And this is perhaps something we too have come to be suspicious of when we seek 'the new man' and tell men to 'get in touch with their feminine side'. That he 'shacked up' with tattoed men (and women) in the Marquesas and wrote about the superiority of that simple life over the one his countrymen were leading is another example of his turning his back on the phallus - even though he came back with many tales of his sexual encounters with island women
However, some things I have read about Melville, some in MD, leads me to question his sexuality and to wonder whether the homosexual/homo-erotic nature of life at sea was, in fact, his preference, but one which could not be expressed in his times.
However, some things I have read about Melville, some in MD, leads me to question his sexuality and to wonder whether the homosexual/homo-erotic nature of life at sea was, in fact, his preference, but one which could not be expressed in his times.
fanuzzir wrote:
I just meant that Freud considers anything with a phallus good in the long run. Even if that thing is a little libidinous and chaotic, it still wants to create life. (Like Dionysus in Greek mythology.) Then there is the destructive impulse. I don't remember whether Freud says that comes from the phallus too. It could be. I realize I will be retreating to my old copy of Civilization and its Discontents for the answer.
I do think that Melville was suspicous of phalluses (short for men with power) in general. His idea of a man were two men shacked up. With tattoes.
Hi KatieAudrey and Welcome! Great post and nothing wrong about it at all. We will all look forward to more although most of those here are now embarked on other voyages around other books
I don't think we have implied actal homosexuality here, more homo-eroticism or homosexual behaviour such as often happens when men are together for long stretches, like at sea. Given what we now know about ships, prisons, the army etc it would be very surprising if there were no homosexual behaviour on board the Pequod (or on the ship in which Melville journeyed to the South Seas) and the only real hint of it is between Ishmael and Queequeg. This does not, however, make them homosexuals - not that it would matter if they were - but many heterosexual men behave in a homosexual way in these sort of situations. I am not a homophobe and do not wish to malign Melville in any way by writing this. I see it more as a fact of life.
I did not see the Ahab-Pip relationship as a paedophiliac one because the boy was not in his cabin from the start of the voyage but only when he became insane and after Ahab had made the long speech to Starbuck about his wife and son: 'Starbuck let me look into a human eye...this is the magic glass man; I see my wife and my child in thine eye...' I saw his relationship with Pip more as a fatherly one, wherein he regretted leaving his own son whilst he went to sea and sought to give Pip the sort of fatherly concern he had not shown before. It was part of what I termed his anagnorisis - recognition/realisation.
I don't think we have implied actal homosexuality here, more homo-eroticism or homosexual behaviour such as often happens when men are together for long stretches, like at sea. Given what we now know about ships, prisons, the army etc it would be very surprising if there were no homosexual behaviour on board the Pequod (or on the ship in which Melville journeyed to the South Seas) and the only real hint of it is between Ishmael and Queequeg. This does not, however, make them homosexuals - not that it would matter if they were - but many heterosexual men behave in a homosexual way in these sort of situations. I am not a homophobe and do not wish to malign Melville in any way by writing this. I see it more as a fact of life.
I did not see the Ahab-Pip relationship as a paedophiliac one because the boy was not in his cabin from the start of the voyage but only when he became insane and after Ahab had made the long speech to Starbuck about his wife and son: 'Starbuck let me look into a human eye...this is the magic glass man; I see my wife and my child in thine eye...' I saw his relationship with Pip more as a fatherly one, wherein he regretted leaving his own son whilst he went to sea and sought to give Pip the sort of fatherly concern he had not shown before. It was part of what I termed his anagnorisis - recognition/realisation.
KatieAudrey wrote:
ziki wrote:
Choisya wrote: However, some things I have read about Melville, some in MD, leads me to question his sexuality and to wonder whether the homosexual/homo-erotic nature of life at sea was, in fact, his preference, but one which could not be expressed in his times.
Sexuality on ships....you brought that issue up earlier and we didn't take that line further. I would zoom on Ahab and Pip. I sure wondered I can say.It looked like Ahab protected him.
(Ahem...we have a pedofile living in the neighbourhood and we need to stay alert here...but that is another thing).
Now, the beauty with this book is that we can mold it in any wy we want (like a clay) and see what shape it takes, then reshape it etc. In that process we can discover quite a lot.
ziki
Hi I'm new here so please don't be too harsh on me and my opinions about this book. I'm a junior in high school and we're reading this for AP Lit. I think I would've enjoyed it more if I wasn't forced to read it and if I had more time to read it, but I still really like the book and I hope to re-read it later.
What you said about the novel being something you can mold into whatever you want is an interesting insight and I agree completely. Each generation interprets this book differently, Melville's generation didn't like it too much and no one really noticed it until the 40's when movies were inspired by the story. Ever since then it's been considered a work of art but each generation interprets the meaning of the book differently. Many aspects of the book, such as the relationship between Queequeg and Ishmael, can be interpreted a myriad of ways. Many people in our generation believe Queequeg and Ishmael are homosexual because of several chapters in the beginning of the book that portrayed them as husband and wife or bosom friends. Perhaps Melville was trying to push the limits of society in his day (which in the 1800's was not very open about sex) and therefore purposely hinted at a homosexual relationship or maybe he did not mean to hint that at all. Queequeg and Ishmael later became ship mates on a life changing voyage, there is reasons for them to be so close (especially since isolation drove Ahab insane). What I'm trying to say is that just because Ishmael and Queequeg were close doesn't mean they were homosexual. Also, just because Melville and Hawthorne wrote seemingly homosexual letters to each other doesn’t mean Melville was gay and therefore purposely created homosexual relationships to write about in Moby Dick, but it could be true. As they say, "anything is possible" (yes, I know, very cliché and Orwell would not like it but I don't care too much, to be honest).
I'm going out on a limb about things I’m saying so if I'm totally wrong about anything, kindly tell me. Thanks.
