Tag Archives: Week 2

“The Blue Humanities” and the Curious Nature of the Ocean

Posted on by
1

Within the article, “The Blue Humanities” by John R. Gillis, alludes to the teachings of Emerson. Gillis writes, “[T]he desire for an experience of untamed nature originated in the eighteenth century among a small group of European aesthetes, for whom the awesome power of the sea, as witnessed from the safety of land, was a powerful emotional and mental stimulant”. It truly made me realize that oceanic research is so new to humans and the level of knowledge during the era of whaling. The newfound exploration of the nature of the ocean “became a fountain of images and metaphors” with the emergence of oceanic writings such as Moby-Dick. With Melville spending time at sea and having knowledge of the ocean, he used the ocean as a metaphor. What that metaphor is, is yet to come with my reading of the book. He allows the average person, who has no ocean knowledge, to immerse themselves into the curious nature of the deep undiscovered ocean.

Inspired by Cannibalism

Posted on by
1

The Essex reflects the internal horrors that one can face when pushed to their absolute limits. As Ishmael himself notes the sea as a romanticized experience that men must run to rather than the safety of the shore, the Essex falls short of that romance when its men were left stranded and starving to the point of cannibalism. Melville takes this tragedy and reimagines new parameters for man, a fictionalized world that speaks to real life tragedies, analogized in the form of a tyrant who takes this boat beyond its limits and ultimately destroys everyone with it. Melville’s romance for the sea is preemptively shaped by tragedy, as seen in the early chapters of Moby Dick. Ishamel has idealized his voyage on the Pequod, yet there is an internal hesitancy as the ship is preparing to take off among other warning signs, immediately sealing this tale as one of misfortune. For Melville, romance and misfortune are fated together, whether this is consciously noted by Ishamel.

The Essex’s fate led to the cannibalization of its shipmates, notably two teenaged boys one of which was the cousin of George Pollard Jr., the survivor who shares his story of the Essex. Melville uses the real life cannibalism from the Essex in his fictional piece, figuratively having the leader devour his own shipmates for his insatiable hunger to conquer nature. The men on the Essex were left to the fate of an unforgiving and endless ocean, left feeble. Yet, Moby Dick presents a man who cannot accept his powerlessness against the open sea, going to inhumane lengths to conquer the unconquerable. 

The Essex is a tragic story that immediately draws your attention with its horrible images and tragedy. It’s easy to see how Melville was able to create a world based on the events of the Essex, drawing from reality as a basis for Ishamel’s journey on the Pequod. From the many mirrored images we can see from the real life story of survival, Moby Dick takes the lived experience of Pollard and weaves it into a tale that speaks to something much bigger than any single individual.

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.

Captain Pollard and the Story of the Essex… holy shit

Posted on by
2

This is actually a true story? All I want to say is what the fuck. While reading the article, “The True-Life Horror That Inspired ‘Moby-Dick,'” I was honestly appalled at the end. It’s almost impossible to think that an event like that could ever happened to someone, much less a group of people. It genuinely felt like I was reading the script to a movie. I’ve yet to read Moby-Dick, but after learning that the story of the Essex inspired Melville, I am definitely excited to dive right into the novel.

Pollard’s story is filled with sadness, trauma, guilt, irony, horror and dread. I wonder if he ever questioned why something like that happened to him. Why did his crew mates burn down an island? Why did a massive whale decided to hit his boat, not once, but twice, sinking it? Why did Chase believe the islands that might’ve saved them was filled with cannibals? Why did his cousin have to be the one shot and killed and eaten in order for the others to survive? Reading about the things that happened to Captain Pollard on this journey, the trauma he and his crew mates went through, all I can think of is holy shit.

If a man told me a story like this, much like how Pollard told Melville, I would definitely have to write a book about it too.


Emerson and the Power of Self

Posted on by
1

In one of the most striking moments of The American Scholar, Ralph Waldo Emerson writes: “Help must come from the bosom alone. The scholar is that man who must take up into himself all the ability of the time, all the contributions of the past, all the hopes of the future. He must be an university of knowledges. If there be one lesson more than another, which should pierce his ear, it is, The world is nothing, the man is all.”

At first glance, this might sound overwhelming. How could any one person possibly “be an university of knowledges”? But I don’t think that Emerson is asking for perfection. I think he is making a much deeper point about where strength and truth really come from: within. When he says “help must come from the bosom alone,” he’s rejecting the idea that wisdom or growth can be handed to us by institutions, traditions, or even other people around us. Instead, Emerson seems to urge his reader to turn inward and to trust the resources that are planted inside of us.

That is classic Transcendentalism. The movement, after all, was built on the belief that the divine and the universal could be found within the individual. Emerson’s claim that “the world is nothing, man is all” doesn’t dismiss nature; I think that it reframes it. The world only takes on meaning when filtered through the mind of the individual. In other words, I don’t think that we receive truth passively, I think we create it by daring to think, question, and imagine.

The scholar, for Emerson, embodies this responsibility. He doesn’t seem to just memorize facts from the past or observe the present. Instead, he carries “all the ability of the time,” “all the contributions of the past,” and “all the hopes of the future” inside of himself. The true shcolar that Emerson writes about is active, daring, and above all, very self-reliant. I think this is a daunting yet empowering vision. Emerson is able to remind us that the potential for greatness isn’t just out there somewhere; it’s already inside each of us. Just waiting.

Week 2: Stealing 100 Turtles and Lighting an Island on Fire! (Boys Will Be Boys).

Posted on by
1

I enjoyed reading about the horror’s that inspired Moby Dick.

Firstly, I love to hear when authors (like Melville) visit places of inspiration for possible literary ideas. I believe this makes for some of the best work to be created as they’re quite well immersed in the eventual “nature” of the novel-to-be.

Secondly, I found it hilarious that Pollard and his crew upon the Essex stole around 100 turtles and then lit the island on fire upon leaving. That cracked me up. I think that is such a “boy” thing to do. In addition, how tragically ironic that their initial response was to not touch the alleged “cannibal” island but to then later resort to exactly this when their hunger descended them into madness. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In all seriousness, this passage right here is really nightmarish:

“They had only the bones of the last crewmen to perish, which they smashed on the bottom of the boat so that they could eat the marrow.”

To then become obsessed with the remains of your crewmates to the point where you’re not relieved to being rescued is creepy as hell. I could only imagine the harrowing countenance of Pollard and Ramsdell in these moments.

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.

Ralph Waldo Emerson : The American Scholar

Posted on by
3

If I am being completely honest, reading this essay was a bit difficult for me. The length and the way of writing caused the words to sort of jumble together on my first few attempts and I wasn’t able to finish it the first few times. However, after reading it again and actually making it to the end, I thank I have developed a bit more of an understanding for what Emerson was saying through this.

My main takeaway might not be what his main point was, as I am still unsure of what exactly it was, but what stood out to me the most throughout this reading was his focus on unity. He constantly referenced the way in which society is broken up, citing that as the reason for division within communities. He says that we do have a common ground and roots, yet we tend to stay divided in separate groups. One of his main arguments throughout this essay, I think, is the argument for the complete unity of the country. He says that through individuals creating and thinking and passing along information, we have the potential to unite through scholarship.

Something I noticed while reading this was how Emerson seems to reference one of Henry David Thoreau’s ideologies, which is that of the Three Chairs. I am not extremely familiar with Emerson and his inspirations, but regardless he did bring up the same idea as Thoreau. Thoreau’s Three Chairs references his belief that in order to be a truly be a well socialized and well thought out individual, it is important to embrace and act upon different methods of reflection. The chairs represent, one for solitude, two for friendship, and three for society. Thoreau emphasizes just how important each of these ‘chairs’ are and within this essay, Emerson does too. Emerson’s main focus is on the unity of society as a whole and how important doing things for your community is (chair three), but he also describes just how important the ideas of others (chair two) through more individualized groups and literature and the practice of solitude and self reflection (chair one) are. He speaks a lot about how important it is for a scholar to be introverted in a sense. He believes that the only true important thoughts come from a place of self reflection and not from the inspiration of others.

Once again, I am not sure how accurate what I pulled from the essay was, but this is what I understood of it!

Entry on Gilbert King’s Excerpt

Posted on by
1

Between Emmerson and King’s excerpts, Gilbert King’s seemed the most interesting to me. I have always been more drawn to the horrific side of history that which some of our society’s literature is based on. Seeing as I am coming into this class having NOT read Moby Dick prior, the mention of cannibalism drew me in.

Being based on the sunken ship Essex, Herman Melville took the tragedy as an opportunity to write about the horrors of the whaling industry. Given King’s approach, both literal and hypothetical, it is difficult to imagine how a person’s mind and body would react given such circumstances. Melville’s book goes in depth about the darker side of human nature, and while King referred to a particular figure within the literature as a “thing,” I could not help but produce multiple instances to which said “thing” could be applied. The “thing” could be the whale, the ship, the sea, or man themselves, but considering a darker, more metaphysical approach, I would like to consider that he is talking about human nature. Human nature as we know it ranges through a wide variety of behavior, but being pushed to the limits as the ship’s crew is in Moby Dick, the “thing” that King talks of could very well the human nature pushed to its limits. Starved, scared, and desperate, the surviving men turn to cannibalism to stay alive. While skimming other’s posts, I could tell that some thought the same thing as I did; given a hypothetical question, we would never turn to it, but in reality, there is no saying what we would do to survive, or the “thing” that we would become to do so.

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?