Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

Where's Herman?

November 22, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The guy featured on the poster had a long white beard and dark black sunglasses, the kind worn by people too cool for any room they might ever enter. At first it looked like he might be the guitar player for ZZ Top. But on closer examination you saw that the event being advertised was not a rock concert but, rather, a "transdisciplinary celebration" called "Why Melville Matters Now.” The man behind those shades was the creator of tortured souls like Ishmael and Bartleby. And the homage to him in Albany this past weekend was designed to make him a local celebrity.

A transdisciplinary celebration is like an academic conference, only different. This one was organized with the support of the State University of New York at Albany -- especially its Center for Humanities, Arts, and TechnoSciences. But the gathering itself took place elsewhere, at the Albany Academy, a private school attended by Melville himself in the 1830s; and the event was open to the general public. Parents and alumni attended, as well as scholars giving papers. It soon became clear that the entire Albany Academy had undergone a recent bout of systematic Melville mania. A bulletin board outside the kindergarten and first grade classrooms showed a school of colorful construction-paper fish, beneath the words “Where’s Moby?” (I must admit that I could not find Moby.)

Herman Melville: great American novelist or great American hipster? Well, it isn’t an either/or kind of situation. Rereading Moby Dick for the first time in ages (now minus the English major’s mental tic of obsessing over how each little part fit into a vast symbolic architecture), I recently underwent the astonishing revelation that Melville (1) definitely has a sense of humor, (2) pretty much invented the postmodern “maximalist” novel of the sort we now associate with Thomas Pynchon, and (3) is so overtly gay and so stridently multiculturalist that Fox News should probably look into how he ever got into the canon.

You don’t have to interpret Melville to make him seem contemporary. He is way ahead of you on that score -- even in ways that can prove somewhat troubling to consider. (Since 9/11, we have gone through a serious bout of Ahab-ism, finding purpose and meaning in the prospect of vengeance, which is the sort of thing that tends not to end well.)

But getting people together to discuss him is no small trick. One of the chief organizers of the gathering, Mary Valentis, an associate professor of English at SUNY-Albany, told me about giving equal weight to two major phases of its preparation. The first was sending out the call for papers, then sorting through the responses to create a program. The other was doing as much as possible to make local people aware of the gathering -- a matter of getting publicity on radio, television, and in the newspapers.

For that, it helped to have things on the schedule other than papers on Melville and cognitive science, or the theological subtext of Benito Cereno. There were art installations, a dance recital, and a 24-hour marathon reading of Moby Dick. The latter even would feature Andy Rooney reading the novel's final chapter and epilogue.

Rooney had a certain amount of drawing power, of course. Apart from being on “60 Minutes,” he is a member of the Albany Academy’s class of ‘39. But it appeared that the single biggest turnout was for the keynote address by Andrew Delbanco, a professor of humanities at Columbia University and the author of a recent biography of Melville.

Any time a scholar can successfully compete with a TV curmudgeon, it seems like a good thing.

Delbanco provided an overview of Melville’s life and work, and discussed his posthumous emergence as an iconic figure in American literature. He also noted that every town seems to have at least one restaurant or bar named after Moby Dick. (In my neighborhood, it’s the Moby Dick House of Kabob.) It was a good example of a talk that could serve as an introduction to Melville for a complete novice while also holding the attention of someone who had read around in the secondary literature. Not the sort of thing you hear very often, alas. The 150 or so listeners, ranging from high school students to full professors, seemed to appreciate the effort.

But it left me wondering why there weren’t more people in the audience. Despite Moby-themed eateries, it seemed as if there might still be some barrier to wider interest in Melville. After all, an event devoted to Edgar Allen Poe would probably have drawn a larger turnout.

“I guess I would say that Poe might draw better,” Delbanco responded, “because he is a writer whom one encounters in childhood and, perhaps, because of the melodrama of his life -- I heard that Sly Stallone was thinking of making a movie about him -- while Melville is up against the general decline in serious reading.... Is there any demanding writer from the past who would bring out a bigger, more various audience? Henry James has a certain currency because of the Merchant-Ivory movies, but I don't think he'd pack 'em in even if Isabel Archer was from Albany.”

Fair enough. And in any case, I did get a glimpse of a potential way of building up non-academic interest in Melville later, while talking with Patricia Spence Rudden and Jane Mushabac, both of them professors of English at the New York City College of Technology, which is part of the City University of New York.

We had been having an entertaining ramble of a conversation at dinner, covering teaching loads, the scholarship on women in rock music (the subject of a book Rudden is editing), and Melville’s sense of humor (which it was good to learn was not just my imagination, since Mushabac has written a monograph  on the subject). At some point, one of them said: “They keep trying to make him a New Englander, but they can’t have him!”

Huh? They filled me in on the argument over whether New York City or New Bedford, Mass. gets to lay claim to Melville. Neither side, it seems, is much impressed by the Albany claim. (Still, it’s worth noting that a letter from Melville’s father described him as being, at age 7, “of the true Albany stamp.”) The dispute is now confined to scholarly circles, for the most part. But it seems like the kind of thing that could be transformed into a full-scale rivalry among the cities, complete with local reading clubs, public lectures and debates, and a certain amount of trash-talking.

Well, it’s an idea anyway. And the flow of benefits between scholars and the public might be a two-way transaction.

One paper “‘Hideous Progeny’: The Monstrous, Monomaniacal, and Gothic Themes of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as Echoed in Herman Melville’s Moby Dick” stirred up some interesting discussion afterward -- including a question by an audience member from Salem who preferred to emphasize the influence of Nathaniel Hawthorne. (A little of that territorial imperative going, maybe.)

The author of the paper, Phil Purser, is a graduate student in English as the University of West Georgia, and he fielded the question well. The influence of Hawthorne on Melville is a standard topic in the scholarship. But for that very reason, it’s not the sort of thing one expects to have to sum up immediately right after presenting an analysis of the relationship between the White Whale and Victor Frankenstein’s Creature.

Afterwards, Purser told me that he had just driven 22 hours from Carrollton, Georgia to attend the event. He expected it to be like other conferences he had attended -- the usual mixture of professors and graduate students. (Which also means, often enough, “questions” for which any possible answer is a minor distraction from the questioner’s performance of a professionalized identity.) The mixed nature of the event took him by surprise. He had to interact simultaneously with other scholars and non-specialist members of the public. “I was asked difficult questions,” he told me, “and I was on some level surprised at how I answered them.... This was definitely not a conference of one-upsmanship in which scholars vie for the spotlight; it was encouraging and intellectually invigorating.”

Take that, New Bedford!
(For a full list of the panels and non-scholarly sessions that made up “Why Melville Matters Now,” check out its Web site.)

Scott McLemee writes Intellectual Affairs each week. Suggestions and ideas for future columns are welcome.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Where's Herman?

  • Melville is alive and well on the TV movie channels
  • Posted by Jim Baron , Dimeritus on November 22, 2006 at 9:00am EST
  • via a major act of intellectual property theft called "Jaws." Seriously -- think about the major characters (including the big white aquatic god/symbol), the plot, and the themes.

  • Posted by Glen on November 22, 2006 at 9:50am EST
  • Melville! enough said.

    "Since 9/11, we have gone through a serious bout of Ahab-ism, finding purpose and meaning in the prospect of vengeance, which is the sort of thing that tends not to end well."

    Well, our Captain has. Alas, we all have our white whale, don't we?

  • hunting Captain Ahab: vengeance or discovery?
  • Posted by clare spark , Independent Scholar on November 22, 2006 at 1:01pm EST
  • There is no consensus in Melville studies or among his readers as to the meaning of Captain Ahab and his quest. Before the late 1930s, he was read as a Chartist, as a nineteenth-century reformer, as a romantic artist/Melville himself, as a tragic hero, as a representation of indomitable humanity doomed to failure, or as a Promethean Faust figure. It was the achievement of the Old Left and then the New Left to pigeonhole this character as a representation of an evil, imperialistic Amerika.
    This debate should be of interest to everyone concerned with the teaching of the history of the West, and not just to a small coterie of Melville-obsessed readers. I correlate the hot debates amongst Melville scholars with the rise of social psychology as managed by progressives in the elite universities in my long study: Hunting Captain Ahab: Psychological Warfare and the Melville Revival.

  • Posted by Ed Pettit on November 25, 2006 at 5:31am EST
  • On humor, postmodernism and overt gayness, I'd have to pretty much agree on all three. The first quarter of the book is especially funny, or witty, I should say. I still laugh out loud when I read certain passages. And the "postmodernism" is all in our own reading of it. When Melville was rediscovered in the early 20th century, the modernists acknowledged their kinship with Moby-Dick. It's the kind of book that each age rediscovers as their own. And the homoeroticism is blatant to contemporary eyes, but I'm still not convinced 19th century readers would have read it in the same way, especially sailors.
    And "why there weren’t more people in the audience. Despite Moby-themed eateries, it seemed as if there might still be some barrier to wider interest in Melville. " Because most people don't read and even fewer read Melville. I would imagine almost all readers of Moby-Dick are in the classroom (and many of those will skip out on finishing it anyway). I usually cringe when academics try to promote literature as "relevant," "hip," or "cool." Hey, check it out, kids. This Melville dude is really whacked. It's like your parents trying to talk in contemporary slang. Melville is Melville, a 19th century writer, mired in his own culture. Does he speak to us? Depends on who's listening. I am. If I have company, that's nice, enjoyable but not necessary. Melville and I get along just fine, just his books and me.
    And the whole regional fight over an author? I'm all for that. I'd be willing to fight for Philadelphia as Edgar Allan Poe's hometown.

  • The 'naive' view witout shame
  • Posted by Jeff Cebulski , Instructor at University of West Georgia on December 1, 2006 at 1:20pm EST
  • Ed and others,

    Just for 'fun'...

    Perhaps the reason why those other-century readers didn't or wouldn't see the "gayness" that claim to be there is because maybe it isn't there.

    I looked with earnest at the alleged passages--I don't see it. What I see is a "Christian" man who is puzzled to find a kind of comradarie and closeness that exists without sexual overtones, as he was taught in his bible studies (to "not lie with a man as with a woman"). Taken literally, it suggests that only a man who is erotically attracted to another man would 'sleep' with him. Here, the young sailor, to have any comfort, is made to sleep in the same bed and finds out, ironically, that he, in fact, can experience an intimacy that is beyond what he was taught. If postmodern eyes want to designate that as a pre-gay condition, so be it, but I don't.

    I sometimes slept next to my cousin on visits to his home, and we "exchanged intimacies," but nothing sexual occurred. Neither of us was interested in that kind of thing; we would talk about girls if anything in that context. I never thought sleeping with another male was 'wrong' because I was never taught that it was.

    One might counter with the idea that since Ishmael and Queequeg could not communicate with words very well, Ishmael's perception of 'intimacy' could only be within his own 'heart,' thus suggesting some sort of transference based on a need. But does that 'need' have to be based on a sex drive alone?

    Melville most certainly was taught that any such situation was wrong, though, and much of his writing suggests a rebellion and sarcasm toward the tenets of his teachers. Thus, the wide-eyed, cynical youthful tone of his writing emerges when his stories hit the sea--and creates images and word play that suggest sexually-loaded ideas from a lad whose education on such matters was suppressed. But that kind of thought can go 'both ways.'

    I don't think it is naive to believe that Melville was not gay or that he was not so "obvious" about it; I have not found any real proof of it (too much suggested metaphor is 'thin' evidence to me). What I find is a sense of wonder in his language and temperament that suggests he is mocking his own upbringing. If that is too simplistic for some, so be it. As for Whitman, well, that's another story...