James claims about Ahab: he is not
a man of peculiar personality. It is the life that he lives that makes him what
he becomes. In other words, there is not something essential in him that creates
his totalitarianism, rather it is his isolated lifestyle that has led him to
become the man he is. This isolation has detached him from humanity.
James goes on to say that although
Ahab also benefits from material progress, industrial civilization is
"destroying his life as a human being", causing him to live an
"inhuman existence". Ahab's problem, says James, is representative of
the problem of world civilization. For now, I am not sure that I quite
understand if the deadly whale bite is a trigger or a cause for Ahab's evil. Until
Ahab's "violent catastrophe", how is Ahab different than any other captain
of a whale boat? Are they all easily susceptible to totalitarianism?
As James builds up Ahab's
character as a prototype madman, he states that "men who are thinking like
that…are being steadily prepared for desperate action". If a "violent
catastrophe" descends upon them, "they are going to throw aside all
the traditional restraints of civilization". Meaning, when Ahab gets his leg bitten off, the
totalitarian within him is unleashed. It seems to me like a few stages have
been skipped here. How did we get from an extremely lonely captain to the
monomaniacal man that he now is? Does that
mean that a violent catastrophe is liable to transform every modern man into a
totalitarian?
All this renders James' comparison
of Ahab to Hitler and other dictators problematic; Hitler didn't contrive the
final solution after experiencing a violent catastrophe. Saying that would be bordering on
blasphemous. Rather, as James tells, the Nazis had a frightfully calculated
plan; it didn't arise from a whim, or from chance events. Doesn't calling Nazis
"mad" release them from responsibility for their actions? In the same
sense, when we call Ahab "mad", aren't we letting him off the hook? What are the real roots of Ahab's evil? And if
I'm already on a question roll- if, like we saw in the previous lesson, the
idea of the whale as a whale gets deflated, why does Moby Dick have to be a
whale? This projection of hate seems so arbitrary. Obviously, we are dealing
with the whaling business, and Ahab is wreaking vengeance on his whale
attacker, but if a seagull (a somewhat slightly less ominous animal) would have
poked his eye out instead, would we be reading about man's chase after bird? Is there a reason (besides the whale happening to be the animal that attacked him) that Ahab "piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage"?
No comments:
Post a Comment