"language does not express content as much as embodies it".

The opposition between content and shape, material and abstract, is really one of, if not the, most crucial and very long rooted dichotomy which is significant not only in the philosophically elaborated thinking, but also in the everyday speech and activity - today maybe even more than ever. Sometimes it would seem like these days the system of signs has already long ago taken off from its traditional role of representation, to gain a life of its own. This could be seen as the by-product, consciously speaking, of spending lifetimes surrounded by buildings and screens, living by the numbers alone (money, time-o-clock, calories, etc.)

     Melville in "Moby Dick" surely is very aware of this dichotomy, which of course raises immediately after it the whole chain of gender, race, religion, social order and many other motives: the concept of the leader as the one who gives shape and meaning, channels the material forces of his subordinates. Just like man over nature – the role given to him by God in the Bible, reflected in his lingual abilities, his superiority over the animal. Supposedly so – because experiencing a close encounter with a whale, as suggested here and there especially along contemplative episodes of the book, might give some people another idea. Yet again, it might not – and some might see in that animal just another huge bag of money. Still, some crumbs of dialogical approach might stick, and if not by recognition – than by the power of Moby Dick (a whale who has a name, a history – a reputation, hence, personality) to prove his equality very simply, by just refusing to die by the hands of the killers, who really think they must kill him. And then again – what is he but a symbol to represent the real whale we are still only reading about?...