Moby Dick

Anyone who has had minimal exposure to greek literature in their lifetime will be familiar with the term “Hubris”.  It is most typically referring to those Greek tragedies in which the main character, likable or not, is brought down by his own haughtiness, oftentimes by the gods themselves.  The most memorable characters involved in these sorts of stories would of course be Odysseus, Oedipus and Icarus, but many others were brought down alongside these men.  Greek historian Herodotus summarizes the idea of hubris in the following passage:

Seest thou how God with his lightning smites always the bigger animals, and will not suffer them to wax insolent, while those of a lesser bulk chafe him not? How likewise his bolts fall ever on the highest houses and the tallest trees? So plainly does He love to bring down everything that exalts itself. Thus ofttimes a mighty host is discomfited by a few men, when God in his jealousy sends fear or storm from heaven, and they perish in a way unworthy of them. For God allows no one to have high thoughts but Himself. (Wikipedia)

Now, anyone who has gotten up through chapter 36 in Moby Dick must surely see the parallels this statement has with our favorite captain, and as the novel progresses, Ahab only digs himself in deeper and deeper:  “Talk not to me of blasphemy, man; I’d strike the sun if it insulted me…. Who’s over me?” (Melville 178).  This does not bode well for the ship, as Starbuck realizes: “God keep me!-keep us all!” (179).  Although perhaps Melville did not write his story after the model of the greek tragedy, that doesn’t mean that he won’t rely on a similar storyline; for what story of hubris would be more relevant to Melville than that of Jonah?  As the bible states, “But the LORD provided a great fish to swallow Jonah” (Biblegateway Jonah 1:17).  So, there is a biblical predecessor to Moby Dick involving both a whale and a man that defies God… it seems that Starbuck was quite founded in his fears. 

Ahab’s hubris is brought on and enhanced by the  impenetrable greatness that Moby Dick possesses as a figure.  In his first unfortunate encounter with the whale, the discrepancy in the power of these two characters could not be more obvious:

His three boats stove around him, and the oars and men both whirling in the eddies; [Ahab], seizing the line-knife from his broken prow, had dashed at the whale… blindly seeking with a six inch blade to reach the fathom-deep life of the whale…. And then it was… Moby Dick had reaped away Ahab’s leg, as a mower a blade of grass in the field. (Melville 199)

Ahab attacks the whale with a pitiful 6-inch knife, crazily hoping to reach the beast’s “fathom-deep life”, and Moby Dick cleaves his leg “as a mover a blade of grass”-and all this after Ahab has experienced the disgraceful destruction of his fleet.  As a result of his loss to the whale, Ahab finds himself mentally altered:

[Ahab] at last came to identify with [Moby Dick], not only all his bodily woes, but all his intellectual and spiritual exasperations…. All the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visible personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. (Melville 200)

And so manifests the “mask” that Ahab refers to (178), and the aporia we referred to in class; Ahab feels that he is kept from some greater truth due to the continued existence of this whale, and by finding this blockage “assailable,” he will most likely stop at nothing to rid himself of this elusive foe.

Although one might prefer to think that in his crazed delirium, perhaps Ahab could never lead his ship to this whale, there is further evidence of their intertwined rivalry in Ahab’s leg-for rather than wood or any other substance that he could have used to replace his missing limb, Ahab chooses whale ivory, intertwining in his very physical being the manifestation for what is to come. 

Works Cited:

“Hubris.” Wikipedia. Wed. 2 Feb. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris>

“Jonah 1.” BibleGateway. Web. 2 Feb. 2010. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jonah%201&version=NIV>

Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. Northwestern University Press, 1988. Reissued 2003. Print.

How far can you stretch American exceptionalism?  Take it too far, and America has regressed to the colonial era.  In class we discussed the hierarchy of the ship and how the Pequod represents a floating ship that Melville wants readers to compare with America.  Yet whaling is an industry of categorization and hierarchy.  Americans relied heavily upon the revenue and resources it brought in and used American success to raise the country’s status among other nations; Americans wanted to rule the seas.  But the organization of a whale-ship and of whaling as an industry mirrors the structure of the governments that America claimed to have separated itself from.  Americans their superiority stemmed from a democracy and the country flourished through the rule of the people.  Yet whaling was an industry that supported an “irresistible dictatorship,” as Ishmael describes Ahab’s captaincy (Melville, 129).

Whaling is entrenched in categorization and in the rankings of those categories.  The novel opens with pages of quotations assembled to describe every possible mention of  a whale in literature.  More categorization follows in  chapter 32 as a detailed account of cetology.  Later, Ishmael vividly describes the hierarchy of the crew.

In classifying whales in the chapter “Cetology,” Ishmael foreshadows the description of the organization of the crew in later chapters.  Throughout chapter 32, Ishmael makes it clear that some whales are useful for whalers and some whales have no value at all.  In the cases where he does not know much about a species, he simply cuts his description off abruptly.

From the first pages of quotations to the extensive chapter on cetology to the descriptions of the crew, Ishmael seems fixated on categorization and organization.  Perhaps Melville is trying to point out the extremity to which Americans try to fit people into categories, often at the exclusion or belittling of others.  When describing whales, Melville says that

“they form such irregular combinations; or, in the case of any one of them detached, such an irregular isolation; as utterly to defy all general methodization formed upon such a basis…nothing but to take hold of the whales bodily, in their entire liberal volume, and boldly sort them that way” (122)

People, like whales, are too diverse and complicated to fit in defined categories.  But then the narrator says that whales should be divided by only their outward characteristics; he has divided whales by these just as white Americans have divided people by their races.

Ishmael, however, does take the time to explain the other whales, not just the favored sperm whale.  This passage mirrors the scenes when Ishmael questions the racist views of white society; he yet again sways between complete categorization, trying to make sense of the world, and accepting differences.

But in his description of people, Ishmael says that the hierarchy is absolute.  He states that

“never mind how much like an old Mesopotamian family these whalemen may, in some primitive instances, live together; for all that, the punctilious externals, at least, of the quarter-deck are seldom materially relaxed, and in no instance done away.” (129)

For whaling, the hierarchy is so important and the captain is so revered that even abuse is valued by the crew.  In chapter 31, “Queen Mab,” a merman says “No, you were kicked by a great man, and with a beautiful ivory leg, Stubb.  It’s an honor.” (115)  This seems to me on par with groveling at a king’s feet and thanking him for a whipping.  If the Pequod is supposed to represent America, then Melville is pointing out how backward America is compared to how she views herself; she has returned to the era of “knights and squires,” not the modern age of democracy.  How could Americans so embrace whaling when it perpetuated all of the qualities that Americans believed themselves to be rid of.  Or even beyond embracing, why did they glorify it?  Maybe in the race to get ahead they unwittingly took a few steps backwards.

But Ishmael (and Melville), even with all of the categories and hierarchies, have left open the possibility of free thinking.  Ishmael says in chapter 32, right after all of the divisions that he just made, “God keep me from ever completing anything.  This whole book is but a draught — nay, but the draught of a draught.” (128)  Melville is open to change, and perhaps his categories have slightly blurred boundaries.

Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1988. Reissued 2008. Print.

Upon first opening Melville’s Moby Dick, I was immediately struck by the etymology and quotation pages.  Although seemingly unimportant even after reading, once I began to delve into the pages of the actual novel, the pages began to gain more sense.  I was interested to see that almost all of the excerpts and much of the actual text refer to the whale as “leviathan”, rather than “whale” or any other descriptive word.  Interested, I did more research into the meaning and etymology of the word, and found that “leviathain” has a highly biblical background, stemming from the Hebrew word “levyatan” meaning twisted or coiled (ExperienceFestival.com).  Although it has many common uses, religiously the word has come to equal the ideas of Satan (mankind’s opposition to God) and more importantly, chaos: Psalm 74: 13-14 states

“It was You who drove back the sea with Your might, who smashed the heads of the monsters in the waters; it was You who crushed the heads of Leviathan, who left him as food for the creatures of the wilderness.” (OpenBible.info)

This general idea being that God defeated the Leviathan of the deep in order to create the earth according to his will (ExperienceFestival.com), I began to see references to attempted order in the text of Moby Dick itself; as if to combat the chaos of the whale itself, whalers create order where order does not inherently exist, both on land and by sea.

An interesting example of this forced order on land can be seen in the empty whalers’ graves in the New Bedford church:

 “Oh! ye whose dead lie buried beneath the green grass; who standing among the flowers can say-here, here lies my beloved; ye know not the desolation that broods in bosoms like these…. What deadly voids and unbidden infidelities in the lines that seem to gnaw upon all Faith, and refuse resurrections to the beings who have placelessly perished without a grave.” (Melville 41)

            As these men have been lost ambiguously to the sea, their bodies were never recovered and given a proper Christian burial.  The families of these men attempt at closure and healing with these empty stones to signify the death of their loved ones, although as Ishmael so solemnly observes, “…In [the widows’] unhealing hearts the sight of those bleak tablets sympathetically caused the old wounds to bleed afresh” (Melville 41).  Thus, although there is little to do to prevent or eventually cope with the loss of a loved one at sea, these people try their best to make order.

            Although many small steps are taken to assure the most physical order at sea (exhaustive cataloging, skill ranking above race, the knight/squire relationships, etc.), the First Mate, Starbuck, makes the first announced attempt at mental order.  Se he says, “‘I will have no man in my boat…who is not afraid of a whale’” (Melville 125).  What he is saying, Ishmael observes, is that “the most reliable and useful courage was that which arises from the fair estimation of the encountered peril” (125), while “an utterly fearless man is a far more dangerous comrade than a coward” (125).  No order can be made from thoughtlessly barging into the dangerous situations that the crew is sure to encounter-thus, although the peril is inevitable, Starbuck hopes that his men will take his advice to heart, and approach the whale with reverent and controlled fear rather than an overconfident, passionate war cry.  

One of the ship owners, Captain Peleg, balances Starbuck by saying “No time to think about death [when the ship is sinking].  Life was what Captain Ahab and I was thinking of; and how to save all hands” (99).  So, between Starbuck and Peleg, a mental balance can be forged: calm reverence to avoid needless death, and quick thinking and bravery when death cannot be avoided.

 Works Cited:

Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. Northwestern University Press, 1988. Reissued 2003. Print.

“Leviathan.” Global Oneness. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Leviathan/id/515120>

“Whales: Related Bible Verses.” OpenBible.Info. Wed. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://www.openbible.info/topics/whales>

The idea of whaling is one that is central to the plot of the novel, which is evident even in the book’s introductory chapters. What I found most interesting thus far, is the way in which the idea of whaling is depicted in the novel. Already on the first page we learn that whenever Ishmael feels “it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul” he goes to sea, and describes these actions as “my substitute for pistol and ball” (Melville 1). Later in the novel we see that whaling also serves the purpose of uniting men of different races.  At first when Captain Peleg meets Queequeg, after previously agreeing to allow him to sail with them, he says that “he had not suspected my friend was a cannibal, and furthermore announcing that he let no cannibals on board that craft.” (Melville 84).  However, after seeing Queequeg’s talent with a harpoon, the captains are quick to overlook his religious and racial background and accept him as part of their crew.  These circumstances seem to create an image of whaling as very powerful, and this idea is reiterated by the seeming reverence that is paid to the whale, the practice of whaling, and to those people who dare to practice it in the novel. An example of this would be in the introduction of Father Mapple, when Melville writes “No one having previously heard his story, could for the first time behold Father Mapple without the upmost interest” (Melville 36) because of the “adventurous maritime life” (Melville 36) that he led.

While in these cases whaling, while still for the most part shrouded in mystery, seems to have positive benefits, the depiction of the activity throughout the novel is much less positive.  It is interesting that despite the great respect people seem to have for whaling and all that surrounds it, it is continuously depicted as very dark, and sometimes seems to be associated with death. In fact even the Pequod itself seems to be a symbol of death. It is not only named after a tribe of Indians that are no longer in existence, but it is also covered in whale bones, teeth and dark paint (Melville 66).  It makes sense that the imagery surrounding such a violent and dangerous pursuit would be dark, and perhaps it is this danger that inspires such awe towards those who dare to attempt such a feat.

Whaling is the perfect career for Ishmael.  The story of Melville’s Ishmael closely parallels that of the Bible’s.  Melville’s opening paragraph sets Ishmael in the same position that the baby Ishmael was placed in: both need water for survival.  Melville then continues for several paragraphs describing the importance of water to humans.  Melville binds the two Ishmaels by the one thing that will save both of their lives.

Violence also binds the two figures together.  As we discussed in class, Genesis 16:12 describes Ishmael as

…a wild donkey of a man;
his hand will be against everyone
and everyone’s hand against him,
and he will live in hostility
toward all his brothers.  (Biblegateway.com)

Many times in the first few chapters, the narrator comments on the violence of whaling – in describing the “heathenish array of clubs and spears” that decorates the inn (Melville, 10), in his concern for Queequeg when he shaves with the head of a harpoon (Melville, 25), and in his confusion over the fact that a devout Quaker, such as Captain Bildad, would participate in such an occupation (66).  For these reasons, the job of whaling meshes perfectly with the biblical figure for whom Melville’s character is named.

The biblical Ishmael also represents a person who followed a different path, just as Melville’s Ishmael makes his own way in the world.  Melville’s characters would have grown up with the stories of Isaac and his descendents, but Ishmael’s story travels off in a different direction.  In mirroring his namesake, Melville’s Ishmael can question the norm and decide his own fate.  But Melville’s Ishmael strays even farther from any sort of settled path; even though he has so many connections to the Genesis story, this Ishmael does not even follow completely in his namesake’s footsteps.  He defies the second part of the prophecy and makes a bosom friend, Queequog at the beginning of the novel.  Although the job of whaling, where everyone must work smoothly together for the three long years that they inhabit the cramped quarters of the ship, seems to work against Ishmael’s prophecy, I think that Melville’s Ishmael makes himself even more similar to the biblical character by making himself a path different from the norm.  But by tearing himself away from the constraints of the story that gives him his character, I think that Ishmael becomes even more closely tied to the biblical character.  And whaling allows Ishmael to explore his freedom and question any norm or idea.

Another question that arises for Ishmael is the morality of whaling.  In presenting this question, whaling allows him to question his life.  Even though Ishmael seems destined for a whaling ship at the beginning of the novel, whaling is perhaps one of the most ungodly professions.  Melville writes that Captain Bildad is “a sworn foe to human bloodshed, yet had he in his straight-bodied coat, spilled tuns upon tuns of leviathan gore” (66).  Here Melville implies that whaling is comparable to murder – a act prohibited by one of the Ten Commandments.  A few sentences later, Ishmael says that “a man’s religion is one thing, and this practical world is quite another.  This world pays dividends” (66). Ishmael is starting to question the well-travelled path of his past and searching for a new religion.  He is becoming the biblical Ishmael.  After all, Ishmael went on to father his own religion, Islam.  The high seas offer Melville’s character a place in which to question and explore his ideas on religion.

Yet Ishmael is not the first to look to whaling for answers to spiritual questions.  It seems that the entire town of New Bedford, and perhaps most of New England, has found a way to reconcile whaling with God.   The imagery in chapters 7,8, and 9, “The Chapel,” “The Pulpit,” and “The Sermon” shows how far a church can go to becoming a whaling ship.  This begs the question “how far can a whaling ship go to becoming a church?”  The church, however, also raises another question for Ishmael to sort out.  In chapter 8, “The Pulpit,” Melville describes the pulpit of the church as enclosing Father Mapple almost as if he is isolated from the congregation in a whaling-inspired room of his own.  The description of the church as similar to a whaling ship makes me think that the Pequod will be a sort of community, but when Mapple shuts himself away, he makes prayer seem to be an individual activity.  So on his journey, will God make Ishmael into “a great nation,” the metaphorical father of the men on the Pequod, or will Ishmael travel alone? (Biblegateway.com) Whaling seems to bring up many questions for Ishmael, but perhaps it will also reveal the answers to his unique future.

Works Cited:

• Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1988. Reissued 2008. Print.
• “Genesis 16:10-12.” Biblegateway. New International Version, Web. 29 Jan 2010. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+16:10-12&version=NIV>.
• “Genesis 17:20.” Biblegateway. New International Version, Web. 29 Jan 2010. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+17:20&version=NIV>.

Most of Melville’s novel deals with aspects of whaling — life on a whaling ship, specific details of how to catch, dissect, even cook a whale. This group’s posts will consider passages or events in the novel that refer specifically to the details of whaling, and what those details might reveal to the reader about larger themes in the novel.