A month and a half ago starring down the 442-page monster known as Moby Dick, I never would have imagined finishing, much less enjoying, this classic work of American literature. I must admit that Moby Dick is not a monster, but a friend. In reflecting over this fifth and final section of Moby Dick, this thought keeps coming to mind, “Boy! Were those first 108 chapters necessary!” The foreshadowing, suspense, and tragedy that define the final section and climax of Moby Dick can only exist in the context and character development of the first four sections.

            Looking at character development, the interactions between Ahab and his mates, Starbuck and Stubb, are key to this final section of Moby Dick but can only be understood in the context of the previous four sections, or more specifically, chapters 38 and 39. In chapters 38 and 39 Starbuck and Stubb both react to Ahab’s pronouncement to hunt the White Whale. Starbuck sees the dismal fate of captain and crew but vows to oppose Ahab, while Stubb sees the same dismal end and vows to go down laughing (“Dusk”, “First Night-Watch”). In the context of these chapters, Starbuck and Stubb’s actions in this final section can be understood as either playing out or failing in their vows.

            Throughout this final section of Moby Dick, Starbuck has several chances to oppose Ahab but fails in carrying out his vow to thwart fate. Starbuck faces an ultimatum in chapter 123 “The Musket” when he must decide between murder or acquiescence. In a long soliloquy on page 395, which features broken sentences, aporia, and hypophora, Starbuck attempts to justify the murder of Ahab but stops short when he faces the question, “And would I be a murderer, then, if…”. Similarly, Stubb also fails in his vow to go down laughing as the reality of Ahab’s hunt sets in. In chapter 130 “The Hat” a brief paragraph uses parallelism in stating that, “Stubb no more strove to raise a smile; Starbuck no more strove to check one.” This same paragraph also states the reason for both Starbuck and Stubb’s failure to fulfill their vows – Ahab’s iron soul. This descriptor is a reference to an analogy between iron rails and Ahab’s set path made earlier in the novel in chapter 37.

            If I had to choose one lesson that I have learned in reading Moby Dick, it would be that looking back over 442 pages is very different from looking down 442 pages. Your opinion of a book can not be formed until you can reflect on a complete work. If I had stopped reading Moby Dick after 30 or so chapters, my opinion of the book would have been that it was wordy, belabored, and scattered. However, after finishing Moby Dick I have realized that Herman Melville’s every chapter and word were written and chosen with a purpose and that purpose cannot be fully appreciated until the very last word of the Epilogue.

This next to last section of Moby Dick was jam-packed with description and characterization, further developing the central themes of the novel. Throughout this section I found myself asking questions such as: How does man relate to nature? How does man relate to his fellow man? In asking these questions, I realized that perhaps I was embarking on the same journey that Melville took in writing his life’s work. In seeking to answer these questions, Melville utilizes a handful of rhetorical devices.

When considering man’s relationship with nature, I noticed an interesting trend in Melville’s description/characterization of the whale. Through a series of rhetorical questions in chapter 81 , Melville suggests that the Leviathan, “with the strength of a thousand thighs in his tail”, is in fact a hunted creature to be pursued by men, suggesting that man and nature are in opposition (“The Pequod Meets the Virgin”, 280). However, Melville later blurs the lines between man and nature by utilizing personification and human comparisons in describing the social dynamics of a school of whales. Melville doesn’t stop there but proceeds to raise the sperm whale to the status of a god when describing a sperm whale skeleton. Melville develops an analogy in which this whale skeleton is the weaver of the loom of the world and man merely its worshipers (“A Bower in the Arsacides”, 348). In this manner, a cycle is completed: man hunts the whale for survival, man and whale are equals with similar challenges, man worships the whale as a provider.            

In addressing man’s relationship with his fellow man, Melville describes a utopian dream and then allows his own characters to tear it down. In chapter 94, Melville describes, through Ishmael, the strange and unique process of squeezing (“A Squeeze of the Hand”). Using repetition, Melville emphasizes the equality and comradery in squeezing, even suggesting the process to be the solution to social injustice. However, Ishmael’s Utopian dream is torn down by the countless flawed characters in Moby Dick. There is the selfish and hypocritical captain Derek (275), the cruel and racist Stubb (320), the monomaniac captain Ahab (338), and the abusive Lord Warden (307). These characters show that the good will and kindness represented in the squeezing is unfortunately unattainable.

The Heidelburgh Tun, Stoicism, Platonianism, and Jeremy Bentham are but a few of the objects, philosophies, and people which Melville’s heavy use of allusion has compelled me to research in reading this third section of Moby Dick. Allusion, amplification, and analogy appear to be the three A’s of Melville’s rhetorical toolbox. However, I realized that much of the mastery of Melville’s writing is lost on me due to the age in which I live – the Information Age. I find it ironic that it is the wealth of information at my fingertips that acts as the limiting factor in my pursuit to understand and appreciate Melville’s writing. The wealth of information available to us in the 21^st century is overwhelming. In exchange for readily available sources of information, man has become a slave to convenience and the pell-mell pace of modern life. In this manner, we no longer prize the acquisition of knowledge and its expression in writing as did Melville’s contemporaries. I have found myself to be impatient and prone to distraction while reading Moby Dick. Therefore, I forced myself to take a step-back, use the tools around me, and learn to appreciate Melville’s writing.

Melville’s use of allusion in this section was bountiful, and as I alluded to earlier (sorry I couldn’t help myself), much of it was lost on me. As such, I wanted to research and reflect on one of Melville’s allusions in this collection of chapters. Melville alludes to Jeremy Bentham, or more specifically, Jeremy’s skeleton (“Of the Monstrous Pictures of Whales”, 211). In the section in which this allusion is made, Melville is explaining the hopelessness of determining the characteristics of a whale from its mere washed up skeleton. I researched Jeremy Bentham and discovered that he is considered the father of Utilitarianism and left express wishes that, upon his death, he was to be dissected and preserved. His body is housed at University of College London. This allusion emphasizes the absurdity of representing the temperament and characteristics of a being based upon its shell or carcass through subtle humor. This allusion can also be seen as a jab at society or the vainness of man.

Another aspect of Melville’s writing which at first bored me was his use of amplification, but as I have continued to read, I have come to appreciate this rhetorical tool as it increases the depth and nuance of concepts and ideas whether abstract or concrete. In fact, whole chapters of Moby Dick can be considered amplification in emphasizing one small point of nuance. Chapters 69, 72, 74 stood out to me as examples of amplification upon a simple idea or point of communication. In chapter 69 Melville uses amplification in describing the disposal of the sperm-whale carcass (“The Funeral”, 241-243). In expounding upon this small event, Melville deals with the relationship between man and nature using personification in describing both whale and feasting sea creatures. Similarly, in chapter 72, Melville describes a monkey rope using amplification, emphasizing the concept of each man’s fate being tied to others (“The Monkey-Rope”, 252).

Amplification and allusion are rhetorical tools which the Information Age has buried in favor of summary and directness. In essence, modern readers of Moby Dick find no time to truly appreciate the knowledge and wisdom behind the plot. To Melville, wisdom, wit, and knowledge were precious treasures that required an investment of time and resource. The modern reader of Moby Dick would strip Melville’s work of all that made it great out of the assumption that knowledge can be gained tomorrow and with a lesser investment of time. Therefore, I congratulate all those who have soldiered on through the minutiae of cetology, monkey ropes, counterpanes, harpoons, various sailing vessels, and other such nautical terms in their quest for knowledge and understanding.

Melville’s recipe for mood in this section of Moby Dick is a simple one: equal parts doom, gloom, and woe. Whether it be a description of captain Ahab’s brow (“Ahab”, 103) or the eerie ravens off the Cape of Good Hope (“The Spirit-Spout”, 187), Melville does not stray from his foreshadowing recipe. Melville also kicks the plot into overdrive (or at least a pace that compared to the previous chapters seems haphazard). Melville dedicates five masterful chapters to the complexity of ship hierarchy and each reveals the crew’s reaction to Ahab’s vendetta, from the first mate all the way down to Ishmael (“Sunset”, “Dusk”, “First Night-Watch”, “Midnight, Forecastle”, “Moby Dick”). In addition to developing the mood and plot, Melville also uses these chapters to introduce several important points and subjects which include cetology, to which a whole chapter is dedicated, and the probability/likelihood of whaling myths (“Cetology”, “The Affidavit”).

            One theme that stood out to me through this section is the idea of fate, or more specifically, each crew member’s view of fate as it pertains to Ahab’s quest for revenge. Captain Ahab, in an eloquent soliloquy, uses several analogies in exploring the weight of his quest upon his soul and arrives at the statement that he desires to be both “prophet and fulfiller one” (“Sunset”, 137). Ahab also compares the path to his fixed purpose (hunting Moby Dick) to iron rails upon which his soul runs a set course (137). However, Ahab’s first mate, Starbuck, having foreseen the dismal end of both captain and crew, refuses to admit that fate is set and vows to change what has already been determined (“Dusk”, 137). Stubb, the second mate, on the other hand, believes that fate is predestined and unchangeable and resolves to face fate with laughter (“First Night-Watch”, 138). All three characters present their inward thoughts via soliloquy. The crew’s perspective on fate is presented in the form of a play, complete with stage directions, and reveals a group of men trapped and tied to Captain Ahab’s fate through servitude (“Midnight, Forecastle”).

            A rhetorical device that features prominently in this section is analogy. An extended or more intricate metaphor, Melville uses analogies in describing the relationship between Captain Ahab and his officers as well as fate. A weary family party, a sultan accompanied by his emirs, and a maned sea-lion surrounded by cubs are just a few of the analogies that stood out to me as Melville described Ahab at dinner with his mates. Melville also presents his view of fate in analogy by comparing it to the weaving of a mat. The various components of weaving a mat become analogous to free will, destiny, and chance. However, this analogy of warp and destiny, shuttle and free will lead me to the following question – can free will and fate coexist? In Moby Dick it seems that the characters are resigned to fate, but perhaps mostly because they are trapped by their duties found in the hierarchy of the Pequod.

Reading through the first twenty-seven chapters of Moby Dick, Herman Melville utilizes rhetorical devices to plant in the mind of the reader ideas that echo the enlightenment ideals of thinkers such as Voltaire (e.g. Ishmael refers to the whole “worshipping world” to which everyone belongs (78)). In these opening chapters, Melville exceeds the necessary word count in communicating his thoughts on American as well as global society. Although he introduces topics such as race and religion, the composition of Moby Dick is far from the direct and absurd satire that Voltaire utilized in addressing similar subjects. In contrast, Melville creates nuance through a combination of rhetorical devices interlaced with passionate and poetic passages that remind me of Shakespeare’s plays or Homer’s epics.

            In addressing race, one passage from Moby Dick stood out to me. In chapter ten “A Bosom Friend”, Ishmael, the narrator, describes how his previous prejudices toward savages (i.e. people from Africa or with darker complexions) dissipate after becoming the bedfellow of a so-called “savage” named Queequeg, leading to an unexpected friendship. The epithets throughout this passage struck me. Phrases such as “splintered heart”, “maddened hand”, “wolfish world”, and “soothing savage” are woven together by Melville into an almost poetic style reminiscent of Shakespeare (49). The result is moving and appeals to the reader’s emotions.

            In addition to race, Melville also addresses the hypocrisy and legalism of Christianity as an institution, while at the same time supporting a tolerant and universal world religion. Again, in chapter ten, Melville uses a combination of hypophora and syllogism as Ishmael presents his reasoning behind joining Queequeg in the worship of the idol Yojo (50). Posing questions such as “what is worship?”, Ishmael then provides the apparent answers to these questions in an inner dialogue. This question-answer cycle continues until Ishmael reaches the final conclusion that, “I must then unite with him in his; ergo, I must turn idolater.” This passage presents Melville’s view that good Christian charity and evangelism can only stem from religious understanding and acceptance. Building upon his ideals of tolerance, Melville goes on to introduce the character of Captain Bildad, a Quaker, who has reduced religious hypocrisy down to a science. Ishmael states that Bildad had come to the “sage and sensible conclusion that a man’s religion is one thing and this practical world quite another (“The Ship”, 67).” Melville utilizes situational irony in depicting Bildad’s hypocrisy, characterizing him as a man who quotes scripture, not for self-betterment, but in an attempt to manipulate others (69).

            Melville’s writing may be complex and archaic, but his subtle critique of the church is one which the modern world continues to support. Hypocritical and bigoted are words still used to describe the modern church. However, these critiques should not drive Christians to reject the church, but instead challenge them to transform it, praying for continued sanctification and Christlikeness. While Melville links Christianity to prejudice and hypocrisy, the character of Father Mapple stands out as a Christian example of humility and understanding.  Melville deems Father Mapple, experienced in the world as a former harpooner and whaler (39), worthy enough to stand and preach from the pulpit. His message of sin and repentance, woe and delight (47) is constructed around the story of Jonah and ends in striking parallelism (“The Sermon”). Father Mapple’s sermon may seem out of place in the context of the first twenty-seven chapters, but in my opinion, it serves as a touchstone, foreshadowing woe to come.