There’s a lot in Delbanco’s introduction that I wanted to highlight, but I’ll try to limit myself starting with this simple quote: “He [Ahab] is on a mission, Ishmael is on a cruise” (xx). It’s very brief but it does a lot to frame one of the main conflicts of the novel. Considering our talks about language in relation to the blue humanities, the words “mission” and “cruise” evoke the different nature of their goals here. Ahab is set on a clear path with the definitive goal of hunting Moby Dick, whereas Ishmael is willing to go with the flow and really goes on the Pequod just to see more of the world and learn about the whaling industry. Delbanco makes the point that this conflict never becomes a direct battle in the novel and their ideals aren’t directly pitted against each other because “Melville himself incorporates both, and he feels their claims with equal fervor” (xix). This I feel is very important to include because rather than only give us Ishmael’s perspective and preach about one over the other, Melville shows that there is merit to each side; no one side is completely right or wrong.

I’m a bit hesitant to view Moby Dick as a prophecy of a doomed American experiment because of the implications it has for our country’s past, present, and future, but time and time again we see the consequences of unbridgeable fissures between the people of our nation (xx). It only continues to get worse when people adopt the “us against them” mentality, and the view that “the other” is always at fault. “Like Ahab, every man feels maimed and hopes to find relief by assigning blame” (xxii). This line of thinking is poisonous, contagious even, and all it does is further increase the gap between differing ideals. Leaning too far on either side leads to more tension and ultimately catastrophe. I don’t even really know what I’m trying to say anymore, but I’m hoping I can find more of the optimism the chronicle of the Pequod has to offer.