Student
ID No. 1171361
‘Leviathanic
Allusions’: Herman Melville’s Moby Dick
and the American Epic.
In
a celebratory appraisal of fellow writer friend and resident of Massachusetts,
Nathaniel Hawthorne, Melville eloquently wrote that the world is “as young today, as when it was created,
and this Vermont morning dew is as wet to my feet, as Eden's dew to Adam's.”
(Melville, 1976, p.411) This, I believe, pertains to the intention of Melville
to construct a national Epic for America. In forging what can be termed
an ‘American Epic’, Melville’s novel demonstrates suitably vast generic and
stylistic plurality. The centralising human conflict of the endeavour to
understand the world and our place within it is arguably Moby Dick’s thematic
core. Amid that most arid and yet implacable of
existential questions we can argue that the book identifies with both
‘American’, and ‘Epic’ as classifications. In his seminal inquiry into the mythology of the American West Richard
Slotkin illuminates the relation between American cultural mythology and
Melville’s metaphorical narrative mode; “In creating his epic, Melville
reenvisioned the traditional myths of his culture, bringing their implicit
structures of symbol and value to consciousness by extending and expanding the
symbolic elements and by providing new contexts for and therefore new
perspectives on the central themes of the hunter’s adventure.” (Slotkin, 2000,
p.550) Melville takes a prominent aspect of American life, whaling, and
gives it metaphorical flight, so it symbolically functions to represent “any
man’s life in general” (Auden, 1977, p.9). Within this symbolic structure
whaling as an analogous representative of epistemological inquiry participates
in and communicates with a framework of popular American mythology. Melville
expands the symbolic structure of Frontier mythology to incorporate his
metaphorical narrative detailing an epistemological quest to penetrate the core
of ‘reality’, in which the white whale symbolises the primary forces of nature,
“is not Leviathan the immortal symbol of the inscrutability of the created
world, a mystery not to be resolved until the end of days?” (Fiedler, 1960,
p.548)
I would
argue that the novels central theme, one of man’s struggle to understand the
world and attain some final ‘truth’, is not an entirely universal one and it is
restrictive to think of it as so. By framing the metaphorical narrative within
the frontier mythical archetype, the thematic core addresses the white,
urbanised, industrialised American man of Melville’s contemporary social
setting. Melville provides new contexts
of understanding for the hunter mythology, he expands the ‘wilderness’ of the
frontier and the prairie into the sea as a symbolic wilderness. In this sense
we can consider Moby-Dick to be a generically transformative epic in as much as
he transforms the symbolic structures of Frontier mythology for 19th
century America, appropriating national myths as a base to produce a work that
could participate in Eurocentric ‘Old World’ tradition of epic poetry. Richard
Martin asserts that ‘Epic’ is a “contingent and culture-bound category.” That
the ‘Epic’ “applied to similar categories across cultures, plays a necessary
role that transcends genre” (Martin,
2006, p.9) Melville adapts the symbolic features of Frontier mythology, the
isolated hunter in the vast wilderness, into a broader symbolic structures
achieving the cosmic scale of Epic material, the hunter is now the whaler, the
wilderness is now the sea. His re-appropriation of the ‘quest’ aspect of
Frontier mythology is most critical, the quest is no longer to cast a nation
out of the wilderness but an ‘epistemological’ quest to understand man’s
position in the world, to penetrate the surface of material reality and reach some
final attainment of ‘truth’. In this way Melville has updated and expanded Epic
content and the symbolic structure of American mythology to communicate themes
of profound importance to Western civilization in the mid-19th
century. The internal logic of the novels thematic metaphor rests upon this
symbolic relation of both the white whale and the sea representing the vast
chaotic forces of nature. The primary symbolic relation of pursuit of the white
whale with pursuit of knowledge of the infinite is delineated in the novels
opening chapter, the alignment of sea and ‘truth’ that generates much of the
metaphorical narrative is cast. “Why did the old Persians hold the sea holy?
Why did the Greeks give it a separate deity, and own brother of Jove? Surely all
this is not without meaning? […] But that same image, we ourselves see in all
rivers and oceans. It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this
is the key to it all.” (Melville, 2008, p.3) The narrative documents the
progression of Ishmael’s sequential thought, this progression from the
optimistic indignation, “Surely all this is not without meaning?” to the
resignation of unattainability, “ungraspable”, “Key to it all”, arguably enacts
the entire course of the epistemological quest that the metaphorical narrative
is concerned with in microcosm, this “reaffirms the inscrutability of
existence.” (Gilmore, 1977, p.6) The whale, functioning as a symbol of nature’s
mystery and all life, is eminently unknowable.
If
we view the loose structure of the novel as that of an epistemological quest, a
product of Melville’s disclosed wisdom of the impossibility of a full
comprehension of the ‘truth’ to the mystery of nature and human existence is
the consideration of ontological identity and subsequent presentation of man
(Symbolically Ishmael, as the ‘everyman’) as an “ontological orphan” (Tanner,
2000, p.69). Crucially, the novel ends on the word “Orphan” (Melville, 2008,
p.509). At various points in the novel, this condition of contemporary man as
an ‘ontological orphan’ is delineated as a contingency of the absence of man’s
access to the ‘truth’ of his reality. We can argue that the internal logic of
the metaphorical narrative posits that the implacable condition of the pursuit
of existential ‘truth’ generates the ontological identity of man as forever
seeking without ever finally knowing. The epistemological conditions the
ontological state of perpetual orphanhood, as Michael Gilmore states; “Ishmael
himself says that all men are figurative orphans who seek in vain for the
secret of their paternity and who voyage eternally in pursuit of “the final
harbour, whence we unmoor no more.” ” (Gilmore,
1977, p.7) Tony Tanner specifically relates this condition of orphanhood to
Nietzsche’s diagnosis of modern man as fundamentally rootless, in this sense
man will forever be searching for understanding primarily because of the
historical loss of the function of myth as the basis for a culture. For Tanner,
this conception of orphanhood comes to resemble the “constituent plight of
modern man” (Tanner, 2000, p.69) for Nietzsche. Nietzsche designates this as
the condition of his contemporaneous man,
Now, mythless man stands there, surrounded by every
past there has ever been, eternally
hungry, scraping and digging in a search for roots, even if he has to dig for
them in the most distant antiquities. The enormous historical need of
dissatisfied modern culture, the accumulation of countless other cultures, the
consuming desire for knowledge – what does this all point to, if not to the
loss of myth, the loss of a mythical home, a mythical, maternal womb?
(Nietzsche, 1999, p.109)
Tanner’s insistence on the correspondence
between Melville’s narrative of metaphysical orphanhood and Nietzsche’s concept
of cultural orphanhood devised roughly 20 years later is most illuminating, but
there is an aspect of it which is arguably misleading. I assert that the
metaphysical orphanhood in the text specifically pertains to the
socio-historical conditions under which the text was produced. The theoretical
paradigm of cultural materialism when used to analyse literary texts asserts
that “culture does not (cannot) transcend the material forces and relations of
production. Culture is not simply a reflection of the economic and political
system, but nor can it be independent of it.” (Dollimore and Sinfield, 2003,
p.viii) We can argue that the concept of orphanhood in Melville’s novel is only
universal in an abstract and removed sense, so man is not universally an
ontological orphan but more specifically, American man is an ontological
orphan. This leads to a consideration of the anxiety of American Identity in
the 1850s, a point at which America can still be identified as a ‘new’
nation. The declaration of Independence
in 1776 from the Colonial master necessitated symbolic acts of cultural
fratricide from which Americans could define themselves and the character of
this new nation could be distilled. The function of mythology within a culture can be
conceived of as that of a schematic structure that works to tangibly define
‘national character’, to provide a symbolic framework through which ideas and
values are transmitted. To establish a structure of meaning from this framework
that all subsequent works participate in. Nietzsche defines ‘myth’ as “the
contracted image of the world” as an “abbreviation of appearances” (Nietzsche,
1999, p.108) Myth functions within a culture to form a basis of communally held
ideas and images that serves both to structure the historical experience of a
nation and to provide a structure for understanding and interpreting ongoing
experience. Thus a vast array of multifarious historical experiences are given
shape and order in the form of a mythological framework of symbols that
constitute this “contracted image of the world”.
The
chapter of Moby Dick entitled ‘The
Gilder’ contains an implicit refutation of Tanner’s claim that Ishmael’s
orphanhood represents Nietzsche’s expression of the condition of man abstracted
and deracinated from the “mythical home”. Through analogy, Melville
continuously aligns the experience of the whaler with the experience of those
first explorers of the Frontier;
and the distant ship revealing only the tops of her
masts, seems struggling forward, not through high rolling waves, but through
the tall grass of a rolling prairie: as when the western emigrants’ horses only
show their erected ears, while their hidden bodies widely wade through the
amazing verdure.
(Melville, 2008, p.436)
Within the symbolic framework of Frontier
mythology that this chapter participates with, this analogy has the same
function as an epic simile within the tradition of Homeric epics. The allusion
to a popular mythical frame of reference elevates and heightens the status of
the whaling ship, further aligning the symbolic relation of the sea and the
unexplored wilderness of the Frontier, and of whaling and the pioneers. Within
the micro-structure of this chapter this allusion serves to establish the
symbolic alignment of whaling and the Frontier, which manifests as a conceptual
bridge that allows Melville to attribute further metaphorical dimensions to the
whaling profession. The narrative is generated through a metaphorical structure
of symbols, Melville relates two aspects of American experience, the historical
experience of the Frontier and the contemporaneous experience of the whaling
industry, to the pursuit of unravelling the mystery of human existence. This is
achieved in the form of a stylised progression of Ishmael’s thoughts in which
seemingly fragmentary and disparate components are sequentially brought
together. With the correspondence between pioneers and whalers established,
Ishmael’s thought pattern takes metaphorical flight which manifests as a poetic
and philosophical evocation of the cyclical nature of human existence; “Where
lies the final harbour, whence we unmoor no more? […] 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.” (Melville, 2008, p.437) We
can argue that the form of this chapter is one of philosophical exposition in
which heterogeneous and fragmentary experiences of reality are related within a
symbolic structure. Imagery of sea and frontier are already aligned through a
literary device resembling the epic simile, Ishmael then describes his state of
a “most mystic mood; so that fact and fancy, half-way meeting, interpenetrate,
and form one seamless whole.” (Melville, 2008, p.437) This sentence can be
conceived of almost as a meta-textual commentary on the form of the chapter as
the “seamless whole” is the metaphorical interrelation of whaling and the
pioneers. The two components of American experience are aligned through
imagery, and then “interpenetrate” to resemble a “whole” in which both are
metaphorically related to the epistemological quest. The logic of this metaphor
being that both acts of seeking, those of the pioneers and the whalers, are
pursuing some “final harbour” (Melville, 2008, p.437). The pioneers were
interpreting a physical wilderness, the whalers interpreting a metaphysical
wilderness, both are confronted with “the impossibility of finding a conclusive
solution to the riddle of the universe.” (Gilmore, 1977, p.6) Pioneers and whalers “interpenetrate” through
imagery to constitute a “seamless whole” in which ontological orphanood is to
be understood as directly corresponding to the cultural history of America in
as much as it is being presented as the historical condition of the development
of American culture.
When
Nietzsche asks his reader to “think of a culture which has no secure and sacred
place of origin” (Nietzsche, 1999, p.109), we can examine America’s cultural
identity in the mid-nineteenth century. The ‘New World’ did not have a
tradition Epic poetry as the basis of its cultural identity, Slotkin asserts
that “The mythology of a nation is the intelligible mask of that enigma called
the “national character”. Through myths the psychology and world view of our
cultural ancestors are transmitted to modern descendants” (Slotkin, 2000, p.3) Thus
myth functions to provide a structure for interpreting both historical and
contemporaneous experience, if we accept Nietzsche’s view that a culture
without a “secure and sacred place of origin” necessarily produces “mythless
man” or ontological orphans then this materialises as a seemingly viable
interpretation of the presence of metaphysical orphanhood in Melville’s novel. But
this view would negate the importance of mythological framework of the Frontier
to an analysis of Melville’s narrative form. Nietzsche argues that “The images
of myth must be the unnoticed but omnipresent, daemonic guardians under whose
tutelage the young souls grow up and by whose signs the grown man interprets
his life and his struggles” (Nietzsche, 1999, p.108) This accords with
Slotkin’s view that the symbols of Americanism propagated by popular Frontier
mythology, the hunter and pioneer casting anew upon a vast wilderness, became
“the structuring metaphor for American experience” (slotkin, 2000, p.5). Melville
places the symbolic components of his narrative, the whaler and the sea, within
this mythological imagery as a means to provide an interpretative framework
this is demonstrated by the use of analogy in the chapter entitled ‘The Lamp’;
“He [the whaleman] goes and hunts for his oil, so as to be sure of its
freshness and genuineness, even as the traveller on the prairies hunts up his
own supper game.” (Melville, 2008, p.381) This analogy builds upon the symbolic
correspondence between the sea and the wildness of the Frontier which is
delineated in the previous chapter, ‘The Try-Works’, “The sun hides not the
ocean, which is the dark side of this earth, and which is two thirds of this
earth” (Melville, 2008, p.380) The sea as the ‘dark side of the earth’ in
representing the natural world in its primal state has a twofold symbolic
function; it serves to relate the pursuit of whales through the darkness of the
sea to the pursuit of knowledge and ‘truth’ through the darkness of nature’s
mystery, and it relates both the literal pursuit of whales and the figurative
pursuit of knowledge to the imagery of American experience within the framework
of Frontier mythology.
Melville
adapts the symbolic structures of his primary source of indigenous myth, the
hunter’s quest, to generate the metaphysical and epistemological dimensions of
his own metaphorical narrative. Therefore these popular American mythical
archetypes are re-arranged and expanded in order to question man’s relation to
nature. D.H. Lawrence elliptically conveys this dimension of the narrative as
“The sheer naked slidings of the elements. And the human soul experiencing it
all.” (Lawrence, 1923) If we reduce the novel’s structure to essential
metaphysical components, the internal logic of the metaphorical narrative
posits that the white whale is nature and that Ahab and Ishmael are man. Man’s
relation to nature changes dramatically from the historical experience of the
Frontier to Melville’s contemporary setting but man is still seeking answers in
nature, the hunter’s quest has become epistemological. By framing the
epistemological quest within the Frontier mythical archetype it can be inferred
that Melville is specifically focalising white, urbanised, industrialised
American man. Man is no longer striving to cast a nation upon a wilderness,
that nation has already been cast, and critically, an industrial and
technological revolution of mechanisation has occurred, casting the relation of
man to nature in new light. The framing of man’s epistemological quest within
an industrialised society within the mythical archetype of the Frontier
illuminates the impact of mechanisation and industrialisation upon man’s
understanding of his place in relation to nature. One of the more explicit
references to industrialisation occurs in the ‘A Bower in the Arsacides’
chapter in which Ishmael tries to comprehend the whale’s totality through
empirical means, measuring the skeleton of the whale as a means to understand its
mystery, and admits failure. Ishmael endeavours to “set him [the whale] before
you in his ultimatum; that is to say, in his unconditional skeleton.”
(Melville, 2008, p.400) In metaphorical terms he pursues nature right to its
most primal incarnation, represented symbolically as Ishmael physically
standing inside the deified whale skeleton temple and reinforced through the
florid use of naturalistic imagery. But a tension emerges when natural imagery
is sequenced alongside mechanical imagery, the contrasting imagery first
established as “The wood was green as mosses of the Icy Glen […] the
industrious earth beneath was a weaver’s loom” (Melville, 2008, p.401) After
the contrasting sets of images are established the mechanical begins to
obstruct the natural; “and only when we escape it shall we hear the thousand
voices that speak through it. For even so it is in all material factories. The
spoken words that are inaudible amongst the flying spindles.” (Melville, 2008,
p.402) Within the internal logic of the metaphor, the noisy mechanical
obstruction results in understanding of the absolute reality of nature eluding
man, “Ah, mortal! then, be heedful; for so, in all this din of the great
world’s loom, thy subtlest thinkings may be overheard afar.” (Melville, 2008,
p.402) and the epistemological quest is obstructed. Within the metaphorical
narrative the hunter of the Frontier, the whaler, and the man who seeks to
understand his origin and purpose are symbolically aligned, this implicates a
broader symbolic alignment in which all human endeavours are aligned, the chasm
between the act of seeking and the act of killing dissipates, “For we are all
killers, on land and on sea; Bonapartes and sharks included.” (Melville, 2008,
p.125)
Ishmael’s
acceptance of the failure to comprehend nature and the absolute in totality, “I
promise nothing complete; because any human thing supposed to be complete, must
for that very reason infallibly be faulty.” (Melville, 2008, p.117) indicates
an acceptance of his own ontological orphanhood. He dwells in mystery, accepts
it and perseveres as the sole survivor of the Pequod, he endures and survives
the ultimate conflict with the incomprehensible void, whilst Ahab is defeated
by the conflict and perishes. Above all, Ishmael displays great courage in his
acceptance, a courage he administers as a sincere compliment to Hawthorne in a
letter to him; “By visable truth, we mean the apprehension of the absolute
condition of present things as they strike the eye of the man who fears them
not, though they do their worst to him.” (Melville, 2008, p.510) The whale
“serves a dual role as an object of both physical and metaphysical capture”
(Belknap, 2004, p.135) for both Ishmael and Ahab and its dual presence conditions
their status as ontological orphans, in which Ahab’s refusal of anything
resembling acceptance conditions the dimensions of his own tragedy and demise. He
observes the immaterial absolute condition of reality that lies beneath the
material reality of appearances, “All visible objects, man, are but pasteboard
masks.” but believes the truth to be obtained through a destruction of
surface-level appearances, “But in each event – in the living act, the
undoubted deed – there, some unknown but still reasoning thing puts forth the
moulding of its features from behind the unreasoning mask. If man will strike,
strike through the mask! To me, the white whale is that wall […] I see in him
outrageous strength with an inscrutable malice sinewing in it. The inscrutable
thing is chiefly what I hate” (Melville, 2008, p.145) Ahab, conditioned by the
suffering of ontological orphanhood, seeks to destroy the “inscrutable” nature
of existence, the forces beyond him. Thus, dismemberment of Ahab’s leg is
metaphorical dismemberment of the illusion of control. We as humans, unlike our
fellow inhabitants of Earth, are endowed to experience this planet with
sentience, this conditions us all as ontological orphans. Sentience presumes
control, which is an illusion constantly embattled in conflict with the vast
chaos of nature and a universe which cannot bequeath to us the origin and
secret of our paternity as a species. Such a concept has been poetically evoked
by Kurt Vonnegut in his novel Cat’s
Cradle; "Tiger
got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder, 'Why, why, why?' Tiger
got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand."
(Vonnegut, 2010, p.182) Ahab seeks to
obtain truth in the act of destruction, for him the physical destruction of the
whale produces the metaphysical destruction of illusory appearances. Much of this characterisation of Ahab is not
generated through the Shakespearean rhythms and cadences of his speech but
indirectly through the prosaic narration of Ishmael; “where Ahab, though everywhere
else foiled in his pursuit, firmly counted upon giving battle to Moby-Dick, in
the sea he was most known to frequent; and at a season when he might most
reasonably be presumed to be haunting it.” (Meville, 2008, p.341) Here we see
the conflict of the disparity between human endeavour and the vast mystery of
nature, the futility of human endeavour is through
the constituents of cognation (thought, reason, language) amounting to merely
hopeful, vague, intangible approximates. In this guise our means to interpret
the world are seen as ultimately meaningless, in the face of great unknowable
nature we have only empty platitudes. “when he might most reasonably be
presumed”, the futility of this statement is conveyed through the leaden,
ponderous syntax, “might most reasonably” amounts to nothing. This enacts the
technical mechanics that produce Melville’s metaphorical narrative structure,
demonstrating an insurmountable void between language, or our ability to
cognate and interpret objects of reality and ‘truth’. Ahab’s firm countenance
presupposes a tangible link between thing and expression of thing that fails to
hold up.
Melville
expands and re-appropriates the symbolic structures of American mythical
archetypes to generate his metaphorical narrative of an epistemological quest. In
this regard we can consider it to be a generically transformative epic, Melville
expands the hunter’s quest to focalise his contemporary setting and nation to
provide a way to structure experience and provide an Epic for America. Within
the narrative whaling and the act of eternally seeking knowledge become “truly
New World models of heroic behaviour” (McWiliams, 1989, p.7) All mortal and
earthly resources are exhumed and yet the mystery of nature and ontological
paternity abides, “Now small fowls flew screaming over the yet yawning gulf; a
sullen white surf beat against its steep sides; then all collapsed, and the
great shroud of the sea rolled on as it rolled five thousand years ago.”
(Melville, 2008, p.508) Man is lost in “unshored harborless immensities”
(Melville, 2008, p.116) as the eternal processes of nature and mystery remain
and abide, “One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the
earth abideth forever.” (Ecclesiastes 1:4) Man remains an ontological orphan “that
in her retracing search after her missing children, only found another orphan.”
(Melville, 2008, p.509) The novels central wisdom is imbued in its denouement “By
ending Moby-Dick with the word
“orphan,” Melville reemphasizes the impossibility of finding a conclusive
solution to the riddle of universe.” (Gilmore, 1977, p.6) We can say the
epistemological quest has led to the ‘truth’ that nature’s mystery is eternal
and human life is transient. The quest resolves itself in epistemological
indeterminacy, the determinate cannot be wrought from the indeterminate.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Auden,
W.H. ‘The Romantic Use of Symbols’ in Michael T. Gilmore (ed.) (1977) Twentieth Century Interpretations of
Moby-Dick: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Belknap,
R. (2004) The List: The Uses and
Pleasures of Cataloguing. New Haven: Yale University Press
Dollimore,
J. and Sinfield, A. ‘Foreword to the first edition Cultural Materialism in Jonathn Dollimore, Alan Sinfield (ed.)
(2003) Political Shakespeare: Essays in
Cultural Materialism. Manchester: Manchester University Press
Ecclesiastes
in Robert Carroll, Stephen Prickett (ed.) (2008) The Bible: Authorized King James Version. Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Fiedler,
L. (1960) Love and Death in the American
Novel. New York: Criterion Books
Gilmore,
M. ‘Introduction’ in Michael T. Gilmore (ed.) (1977) Twentieth Century Interpretations of Moby-Dick: A Collection of
Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc
Lawrence,
D.H. (1923) Studies in Classic American
Literature
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/LAWRENCE/dhlch11.htm
Martin,
Richard P. ‘Epic as Genre’ in John Miles Foley (ed.) (2006) A Companion to Ancient Epic. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing
McWilliams,
John P. Jr. (1989) The American Epic:
Transforming a Genre, 1770-1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Melville,
H. (1850) ‘Hawthorne and His Mosses’ in The
Literary World, August 17 and 24, 1850 http://www.eldritchpress.org/nh/hahm.html
Melville,
H. (2008) Moby Dick. Boston: Harvard
University Press
Nietzsche,
F. (1999) The Birth of Tragedy: And Other
Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Reising,
R. (1986) The Unusable Past: Theory and
the Study of American Literature. New York: Methuen, Inc.
Reynolds,
D. (1988) Beneath the American
Renaissance: The Subversive Imagination in the age of Emerson and Melville. Boston:
Harvard University Press
Slotkin,
R. (2000) Regeneration through Violence:
The Mythology of the American Frontier. 1600-1860. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press
Tanner,
T. (2000) The American Mystery. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Vonnegut,
K. (2010) Cat’s Cradle: A Novel. New
York: Dial Press
Whalen-Bridge,
J. (1998) Political Fiction and the
American Self. Champaign: University of Illinois Press