What is THE American novel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellsapoppin

I agree that Moby Dick was the definitive 19th century novel. What a visionary Melville was to write a book of such great depth!

Back then Melville was laughed at. Critics said his writing was the most stupid book ever written. Today the book is acknowledged by many as the USA's greatest writing.

Imagine what a daring thing it was for someone to portray a black man such as Queequeg forging a brotherhood with a white man like Ishmael. An integrated church in segregated New England presided over by a black preacher in Father Mapple. Mapple was a fictional character based on Edward Thompson Taylor who preached in integrated churches -- very unusual for that era.

The color white is usually portrayed to this day as representing good, purity, or cleanliness. In Moby Dick it is portrayed as being the embodiment of evil (the whale is white; see also Chapter XLII where several examples are given which display white as evil). Critics of that era viewed that as blasphemy!

There is so much to that book that one could write an encyclopedia just to analyze it. What a writing!

---

Queequeg was south pacific; Tashtego was native-american, Daggoo was African; Fedallah was Parsi. I don't recall Father Mapple being black. Perhaps I'm not recalling correctly but I don't think you're right about that.

Interesting about the black/white color scheme in reference to the racial issues of the time. I have never seen that in any criticism. I also don't really see racial themes inside the novel, but i guess one can make the argument. Melville has a very universal cast of characters, certainly by intention.

The most exciting part of that book was when Queequeg and Ishmael were in bed together, except they didn't do anything, much to my 13 year old self's chagrin.

I argue that Gatsby and Of Mice and Men are, because the first is about living the American dream, and the second is about yearning for it. If you don't have an interest in America, you lose something from reading them.

What about Lolita? Yeah, it's not American, but it's about Europe vs. America...

Winesburg, Ohio by Anderson comes to mind. To this day it can describe life in small town America.

''Queequeg was not black ... he was south Pacific''


The narrative describes him as a south Pacific 'savage' who had a ''bald purplish head''. You may recall the old story of the so called ''purple people eaters'' and this should help illustrate his skin tone. As for other south Pacifics, consider these:

http://www.as.edu.au/current_happeni...an_culture.jpg



Father Mapple is described as having ''large brown hands'' [p 51] and a ''swarthy forehead''[p 56]. To the people of that era, Mapple and Pacific islanders would have been called black rather than brown because they were not as racially sensitive as we are today.

Still, the idea of a black/brown man as brother to white man was astonishing to people of that time. This was a reason why the book was so hated by those critics.



see MB, Riverside Edition, 1956

Moby Dick is very very boring

an american tragedy, what else. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellsapoppin

''Queequeg was not black ... he was south Pacific''


The narrative describes him as a south Pacific 'savage' who had a ''bald purplish head''. You may recall the old story of the so called ''purple people eaters'' and this should help illustrate his skin tone. As for other south Pacifics, consider these:

Father Mapple is described as having ''large brown hands'' [p 51] and a ''swarthy forehead''[p 56]. To the people of that era, Mapple and Pacific islanders would have been called black rather than brown because they were not as racially sensitive as we are today.

Still, the idea of a black/brown man as brother to white man was astonishing to people of that time. This was a reason why the book was so hated by those critics.



see MB, Riverside Edition, 1956

---

The point of Queequeg is the exotic nature of his character, that he is a cannibal, or at least was. I think it does suggest a universal friendship across cultures. But it does not really suggest (at least to me) the specific racial issues of negro slaves in America. I think the character of Pip, the little black boy, may suggest that. As to Father Mapple, I have found no one who refers to him as a black man. Those details you point out can mean anything and if Melville wanted to make a black/white theme with his character he would have been more explicit.

am glad to hear other people bashing (rightfully so) moby dick besides me! the only other book ive read that comes close to being as disappointing was catcher in the rye (thank you lokasenna).

i like semi-fly's question but id like to go a bit earlier and id have to put forth something by james fenimore cooper---the pathfinder, or last of the mohicans.

Having read this entire thread I must as this question. CAN the " Great American Novel" be quantified?


It rather depends upon the era one selects from and ones individual criteria does it not? It's likewise dependent upon what given tome "hits the nerve" and resonates resoundingly within ones soul.

For some of us who came of age in the '60s and '70s it may well be from the beat generation writers and those influenced by them ,Kesey comes to mind as does "Bible" of the Beats i.e. " On The Road" ( of course already mentioned) , but there's much more to Kerouac that just that pivotal volume.

For a certain body of readers it may well be the three by Steinbeck mentioned within this thread , but once again there's much more to his body of work than Of Mice and Men , The Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden.

Likewise with Fitzgerald or Faulkner , Hemingway and myriad and sundry other writers.


For some it may well be a "road book" such as On The Road , or William Least Heat Moons " Blue Highways" or Steinbecks " Travels With Charlie".

For some it may well be something of contemporary nature such as " The World According To Garp , Heller's " Catch 22" or The Milagro Beanfield War by Nichols or any given Tom Robbins novel , some may vote for certain Mailer volumes , some for Studs Terkel , some for Capote , some for James Baldwin.

There are a thousand and one candidates , but personally I'd be thoroughly unable to pick a sole volume as the definitive 'great American novel"......

And I for sure wouldn't pick Moby Dick , my bias against Melville is well known and quite longstanding.

As regards Fitzgerald , don't miss Tender Is The Night , The Beautiful and The Damned and This Side of Paradise.

Faulkner? Light in August was good but Absalom, Absolom and The Sound and The Fury and his last work The Reivers were easily it's equal.

And for southern writers , how can we forget Tennessee Williams , Robert Penn Warren, Flannery O'Connor , Eudora Welty and Twain?


The original question is highly subject to individual likes/dislikes and interpretation and thus unquantifiable.




B.

I must play advocate to ye landsmen...


I understand some people don't like Moby-Dick because its long and it has those slow, philosophical chapters. But those same people won't mind those great 600 page Russian novels with the expansive plot. If you focus on the plot of Moby Dick, however, you are missing Melville's purpose.

Half of the novel is not there arbitrarily; to compare a Right Whale's head and a Sperm Whale's head; or to ponder the history of "white." Its there to first off, give you more background information on the book you're reading and second, it lets you think about the subtleties of Moby Dick. The reason its a great piece of literature is because it can be interpreted in so many different ways and your interpretation of it is key to understanding it.

''Those details you point out can mean anything and if Melville wanted to make a black/white theme with his character he would have been more explicit.''


As was pointed out by another poster here, you cannot get more explicit than by having two guys sharing the same bed (this, after declaring their brotherhood for life).

;)

And Ishmael WATCHES Queequeg get undressed. Isn't that a bit pervy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby died with the Stock Market Crash of 29. The Great Gatsy was a fun story.

---

If Gatsby died with Stock Market Crash of 1929, how come that between 1941 - 1949 there were 17 reprints of the book and it is still being reprinted today? Your off-hand reference to it as "a fun story" is refuted by many of those who have written introductions to those reprints; such as Ruth Prigozy;Professor and former Chair of English at Hofstra University,Hempstead, New York. Her introduction shows how such influences as Keats, T.S.Eliot, Spengler etc. are embedded in the novel and that, "The Great Gatsby is an original novel that traces through the history of one shadowy man the history,hopes,dreams, and fate of a nation and ultimately leads us to consider a human quest that lies beyond geographical, even earthly boundaries."
Prof. Prigozy concludes her introduction with: "Surely that image of the individual pursuing his destiny, however, is the greatness of Gatsby, and perhaps of us all."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joseph90ie

Nothing off-hand about calling something a fun story; that's the most flattering compliment any author can get. All those professors writing introductions: those brains are ten a penny.

---

I think it's clear from the general tone of jon1jt's post that he was being dismissive of Gatsby rather than complimentary. I would agree with you that a novel should be enjoyed as a story and not just as an intellectual exercise.
Here is something I posted on a fortmer thread:

[QUOTE=Brian Bean;671315] When I read a book, I expect to be informed AND ENTERTAINED,but a host of 'GREAT' writers featured on this forum fail miserably in the entertainment stakes. One of the few writers who combines intellectual insight with an entertaining story is Scott Fitzgerald whose Tender is the Night I am currently reading. If I were to name the writers that I think boring, I would be thought to be an utter philistine but my literary interests cover French and German writers in their original language. I have no time for writers whose works flounder in the kind of intellectual obscurantism that gives them an importance that registers with a comparatively narrow stratum of the intelligently literate population.[/QUOTE

However, there is a clear difference between pulp fiction and writing that both entertains and informs the reader.
As for Prof. Prigozy, I found her introduction to The Great Gatsby very informative and exceptionally enjoyable; I can recommend it as a fun read.

Well, it wasn't jolly.