Moby Dick: A Novel?

Today in class we talked about how we're supposed to classify "Moby Dick." For me, I felt myself immediately feel like saying that the book was a novel. It doesn't matter whether it had encyclopedic input, it didn't matter if it appeared to be trying to create a mythology, it was a novel. It had always been a novel, it was written to be a novel and written to be read as a novel.

Now, obviously, this reaction doesn't do a very good job of actually giving a clear definition of what a novel is and why Moby Dick "should" be classified as one. I typed in "novel" at google and got the definition "a fictitious prose narrative of book length, typically representing character and action with some degree of realism." Well, Moby Dick is definitely book length. And, though based on semi real events, it's still been fictionalized. It also has a degree of realism, so the answer is simple, right? It's obviously a novel. 

If only things were that simple. We haven't gotten so far into the book that the real heavy descriptions on whaling and the ship that sound encyclopedic in nature and feel more like a how-to manual rather than a story driven by plot. Perhaps the attitude toward the book will change when it isn't conforming to what we as students and instructors understand a novel to be. Once Ishmael isn't making hilarious commentary on everything and instead is trying to teach the audience about a practice that was outlawed years ago we might change our minds on whether or not this can be classified as an entertaining read. 

But that makes me wonder whether we can even really classify what a novel is in the first place. Obviously the definition has changed over the centuries. As mentioned in class, historians usually pinpoint the beginning of the novel in the 18th century, while others argue that novels are obviously found way before than. We are arbitrarily trying to confine the works of imagination and the understanding of individuals who have written about whatever tickles their fancy. The definition I cited above tries to limit novels to what has "some degree of realism" so does that not include fantasy novels and sci fi novels? Perhaps we have gone down the wrong path with constantly trying to categorize everything. Literature comes in as many shapes as human beings. No two think or say exactly the same thing, which when you think about it is incredible! There are 26 letters in the alphabet and no two books (besides reprints, come on guys) that are exactly the same. Maybe we should stop trying to force our literature into arbitrary categories and instead enjoy the richness for what it is -- the ideas and images of an individual as unique and different as ourselves.  

Then again. Categorizing things makes it a lot easier to study. . .#firstworldproblems ;) 

We'll Probably Be Considered a Bunch of Idiots Too

I was the first one in the classroom today, and while pretending to be very focused on my  notebook in front of me, had the opportunity to hear an interesting conversation regarding Moby Dick. If the two contributors to this conversation read my post, I hope you won't be offended that I quote you. Your comments really made me think and were the inspiration for this post.

One classmate made the comment that she was thoroughly enjoying Melville's trashing of Christians in the book, and that they thought the people were so stupid to not see how incredibly hypocritical, arrogant, and self-serving they are.

Another classmate replied, "Yes, but it is always easy to say from our perspective, 150 years later, that they were a bunch of idiots. We saw how their ideas played out. I wonder what people will think of our ideas 150 years from now. We'll probably be considered a bunch of idiots too."

I thought that these were both interesting ideas. On the one hand, someone is saying, "How could they not see the error of their ways?" She acknowledged that while these people were "stupid" they were also surely clever enough to see their awful state. On the other hand, another person is saying, "And like them, are we not seeing the error of our own today?" Are we also clever enough to see our own awful state, but too "stupid" to do anything about it? Are we being blinded by pride?

A first edition of Moby Dick--being handled with gloves no less!

We learned today that Moby Dick was published in 1851 when Herman Melville was 32 years old. It was published first in England where it was not well-received, and consequently was not well-received in the United States. In fact, Moby Dick did not become big until during and after World War I.

Here is an initial review of Moby Dick from the London Morning Advertiser, October 24, 1851:

"This is an ill-compounded mixture of romance and matter-of-fact. The idea of a connected and collected story has obviously visited and abandoned its writer again and again in the course of composition. The style of his tale is in places disfigured by mad (rather than bad) English; and its catastrophe is hastily, weakly, and obscurely managed...."

Here is another from the London Athenaeum from October 25, 1851:

"The result is, at all events, a most provoking book, -- neither so utterly extravagant as to be entirely comfortable, nor so instructively complete as to take place among documents on the subject of the Great Fish, his capabilities, his home and his capture. Our author must be henceforth numbered in the company of the incorrigibles who occasionally tantalize us with indications of genius, while they constantly summon us to endure monstrosities, carelessnesses, and other such harassing manifestations of bad taste as daring or disordered ingenuity can devise....We have little more to say in reprobation or in recommendation of this absurd book.... Mr. Melville has to thank himself only if his horrors and his heroics are flung aside by the general reader, as so much trash belonging to the worst school of Bedlam literature -- since he seems not so much unable to learn as disdainful of learning the craft of an artist."

Had society changed so much from 1851 to 1914? Maybe...but it seems more likely that 3 generations were far enough removed from the criticisms that Melville heaped upon the Christians around him, that they were less likely to feel the pains of criticism, and more likely to acknowledge the mistakes of their forefathers. After all, it's always easier to acknowledge the mistakes of someone else than your own.

Or was the book just not people's style anymore? We touched on the Gold Rush that was happening when the book was published. Whaling just wasn't popular.

But this second explanation--Moby Dick just not being interesting during the time of its publication--doesn't sit well with me. For one thing, whaling is not popular today either. In fact, I had to look up on Google what a harpoon is. I'm not reading it for the whaling story, but more for the substance that lies below the surface of the story: the religious tensions and the microscopic views of society. And it seems to me that this is what the critics were commenting on as well: they didn't say anything about the book not "keeping up with the times." Rather they called it "mad...hastily, weakly, and obscurely managed...tantaliz[ing] with indications of genius...careless...absurd." It's not that they didn't understand the book or read it just for the plot. No, these critics recognized the subplots and they didn't like them.

If a book like Moby Dick were written today filled with subplots of criticisms of the popular ideas of today, do you think this book would be well-received? Are we more open-minded now than our ancestors were back then? Or would the book be a total flop only to be considered a masterpiece three generations later?

The Christianity Crisis

To start, I love Moby Dick! I really love the tone of Ishmael's voice because not only is it our lens to Melville and the plot but it has a certain energy that is deep yet energetic that I find fascinating.

Let's talk about religion. Does Ishmael really claim Christianity? What does he think of Christianity? How does his relationship with Queequeg influence his view of religion? These are the questions that are constantly scrolling through my thoughts as I finished the first 18 chapters.

Although I'm still working out the answers to these questions, I'm convinced that religion has been turned on its head and is extremely unconventional in the narration. Do you notice that every time we enter a church with Ishmael, we hear him reference it as hell when he walks into the room finding a " black Angel of Doom [...] beating a book in a pulpit." And if you remember, there's even wailing and knashing of teeth in this Angel of Doom's sermon.

Then as we read further, I'm fascinated by Queequeg diving in to save the sailor and Ishmael going nuts trying to get us to see that the "cannibals must help these Christians." Crazy! So everybody convert to cannibalism? I don't think so. Maybe we're looking at the hypocrisy of Christian faith.

When we see who's representing Christianity we see Ishmael, who feels obviously inferior to Queequeg the cannibal and then we see Captains Peleg and Bildad. These are the guys that interest me. They won't let Queequeg on the boat until he has documentation of Christian baptism, right? And they're constantly bickering... is Peleg bipolar? I don't know about you, but I don't think these captains are doing a good job of embodying Christian ideals, especially as they seem to ditch the rule about Christian baptism to fulfill self-interest or, in other words, employ Queequeg because of his sweet skills.

There's a reason we all love Queequeg, make no mistake about it. Christianity is being scrutinized and those who adhere to it are faulty and inconstant. To paraphrase Melville, maybe a sober cannibal really is better than an angry Christian.

Moby Dick--Way Better than I Expected

I read The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne about seven years ago and hated every page of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scarlet_Letter_%28TV_miniseries%29

 It was the driest book I had ever read; so boring and painful that at the end all I wanted to do was throw it away. But I couldn't because I needed it to study for the upcoming test in my high school English class.

I figured that Moby Dick would be the same for me. It's a classic--a very famous classic--but all I'd ever heard about it is that it's boring, hard to get through, and really, just a large waste of paper. Despite a little bit of excitement to read it (really just for bragging rights of finishing this colossal book), I didn't have much hope for enjoying it. I figured my reaction towards it would be the same as The Scarlet Letter: slogging through it, hoping the next page would have a point, get back to the story, be a little less flowery, or even just be the last page so that I could set it aside and never look at it again. Compound this with the fact that Melville dedicated the Moby Dick to Hawthorne, and you can see why my expectations were so very low.

I guessed I'd look like this most of the time while reading Moby Dick.

It's been nothing like that though. From the first page I have been hooked. And I'm not even remotely interested in whaling, or sailing, or the ocean . It's the characters of Ishmael and Queequeg, and Herman Melville's deceptively simple writing style that has pulled me in so much. I'm always left wanting more.


I am especially enjoy the parts with Queequeg. Whenever I see his name in the chapter, I get a little excited feeling in my chest and all I can think is, "This is going to be good."

I particularly loved the story of Queequeg and Ishmael's first meeting in the same bed, particularly Queequeg's initial alarm and then good-natured invitation for Ishmael to join him once the landlord smoothed things over. Queequeg's character is fascinating too what with his pagan rituals, aloof disposition yet friendly personality, and thirst for knowledge and understanding of those around him. He is deeply religious, extraordinarily clever, and very loyal to himself. Queequeg stands up for what he believes, even if he cannot use many words to do so (e.g. picking up, throwing, and then saving the country bumpkin).

However, I wonder too if I would find these parts with Queequeg so interesting if I came from a background more like Queequeg's and less like Ishmael's. Perhaps I would find Ishmael to be the interesting one, and Queequeg the average one. Kind of a deep thought...

Melville has many of these deeper moments interwoven into his simple writing style, and that's another reason why I find myself loving the book. While these deeper moments are what causes the book's plot to move at a famously slow pace,  they are also what makes the book so fascinating and more than just another whaling story. Furthermore, Melville gets these deeper points through to his readers quickly and painlessly, unlike Nathaniel Hawthorne.

This isn't how I imagined the pulpit in the book, but it's a neat picture all the same.

For example, Melville explores not only death, but grieving in the chapter entitled "The Pulpit" which is no more than two pages long. "Oh! ye whose dead lie buried beneath the green grass," he writes, "who standing among flowers can say--here, here lies my beloved; ye know not the desolation that broods in bosoms like these." He gets his point across in a mere paragraph and then expounds on that point for just a little more than a page, all the while staying on task with the book's plot and life explorations. Exploring and staying on task at the same time is hard to do and I commend Melville for it.

Perhaps I am being unfair to Hawthorne. I read his book seven years ago as a junior in high school and it is entirely possible that I was not ready for the deeper symbolism his book contained. If I were to go back and reread it today, perhaps I would enjoy it just as much as I am enjoying Moby Dick.

I don't have plans to reread The Scarlet Letter any time soon though, and so therefore I'll leave it in peace for now, and end with saying that Moby Dick is brilliant and what's more it is enjoyable. There are still several hundred pages to go before I reach the end of the book, so maybe I'll soon discover where its reputation of being boring comes from, but until then I'm going to enjoy Moby Dick and its plot and subplots for as long as I can.

Digital Culture Follow-Up

I am really excited for this class! The conversation we had last Wednesday regarding digital culture was very interesting to me. 

I had a reoccurring thought during the discussion about quantity vs. quality. I may not be able to make this a general application to all students, but when I go into a library for research, I revel in the walls of books that surround me. When I do research online, however, I get easily overwhelmed. I'll be in the middle of reading an article when there's a link off to the side directing me to another article. Then when I go to the new article, there are more links leading me to other similar sites. I get easily distracted and read lots of snippets of literature, but not enough to formulate quality ideas with sufficient support. It's at that point in any online research that I throw in the towel and finish up my studies with web surfing for the quickest delicious recipe that I can later attempt and probably fail at making. 

I'm excited to jumpstart blogging and develop skills that will improve my work.

Introduction!

Hello, everyone!!
My name is Shelly Russon.... but soon to be Shelly Lystrup!

I am getting married next month! October 12th in the SLC temple and to say I am ready and excited is an understatement. My fiancé and I met on January 2nd on my first day teaching at the MTC this year. He was another teacher in my department and quickly became my closest friend and rock of support. We got engaged on June 8th, the day before my birthday. Thankfully, we're reached the downward slope of the engagement and I have become numb to discussions of luncheons, colors, announcements, etc. Make the madness stop! No one tells you how stressful it is to plan a wedding!

Let me share a little non-wedding info about me. I am a born and raised Californian. I am from the bay area, about 20 minutes south of San Francisco on the peninsula. I'm a senior at BYU. Last year I returned home from serving a mission in Dallas, TX (Don't worry - I rooted for BYU this weekend). I come from a pretty vibrant family: I am the second oldest of six. Three of us came from my parents and then my dad remarried and he and my stepmom had three together. The ages range from 27-4 years old. I love going home and having young siblings again. 

Queequeg - Perfectly Content to Make You Uncomfortable

Hey! I'm jumping ahead a little bit. I know not everyone is done with their introductions but I just finished the Moby Dick reading assignment and really want to talk about it.

That would be terrifying

I've heard about Moby Dick throughout my life. I'm pretty sure we all have. But when I started the book I had no idea that it would talk about such complex issues. Specifically in the character of Queequeg. Here is a character that I find infinitely more complex, interesting, and engaging than any of the other characters I've met so far in the book. His very existence brings multiple problems into light that reflect not just the society of the day, but also the society that we live in today. His introduction was vivid and left a clear picture in my mind. Tattooed, large, pagan and a cannibal, he isn't what might be considered the "ideal" bedmate. I loved how Ishmael freaked out at the idea of sharing a bed with anyone, before he even knew that Queequeg was a "savage" or a "cannibal." That so clearly reflects the way people (men in particular) react to such things, even today. I know of several men who would rather sleep on the hard floor than share a bed with another man.

Gotta admit, this would make me uncomfortable too

Queequeg seems to me to be a representation of everything that makes Christians and men uncomfortable. I love it. Ishmael talks about extremely important issues that surrounded the day - and now- about religion and whether or not it's "okay" not to be Christian. He says that he shouldn't judge other people because they are of a different religion. This is amazing, simply because of the time this book was written. But besides religion, Queequeg is just an awkward character. Awkward meaning he pushes the social boundaries that our society has put in place. He cuddles with a strange man, embraces him and calls them married once they've become friends, and also offers Ishmael the opportunity to pray to his god. He's everything that makes men uncomfortable.

I'm deeply invested in this character already. Even though this book was obviously written way before the Internet, I feel like Queequeg could be a metaphor for it. A little awkward, a little unruly, and constantly reminding you (sometimes without trying) that we can't really judge other people. Of course, there is the dark side of the internet, but we'll see if Queequeg embodies that portion as well.