Is This Truly One of the Great Works in English?

Do people unanimously agree on that, nowadays?

I'm sixty years old. I "read" Moby Dick in high school, but as it was too abstruse for me to REALLY read it (and I've spent a lifetime as a literature major, writer, and reader), I thought I would try it again.

I just finished listening to a set of 18 CDs. Took me over a month. I told my wife, "If I were an editor and someone sent Moby Dick to me as a manuscript, I'd say, "Cut out the 600 pages of didactic information about whaling, and you've got a 'whale' of a 200-page story there!"

Does anyone agree? Even if I'm humiliating myself in front of every Western Literature aficionado, I want to say this. I did not feel that way when I re-experienced, after many years, The Great Gatsby or Cry, the Beloved Country or Tender Is the Night, to give three examples.

Besides the encyclopedic essayism about whaling, I found Melville's way of using metaphors to be sometimes overblown and a little irritating--his penchant for saying "the were 'Japans' of so-and-so". I don't know if I can articulate this clearly.

There were some very moving passges in the last several hundred pages, the relationship between Starbuck and Ahab, Pip and Ahab, all the elaborate foreshadowing, etc...although even here it sometimes seemed a little consciously "Shakespearian" to me.

That's my considered opinion, spoken just after finishing the book and before I've had time, or read enough essays, to alter my genuine response.

Please tell me what you think about what I've said.

Sincerely,
Max

well i'm 320 pages into it and so far i've found the education that i've learned about whaling and the whaler's life to be most interesting. that said, i expect the last two hundred pages to be the key to what people say is it's literary greatness. will probably post again if there's any life here after i finish the book.

I read it along with my daughter, who is reading it for summer reading in school (along with The Chosen). I was most impressed with how experimental it seemed, with the way Melville alternated among straightforward narrative, encyclopedia, Shakespearian dialog and stage direction, history, and other forms. In form, it could have come right out of the 1960s.

I've only been finished with it for a couple days, and I don't have my thoughts about what I've read completely together yet. I haven't read any of the critical analysis of the work, although it is impossible to not be aware of the symbolism; even if you never read a word of the book, Moby Dick is now almost a metaphor for allegory and symbolism.

One thing I found most striking is the way that the crew of the Pequod is along for the ride during Ahab's quest; he is leading them toward a goal that they do not share. They are there as a job, for "life" reasons, and the only way Ahab can unite the two goals is economically, by offering the doubloon and promising that Moby Dick is a worthy prize for his sperm oil.

I haven't put that into an overall cohesive understanding yet; it is only a fragment of a thought, one of many.

i like how he ends many of his chapters with such emphatic statements addressed to the reader. he was obviously a very educated man of the world's peoples and religions. you get a real flavor of how he viewed the world through ishmael. many of his statements wouldn't pass the 'politically correct' test today, but i'm sure this was how the elite viewed the world. added about 30 pages to my reading yesterday. in that was the chapter with the german 'jungfrau' ship. here he points out that the germans aren't really seen as much of a force in the whaling industry and the story of how they miss out on the whale kind of affirms that. re-read how he ends that chapter and you will get an idea of what i mean about how he ends many of his chapters with his words of 'wisdom' for the reader.

Early on he sets up Ishmael as an unreliable narrator. In the section on whales, Ishmael calls the whale definitively a fish; but whales were known to be mammals for well over a hundred years, and Melville had to be aware of this. That has the effect of shading the narrative, from it being a definitive account to one that must be taken with some doubt. All of it falls into the realm of Ishmael's "I think", "I believe"; Melville's unreliable narrator's personal truth. Ishmael is trying to tell the truth, but with limited knowledge. This places the story in the context of a larger, unknown truth.

To answer the initial question, ABSOLUTELY one of the great works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

To answer the initial question, ABSOLUTELY one of the great works.

---

I concur. The sections on whaling are part of the whole. Melville is saying something about human nature through detailing the predation and industry on the whaling ship.

To the original poster, your comments follow almost point for point my own notes when I read the book a year ago.

I'm of the opinion that you could trim almost any of our classics and make them superior works. I might take the essays out of the end of War and Peace for instance, the same way you'd like to remove the Whaler's Encyclopedia from Moby Dick. The passages you refer to act as a drag on the rest of the narrative, but I'm afraid that they also fulfill other functions such as breaking up the narrative and providing a type of commentary upon the action in the manner of a Greek Chorus. There's an element of counterpoint that provides a relief from the cross of Shakespearean and Biblical rhetoric in the rest of the book. If it weren't for those frustratingly dense passages, Moby Dick would be a three hundred page whaling adventure the likes of an extended Billy Budd or Benito Cereno. Those novellas are excellent and Melville shows himself a master of the form, but those whaling passages in Moby Dick make a kind of structure which gives the rest of his narrative it's cohesion. While I do think that they create more problems than they solve for the reader, the book would suffer from their removal. There's probably a better way to do what he was aiming at, but balancing the equation is not a matter of simple subtraction as it is with most other books. In this rare case, we would need to add something and I don't know what that something is. It's a bitter pill to swallow but more than made up for by the other elements in this novel.

I was the originator of this thread and last time I'd visited, alas, there were no prospective replies "spouting" anywhere, even to the far horizon. It's gratifying to find these replies.

What I see is, I think, that taste varies. Some of you are definitely deeply stirred by MOBY DICK. I was in parts, but I don't think Melville will ever be my main man. He's too discursive. I tried listening to BILLY BUDD recently on CD, and got bored. I don't tune in to Melville's style, the way I do to some authors.

Not long ago I listened to DON QUIXOTE, some 1,000 pages, and couldn't wait to get in my car again, to hear more. MOBY DICK felt more like a duty.

I don't know that reading it in print would have changed these responses. It so happens that, these days, my print reading consists mostly of short stories, and it's wonderful to "read" the long books with my ears, as I go about errands & drive to/from work, enlivening these otherwise dull periods of time.

Thank you again for replying, fellow sailors of the seas if life and literature!

well i've got less than one hundred pages to go and moby hasn't showed up yet. i'm enjoying melville's writing style though. what an industry this must have been in it's heyday. once the saltwater got in your blood, i'm sure you were hooked.

Max,
I'm 44 years old and I've just finished reading Moby Dick. As I was reading the book I was saying exactly what you were, my copy of the book was 603 pages long and I thought the story could have easily been told in 200 pages. I'm not an English scholar but I do like to read and discuss good literature. So in my very humble opinion the book most definitely has some great qualties, I particularly enjoyed the characters and personalities that Melville worked into the story. However, the endless details about whales and whale ships were beginning to irritate me as well. I know that Charles Dickens was paid by the word for his work and I'm wondering if Herman Melville was also paid by the word. That may explain the lengthy details. Well, now I'm ready for a Michael Crichton novel.

Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by REALnothings@co

Do people unanimously agree on that, nowadays?

I'm sixty years old. I "read" Moby Dick in high school, but as it was too abstruse for me to REALLY read it (and I've spent a lifetime as a literature major, writer, and reader), I thought I would try it again.

I just finished listening to a set of 18 CDs. Took me over a month. I told my wife, "If I were an editor and someone sent Moby Dick to me as a manuscript, I'd say, "Cut out the 600 pages of didactic information about whaling, and you've got a 'whale' of a 200-page story there!"

Does anyone agree? Even if I'm humiliating myself in front of every Western Literature aficionado, I want to say this. I did not feel that way when I re-experienced, after many years, The Great Gatsby or Cry, the Beloved Country or Tender Is the Night, to give three examples.

Besides the encyclopedic essayism about whaling, I found Melville's way of using metaphors to be sometimes overblown and a little irritating--his penchant for saying "the were 'Japans' of so-and-so". I don't know if I can articulate this clearly.

There were some very moving passges in the last several hundred pages, the relationship between Starbuck and Ahab, Pip and Ahab, all the elaborate foreshadowing, etc...although even here it sometimes seemed a little consciously "Shakespearian" to me.

That's my considered opinion, spoken just after finishing the book and before I've had time, or read enough essays, to alter my genuine response.

Please tell me what you think about what I've said.

Sincerely,
Max

---

I think Moby Dick has one of the greatest opening passages of any novel ever written. And it has occasional flashes of brilliance. But it is very uneven. The metaphors are often terribly heavy-handed; it bears the mark of New England Puritanism far too conspicuously, and subtle it is not. It's probably a great novel to teach to college undergraduates, or smart high-school kids, because the metaphors jump out at you.

The narrator is far too obtrusive. Not only are there chapters full of whale-ship technicalities which simply don't belong in a novel, but it also seems that at times the characters aren't allowed to speak for themselves. We don't get to see what they are about; we are told what they are about.

There's a discursive chapter on the subject of whether a whale is a fish or a mammal. It concludes that the whale is a fish. The narrator thereby makes a fool of himself. Sad, really.

Queequeg is one-dimensional. With his buffoonery, his simple-mindedness and his great physical strength, this portrayal of the "savage" borders on being racist. Worse, it's simply bad, lazy writing.

On the other hand, Ahab is an amazing character. In the days after the ship sails, while he mysteriously does not appear on deck, the threat is palpable. A very ominous atmosphere is created. Wonderful stuff.

Moby Dick certainly does have one of the greatest first chapters of any book. I think it's absolutely brilliant, and it breaks my heart that Melville was ridiculed for the writing of this while he was alive.

I'm on page 249 of a 509 page edition and enjoying it, but feeling frustrated in the same ways as you describe, REALnothings. Just now there was a halting bit of narrative as Ishmael described the Pequod's encounter with another whaling ship, the Town-Ho and told a story, to a group of Spaniards, oddly, about how it came to be crewed largely by Polynesians. Then it was back to the encyclopaedic stuff, descriptions of pictures of whales distinguishing the accurate from the inaccurate, and a chapter about 'brit' the food that right whales eat. There's no denying the interest of this stuff, especially for the insight it gives us into the knowledge and lack of it of the day, but it's a strange experience reading it when Melville's done such good work early on setting up the potential for some really tense, conflictual, good old gripping narrative. In a way the constant peeling off on informative tangents and refusing to stick to the story reminds me of Tristram Shandy, which, coincidentally, was the last book I read.

As an otherwise educated 48 year old, I decided to start reading some of the 'great literature' I missed while in school. I was always intrigued by Moby Dick so after I was reminded of this by a glowing review of it on NPR's summer reading series, I dove in---well over a year ago. Last night I finally finished what can only be described as wading through the book. It definitely was a chore.

I agree the whaling encyclopedia, while somewhat interesting, is also a big diversion from the story. In addition, it seems quite odd coming from a guy who says he goes to sea when restless but is new to whaling boats. This is his first whaling trip. Where'd he get all this 'expert' knowledge?

I thought the initial handling of Queequeg was very interesting, illustrating Ishmael's prejudices, but his ability to move beyond these and befriend someone quite different from himself. I was looking forward to how this would relationship develop in the rest of the book. But Queequeg essentially disappeared from the rest of the book. Even when he was on his 'deathbed', Ishmael doesn't deal with it on an emotional level. I found this rather bizarre.

Actually, after he gets out to sea, Ishmael doesn't seem to deal with much of anything on an emotional level. We never hear about his reaction to this mad quest of Ahab's. Does he agree with Starbuck or just get caught up in it like the rest of the crew. I've read very few novels, but this change in the narrator seemed to me to make little sense.

While there were certainly some interesting and moving passages, the overall unevenness and definite cumbersomeness of the book left we wondering why it had survived as one of the "truly great works in English."

I'm currently re-reading Moby Dick for a book group-- this is my third reading of the novel. It definitely rewards repeated readings... something I'm finding to be true of the Iliad also, which I'm also currently re-reading. I'd say this is a characteristic of great literature.

Structurally, Moby Dick was ahead of its time. It reads almost like "experimental fiction", abandoning traditional narrative. It's something that can be frustrating at first brush, and takes a little getting used to. But I'm finding that the effort is rewarded; each time I read Moby Dick, I like it better. (Same as with James Joyce or Proust).

Structurally, Moby Dick begins as traditional first person narration. Then, as the Peqod sets sail, it shifts to an omniscient narrator. We're suddenly privy to other character's thoughts, things "Ishmael" could not possibly know. There is an interlude of theatrical prose, complete with stage directions, and then the non-fiction encyclopedia stuff, and we're off into the stratsophere....

Taken as a whole, though, Moby Dick remains a very traditional novel. The whale-ship is a microcosm, a sounding board on the nature of man, justice and laws, democratic (and other) government of men, religion, and speculations on Nature itself. It reminds me of Victor Hugo and his great "trilogy" of novels on the subjects of Religion, Nature, and the Law: The Hunchback of Notre Dame, The Toilers of the Sea, and Les Miserables, respectively.

And as for his method, what Melville does in Moby Dick is not all that much different from what Balzac did-- Balzac often got quite specific in his novels on the nitty-gritty of society and economy, matters normally outside the scope of fiction. For instance, the business of paper manufacturing in Lost Illusions.

So I think the "digressions" upon the natural history of the whale are not really digressions at all (though they sure seem that way at first...) They simply bring the arena of Nature within the compass of this rather all-encompassing novel. Something novelists, and other artists, have often done.

Well, it's a slow book. But reading is not about speed and action on the first place. I'm re-reading it now, for the first time in English, and I don't find it that "hard" to read.

I see the humour better as in translations. And damn, I love the Ishmael/Queequeg subtext. And I like Starbuck - he's the most "normal" character aboard.

But yes, I admit to love Billy Budd way more than Moby Dick. Not because it's shorter, but its theme grabs you and doesn't let you go. MB is a slow-paced epic, BB is a tragedy which has very few plot-stopping things. And they are all nececcary. And BB's characters are just more lovable. Captain Vere needs a hug.

As for "listening" BB: forget the audio books. Listen the OPERA. It's badass, and if anyone, Britten understood all the subtext. (And by subtext, I mena slashiness.) :blush::blush::blush:

Besides all the intended symbolism of the great white whale, it seems evident to me that Melville intended to introduce the reader to whaling just as much Ishmael, the former merchant marine hand, is being introduced to it. The cadence of a 3-4 year voyage is depicted by the slow chronicle that with encyclopedic asides introduces us, the reader, into this world and let us participate in the hunt. For one, I could hardly wait for the call of "There she blows" breaking with all excitement the every-day routine of days at sea. It is this same monotonous rythm that allows us to get to know piecemeal the crew of the Peaquod. This kind of work harks to a slower paced literary enjoyment unencumbered by the MTV-gen time span or comic book visual narrative. Like other parsed works of great literature [Rememberance of things past - comes to mind] character is revealed hapenstance in bits and pieces, and together with it the general ambiance of an alien time and world. At the end of this voyage you, the reader, come out as expert a whalemen as Ishmael became. You become he.

Good point about Melville writing with a greater knowledge but assuming the ego of a narrator with lesser knowledge. I am reading Moby Dick for the first time, after hearing for years that it is one of the greatest works of American literature. I agree with Max that a lot of editing regarding whaling might make the book more readable.

I am wondering if anyone knows if Melville really believes what he says about animals becoming extinct. In chapter 106 the narrator compares whales to elephants saying elephants are not extinct and will never be, but just before that he wrote about the extinction of the American bison. I am looking for further knowledge or critical analysis about this work.

[QUOTE=country doctor;610794]i like how he ends many of his chapters with such emphatic statements addressed to the reader. QUOTE]

I do know what you mean. Those are some of my favorite parts.

I have to agree with everyone who described reading this book as a chore. It has taken me most of this year to read it and perserverance was certainly the product of a sense of duty at times. The page-turning interest generated by the first (land-lubbing) chapters was not fully rekindled until very late into the book.

Having said that, I actually quite enjoyed Ishmael's lengthy discourse on, and categorisation of cetaceans. I know it could be argued this type of (pseudo) scientifical digression has no place in a novel, as it contributes nothing to the dramatic progress of the tale. However, the beauty of what I would call classic literature is that no stone is ever left unturned. The 'facts' (and Ishmael's ignorance of the Blue Whale - the largest creature ever to have lived - did provoke a smile) serve to add depth to the novel. Without the efforts Melville takes to illustrate the magnitude of the Sperm Whale, I think many people's appreciation of the actual chase of MD, and the destruction he creates, would have been hampered. This would particularly have been true in times gone by when you or I would have no real concept of how truly enormous a whale can be.

Many ideas expressed in the novel have contributed to its recognition as one of the classics. I think the novel overcomes its flaws to be worthy of its lofty status, although I am looking forward to the day I re-read it, and find more in some areas of the book I found less rewarding on my first read.