Tag Archives: workforce

The Apex Predators: Great White Sharks & Great White Aristocrats

Posted on by
79

In Herman Melville’s Moby Dick, a unique relationship takes forms between the crew, the captain and the ship itself out on the vast sea. In this lawless landless place, the Pequod becomes their new “homeland,” with the captain functioning as a form of ruler of this new “estate” and the crew functioning as the workers. By viewing the interactions of different characters on the ship in relation to the role they play in the hierarchy, we are able to understand the society of the 19th century on a more intimate level. 

In this essay I will argue that Melville intentionally intended for the Pequod to symbolize the state of America during the 19th century in order to critique the capitalist system of consumerism whose primary industry relied on exploiting the working class—who were typically members of minority races—in order to supply luxuries products to the upper-class members of society.

Through analyzing specific relationship dynamics, Melville is able to characterize aspects that are intended to represent consumerist society as violent, lazy and cruel in contrast to the working class whose characterization stresses the importance and value of workers in the hopes of sparking change in the social hierarchy. 

Additionally, I will demonstrate this argument through an illustration titled The Fruit of Thy Labor, that will symbolize this capitalist society in the scope of violent exploits of this consumerism system. 

However, to fully grasp the extent of this metaphorical state and its critique of the current system, we need to firstly understand the historical context of the time period in which it was written, and its direct influence on the narrative. 

During the 1800s, as the United States was emerging with a newly formed government, there were contrasting political debates on how to run the country after being newly separated from the British Empire. The United States system of government decided to shift away from the monarchy to form a democratic party and build a new empire resulting in the transpiring of Manifest Destiny with the purpose of expanding democracy and capitalism. 

To prevail they needed the means of industry to further this expansion—which led to the debate over the state of labor leading to the eventual Compromise of 1850. Prohibiting the expansion of slave labor in the new states and the integrating the Fugitive Slave Act (Heimert, 1963).

In Melville’s novel, Manifest Destiny is constantly brought to the forefront of the narrative’s journey as a direct result of Melville’s awareness of the moral dilemmas of 19th century politics. These often involved divided debates that questioned the power structure of the system of the states in terms of, class, labor, and race.  

In chapter 64 of Moby Dick, titled “Stubb’s Supper,” class, labor, and race are represented through the interactions and dynamics of the characters; Stubb, Daggo’s Fleece, and the sharks—with each playing a specific and intention role in relation to each other in order to represent the current state of society and demonstrate why it should change. 

In this part of the novel, the Pequod had just made their first whaling kill and were in the process of hulling in the exploits from their venture. During the transportation of these various items, Stubb specifically requests Daggo to cut a piece from the whale, then he has Fleece cook him up an individual steak. As Stubb finishes ordering him men around, he eats his meal in the midst of night, while thousands of sharks can be heard simultaneously attacking what remains of the whale below him in the water. In this particular scene, the sharks play an interesting dual role of representing and criticizing both aspects of consumerism culture of the upper class while also simultaneously the middle-class work force. 

Initially, there is a distinct power-dynamic being enacted by Stubb that is mirrored through the actions of the sharks. The sharks in this scene are currently ravaging the remains of the Whale they had nothing to do with—reaping the benefits of a free meal from the labor of the crew on the ship. Similarly in the way that Stubb has Daggo fetch the meat while having Fleece be the one to cook it for him. In no significant way did Stubb contribute to the work besides giving the orders and dishing out critics—yet he still is the only one who ends up with a stake. 

The sharks are purposefully in juxtaposition to Stubb’s while doing this same action in order to represent the competitive and unstable state of consumerism culture itself—framing Stubb’s consumption of meat as something that is simultaneously violent, and lazy, inadvertently framing consumerism as being such qualities. 

By having Stubbs literally consume a product [the whale] and correlating it to the shark frenzy created a gruesome visual that represents the brutal nature of the society they are a part of and their roles in the hierarchy [as consumers]. By making the idea of consumerism “undesirable,” Melville is indirectly asking for change from the current rhetoric characterized by this laziness and violence. 

However, the sharks don’t just represent the consumers of society, but also the workforce as well, creating a unique relationship between the two by bringing them into the conversation.

“Cook…Don’t you think this steak is rather undone?…Don’t I always say to be good, a whale steak must be tough? There are those sharks now over the side, don’t you see they prefer it tough and rare? What a shindy they are kicking up! Cook, go and talk to ‘em they are welcome to help themselves civilly and in moderation, but must keep quiet” (Melville, pg. 320).  

In this excerpt, Stubb directly compares himself to the sharks, by indicating that he prefers his steak in the same manner “tough and rare,” however he does something even more interesting when he asks Fleece [Cook] to literally talk to the sharks. Now, the sharks in this scene are no longer simply a background but actual characters in conversation with both characters. The significance of having both Stubbs, and Fleece in conversation with the shark, is because it situations the consumer [Stubb] and the workforce [Fleece] in conversation with each other—connecting and revealing the truth of their current society. With the consumer having more power in the hierarchy over the workforce regardless of if they can be in conversation with each other. 

This is further reinforced by the context of the conversation in itself. Although Stubb is talking to Fleece, it seems more like he is talking at him—not allowing him to get a word in and then making demands and orders for Fleece to follow. The way he talks establishes a relationship whose dynamic is more reflective of an employer and worker dynamic. The specific word choice of “welcome” and if they are “civil and in moderation,” was also to reiterate this dynamic in the hierarchy by reiterating the limits and restraints of workers in this system. Being “welcome” implies that they can easily be unwelcomed and “civil and in moderation” means there is a specific way one must act in order to successfully participate in this system and there is only a certain level they can aspire to or “moderate”. 

This dynamic between Stubbs, Fleece and the Sharks can be interpreted as how the effects of capitalism can be dehumanizing for not only the workforce but also for the consumer itself. In this situation, they both may be able to be represented by sharks, but only one is a Great white and the other is a pygmy.

However, despite this distinction, there seems to be a sort of necessity for Stubbs to belittle him in order to reinforce his higher status in the hierarchy. This is tied directly to their class distinction but also exhibits larger racial connotations. 

After the Compromise of 1850—that divided the nation on the issue of slavery, conflict arose about the status of new territory on how to go about capitalist adventures in a newly free-market. It was during this era that the term “wage slavery” gained traction which “suggest a permanent condition of wage labor from which there was no chance of rising to economic independence…where, in Eric Foner’s words, “slavery was an immediate reality … the small producer still a powerful element in the social order, and the idea still widespread that the wage-earner was somehow less than fully free.” (McGuire, 2003). 

Although slavery was now illegal under law, the effects and conditions of slavery were still present and lingering on the people of these communities. The linger effect situating them in a state of disadvantage [poverty]—which puts them in the terrible position to be exploited. The condition of poverty, albeit an improvement, is still just another form of oppression in the form of exploitative labor. 

In the context of Moby Dick, Melville is writing this novel at the same time the nation is shifting and trying to reform their structure of government in terms of race, class, and labor. As a result, certain characters become representative of this society through their role and dynamic relationships on the ship. The most prevalent example is the organization of roles on the ship, in relation to their status and their pay. 

On the Pequod, there is a main established hierarchy according to the workstation that goes as following; The Captain, the 1st, 2nd & 3rd mate who function as officers commanding their own whale boat, the harpooners and the sailors. In terms of whaling, the harpooners have the riskiest job—having to actually pursue and kill the whale—yet they get significantly less money than that of the officers who are just supervising. As high-ranking officers, they receive a substantial amount of the profits for their ability to control their subordinates and reinforce this balance of the hierarchy they established. However, Melville does something incredibly clever, situating the different cultural and racial background of the characters in tandem with their positionality on the boat’s hierarchy, to show a direct reflection of 19th century society and the inequalities of this system on a smaller, more understandable scale. 

“The harpooneers…who so “generously” supply “the muscles… are representatives of the three races on which each of the American sections…had built its prosperity in the early nineteenth century. Stubb’s squire is an Indian; Star-buck’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 1963).

In the wake of free labor in the new free-market economy brought growth to the American people—including the minority population. Although they now have better opportunities, these opportunities are still not equal or substantial in the same way the dominant race and culture receive them. Going back to the concept of wage slavery—there is a lack of upward mobility for people of color during this time period. This is reflected in Melville’s work by having all the hard labor jobs being represented by a person of color. Not only are the jobs hard but Melville makes it a point for these jobs to be essential and to highlight the importance of the working class who have a history of being oppressed and exploited and continue to be. Just like how Flask was held up by Daggo, Stubb uses Daggo and Fleece to make a meal—exploiting their labor for consumption of different kinds but with similar results showing that even though some change has been made to fix the system, there is room for improvement.

 This scene describes the interactions between Stubb, Fleece, and the Sharks functions as a hopeful and positive critic towards future changes to reflect and create equality in our society.

Having the sharks reflect different qualities of both sides of the capitalist society goes to show how despite the hierarchy of race, class, and labor—-essentially, we are the same. Just like how there are many different types of sharks but at the end of the day—-they’re all still sharks. 

“through amid all the smoking horror and diabolism of a seafight, sharks will be seen longingly gazing up to the ship decks, like hungry dogs round a table where red meat is being carved…while the valiant butchers over the deck-table are thus cannibal carving each other’s live meat…the sharks, also, with their jewel-hilted mouths are quarrelsomely carving away under the table at the dead meat; and though, were you to turn the whole affair upside down, it would still be pretty much the same thing” (Melville, pg. 319).

In this excerpt, the butchers [or consumers] are described as cannibals feasting on live meat which functions as a metaphor for how consumerism culture thrives off the exploitation of others. In order for the butcher to feast, someone must die, which is a very morbid analogy to the sacrifices of the working class for the upper-class commodities. In contrast, the sharks [workers] are feasting on dead meat from under the table—-essentially scraps from the butcher’s feast. Another morbid analogy about how the rich get richer while the poor remain poor, working to merely survive in such a cutthroat society. 

However Melville then subverts the hierarchy….yet….everything looks the same?

For in this imagined proposed society of butchers and sharks, despite the different categories that individual roles seemed to be assigned to—under one system they are all the same, hence the lack of change regardless of the subversion.

Melville doesn’t want to simply switch the positions of the roles in the hierarchy but to dismantle the system itself that perpetuates this sort of exploitative capitalist consumer society. Using the Pequod as a metaphor for 19th century America, Melville is expressing his desire for changes to the capitalist system of consumerism that addresses these issues of race, class, and labor. Through these interactions and dynamics of the characters in the narrative, we were able to grasp a better understanding of Moby Dick in the historical context of its time period and its criticism of the governmental systems in place. 

References: 

 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 17 Dec. 2025.

McGuire, Ian. “‘Who Ain’t a Slave?’: ‘Moby Dick’ and the Ideology of Free Labor.” Journal of American Studies, vol. 37, no. 2, 2003, pp. 287–305. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27557332. Accessed 17 Dec. 2025.

Illustration: The Fruit of Thy Labor

For my illustration, I chose to draw my interpretation of consumerism in order to visualize the violence behind the action that society deems “normal.” Subversion the idea of normalcy by bringing that brutality to the forefront—or in this case, the dinner table. I wanted to showcase how even the minimalist pleasures and commodities enjoyed by the upper class are built upon the blood sweat and tears of the working class—having her wine literally being made up of the blood of the whale that’s been slain by the whaling ship in the cup. As the whale bleeds out and dies, it supplies products for the upper class. Similarly to how sperm oil was commonly used during this time as the primary light source or the ivory that makes up the very corset aristocrat’s wear. I wanted to take this idea of the whaling industry and compress it into a scene at home. I chose to showcase the whale bleeding out to bring this violence that isn’t often seen to the forefront. Jarring the image of esteem and class portrayed by the aristocrat by having death and labor being at the center of it all. The Whale dies a gruesome death, meanwhile she indulges herself in overconsumption of wine to the point where she’s spilling it from the cup. 

Her features are obscured yet prominent, with her skin tone matching the background to bring intentionality to the overwhelming whiteness on the page—meant to symbolize the dominant imperialist white culture of the time period. I also had her nails exaggeratedly sharp to dehumanize her and make her ambiguous and less sympathetic.

In contrast, the whale and ship itself are much smaller and additionally, are contained in the wine glass in the palm of her hand. Using the juxtaposition of the size difference and positionality on the page to show the differing power dynamics, portraying the wealthy holding the power over the working class. With the aristocrat in this picture notably staying out of frame so the main focal point in the scene will be the contents of her wine glass.

The center of the frame portrays the ship, but most glaringly the dead whale in its own giant pool of blood. I wanted this image to be both provoking and sad—hoping to garner sympathy towards the whale itself and those trapped under the command of the aristocrat’s hand. 

A picture of consumerism in a capitalist society—where the rich feed off the labor of the poor and more. 

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.

Final Project Proposal

Posted on by
1

Final Project proposal: I will be elaborating and extending my second essay regarding chapter 64 of Moby Dick, titled “Stubb’s Supper”, during which Stubb begins making his meal of their whale while thousands of sharks can be heard simultaneously attacking what remains of the whale below him in the water.

 My thesis is going to argue that this scene is meant to symbolize the consumerist society they live in and what becomes necessary to survive in this capitalist system. In order to participate in this capitalist society, it becomes necessary for an individual in the workforce to become violent themselves in order to survive this type of system.

I will be demonstrating this through an essay accompanied with an illustration or poem [still deciding] that symbolizes and demonstrates this violent relationship in regard to capitalist adventures. 

Essay #2: Shark Tank

Posted on by
Reply

In chapter 64 of Moby Dick, titled “Stubb’s Supper”, the Pequod had just made their first whaling kill and were in the process of hulling in the exploits from their venture. During the transportation of these various items, Stubb specifically requests Daggo to cut a piece from the whale so he can cook a steak. As Stubb begins making his meal in the midst of night, thousands of sharks can be heard simultaneously attacking what remains of the whale below him in the water. 

In this scene, the sharks are purposefully in juxtaposition to Stubb to demonstrate how they are both participating in the same action for the same purpose—survival in their respective worlds. 

“About midnight that steak was cut and cooked; and lighted by two lanterns of sperm oil, Stubb stoutly stood up to his spermaceti supper at the capstan-head, as if that capstan were a sideboard. Nor was Stubb the only banqueter on whale’s flesh that night. Mingling their mumblings with his own mastication’s, thousands on thousands of sharks, swarming round the dead leviathan, smackingly feasted on its fatness.” (319). 

This scene is meant to symbolize the consumerist society they live in and what becomes necessary to survive in this capitalist system. In order to participate in this capitalist society, it becomes necessary for an individual in the workforce to become violent themselves in order to survive this type of system.

The whaling industry during this time period was very integrated into everyday society as indicated by the everyday items people were using and consuming. Even in this very scene, Stubb is only able to cook his food from the whale during midnight because he has light from “lanterns of sperm oil.” Although Stubb is the only living character, the whale’s presence dominates the atmosphere because of how integral and necessary it is in society and specifically to Stubb’s survival—as he is literally feeding off the whale. The whale becomes both sustenance of survival [food] and a commodity for consumer consumption [lantern oil].

 The importance of the whale cannot be overlooked in these scenes despite not even being alive anymore. The whale is instead transformed through acts of violence to become “useful” in our society—and there is no other way to procure these materials without the means of violence  

However, the way Stubb goes about preparing his meal isn’t particularly visualized as “violent” in the scene as to how it was portrayed in the previous chapter. Instead, the sharks are utilized in comparison to Stubb in order to visualize the violence behind this everyday act of simply preparing a meal. As Stubb feasts, the violence festers below him over the same exact thing in a much more cruder description. Depicting thousands of sharks and using descriptors such as “mastication” and “smackingly” to show the brutalization of the whale during this process and the sheer number of sharks that depend on this feast for their own survival.

 In comparison to a capitalist society, it can also represent the overwhelming number of people who depend on the whaling industry to provide for these commodities. Much like the sharks, a large number of people need the whaling industry, and depend on it to survive. It not only provides products, but also provides a job and purpose for an individual—if they can adapt to the violence necessary for such a task. 

Stubbs is the perfect character to display this adaptation because he operates on logic and knows what he needs to do to maintain his station. Although Stubbs isn’t actually feasting with the sharks, in a sense, the sharks and Stubbs are one in the same—the work force in their society, and much like in our capitalist society, the procurement of products and the consumption of exploits is built on a system of violent expenditures. This characterizes the capitalist whaling industry as an institution of violence. With the work force in the society adapting to be more like sharks in order to survive and thrive. 

However, that’s not to say that all sharks [workers] are created equal. For it’s not Stubb’s that procures the steak for his meal, but it’s his subordinate Daggo—and Stubb’s does not share with anyone. This solitary act of eating what others provide and reinforces the power-dynamics between characters and how violence and influence is seen as power. Stubb is not only representing the work-force at this moment but also the consumers who don’t realize the work of others to produce their items. The work behind the carnage is unseen–out of sight out of mind. However, the sharks bring that carnage back to the forefront. 

 In the previous chapter, the whalers crudely killed the whale, but this act was framed in the sense of accomplishment of their goals, rather than what it actually is—-the act of killing a living creature in order to benefit from what we can use from it. That’s why the scene depicting both Stubbs and the sharks acting in the same manner allows us to make these comparisons on our own volition.

 The sharks were acting erratically, manically tearing apart the beast—-but so were all the men in the previous chapter and the beginning of this chapter. Man and beast become one in the same through their mutual violent acts against the whale. The sharks become necessary to displaying the raw brutality in the act of a killing—regardless of the general motivation. The sharks did it to eat, the whalers did it because it’s their job and that’s what’s necessary in the society they live in. 

However, that begs the bigger question of if the means of procuring these items justifies the violence in their retrieval—-why is the violence necessary? 

This is because violence becomes necessary due to capitalism. The whalers live in a capitalist society that thrives for continuous economic growth and competitive markets, and as a result, they are pushed to be better than their competitors. For whoever has the most money in this society, holds the most power. This individualistic and competitive mindset are what leads to the pursuit of power through any means necessary and this typically manifests into a particular type of violence. In whaling, it has manifested in the overhunting of whales in the pursuit of profit and to just survive in general. Just like the sharks, many people are just trying to survive in the world that they live in. If violence becomes a means of survival, then we must be violent. This is what this scene depicts, how because of the capitalist society they live in, the work force has had to adapt to violence. For in order to survive in a cruel world, we must become violent—we must become sharks.

Week 4: Idea of the Workforce to Cultural Imagination

Posted on by
5

One part of the reading that stuck out to me this week was the idea that as the sea becomes less relevant to the workforce, it becomes bigger in the cultural imagination. This is such a transition of thought, and maybe why we have more environmental awareness about the ocean. Instead of using the ocean as something for profit and to sustain ourselves, it becomes a cultural idea, and as it becomes personified, we feel more reason to protect it. As we create this cultural idea/fact that the ocean is alive, we can also see this idea of it being helpless, and want to protect it. Similar to a puppy, maybe. 

Gillis brought up this idea of the growing cultural imagination in the context of how the humanities shape our knowledge of the ocean. Right now, I think the ocean is such a signifier of wealth. Real estate properties are higher by the ocean, and it is considered a luxury to be able to go to the beach. I don’t know if this holds true everywhere, though. In Japan, not all of the coast was as valued as living in a big city, like Tokyo. I would be interested in exploring what differences there might be in the value of the ocean in the US versus Japan. In California, anywhere on the coast is expensive and valuable, but I went to plenty of coastlines in Japan that weren’t populated or seemingly expensive. How we view something and the cultural value we place on it is simply that.

I also think it should be noted that our idea of the ocean in the cultural imagination is so limited. When we think of going to the ocean, it is simply to go to the seashore, maybe dip our bodies in for a few minutes. When the ocean was more relevant to the workforce, thoughts of the ocean must’ve been so different. I doubt many thought of white sandy beaches; rather ports with large ships and months of journey.