Feb 10 2010
ship and whale
In the next many chapters we are finally introduced to a real female presence: the whaling ship. The ship is consistently referred to using feminine pronouns and whaling is even referred to as an “Egyptian mother” (p. 104). This is a particularly curious and perhaps problematic element of our interpretation of gender within the realm of whaling for it creates a complex relationship perhaps impossible to fully interpret. On the one hand, we have of course the possibility of a highly misogynistic interpretation in which the men control the female boat, using her and constantly redirecting her in order to accomplish their task. However, there is at the same time the fact that the whale-men respect and value the ship they sail upon, depending on her greatly to guide them and keep them safe out at sea. In addition, we cannot ignore given the rest of this novel thus far the sheer magnitude of this feminine presence: the ship plays an obviously substantial role in the voyage and thus in the entire story and is referred to at times as having its own will, if not personality:
“But in that gale, the port, the land, is that ship’s direst jeopardy; she must fly all hospitality; one touch of land, though it but graze the keel, would make her shudder through and through. With all her might she crowds all sail off shore…” (p. 102)
Nevertheless, the ship remains an object.
This odd tension can be resolved in part, I believe, when we look to the gender of the whale. In the highly recognizeable and widely known exclamation “there she blows!” the whale is considered female. This static phrase, however, is where that gender role begins and ends, for both in describing Moby Dick and the stories and reputations of other famous whales, they are all referred to as “he” and in fact are given each and every one a highly masculine name. In taking these two non-human but highly highly prominent elements of the novel, we can see a complex but also undeniable sexism. The whale, while referred to from a distance as female, is considered not just male but overwhelmingly masculine, almost brutish, when up close revealing its strength, size, and intelligence, e.g. when the battle begins. This seems to indicate the necessity by the whale-men to maintain their pride and masculinity by creating a dominant male threat to fight against.
2 Responses to “ship and whale”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This post, coupled with the lecture we had in class today, makes me think of how often Melville includes both genders within different objects. We went over some of these examples in class… the sea is both calm and serene, but also powerful and brutal. Here, you mention that the whale is referred to as a female in “There she blows” but that Moby-Dick and stories about him refer him as a male. Additionally, Queequeg has both masculine and feminine qualities: he is strong and powerful, yet caring and kind.
Perhaps Melville is willing to place qualities of both genders in his characters/subjects because he sees individual people in the world around him exhibiting both genders. His relationship with Hawthorne could be a key example of this. In Melville’s time, men were attracted to women. Thus, and this is only speculation, perhaps when finding himself attracted to Hawthorne, Melville attributed to him more feminine characteristics. At the time that Melville was writing Moby-Dick, it seems that Hawthorne was quite prominent in Melville’s mind, shown by Melville’s dedication of the book to Hawthorne, so it would make sense for much of Melville’s writing to be influenced by his feelings for Hawthorne. Furthermore, as Melville was at the time supposedly very interested in Hawthorne, perhaps he saw effeminate characteristics in himself through his attraction to another man. Perhaps his attribution of both male and female characteristics in the characters of his book was a way for Melville to try to justify his own feelings towards gender.
Hi Kate — an interesting response — I would be careful, however, to avoid generalizing: “In Melville’s time, men were attracted to women.” Men have been, and still are, attracted to women; men have always, and still are, attracted to other men. What might be more precise is to say, “In Melville’s time, it was more SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE for a man to PROFESS HIS ATTRACTION for women.” An even more precise thing to say would be something like, “In 19th c. America, a man like Melville might have been encouraged to sustain a passionate friendship with another man, but Melville himself would have been loath to admit his attraction to another man.” I would also be careful about essentializing the characteristics of men and women — Melville’s idea of gender was obviously fluid, and he saw men as being capable of encompassing the “stereotypical” attributes of women, such as nurturance. But we should be careful to note that Melville is himself aware that he is trapped in stereotypes — we all are — and so we automatically assume that women are nurturers and men are brutes, when in truth, some women aren’t interested in nurturing and all men are certainly not brutes (women can be brutes, too — didn’t you know any mean girls in high school? I sure did). What Melville wants us to do is QUESTION the nature of our essentialist, knee-jerk, stereotypes of gender and particularly of masculinity and femininity.