Need help with Moby Dick.

Okay, maybe I am just not smart enough for this book but why does anybody think Moby Dick was a good book. I seriously think it should have been titled everything you never wanted to know about early 19th century whaling.

There is just about enough story development in this giant book to make a small novella or a large short story. But good God, does any non-cetation bioligist want to read hundreds of pages about the difference between butchering different kinds of whales? Or how about the long winded lecture in which we learn of property laws when a dead whale with harpoons in it washes up on a beach (an event that does not even happen in the story proper.) Sure Ahab is an intresting character, but he does not make it worth it.

Somebody please tell me why this is a good book.

Ahab makes worth of it.
but anyways, a Nightmare is more dreadfull when you discover that you are indeed in your real bed, real room, real house and it seemed to be exactly like your real life.
It would be too strange a book about whaling people do not have references to it, and in the middle of the book, it just helps to prepare you for moby dick coming. Sure, it is far from what we would love to see written, but it works. No one complains when Dumas, for the same reason, give a hystorical explanation in one chapter of the 3 Mouskeeters about the war against the protestant city and Richelieu...

To JADJARAD: If you insist on taking Moby Dick and Melville literally then you will never appreciate one of the great classics of American Literature. It is not about whaling as a trade or an environmental nightmare; it is not about trade or property. It is an epic story of a man's obsession and that obsession at a metaphorical level and about how his intense feeling ultimately is transmitted and taken up by the crew. Moby Dick is not a whale; he is the inexorable power of nature that mocks man and his puny efforts to contain it. You better read about Melville and how he wrote the book over the years before you dismiss it on a prosaic and literal level. quasimodo1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quasimodo1

To JADJARAD: If you insist on taking Moby Dick and Melville literally then you will never appreciate one of the great classics of American Literature. It is not about whaling as a trade or an environmental nightmare; it is not about trade or property. It is an epic story of a man's obsession and that obsession at a metaphorical level and about how his intense feeling ultimately is transmitted and taken up by the crew. Moby Dick is not a whale; he is the inexorable power of nature that mocks man and his puny efforts to contain it. You better read about Melville and how he wrote the book over the years before you dismiss it on a prosaic and literal level. quasimodo1

---

Thats fine, and I can see it in the handful of chapters (maybe ten of them) that actually advance the story. Its the other 400 or 500 pages that I found completely dull and worthless. When you read it, did you not spend the entire book waiting for something to happen? There is some good writing in the first few chapters, a couple of intresting points about Ahab as you go along, and then a finale that is much too small a payoff for all those long dull pages.

Melville goes off on these pointless tangents that I mentioned above that have nothing to do with the story you have described, and there is more of those than there is story. You said it yourself, its not about "trade or property" or "an enviromental nightmare", so why do we have to be subjected to those chapters that detail the things the book is not about?

I know that everybody and their grandmother thinks this is a great book, so I am most likely wrong and you guys are right.

To JADJARHD: oK so you have decided on one criticism...As Ambrose Bierce once criticized a book..."It has only one defect...the covers are too far apart". In literature, no point of view is sacred. So your point cannot be dismissed out of hand. You will have to withstand alot of high-handed and uppety comments on your critiique. It is not fair for me to pound my point of view regarding the work onto your experience of it. I'm thinking you might have a problem with the language of Melville and of the day but still there MAY be tons of verbiage better done without. I wouldn't say so but I'm a fan since reading "Typee" and "Oomoo" (spelling), his earliest works. It is also noteworthy that Melville was associated with the trancendental school which included authors like Hawthorne and Emerson and Thoreau. I am not a traditionalist and think it takes a certain confidence (or niavite) to critisize Moby Dick in this way. But if you think so...so be it. I would say similar things about alot of Dickens work and probably get slammed for doing so. Regardless, the reader may have his day. quasimodo1

I like that covers are too far apart quote.

Its not just that though. I actually really like Dickens although I agree he is long winded. And I have to admit that the language made Moby Dick difficult. The real problem though is that I feel much of the exposition did not actually fit within the story. It's just my complaint though.

The one value I will give Moby Dick is that it makes for good reference material in other fictions. Sometimes it seems every obsessed character since this book was published is compared to (or even quotes) Ahab.

Probally, do you see that the psychological construction of Ahab is almost perfect, and this is why he is such reference?
Now, let me give you a Borgenisian take...
Imagine the book, everything is a product of Ahab acts, hence his crazy mind. Now, we must get lost there. In momments we must be austonished by Ahab and others, just lost. His absence creates some emptiness.
Now, if you enter in the labyrithing you will only be lost in you enter in place almost familiar, that almost seems like normal, almost the exit and you discover it is not.
All the pages where no action is taking, no Moby, No Ahab, they are just setting the moody for all the drama. That is it. If Hollywood had 100 pages it would be a hollywood movie with a main hero that quoted the bible.

Here's why Moby Dick is a stunning piece of literature - Melville creates a piece of writing that delves into some very intense metaphysical ideas - the key question Moby Dick asks is this: What is real, and how do you know?

If you pared the book down to the "action" or "narrative" chapters (the ones where something "happens"), then it becomes a simple adventure story of not much literary weight. Trust me on this: those "useless" info chapters function in the "background" of the story to carefully fill out the larger thematic points Melville wishes to make. Literature is rarely about "what happens" and all about characters and ideas. There's no point in reading just the chapters where whales are being killed or chased - because Moby Dick isn't really about a big white whale. If you think it is, you need to read the book again (which, luckily, will improve your chances of seeing Melville's grander master plan). Good luck :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

Here's why Moby Dick is a stunning piece of literature - Melville creates a piece of writing that delves into some very intense metaphysical ideas - the key question Moby Dick asks is this: What is real, and how do you know?

If you pared the book down to the "action" or "narrative" chapters (the ones where something "happens"), then it becomes a simple adventure story of not much literary weight. Trust me on this: those "useless" info chapters function in the "background" of the story to carefully fill out the larger thematic points Melville wishes to make. Literature is rarely about "what happens" and all about characters and ideas. There's no point in reading just the chapters where whales are being killed or chased - because Moby Dick isn't really about a big white whale. If you think it is, you need to read the book again (which, luckily, will improve your chances of seeing Melville's grander master plan). Good luck :)

---

I'm not sure I will ever pick the book up again (the list of books I want to read before I die being so long) but you have given me something I had not thought of. Nor am I able to visualize it in retrospect. I can see the character study of Ahab stuff. But Metaphysical flew right past me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JADJARHD

Melville goes off on these pointless tangents that I mentioned above that have nothing to do with the story you have described, and there is more of those than there is story. You said it yourself, its not about "trade or property" or "an enviromental nightmare", so why do we have to be subjected to those chapters that detail the things the book is not about?

---

Who says the book is only about a whaling voyage? Or more to the point, who says the book is not about these subjects you consider irrelevant?

Melville started his career writing rollicking stories based on his seafaring adventures. Maybe you should read his debut Typee and see if his more straightforward style appeals to you.

Even in his earliest writings, however, Melville wove his own observations and meditations throughout the story. And the plot of his third book, the remarkable Mardi, started out on a whaling ship but disappeared into political satire, surreal comedy, and philosophical argumentation. At the end, the protagonist's search continued, because the pursuit itself was the point all along. Sound familiar?

In Moby-Dick, Melville combined his most gripping plot with his most probing philosophical inquiries and his most impressive prose poetry. Whaling was the structure of his story, but also was a metaphor for society at large and any community that claimed a common purpose. He played games with his readers' expectations. He deliberately made his characters seem like the cast of a theatrical drama, often speaking in Shakespearean verse or singing bizarre songs. He parodied modern manias about classification and scholarship. He indulged his rhapsodic side, exploring the profound meaning behind the quotidian activities aboard a whaling vessel.

If all this is too much for you, well, you're not alone. But there are Melville fans like myself who appreciate his reckless innovation, and his willingness to give his imagination free rein.

as a reader i would regard moby dick as a soldier might have done when dealing with general patton: hate him i would but never would i disrespect him.

You might have a point about my ability to understand the puropose of those tangents. I am much more grounded in the physical world than the metaphysical. (Indeed my degree is in Physics) So perhaps I have not properly cultivated my intellect to read between the lines to the extent you have indicated. I am no dunce however, so if there is an intended subtext in those long passeges that contains a deep social message than it must be VERY subtle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JADJARHD

perhaps I have not properly cultivated my intellect to read between the lines to the extent you have indicated.

---

You were, however, astute enough to figure out that the main appeal of Moby Dick is not in the plot. Judging by threads like this, you're not at all alone in finding it boring and pointless.

Quote:

---

if there is an intended subtext in those long passeges that contains a deep social message than it must be VERY subtle.

---

I think I can identify with your frustration. I'm sometimes quite baffled by the aesthetic sense of more sophisticated readers. Why in the world should I care for an encrypted manifesto of Melville's opinions?

For what it's worth, I did enjoy Moby Dick very much. It really stimulated my imagination; it was a pleasure to read about this parallel society on a whaling ship, kind of like the pleasure of watching the parallel worlds of toys or monsters in Pixar movies. I enjoyed the overwhelming sense of sublimity that began with the quotations about whales, even before the famous first sentence. I think the "tangential" sections were crucial in establishing this sublimity. I even enjoyed the plot!

As one of the previous posters pointed out, an important part of the appeal stems from the experimental nature of the novel. I think it stands out from the works of Charles Dickens, Victor Hugo, and Tolstoy in much the same way an independent film stands out from the major studio blockbusters. Perhaps that is part of the reason why so many people dislike it; maybe they were expecting an action packed blockbuster and feel disappointed when they find an artsy experiment.

It seems like you're not inclined to try another Melville novel anytime soon, but perhaps a less tedious introduction would be Billy Budd, Sailor. It is much shorter than Moby Dick, but I feel it has a similar aesthetic appeal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluevictim

I'm sometimes quite baffled by the aesthetic sense of more sophisticated readers. Why in the world should I care for an encrypted manifesto of Melville's opinions?

---

Why not? That's one of the many things Moby Dick was. If you didn't appreciate it on that level, fine by me. But there's nothing to be "baffled" about. Certain people appreciate a multifaceted experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babbalanja

Why not? That's one of the many things Moby Dick was. If you didn't appreciate it on that level, fine by me. But there's nothing to be "baffled" about. Certain people appreciate a multifaceted experience.

---

Fair enough. On the other hand, why shouldn't I be baffled? :)

One of the things to keep in mind is that the expectations of the reader in the 19th Century were different than those now. This is both a good and a bad thing, I suppose. Bad because there is stuff we find excruciating now that was great then. Good, since it invites us to put aside how we are now accustomed to how a story should be told and look at story-telling from another angle.

Why is there so much detail in Moby Dick? Well, in part, to give credibility to the story -- Melville was selling this and other stories on the idea that he had been there and done that. (In a way he is a kin of Hunter Thompson -- now wouldn't that be an interesting paper!) Also, it helps develop the idea of how bizarre Ahab's idea is, when put against the prosaic. Also, in the days before TV, these chapters were the equivalent of the Discovery Channel.

Interestingly, the book was originally a flop, so your appraisal was shared by many readers in the day. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

Here's why Moby Dick is a stunning piece of literature - Melville creates a piece of writing that delves into some very intense metaphysical ideas - the key question Moby Dick asks is this: What is real, and how do you know?

If you pared the book down to the "action" or "narrative" chapters (the ones where something "happens"), then it becomes a simple adventure story of not much literary weight. Trust me on this: those "useless" info chapters function in the "background" of the story to carefully fill out the larger thematic points Melville wishes to make. Literature is rarely about "what happens" and all about characters and ideas. There's no point in reading just the chapters where whales are being killed or chased - because Moby Dick isn't really about a big white whale. If you think it is, you need to read the book again (which, luckily, will improve your chances of seeing Melville's grander master plan). Good luck :)

---

I agree when you say that "Literature is rarely about "what happens" and all about characters and ideas". BUT: the great author is able to weave these two things together, instead of hopping from the adventure story narrative into long rantings about his ideas. A novel, in the end, is meant to be a pleasant read, whatever the "ideas" the author wants to share with his public. A perfect example of such an author that manages to write highly readable multi-layered stories is Salman Rushdie. Melville, I'm afraid, is not.