Deterritorializing Preface

Posted on by
4

In this article, Steve Mentz mentions seven words and how they can overall re-shape our ways of thinking, viewing politics, and intellect. Nothing is stable, not even the land we are upon. It’s constantly changing- such as the environment itself, nature, our values and beliefs, even the cities we live in are constantly changing, so why shouldn’t we? This is why it’s important for us to allow our state of thinking to flow like the currents, as Mentz put it. If our thinking never changes we are allowing ourselves to stay close-minded. We need to have a shift in our thinking. Mentz says “Our metaphors must float on water rather than resting on ground. In an aqueous environment, nothing stays on the surface forever” (Mentz xvi). Mentz here makes a great point. The language we use should be evolving just as we are. By staying on the surface and resting on the ground, it makes it static and unchangeable. There is no fluidity. But if the language we use floats, it is able to adapt. And adaptability is key here. People were able to adapt on land, and we are still adapting to the changes in our world and society. And since the world and the people are changing, our language can too. 

Another thing that I found interesting was word 3: flow. We view our achievements and our progress as one straight path. Because that’s how we’re told to view our lives. According to Mentz, it’s “linear”. For example, we get told to go to school, graduate, and get a job. That is linear progress. It’s like we have a set path for us and we’re told to follow it in order to succeed. However, Mentz throws out the old and brings in the new. By looking at our lives like we do the ocean, it’ll bring in new opportunities. The ocean is at a constant state of flow, and by applying this to our lives, it makes our path not so linear and instead makes it so that it’s all over the place. It makes it “messier, more confusing, and less familiar” (xvi).  This allows us to be free and do as we please with our lives, but still achieve things. Mentz encourages us to open our minds and to look at our world differently. 

While I do agree with Mentz, I understand not wanting to have a “flow” in your life. Being stable is what makes us comfortable. Knowing we have stability in our lives and the world is what helps us sleep at night. The ocean is full of secrets and that could drive away our ability to think deeper. We are comfortable with what we have on land because it’s what we could see with the eye. Anything we can’t see makes us uneasy. And that’s where our comfortability with land comes in. Even though we view land as such a stable place, it’s constantly changing. Which is why it’s important to view things differently. It’s all about being uncomfortable and questioning things. The more curious we are, the more we’ll go out and learn. And this can go back to Emerson as well. Going out in nature will heal you and allow you to be more open-minded. So, allow yourself to go out and make a connection with the sea and land. 

Poetics of Planetary Water

Posted on by
1

Reading Mentz’s essay on The Blue Humanities, while more extensive than the Gillis article from the week before, really helped but into perspective how vast the train of thought towards the topic can be. The gears only turned in my head after reading this specific chunk, “The reason to study the water today, as I would phrase the point now, is that we are going to be seeing more of it, closer up, in the future. Rising sea levels and high-intensity rainstorms are making our environment wetter.” Water is an ever-changing substance, and even thanks to the long lasting impacts of global warming, water is what fuels life, yet is something that can also destroy it. Water is everywhere, and just as Mentz put it, is close to us in many ways, shapes, and forms. Whether or not we choose to acknowledge what water can do for us is up to the individual, but blue humanities, as it turns out, is starting to shape the way I think about tackling Moby Dick. Sure, I can simply think about water as a simple substance that I drink or as a recreational thing to swim in or exist by, but why is the human relationship towards it so important? What drives human nature to want to “bond” with a liquid of life? Honestly, it’s human nature to want to discover the unknown. People fear what they do not understand, and even though we’ve discovered many things about the land, the sea, and the sky, I do believe the sea is still the scariest there is. It is lots of uncharted territory, but needing to strive towards the knowledge of how to approach it safely, I’m certain humans aren’t ever going to stop. It’s ego, it’s hubris, it’s passion, all in all, tackling the vast blue of the ocean through the lens of humanities rather than science seems a little more humbling. Our environments change because of water, and while science gives us the numbers, arts and words allow for a sort of empathy that’s required to even spare the blink of an eye.

An American Prophecy

Posted on by
2

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.

Strife is Justice

Posted on by
3

When we think about nature, we often imagine balance, ecosystems in harmony, waves rising and falling with rhythm, the shore holding steady against the sea. But Steve Mentz reminds us that this vision of stability doesn’t hold up when we actually pay attention to a massive part of nature, the ocean. In A Poetics of Planetary Water, he borrows Adam Nicolson’s phrase, “strife is justice,” to describe how ecological systems thrive through tension, conflict, and constant change (Mentz, Poetics of Planetary Water, p. 151). The ocean teaches us that instability, not balance, is the true condition of life, and that lesson changes how we think about both ecology and ourselves.

We see this truth played out every day on the shoreline. The waves erase footprints as fast as they are made. Hurricanes reshape beaches in a matter of hours. The “justice” of the beach isn’t a peaceful balance, but an endless battle between land and water, constantly moving and never settled. As Mentz explains, Nicolson’s tide pools reveal a Heraclitean vision of the world: “Nothing is stable, and yet everything coheres” (Mentz, Poetics of Planetary Water, p. 151). In other words, order doesn’t emerge despite strife; it appears through it.

This idea challenges the comforting “green” ecological ideal of sustainability, where everything is in harmony. Instead, the ocean tells a harsher but more honest story. Systems survive by adapting to disruption. Coherence comes only in temporary, fragile forms, like sandbars that will one day be washed away.

That vision can be unsettling, but it’s also liberating. If strife is justice, then change isn’t failure; it’s the rule of life. The ocean doesn’t offer us peace or permanence. It offers us dynamism. To live with water is to accept instability as our ground, or better yet, our current. And maybe the most human thing we can do is learn how to float.

Flow > Fields: Fluid Mindset of the Ocean

Posted on by
1

When I read Steve Mentz’s Ocean, the line that stuck with me the most was: “We need flow to know Ocean.” (xvi) That short sentence on page 2, to me, captures the whole spirit of the blue humanities. Flow isn’t just about water moving; it’s about how we think, how we connect, and how we let go of the old land-based metaphors that have shaped cultures for so long.

Mentz challenges us to stop thinking of “fields,” which sound fixed, solid, and agricultural, and instead to think in “currents,” which are always in motion. As we should be. That shift feels important because the ocean itself is never still. Knowledge about the ocean, and probably knowledge in general, cannot stay locked into stable and fixed categories. It has to move, to bend, to circulate around us. Flow becomes not only a method but also a mindset.

What I found powerful about this idea is that it kind of resists the comfort of any type of certainty. Fields produce neat harvests on a sort of schedule, whereas flows of the ocean can carry you into the unknown. Flow makes history “messier, more confusing, and less familiar” (Mentz xvi), and that’s a good thing. It reminds me that learning, like the sea, isn’t about arriving at a final, solid truth but more about engaging with change, turbulence, and unpredictability. That’s when we learn.

Thinking this way also changes how I picture the climate crisis. Rising seas aren’t just a threat but also a reminder of interconnection. Flow shows us that humans aren’t separate from the ocean but are caught up in its movements. To “know Ocean” is to accept that we live in fluidity, that stability is more of an illusion, and that survival might mean learning to move with the currents instead of trying to anchor ourselves against them.

Ment’s simple phrase has made me rethink how I will approach literature, history, and even my own writing. Maybe instead of looking for the solid ground in every text, I should be searching for the flow, the connections, the shifts, the messy but vital movements that carry meaning forward.

Extra Credit – Steve Mentz Questions

Posted on by
1
  1. What first drew you to the ocean as a central focus, and how did that interest evolve into what is now the “blue humanities”?
  2. How do you think studying the ocean through literature can help us think differently about challenges such as climate change today?
  3. Are there any particular books or authors that you think students should read if they want to get a better sense of how literature connects to the ocean?
  4. What advice would you give to students who want to bring environmental or ocean-focused perspectives into their own writing?
  5. When you first started writing about the blue humanities, did you expect it to grow into the field it is now?

Extra Credit:Steve Mentz Questions

Posted on by
1

1.) What importance does Blue Humanities hold for you? How would you say this topic works along existing fields of marine science?
2.) Despite a primary focus on the ocean, are there any other bodies of water that you think humans can explore just as in depth?
3.) Why does poetry offer such a lens into planetary waters in comparison to essays or other academic leaning books?
4.) Are there any other notable authors you look towards when speaking about or studying Blue Humanities besides Melville or Gillis?
5.) If you could chose one word to describe human relationship with the ocean, what would you pick and why?

Questions for Steve Mentz

Posted on by
1
  1. Do you believe that technology in modern days plays a huge role in helping humanity connect to the ocean a bit more visually?
  2. Do you think poetry could change a person’s perspective about the ocean? Even if they think about it negatively?
  3. What is the one poem you would like to recommend to students if they want to learn more about the vast ocean?
  4. What are your thoughts about the deep sea and the mysteriousness that lies beneath it?
  5. What would be the one advice you would give to students as they start to read Moby Dick for the next couple of weeks?

Steve Mentz’s article is truly noteworthy. 

Posted on by
4

After reading Mentz’s article, it feels like my eyes have opened up a little bit more because of the details that I completely agree with. In the article, he quoted: “For literary writers and scholars, the ocean seems especially attractive because of its metaphorical vastness. The great waters represent a principle of narrative fecundity that Salman Rushdie has described as the “sea of stories.” (140). This quote is so interesting to me because, for a long time, I have been curious about the idea of: is there more to the ocean than just water? We all know that the ocean is vast. We all know it has tons of stories of people who are worth mentioning. This is when curiosity strikes me. I want to know more about the deep-sea creatures. Most people would think that such creatures would never exist, but the deep dark sea contains everything, and when I say everything, I mean creatures that our eyes could not even believe in. Mentz made such great points in this quote because, as scholars, we allow our curiosity to win over us. We study by gaining knowledge. We study by thinking about the possibilities of everything that could possibly happen at any moment. We create thoughts that are beyond the human imagination. We are attracted to the ocean not only because it has water, but because it creates images that allow us to visualize those stories in our heads. This is why Moby Dick plays a huge part in all of the articles we have read so far. The novel allows us to explore the mysteriousness that the sea offers to us. As scholars, we are not meant to know everything about the sea. We are meant to study it, to visualize it, and know the dangers behind it. When Mentz refers to ‘sea of stories’, I believe he is referring to the stories of the people who sail to the sea in the novel. There has to be people who challenge their lives in order to go out into the deep sea. Even though there are some points that I believe are spectacular and worth mentioning, this article still confuses me because it talks about the sea with poetics alongside other poets. Does this mean the ocean is the body of a poem? And people just sort of utilize it as a way to create more poems? I would love to learn more about how the ocean is associated with poetry because it definitely plays a huge role in explaining the vastness of the ocean.

Moby-Dick

Posted on by
1

Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick is more than just a story about a whale-it’s a meditation on obsession, fate and the vastness of vastness of nature. The narrator, Ishmael, takes readers on a perilous voyage aboard the Pequod, where Captain Ahab’s relentless pursuit of the white whale consumes the crew. Through detailed descriptions of the sea, whaling life, and philosophical reflections, Melville blends adventure with deep symbolism. The white whale itself becomes a powerful emblem of mystery, resistance, and the unknown forces beyond human control. Reading Moby-Dick is both a thrilling narrative and a challenge to reflect on humanity’s place in the universe.

Imagine a dark ocean horizon where the Pequod sails forward under stormy skies, its sails strained against the wind. Captain Ahab stands on deck, gripping his whalebone leg and pointing his harpoon toward the turbulent waves. Below, the crew works tirelessly, their faces tense, reflecting both fear and loyalty. Suddenly, the massive white from of Moby Dick breaches the surface, scattering water like shattered glass. This dramatic clash of man and nature captures the epic struggle that defines the heart of the novel.