Natalie Roberts

Walter E. Bezanson- Work of Art:

In the first section the author discusses the “subject matter” in a “gross sense”. Which is considered, in our terms, the not-so-deep description of what Moby-Dick is about. He defines the Natural World (seas, oceans, animals of the sea, and weather), Historical World (Man as a land animal and who is constantly fighting nature to survive as well as important time periods), Artifacts (The Whale ship, Nautical equipment, Navigation equipment, Space of the ship, and processing equipment), Techniques (cytology chapters and explanation of the workings of the Artifacts), Social Organization (Owners, captain, mates, harpooners, and everyone else) and Object of the Voyage (killing whales). However, he sees this as a simple explanation of a complex and masterful piece of literature (defined as art).

He separates the two Ishmaels into the present (writing the book) and the past (being written about) to explain the structure of the story. Explaining the difference between the two he also acknowledges that you cannot completely separate the two. The distinction is made so that the reader is able to read the story from an outside point of view while Ishmael still being apart of that story “The story is his”. However, he also brings up the question, “But this [narrator Ishmael] is only Melville under another name, is he not?” which he also considers another aspect lending itself to the idea of Moby-Dick as an intricate piece of art.

While discussing the separate Ishmaels he is able to explain how each see the events, facts and images as symbols and how he (the young sailor Ishmael) and Captain Ahab both see similar things. Though Mr. Bezanson argues the Ahab often chooses to ignore the symbols and creates his own for his one-way reading and infereance of that symbol. By doing this Ahab’s struggle is more so tragic then if he had not seen the warnings.

After this he discusses the dream aspects, mechanical structure, as well as how there is a transition from The Scarlet Letter to Moby-Dick, calling it a shift from “world-as-machine” to “world-as-organism”. In the older there was reason and law but with the newer allowed for growth and development. Ishmael and the symbols are constantly moving throughout the book and adding as well as taking away from each other.

Serena Dusz & Makena Busch
“Ahab and ‘The Larger, Darker, Deeper Part,” by John Wenke

Wenke has written a solid summary of Ahab’s character, but we disagree somewhat with his characterization of Ishmael. He defines the ‘nexus’ between Ishmael as ‘tyro actor and process narrator’ (Wenke 702). We disagree that Ishmael in any capacity resembles an actor throughout the book. He is more of the bias bystander who reports discussions and events from his point of view only. Wenke’s strongest argument concerns Ahab’s mental stability and consequent behavior. “ Within Ahab where two beings vie for sovereignty, the “living principle” is no match for the ‘characterizing mind.’” (Wenke 705). Wenke roughly sketches the idea that Ahab is almost schizophrenic in nature, being both a captain and a madman. While we agree with Wenke’s mental assessment of Ahab we feel like he dives of the deep end concluding his criticism. He associates Ahab to that of a god and attempts to mold Ahab and Ishmael into the same person. He explains that Ahab, “through the ‘unfathered birth’ of his ‘characterizing mind,’ locates himself on an equal plain with the immortals” (Wenke 706). While Ahab is socially reclusive we both don’t agree that he is in fact a god. He separates himself from the rest of the group because he is a lonely madman dwelling on his obsession with Moby-Dick and consequently becoming madder. We both enjoyed Wenke’s insightful theories and ideas about Ahab even when we disagreed.

Alex Graves/Andria Russiff

Harrison Hayford, "Unnecessary Duplicates

Critique of a Critique

Harrison Hayford’s “Unnecessary Duplicates” examined repetition in Herman Melville’s Moby Dick. The essay began by dauntingly listing pages of things repeated in the novel: inns, whales, other ships, captains, and so forth. The essay then presents Hayford’s main thesis, that many of the duplicates and discrepancies prove that Moby Dick was written out of order, that Melville never fully committed to a few of his characters, and finally that these things show Melville’s lack of overall commitment to the novel.

While Alex and Andria both agree that the disorganization and discrepancies perhaps indicate evolution of Bulkington, Peleg, and Queequeg, we completely disagree that this novel was born without Ahab. His charisma, deep, dark character, and goal drive this book.

We also both agree that Hayford raises some really good points about the organization of the novel and Melville’s purposes for repeating things. We also agree that the shore narrative could have been added afterwards and is nearly unnecessary as far as literary merit goes.

As far as the critique itself, it was interesting to read, but also quite tedious and unorganized. It was also amusing to read the words of someone who has probably read Moby Dick a hundred times.

Brad Pearce

The Melville Revival

The American writers who looked to Melville when creating their own novels saw an epic which shrugged convention and pushed American literature to new plateaus. The influence which Moby-Dick had on great literature is apparent through the whole book and increases my respect for Melville. The main difference in perceptions based on time periods is that the authors are discussing an obscure author who they feel should be more famous.

Jennifer Hartwig

Camille Paglia, "Moby-Dick as Sexual Protest"

Paglia focuses her argument on sexual protest, or the dehumanizing of women. The most significant points int eh essay include the way in which Melville describes Moby Dick. He does not want to portray his whale as the female grossness of matter, as he does the squid, but instead wants to admire its vast size. By elevating the masculine principle, Melville is limiting female power. Whenever Melville gives the whale a feminine trait, he immediately cancels it by a masculine afterthought, such as violence or rape. Paglia goes on to talk about male bonding between Queequeg and Ishmael. Paglia argues that masculinity struggles for dominance thorugout the story of Moby-Dick. Women only really exist in Moby Dick through "bawdy banter." I have a hard time believing/agreeing with Paglia's Argument. It seems that it is hard to dehumanize women when they don't exist in a particular story.