Tag Archives: moby dick

Ishmael and Religion

Posted on by
1

I would like to argue that Ishmael has become hypocritical in accepting religion as the book progresses. Ishmael states numerous times over, “I have no objection to any person’s religion…so long as that person does not kill or insult any other person, because that other person don’t believe it also” (94). With this, the reader would assume that as his and Queequeg’s relationship and bond progress over the course of the novel, Ishmael would become more accepting of the differences between his religion and others. But, directly following the quote above, Ishmael states, “But when a man’s religion becomes really frantic…makes this earth of ours an uncomfortable inn to lodge in; then I think it high time to take that individual aside and argue the point with him” (94).

All of this turmoil within Ishmael began because of Queequeg’s day of fasting – Ramadan. And because of Ishmael’s lack of understanding of how Queequeg goes about Ramadan (kneeling in silence for a day with no food), he chooses to argue with Queequeg and attempt to get him to stop (you could arguably call this a conversion of some sort, if not to Christianity, then away from his own religious practices). It is hypocritical to reiterate throughout the novel how we should remove certain prejudices from our ways of thinking, especially regarding different religions, and even more so concerning that Ishmael is letting his ignorance feed into his fear of losing Queequeg. One could argue that, based on ignorance and prejudice, the likelihood of losing Queequeg is even stronger by those means than by any other. The novel seemingly contradicts different comparable topics: comparing men as one thing alongside the complete opposite, or writing so that their speech does not reflect their internal monologue or thoughts.

I believe this to be hypocritical; while it could be seen as a reflection of Ishmael’s concern for Queequeg’s well-being, this moment in the novel directly reveals the boundaries between Ishmael’s radical openness towards different religious practices and the difference between mental/intellectual acceptance of these practices and Ishmael’s practical interaction with them.

Week 6: Queequeg and Ishmael

Posted on by
2

The change that occurs between Queequeg and Ishmael, as well as the further development of their friendship, is worthy of note. In the beginning chapters, Ishmael constantly repeats the narrative that ignorance is the parent of fear and that he has underlying prejudices against Queequeg because he is a cannibal. That being said, later in our reading, it is written that, “[Queequeg] seemed to take to me quite as naturally and unbiddenly as I to him; and when our smoke was over, he pressed his forehead against mine, clasped me round the waist, and said that henceforth we were married…that we were bosom friends; he would gladly die for me…” (57). To see such a shift in their dynamic after a mere two days in each other’s company is conflicting, given the apparent observation. Whether romantic or platonic, their dynamic mirrors the ever-shifting relationship that people have with the ocean.

The ocean is constantly changing, and while there are various descriptions throughout the novel that highlight the world’s fascination with the ocean and the fear that it holds towards the depths and its inhabitants, there is always something that ends up luring them out into its vastness. Ishmael’s quick change towards Queequeg is representative of the change in attitude towards the ocean and its dangers; yes, Queequeg is a cannibal, but after finding the time to pick him apart and get to know his peculiar habits and behavior, Ishmael has developed a strong connection and understanding of his friend, having been lured in by his peculiarities and affection. With understanding and patience comes a sense of stability and safety, one that can be found alongside Queequeg, as well as traversing the unknown expanses of the ocean.

Where Comfort meets Discomfort: A Lesson in Opposites

Posted on by
2

In Chapter 11, “Nightgown,” Ishmael muses: “Nothing exists in itself. If you flatter yourself that you are all over comfortable and have been so a long time, then you cannot be said to be comfortable anymore.” (Melville 59) On the surface, this might be a casual observation about lying in bed, but the phrasing suggests something larger to me. Ishmael reveals that human experience is always relational. Comfort only matters when set against discomfort, just as light only has meaning when contrasted with darkness. This small moment becomes a window into Melville’s larger project: a novel that is less about fixed truths than about oppositions and tensions that define how we see the world.

For the book as a whole, I think that this insight resonates with the way Moby-Dick constantly frames the sea in these sorts of paradoxical terms. The ocean is vast yet suffocating, a space of both freedom and imprisonment, life and death. Just as Ishmael can only recognize comfort when he knows discomfort, he (and the reader) can only approach the meaning of the sea by holding together its contradictions. This shows that the novel is not about mastering or defining the ocean but about living within its shifting, relational nature. Ishmael’s comment in this chapter reads almost like a thesis statement for the entire narrative: nothing in this world exists as a single, stable entity. Everything takes shape through contrast, through relation, and through constant and fluid change.

This is why the moment with Queequeg is so significant. Ishmael’s newfound comfort sharing a bed with someone who once seemed strange or threatening underscores the novel’s interest in difference as a necessary condition for understanding. Without his earlier unease, Ishmael’s warmth with Queequeg would not stand out as meaningful. On a small scale, the line about comfort captures Ishmael’s transition from suspicion to intimacy. On a larger scale, it anticipates the way Melville’s novel demands that we hold opposites together, rather than separate and resolve them.

What makes this moment in Chapter 11 so powerful is how it condenses so many of the novel’s concerns into one simple observation. Ishmael isn’t just thinking about whether he feels warm and at ease in bed; he’s actually reflecting on how human life (and the ocean) can only be understood through contrast, tension, and change. The same principle applies to his friendship with Queequeg, to the sea that both unsettles and attracts him, and to the very shape and format of the novel itself, how it constantly weaves together opposites without trying to resolve them. By pausing on this line, I could see how Melville uses Ishmael’s everyday musings to point us to the larger philosophical questions that run beneath his story: how do we find meaning in a world defined not by its stability, but more so by its shifting contrasts?

Chapter Ten

Posted on by
2

In these chapters of Moby-Dick, Melville offers us a deeper look into the relationship between Ishmael and Queequeg. We could interpret their connection as more than a simple growing friendship; there are elements of a romantic bond, as described by Melville. This interpretation is particularly interesting given the cultural context of the 19th century, where queer relationships were rarely, if ever, represented openly in literature. Seeing such intimacy written in this novel, in this way, can show how people at that time resisted or ignored the possibility of a queer narrative. In modern day, we are more exposed to queer narratives and can easily point out when artwork is queer; unlike in the 19th century, when representation was kept minimal.

Chapter 10 especially emphasizes both the physical and emotional closeness between Ishmael and Queequeg. Ishmael describes how Queequeg “pressed his forehead against mine, clasped me around the waist, and said that henceforth we were married.” (Melville 57) The way that Melville worded this is striking, not only for its tenderness, but also for implying a relational permanency between the two with the term “married”. Later, Ishmael continues, “thus, then, in our hearts’ honeymoon, lay I and Queequeg — a cosy, loving pair.” (Melville 28) These scenes show the intimacy between the two sailors, hinting at a relationship rooted in devotion to one another. 

What makes this chapter especially significant is not only the intimate dedication between Ishmael and Queequeg, but also the way their bond has been understood—or dismissed—over time. Some readers see their relationship as purely platonic, reflecting the deep companionships sailors often formed, while others interpret the affectionate and even erotic language as evidence of a queer connection. How readers respond to these passages depends greatly on the cultural lens of the time. In the 19th century, queerness was rarely acknowledged; the term “homosexuality” itself was not coined until the late 19th century, as early as the 1960s, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia — about 10 years after the release of Moby-Dick. This does not mean that queer relationships did not exist, but rather that society lacked the language and openness to recognize them. Reading Moby-Dick today, in a time when queer relationships are more visible and celebrated, allows us to see possibilities in Ishmael and Queequeg’s intimacy that may have been overlooked in earlier years. This contrast across time highlights how literature can be reinterpreted by different audiences, reflecting changed understandings.

Etymology and Extracts – Moby Dick

Posted on by
Reply

For this week’s reading, I understand all the warnings now about how Moby Dick is a difficult and boring read. I could not really grasp the entirety of what I was reading, but I am sure that as I continue on, I will better understand it.

From what I could gather from the readings, the way the Etymology sections starts off creates an important question as to the lack of inclusion on all matters of whaling and the ocean, and whether that assists in the lessening of the significance of either. Melville’s telling of whaling and exploring the sea, while not entirely non-fiction, but also not entirely fictional, may create a gap in the reader’s understanding of the extent of the dangerous and unintentionally frivolous travels of the ocean. The quote, “While you take in hand to school others, and to teach them by what name a whale-fish is to be called in our tongue, leaving out, through ignorance, the letter H, which almost alone maketh up the signification of the word, you deliver that which is not true” by Hackluyt announces the importance of the accomadations made towards important areas of information for the benefit of assisting our learning of it in our own language. While somewhat off topic, we can see this in translations of many other texts, for instance: The Grettis Saga, which has been translated into various different languages. In the beginning of each of these books there is a disclaimer made by the translators that the significance and the grammatical choices made in the origonal texts are often lost through translation, making the texts become modified and in theory, un-truthful in their translation of the original accounts.

Week 5: Etymology – On Melville’s Consumptive Usher.

Posted on by
2

Why does Melville start, or refuse to start, with the figure of the consumptive usher? I interpreted his presence as an announcement of the experimental literary form that we are about to dive into. We are told that this man is an usher for a grammar school. Grammar schools used to focus on teaching the classic languages and literature. From a quick internet search I learned that the role of a grammar school ushered was typically a subordinate position to the headmaster and was often a transitory position. Meaning that an usher could expect to eventually become a headmaster of get a different position elsewhere. The Usher in this story has passed away and the reader can assume that the Usher never did go on to ascend any further in his career, he is only acknowledged as a dying usher from an non-descript school. The text first directs our attention to the image of this solitary figure amongst books full of grammar rules and instruction created by people long gone. I am particularly interested in the following line, “He was ever dusting his old lexicons and grammars, with a queer handkerchief, mockingly embellished with all the gay flags of all the known nations of the world.” We are not told where in the world this usher resides but I assume that in this handkerchief, the United States flags is probably not included. From what we have learned in class, the United States as a country is in this burgeoning state but it is still a child compared to the history of the European nations. According to Emerson, it is a country that up until this point is still looking to Europe for instruction. I like that Melville says that it is imprinted with all the “known” nations of the world. By adding the word “known” Melville tells us that we are not to assume that this is the totality of nations in the world, whatever nations are omitted from this handkerchief are simply not yet known in their own right. Here then, is Melvilles submitted work for the nation of America. A book that challenges the pre-established rules of what constitutes a piece of literature and simultaneously claims that America is so unlike any nation like the ones on this handkerchief that it necessitates the breaking of the rules that can be found in these grammar books. Melville signals to the reader, that just like the dying usher, these classical rules are also fading. But this does not mean nothing else will rise to replace it in its stead.

“Call me Ishmael”, Reveling in an Obscure Identity

Posted on by
2

There is a lot to discuss within our first chunk of reading for Moby Dick, but I want to focus on one passage and then try to expand.

Before I do this, I thought it was curious how our narrator uses the pseudonym of “Ishmael”. He asks us to call him this, which made me look into the significance this name. Turns out it was a biblical reference used. Ishmael was born unto Abraham with Sarah’s hand maid Hagar. After, Sarah gave birth to Isaac, and she asked Abraham to expel the hand maid and her child into the desert. Though blessed by God, Ishmael became an outcast. This can open up discussion about the word “outcast” and how “Ishmael” ventures to meet people aboard a ship who have a common goal: whaling.

“Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people’s hats off–then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can.”

“This is my substitute for pistol and ball.”

This is a huge sentence. I could have paraphrased it lol. What he is saying is that instead of inviting suicidal and/or fatal temptations, the sea is where he can find respite. Only the ocean can provide him this. We get this passage literally on the first page, so you can see how important the ocean is to our “Ishmael”. Arguably, this is an early glimpse of the feelings that our protagonist portrays to the natural unknown world on the horizon.

Ishmael’s Restless Desire for the Remote

Posted on by
Reply

At the very end of chapter 1, Ishmael admits, “I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote” (Melville 8) which is a line that captures the spirit of his character and his larger ambitions of the novel. On the surface, Ishmael is explaining to his audience why he chooses to ship out on whaling voyages rather than just staying on land. But the phrasing, especially the word “tormented,” suggests that this desire for distance is not a casual curiosity but a relentless compulsion he must follow. His “itch” is not just wanderlust; it seems to be more of an existential drive that pushes him toward places, ideas, and experiences that lie beyond the familiar and outside of day-to-day life on land.

I think the key word in the sentence is “remote.” It refers to faraway places and geographies, such as the open sea, uncharted waters, and, of course, the dangerous world of whales, but I think it also signals Melville’s fascination with the abstract and the unknowable. Throughout Moby-Dick, Ishmael seeks knowledge that is just out of reach, whether that’s the biology of whales, the vastness of the ocean, or the inscrutability of Ahab. This passage, I believe, foreshadows the novel’s central tension: the pursuit of truths that can just never fully be grasped. Ishmael’s yearning mirrors humanity’s broader struggle with the limits of knowledge, especially in the face of nature’s just pure immensity.

At the same time, the quote also reflects the novel’s more restless narrative side. Melville’s digressions into philosophy, science, and history can be read more as Ishmael trying to scratch that same “everlasting itch.” The story refuses to stay straight and still, just as Ishmael cannot remain content just being on land. In this way, I believe that this line operates as a kind of mission statement for the novel itself: Moby-Dick is not only a whaling adventure but also a relentless reaching toward the remote, the distant, and the very unknowable.