Moby Dick

What strikes me as most interesting in the chapter The Advocate is the way in which Melville portrays whaling as a flawless and almost royal pursuit. He challenges every conceivable argument against the profession, and he does so in a very convincing way.  His most bold and interesting claim, in my opinion, is his defense of whaling against the argument that it simply a business of butchering, by comparing the profession of whaling with that of a soldier.  He claims that if it is in fact true the whaling is an uncleanly business, that does not mean that it cannot still be honorable, as is the profession of a soldier. To make this comparison he asks “what disordered slippery decks of a whale-ship are comparable to the unspeakable carrion of those battle-fields from which so many soldiers return to drink in all ladies’ plaudits?” (Melville 103).  He then goes even further than simply defending the business of whaling, to state that it is in fact more noble than going to war. This struck me as a kind of daring claim, but I’ll admit that the logic of his argument is somewhat convincing.

He argues that if it is the fear of war that earns the soldier his admiration, that what one faces on the battle field cannot compare to the terror of encountering a whale when he says:

And if the idea of peril so much enhances the popular conceit of the soldier’s profession; let me assure ye that many a veteran who has freely marched up to battery, would quickly recoil at the apparition of the Sperm Whale’s vast tail fanning into eddies the air over his head.  For what are the comprehensible terrors of man compared with the interlinked terrors and wonders of God! (Melville 103)

He goes on the argue that if it is the benefits derived from their services that earn soldiers their respect, then the benefits of whaling are just as great. Not only do we reap material benefits from a dead whale, including the highly valued oil it produces, but we have also discovered much of the world through the adventures of whaling ships. He speaks of Australia claiming that “The whale-ship is the true mother of that now mighty colony”(Melville 105).

Finally, at the end of the chapter, he states his claim that whaling is in fact more noble than going to battle by saying  “I know a man that, in his lifetime, has taken three hundred and fifty whales. I account that man more honorable than that great captain of antiquity who boasted of taking as many walled towns.” (Melville 106)

The reason that I find these seemingly outlandish arguments so compelling is that they are true. When you think about it logically, it is true that whaling and battle are similar in many ways.  The soldier goes out with intention to kill, not an adversary in the form of a whale, but other human beings. While Ishmael argues that this is less perilous and frightening, should killing a human not be more abhorrent then killing a whale? And yes, wars are fought for a purpose, usually to conquer land, so it could be argued that the soldiers are helping to expand, or defend, the land of their country.  However, Ishmael makes the argument that whaling ships have discovered new land for their country. It could be argued that the founding of these new colonies is just as beneficial. In these regards Ishmael’s arguments are compelling to me, however, I still don’t think that whaling seems to be equivalent to going to war, and I think that the important distinction lies in the intention of the soldier to defend his country, which is not a claim that whalers can make.  I was, however, struck by the power of Ishmael’s argument to almost convince me otherwise.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS