Tag Archives: americanscholar

Final Essay

Posted on by
Reply

Diego Aguirre

Professor Pressman 

ECL 522

16 December 2025

An Ode to the Working Class

The Great American Novel, Moby Dick, offers readers with a plethora of rich subject matter to dive into through its tale that is not so much about hunting a whale. A common reading of the novel is that in treating the Pequod as a nation-state representative of the 1850s United States, Herman Melville criticizes the unjust practices of our capitalist democratic republic. In Moby Dick, Melville employs medieval language to expose the hierarchical systems rooted in our country that have prevented the working class from getting the recognition they deserve; he further uses this language of nobility to flip the narrative as he celebrates the working class that has lifted this country on its back. 

Before discussing how Melville does this, it’s important to look at one of his sources of inspiration: Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “The American Scholar.” In it, Emerson touches on the ramifications of the increased specialization of workers in the United States. He writes “Man is thus metamorphosed into a thing, into many things. The planter, who is Man sent out into the field to gather food, is seldom cheered by any idea of the true dignity of his ministry” (Emerson). This evaluation from Emerson can be applied to most other physical laborers that fuel the nation, such as whalemen. Despite their importance to the growth of the United States, they’re treated as just another group of “Man sent out into the field” and are “seldom cheered.” Recognizing this, Melville writes an entire novel around whaling to make sure that this essential part of our whole is not forgotten. 

Of the many terms ascribed to the novel’s central characters, including the whales, one of the most interesting is their association with the medieval era. In the adjacent chapters, “The Advocate” and “Postscript,” Melville asserts “Whaling is imperial! By old English statutory law, the whale is declared a ‘royal fish’… we whalemen supply your kings and queens with coronation stuff!” (121, 123). In suggesting that both whaling and whales themselves are “imperial” and “royal”, Melville is prompting us to reconsider how we view them, especially since they are sourcing the materials used in coronations for those at the top. He continues with this language in the subsequent chapters “Knights and Squires.”

Melville introduces the crew of the Pequod through a medieval caste to highlight the hierarchy of both whale ships and the United States of America. The shared title of Chapters 26 and 27, “Knights and Squires,” is already enough to indicate a divide between the crew. The mates Starbuck, Stubb, and Flask, white men from Nantucket, Cape Cod, and Tisbury, assume the position of knight. Directly under each of them is their “savage” squires: Pacific islander Queequeg, Gay-Header Indian Tashtego, and the imperial negro Daggoo. Though they are all described to be more physically capable and reliable, hence their position as the harpooners in such a violent and vital industry, their non-white skin creates a clear distinction in their status.

This dynamic in which the white man leads extends to the rest of the unnamed crew, and many other American industries as well:

As for the residue of the Pequod’s company, be it said, that at the present day not one in two of the many thousand men before the mast employed in the American whale fishery, are Americans born, though pretty nearly all the officers are. Herein it is the same with the American whale fishery as with the American army and military and merchant navies, and the engineering forces employed in the construction of the American Canals and Railroads. The same, I say, because in all these cases the native American liberally provides the brains, the rest of the world as generously supplying the muscles. (Melville 131)

Melville’s emphasis here is to remind us who it was that labored the most in the founding of our country. Even though “not one in two of the many thousand men” in the whaling industry were born in America (immigrants), most never received the title of officer, nor the benefits expected for someone who puts in the most work. In the specific case of the Pequod, we are never given the names of a majority of the crew who keep the ship operating; they don’t receive the focus given to their king Ahab, his knights Starbuck, Stubb, and Flask, or even their squires Queequeg, Tashtego, and Daggoo. At the base of the ladder, few of them receive proper recognition in spite of their importance in maintaining the ship. Within the context of 1850s America, this group stands in for the enslaved, unrecognized as humans to the highest degree as they were stripped of their rights, yet expected to provide the labor necessary to maintain the growth of the nation.

Melville then directly calls out the same structure in the “American army and military and merchant navies, and the engineering forces employed in the construction of the American Canals and Railroads.” These foundational industries that served to protect and expand the United States ran off of the same design that let the mass contributors go unnoticed and unappreciated while the ones in charge received all of the attention and glory. The employees of these industries, mostly immigrants, were used in service of further increasing the position of the white man with the conquering of Mexican land and expansion towards the West; they were the ones that made it possible, but the end goal was never in favor of them. 

With some effective word choice, Melville then starts to hint towards who actually deserves our praise: “the native American liberally provides the brains, the rest of the world as generously supplying the muscles.” In deliberately leaving native uncapitalized, Melville presents the replacement of the Native American by the white man who have claimed the term for themselves. Considering this appropriation, liberally seems to be the native Americans’ loose assumption that they should provide the brains. Meanwhile, the rest of the world generously supplies the muscles. By suggesting that the rest of the world is more benevolent, Melville questions the legitimacy of the white man at the head to challenge the structures of all the American industries he has just described.

All of this culminates in the fact that these imperative industries were established with hierarchical systems that placed one group, the white man, above the rest who were not even deemed worthy of recognition. In the context of 1850s America, specifically in the increased national attention towards slavery and the continued Westward expansion, Melville draws attention to the structures behind the categorization of humans as more or less and breaks down the reasoning of these systems to show how unreliable they are. This faulty system is at the core of the Pequod, positioning Ahab as the king of the ship. However, Melville treats this as a cautionary tale of what happens when democracy shifts to monarchy, when kings are valued over their subjects, and when any opposition is considered rebellion.

As Ahab takes after King Lear in his descent into madness, Melville applies the noble traits expected of a king to another group of characters: the harpooners. In his journal article “Moby-Dick and American Political Symbolism,” Alan Heimert offers a possible reason on why they are treated as such. The harpooners: 

are representative of the three races on which each of the American sections, it might be said, had built its prosperity in the early nineteenth century. Stubb’s squire is an Indian; Starbuck’s comes from the Pacific islands. And Flask, perched precariously on Daggoo’s shoulders, seems, like the southern economy itself, sustained only by the strength of the “imperial negro.”(Heimert 502)

The harpooners fitting perfectly into Moby Dick’s allegory of the United States, Melville constantly shines an honorary light on them for their heroics. While Queequeg receives the most attention out of all of them, the most poignant scene of Melville’s praise is “Flask, perched precariously on Daggoo’s shoulders” referenced by Heimert.

In “The First Lowering” to hunt whales, Melville zooms in on a peculiar scene where, acting as a mast-head, the “noble negro” Dagoo bears the “vivacious, tumultuous, ostentatious, little Flask” upon his shoulders (241). This scene on Flask’s boat serves as a microcosm of the United States in which the black man literally uplifts the white; Melville uses this to reverse the preconceived notions of nobility based on race all while praising the stability of the foundational Daggoo. 

At the start of this scene, it is described that little King-Post (Flask) was “recklessly standing upon the top of the loggerhead” in hopes of satisfying his “large and tall ambition” (Melville 240). In a situation where these men are chasing their profits, it’s important to note that the ambitious yet little King-Post could not satisfy his desires by himself. Fortunately for him, his harpooner Daggoo “volunteered his lofty shoulders for a pedestal” (Melville 240). Daggoo’s volunteering of himself as a pedestal, or mast-head, recalls the generosity of “the rest of the world” and it can also be viewed as a reclamation of power. If we are to view this scene as a representation of the United States in the 1850s, Daggoo willingly offering himself directly goes against the subjugation of slaves’ labor. Daggoo is proud to offer himself as a mast-head because their unified work is what will lead to their success in this whale hunt.

Though there may be something to argue about Daggoo maintaining the status of an object, specifically one that lets the white man stand upon him, Melville proposes we change our minds about which position is praiseworthy. He writes:

But the sight of little Flask mounted upon gigantic Daggoo was yet more curious; for sustaining himself with a cool, indifferent, easy, unthought of, barbaric majesty, the noble negro to every roll of the sea harmoniously rolled his fine form. On his broad back, flaxen-haired Flask seemed a snow-flake. The bearer looked nobler than the rider. (Melville 241)

It would be easy to forget that this all occurs during their first chaotic whale hunt since Daggoo is described as “sustaining himself with a cool, indifferent, easy, unthought of, barbaric majesty.” Maintaining his posture on the small boat rocking against the rolling waves is a second nature to Daggoo; he is able to stand firm and support the little Flask in all his “barbaric majesty.” No longer is Flask referred to as little Kind-Post, now Daggoo receives the title of majesty. Melville uses his common trick of pairing opposing terms, barbaric and majesty, to overthrow the idea that they’re meant to be separate. He continues to use this honorific language as “the noble negro to every roll of the sea harmoniously rolled his fine form.” Again, Melville gives praise to the ones that not only withstand the pressure of nature and those they’re uplifting, but are in harmony with its flow. It’s no surprise that “the bearer looked nobler than the rider,” for Daggoo, and the many noble negroes enslaved by the majestic barbarians of nineteenth century America, were the pedestal that provided the stability that Flask and all the other snow-flakes relied on to satisfy their ambitions.

While Melville sings the praises of Daggoo, Flask seems to have fallen from grace. He was already stripped of his title of King-Post, but Melville only continues to mock the attitude of this snow-flake: “truly vivacious, tumultuous, ostentatious little Flask would now and then stamp with impatience; but not one added heave did he thereby give to the negro’s lordly chest. So have I seen Passion and Vanity stamping the living magnanimous earth, but the earth did not alter her tides and her seasons for that” (Melville 241). Flask seems to have now been reduced to a spoiled and bratty prince. He maintains his lively and obnoxious attitude, trying to lord over the boat, stamping with impatience, but his power has diminished. He knows how reliant he is in this situation too, as he does not dare add one heave to “the negro’s lordly chest.” Melville can’t help but sprinkle in more compliments for Daggoo, again referring to him as “lordly,” now bearing not only Flask, but his authority as well. Then Melville closes this scene with one last comparison for both men: Flask is assigned to the “Passion and Vanity” that stamps “the living magnanimous earth” that is Daggoo. The once lordly King-Post, now just a vain bundle of intense emotion and pride, can only try and stamp his desires upon the generous and forgiving Daggoo. But in this celebratory scene of Daggoo, we are presented with an alternative to the United States in which the noble negro refuses altering for the ones they bear on their backs.

In the context of their first frenzied chase of whales, it is important that Melville stops for a second to focus on this comedic scene of Flask and Daggoo. By positioning the mast-head Daggoo as noble, majestic, firm, and magnanimous, we are left to commend him rather than the ambitious, ostentatious, vain, snow-flake Flask. A whale boat in which the ambitions of the head are prioritized over the stability of the pedestal cannot even participate in the chase. The humbling mockery of Flask and glory given to Daggoo is a direct reversal of the narratives that have persisted since nineteenth century United States, in which the figureheads are praised while the people they stand upon are belittled, mocked, ignored, enslaved, and persecuted. 

Ultimately, Melville’s treatment of Daggoo here is how the working class should’ve always been treated. But from our country’s inception to the present, this established hierarchy has been used by those in power to ignore and vilify those at the bottom, ranging from our history of slavery to today’s targeting of the immigrants that are a vital part of this nation’s workforce. Recognizing this back in the nineteenth century, Melville proposes that we reconsider who is nobler between the bearers and the riders. Should we desire a different fate than the doomed Pequod, the United States needs to take after Melville and celebrate the ones before the mast, the ones that keep our nation afloat. 

Works Cited

Emerson, Ralph Waldo. “The American Scholar.” 1837

Heimert, Alan. “Moby-Dick and American Political Symbolism.” American Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 4, 1963, pp. 498–534. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2710971. Accessed 16 Dec. 2025.

Melville, Herman, et al. Moby-Dick, Or, The Whale. Penguin Books, 2003.

Week 13: Final Project

Posted on by
1

What do you still need to learn/do for your final project?

I feel like there’s so much that I still need to learn before diving into my final project. I’m planning to write a creative poem that touches on how Moby Dick directly responds to Emerson’s call for the “American Scholar,” incorporating form and direct quotes from both Melville’s novel and Emerson’s lecture to create a complete work that illustrates the call-and-response relationship between the two. I’m sort of ping ponging between what actual form and structure to use for the poem and the specifics of what I want to say, how to say it, and then the actuality of how to present it. I think it’s hard because poetry sometimes clicks into place and feels right in a particular form, so I need to play around with it a little bit more. Additionally, I need to reread Emerson’s work and revisit the several moments in Melville’s novel that I tabbed for their connection.

Emmerson and the Abuse of Books

Posted on by
Reply

After reading the “American Scholar”, this particular quote has stuck with me:

“Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst.”

I agree that books and written language truly are the “best”, whether through escapism or knowledge. Fiction, and in particular fantasy, offer a place for people to escape from the real world, into the problems of other people. Another example of this is Romance, which people, especially women, often read to fill their romantic desire. And even fiction books can help you build knowledge, particularly on different countries and cultures, as well as empathy. Books are glimpses into other worlds, and into the minds of their authors.

I, personally, am so thankful to have readers in my family. As a child, they encouraged my addiction to series such as “Nancy Drew”, “Warrior Cats”, and “Little House on the Prarie”. And each and every one of those has helped to shape the person I am today. “Nancy Drew” made me curious and observant, “Warrior Cats” kicked off my fantasy addiction, and “Little House on the Praries” caused me to get interested in American history and politics.

Books, when “well used” can and will shape identities, and help us as readers grow as human beings.

When I think of abused literature, I not only think of book banning and/or burning, but an abuse of the contents within the books. In this modern world, people will often take quotations from books out of context and post them online. While this can be fun, such as in the case of “out of context” quotes, used for memes or comedic purposes, it often leads to a misinterpretation of the ideas presented in the text.

One that I have learned of recently is how in “Romeo and Juliet”, when Juliet says “Where for at thou Romeo”, she is not asking for his location. She is essentially asking “Why are you Romeo”, alluding to the feaud between their families.

In particular, this is dangerous when out of context quotes change people’s perception of the literature. This is also a problem when it comes to book reviewers. Because, ultimately each and everyone of us will have infinite interpretations on the meaning of books. But when readers look to others about their perceptions, they go into a book with preconceptions about this.

I do enjoy listening and watching book reviews and recommendations. But I don’t simply read a book because someone online said it was good, or that they enjoyed it. I first do my own research, looking for any content warnings, and reading the description. But I don’t go into spoilers, because spoilers, especially out of context, can ruin a reading experience, or perception of a book.

And, this may just be me, but I also think of the physical abuse of books, particularly that of burning. If you burn or somehow destroy every last copy of a book, you are loosing so, so much potential knowledge, whether it was fiction or non-fiction. Another example of this is leaving a book out in the rain. Both of these could and can prevent people from accessing that knowledge. And who knows? Maybe that book could have changed their life. But because it was abused physically, now they will never pick it up and be transformed by the words within those pages.

My Response to Emerson’s Speech!

Posted on by
4

So when I first saw how long this speech was I was intimidated by it. Reading it I was a bit confused until we spoke about it in class. Our discussion helped me see it a bit more clear the concepts he is trying to make us think of while we read through his speech. The line which we spoke of in class was one that made me think a bit when I read through it the first time. “In this distribution of functions, the scholar is the delegated intellect. In the right state, he is, Man Thinking. In the degenerate state, when the victim of society, he tends to become a mere thinker, or, still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking” (paragraph 6). At first when I read that line I was confused to what Emerson was trying to tell us here but then I think I realized what he was trying to state.

We don’t want to base our own thinking off of others around us and “parrot” them and their ideas. We want to have our own thoughts and think for ourselves as we are our own person. If I am understanding this correctly, Emerson wants to make us use this to our advantage and make oursleves unique and not like everyone else. This is how we get more unique works and articles made by impressionable writers.

Another concept which I am still a bit confused on is the Nature element. Emerson states that he is ignorant of nature and his mind can not process that. He says that he wants to understand it more from what I understand. I think anyone would want to understand the world around us and concepts that we might not be very knowledgeable about. He wants to attain more knowledge so he can write about more concepts that might not be written about. Please let me know if I am on the right track with what I am thinking reguarding this reading.

Concepts like this are a bit complicated for me and I can hope that I can understand them a bit more with the help of everyone’s feedback on this post.

Emerson’s American Scholar

Posted on by
2

After our discussion in class today, specifically the mention of how boredom begets creativity, I wanted to highlight a quote from Emerson’s essay that seemed very applicable to today in which he says “Our age is bewailed as the age of Introversion”. When I first read this I was surprised to see that even back when this was written, there was the sentiment that people are becoming more isolated from one another. I think this separation comes from the individualism that is so deeply rooted in our culture, which Emerson promotes here but, Emerson goes on to state that this doesn’t have to be to our detriment: “Must that needs be evil?. . . This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it”. This seemed like another example of Emerson pushing for the American scholar to break off from the teachings of old and avoid the stagnation of idolizing revered works rather than exploring our own thoughts provoked from the readings. I’m excited to learn from Ishmael as the vessel of these traits of the American scholar and how it might conflict with other approaches, especially the unwavering will of Ahab on his revenge quest.

Emerson and King – Honest Review

Posted on by
3

I’m going to be honest and say that it probably wasn’t the best to be trying to write about this at around 10:30 PM, but I’m going to go ahead and do my best to break down what I understand and what I’m gathering from both. I’ll start with King purely because it is shorter. Reading about the tale that inspired Melville’s book in the first place doesn’t strike me as entirely horrifying. While it is a scary and unfortunate circumstance that occurred many many years ago, I do not find myself surprised by what has occurred. Human nature is often driven to limits and a breaking point, and it is only “natural” for dire circumstances to occur. Cannibalism thanks to extreme starvation from a lack of available/nutritious food? Yikes! I find the sort of questions that are phrased in a “Would you do this if you had to?” when it comes to scenarios like this are a little unreliable. I personally would obviously never condone or commit the act itself, but in a desperate attempt, I wouldn’t really know how my mind would justify it. If Moby Dick is actually based off of this retelling that includes the horrific nature of whaling back in the day, color me intrigued as boring as I thought the book would be based off of its initial length.

In terms of Emerson’s essay, I like how he puts this specific quote into perspective. “Man is thus metamorphosed into a thing, into many things.” The word thing seems entirely impersonal, a thing could be anything, as repetitive as that sounds. Man itself has evolved, made many advancements, and continues to strive for greater things to this day (at least I hope.) It is no surprise that it makes me think about the intriguing way he frames the way someone thinks about themselves. What purpose does someone have unless it is shaped by the very “things” around them? Ultimately, I do think his essay is something that strives to tell someone to move into action. There are a lot of phrases around there that say the world does not revolve around oneself, but even if it doesn’t, why not take knowledgeable advantages?

Emerson & King

Posted on by
1

Waking up at 6:30am to read Emerson’s ,” The American Scholar”, (TWICE) and I still don’t understand it, sadly. What I got from it was a little bit on how to be the perfect “American scholar” is the past (books), which probably means having the right understanding and be yourself because you won’t get to experience life in order to have.

Emerson kind of mentioned on how you can find knowledge by learning the real truth with books and how they are basically the key to understand life fully, “Books are the best type of the influence of the past, and perhaps we shall get at the truth,–learn the amount of this influence more conveniently,–by considering their value alone.” (Emerson) I agree with this concept becasue I actually do agree on how books open up more creative minds and ideas with a full experience on what the book mentions or the type of genre it is. “Books are written on it by thinkers, not by Man Thinking; by men of talent, that is, who start wrong, who set out from accepted dogmas, not from their own sight of principles,” this quote got to me, no words.

“There is then creative reading as well as creative writing. When the mind is braced by labor and invention, the page of whatever book we read becomes luminous with manifold allusion. ” (Emerson), this quote caught my interest because I majored in Creative Writing (even got a certificate) and enjoy creative writing because it I think creativity can expand the mind to it protentional of creativity when it comes to writing.

For some odd reason, I found King’s article interesting, but sad at the same time. The fact that those men had to endure for months in the sea and their only way to survive was cannibalism, its heartbreaking and the fact that they had to choose who to eat was just horrible to read about that. It reminded me about the Uruguayan rugby team whose airplane crashed into the Andes mountains and endured so much a traumatic event and also to recourse to cannibalism as well. To know that Herman Melville was inspired by this true event makes it more interesting, nerve-wrecking and fully grasp the need on wanting to read it now and know what the deal is with Moby Dick. It still was a bit hard to understand so hopefully can someone help me understand it a bit more in class.

Emerson’s “The American Scholar”

Posted on by
1

To talk about Emerson’s “The American Scholar” was a fun read, in a way to see how one brain works and thinks. This idea of what it means to be a man scholar, I want to focus the word man because that is all he talks about in this essay is about man, man thinker, man farmer. There was one part of the text where he talk about women and how men need women which was nice but most of the time he talked about men. Back to the idea or structure of being a scholar, it was very interesting to hear about this guideline almost because it makes me think do I agree or do I not, but he did have some great points that did have me hooked. “who can doubt, that poetry will revive and lead in a new age” love this, totally agree with this idea and think it is somewhat true, i think for it’s time it really sticks out because in a way he is right, poetry did lead into a new age of thinking and literature. He talked a lot about Shakespeare influence which in this statement that I just quoted, his influence has lead a new age of poetry such has T.S. Eliot.

His ideas of being a scholar were fun, Man Thinking which is just a bookworm, books are the mans strongest tool then he says that if there is no book a man will have a resource, which I mean yeah. Then one could argue that the book is the resource. the scholar should be free and brave to collect all this information and write freely from the brain. Many aspects of being a scholar and where it can take you almost. These thinking skills give the man soul and thats the one thing man values the most, is an active soul.

This easy was a little hard to follow but after a while I feel like I started to understand him and his thoughts, his idea and they way he portrays them, make them seem factual. I feel almost to really take in what he is saying and apply it to my way of being a scholar.

Emerson and King

Posted on by
1

Of both readings, Emerson’s was most challenging. However, I think I was still able to pick up what Emerson was laying down. Emerson points out that the American scholar’s first influence is nature. Nature draws curiosity and inspires scholars to be hungry for knowledge and search for the truth. Emerson also points out that books are thee most important thing to influence others. He writes “Each age, it is found, must write its own books; or rather, each generation for the next succeeding. The books of an older period will not fit this.” (Paragraph 14). Each generation has their own books that reflect their beliefs and values, so when the readers read the books of their time, they can continue to get inspired and eventually write their own. Something that stood out to me that Emerson wrote was “The world is nothing, the man is all…” Man is who brings curiosity into the world and also takes knowledge from it. By challenging nature and books, scholars gain their knowledge and experience. The soul in ‘man’ is what inspires us to look for the truth and answers.

After reading King’s article, it made me wonder if Melville included any cannibalism in Moby Dick. Now, I am even more interested in reading the book to see how the real life incident shaped this story. I found King’s article both terrifying and interesting. Terrifying— because I am not very fond of the ocean. The ocean is very large plus it has a huge number of animals, both discovered and undiscovered. And interesting— because I enjoyed the history aspect of the article. In his article, King mentions that during the real life incident of the Essex being attacked, the first mate spotted a 85 feet whale. This is absolutely horrifying and not something I would like to imagine. The captain of the ship, Captain George Pollard and his men were attacked by a sperm whale and had spent 92 days without food or water, and these men eventually resulted to cannibalism. During the Captain’s journey though, they had come across an island but decided to keep moving because they said it was filled with cannibals. I found this to be pretty ironic and slightly amusing because they became exactly what they didn’t want to encounter.

Emerson’s “The American Scholar”

Posted on by
2

I’m extremely familiar with Emerson’s work due to his proximity to Louisa May Alcott in her childhood. I did my honors thesis on Alcott’s Transcendentalist background and upbringing, so a majority of Emerson’s either subtle or sometimes direct references to nature and Transcendentalism took me back to the labor of love that was my 25-page paper. It was interesting to read this specific essay and reflect on how his perspective is almost openly mirrored in Alcott’s Little Women, Flower Fables, and her personal letters as both an American author and American scholar.

Emerson points to nature as the first teacher of the American scholar, urging the audience, which extends beyond just Martin Van Buren, to return to the land to be re-inspired and literally touch grass. One of my favorite things about Emerson, and thus Alcott, is how reminiscent the writing is—I can see Emerson looking out his window at Bostonian elms or bluestem grass, recognizing the individuality of nature, and discovering that a return to these central elements is the key to correcting “the degenerate state” (Emerson). I know we discussed the historical context during one of our other sessions, but Emerson’s letter is such a time capsule to the fears that the Industrial Revolution brought. There are so many instances where Emerson warns against a copy-and-paste American scholar, who thinks what others think as if on a mass-produced conveyor belt of national intellect.