the text, stop and take note. You may find something interesting.

*Compiled list of footnotes (by no means authoritative):

Signet Edition

Pg. 106,128,133,182,183,199,200,228,234,276,277,293,311,325,376,406,456,527

** I can’t count, there are actually 18

What is the significance of Melville’s changing of the narrator’s voice after the Peqoud sets sail? To be sure, Ishmael is a major part of the opening chapters of the novel, so why do we suddenly cease to hear his voice for such a long time? It can not be denied that Ishmael has not disappeared completely, as sections such as the few chapters on Cetology seem to carry on the spirit of Ishmael’s “Whale Mania” that is found in the introductory sections of the book, and these moments are clearly examples of Ishmael’s voice. But we soon encounter scenes in the novel where Melville presents the action of his characters through the use of stage direction. It can not be said that this is done because Ishmael is not present at the scene and lacks opinion on the matter because he is not an omniscient narrator, nor can it be said that an omniscient narrator wouldn’t have made sense to add for the purpose of presenting these scenes to the reader, as at times in the later sections of the novel it does seem that Melville has suddenly given us a third-party omniscient onlooker to describe the action that is certainly not Ishmael. I find it hard to believe that the entire idea of Ishmael was nothing more than one of the many tangents Melville takes building off of his “riff” that is Moby Dick. There would have been no reason for Ishmael to take such a prominent role for such a long time before setting out to sea were this the case. In addition I find it very unlikely that the world would have latched onto the line “Call me Ishmael” were Ishmael eventually made to be irrelevant. Instead I feel that Ishmael acts as Melville’s avatar in the novel and the sections right after taking sail where we seem to loose touch with Ishmael act to give us information about a scene in a way that Ishmael could not have at this early point in the trip. Ishmael is very good at commenting in a philosophical way on things that happen as part of the daily routine on a whaling vessel, but I get the impression that he is not the best person to describe direct human interaction. I learn much more about how Ishmael feels about people when I hear him talk about a piece of rope then when I hear him speak directly about Ahab. Certainly by the end of the novel the reader has learned enough about Ishmael’s feelings on humanity’s struggle with the concept of God that one can come to an educated conclusion about how Ishmael would have responded in any scene when he is not present. It seems that Melville wanted Ishmael to remain a slightly solitary individual with very specific ideas, through whom he could speak, but Melville did his best to keep him out of the world of commenting on interactions between parties that did not include him. This also serves a purpose in that because these scenes occur so soon after setting sail the reader is able to picture Ishmael cherishing the fact that he is away from land and perhaps away from his depression so tangibly that Ishmael doesn’t go all philosophical on us for a few “days”. Regardless, I believe there is true purpose for the narrative voice in Ishmael’s disappearance for a fairly large part of the novel, and that this purpose says nothing about his absence being the norm, but instead the disappearance of Ishmael is one of Melville’s “riffs” in order to convey a point about humanity that is not best suited to Ishmael despite the fact that in most situations Ishmael is the best observer possible.

Throughout Moby Dick, Melville obsesses over the concept of sanity, and the delicate balance inside each of us that can be tipped fairly easily. In Moby Dick, power is most frequently what is hanging in balance. Too much power, exemplified by Ahab, causes insanity. We find Ahab consumed by his absolute rule over his boat. This is the reason why he doesn’t emerge from the boat until they are well out to sea, and the reason why he dislikes gams. Ahab is so entangled in the societal microcosm of the Pequod that he shies away from contact with outsiders for fear of disrupting the bubble in which he is the master.

On the other end of the spectrum is Pip, whose utter lack of control eventually drives him to insanity. Already a slave, Pip’s sanity is broken when Stubb leaves him behind after he jumps overboard for fear of a whale:

Pip’s ringed horizon began to expand around him miserably…The sea had jeeringly kept his finite body, but drowned the infinite of his soul (401)

Here Melville explores Ahab’s counterpart. Pip’s control over his own existence was so completely lost, that he resigned himself to a passive form of insanity as opposed to Ahab’s active.

But what of narration? These accounts of insanity give the reader a clue into the mental state of the narrator himself, be he Ishmael of Melville. Ahab hunts Moby Dick, because Moby Dick is the only thing that Ahab does not feel he has control over. The narrator, much like Ahab, is obsessed with his own sanity and mental processes because it is the only thing a person is sure they are in control of. Pip’s fall from sanity fascinates and terrifies both Melville and Ishmael.

Man comes at last to that celestial thought, which, to reason is absurd and frantic; and weal or woe, feels then uncompromised, indifferent as his God. (402)

The narrator here explores the fine line that we all tread between sanity and insanity, admitting at this point that he himself is unsure of which side he falls.

It will then be seen what like abandonment befell myself (402)

What does this reveal about the novel in its entirety? If the narrator himself is insane, then how can one rely on his judgments of other characters? Perhaps these are questions that Melville wanted the reader to ask in order to make the reader question their own sanity, and perhaps realize that sanity is fragile and relative.

Trying to catch sight of Ishmael’s narration is like to trying to catch sight of Moby-Dick:  it’s elusive, volatile and unpredictable, emerging and submerging beneath the surface.

From the beginning one can imagine Ishmael disappearing into the narrative as he weaves in and out of the nautical streets of Nantucket.  Yet, now, after his long absence, like the poor wife of Starbuck, we must ask, where has he gone?

Ishmael clearly has some explaining to do.  Appropriately, in the chapter titled Moby Dick, he offers us an explanation for his behavior:

How it was that they so aboundingly responded to the old man’s ire–by what evil magic their souls were possessed, that at times his hate seemed almost theirs; the White Whale as much their insufferable foe as his; how all this came to be–what the White Whale was to them, or how to their unconscious understandings, also, in some dim, unsuspected way, he might have seemed the gliding great demon of the seas of life,–all this to explain would be to dive deeper than Ishmael can go. The subterranean miner that works in us all, how can one tell whither leads his shaft by the ever shifting, muffle sound of his pick? (180, Signet)

One gets the feeling that Ishmael doesn’t know where his narration is going, akin to an episode of Lost. His admission here complicates the view of him as an omniscient narrator.  He has limits.  There are some thoughts and occurrences that he cannot fully understand or explain. Like the miner he speaks of, he gets lost in the tunnel and begins feeling his way around.

In Ch. 45 he even admits that he’s not much of a narrator, “So far what there may be of a narrative in this book…” (195). Nevertheless, he feels compelled to take on the task; in the chapter The Whiteness of the Whale, he lets the reader for a moment into his subconscious: “…how can I hope to explain myself here; and yet, in some dim, random way, explain myself I must, else all these chapters might be naught” (181). This is both a confession of weakness and strength by the narrator.

Ishmael is of course neither omnipresent nor omniscient.  The question is whether his narration is; I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that Ishmael ever quits being narrator, so I assume that he is narrating even during the omniscient parts.  His narration is certainly not omnipresent, as we all know too well.

In Chapter 46, humorously titled Surmises, which are thoughts or ideas based on scanty evidence (Merriam-Webster), Ishmael surmises on the thoughts swimming through Ahab’s head: his need for tools (Starbuck being one of them), the reason why he enjoyed going after other whales (it reminded him of Moby Dick), and how anxious he must have been to protect himself (his men would want to be paid after emerging from their euphoric state).

Just a few chapters earlier, in Ch. 44 The Chart, Ishmael appears to shift into an omniscient form of narration, as James mentions in his post.  I think Surmising stands in stark contrast with this chapter, almost like a foil, illustrating Ishmael’s limits as a narrator.

Here, he is not surmising on Ahab’s thought, but describing the scene. This chapter does not attempt to explain Ahab’s psychological motives, which he can only guess at, but his mechanical scheming to catch Moby-Dick, which does have a certain logic to it, as evidenced by the footnote (191).  The ending of the chapter and its emotional depth are based on explosive observations: Ahab rushing out of his cabin and shouting exclamations into the night.

Perhaps, Ishmael, too, cannot explain what is behind the unreasoning mask.

“surmises.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010.

Merriam-Webster Online. 11 February 2010

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surmises>

While Moby Dick’s narrative is characterized for the most part by Ishmael’s inner monologue and musings, there are several distinct, extreme shifts in narrative that Melville employs. One of the most obvious, and important switches in narrative is when Melville adopts an omniscient narrator, and Ishmael seems to vanish altogether. This omniscient narrator doesn’t emerge until the Pequod is out to sea, as it is used to develop the other characters on the boat, namely Ahab. Because Ishmael’s ability to be everywhere at once is obviously implausible, Melville uses this style of narration because characters such as Ahab, and Starbuck are equally important to the novel.

Had you followed Captain Ahab down into his cabin…you would have seen him go to a locker in the transom…Where thus employed, the heavy pewter lamp suspended in chains over his head, continually rocked with the momentum of the ship, and for ever threw shifting gleams and shadows of lines upon his wrinkled brow (190)

Here we find a vivid description of Ahab in the most inaccessible part of the boat to Ishmael: his cabin. Because of this, it is certain that Ishmael is detached from the narrative altogether. This is employed to diminish Ishmael’s role in the story, thus giving the reader a sense that Ishmael is not in control of the narrative, the boat, or his destiny. Melville uses shifting narrative to establish and emphasize the power hierarchy on the ship. Ahab is quite often the object of omniscient narrative, however Melville also devotes a similar style chapter to the thoughts of Starbuck. In both cases, Melville provides inner monologues, as well as intimate glimpses into the characters’ lives.

It is also important to note how Melville frames these chapters with stage directions, akin to a Shakespearean tragedy. I think that this was done on purpose to present the novel as such, establish fatal flaws, and foreshadow the catastrophe that is to come.