(no subject)
Jun. 24th, 2006 06:44 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
which_chickToday we're going to see what my email looks like. I get some very odd email. Today, I got email from Holland, asking me (in English) about Moby Dick.
The first email:
quote: You don't like my interpretation, fine. I have a Phi Beta Kappa key and an English Literature degree that says I'm qualified to read literature. What do you have ?
Is your selfesteem so low you have to let the world now, and perhaps more yourself, you have a degree or whatever. You almost imply that having no degree in literature, people are not allowed to comment on literature or give opinion for that matter.
Please use your intelect and your knowledge from the books you read to better the people who don't have a degree, don't challange them. Or you got your degree at West-Point ?
Greet
Jorn
Holland
I replied:
> You don't like my interpretation, fine. I have a Phi Beta Kappa key and an English Literature degree that says I'm qualified to read literature.
> What do you have ?
> Is your selfesteem so low you have to let the world now, and perhaps more yourself, you have a degree or whatever.
That got added because I got a bunch of email from people telling me that I had no right to discuss things of a literary nature. I figured that including some credentials (which I do, indeed, have) might ward off further unsolicited comments about how I was not qualified to discuss literature. This has had mixed results.
> You almost imply that having no degree in literature, people are not allowed to comment on literature or give opinion for that matter.
I'm sorry if that was the reading you took from it. That wasn't really what I was going for. I am all in favor of people reading and thinking about and commenting on literature for themselves. That's what folks are SUPPOSED to do with literature and why I feel there is merit even in discussing popular culture stuff that isn't very high- brow. I actually think that strongly enough to have written an essay in defense of fannish interaction with fluff. See here: http://www.bedford.net/teep/guilty.htm
In the stuff you quoted, I was going for "Please don't email me and tell me I'm not *allowed* to write stuff about literature" because people did that, fairly regularly, until I added the blurb. Now I
get email from people who think I'm being arrogant and closing the doors of literary interpretation to others. *sigh* I can't win for losing, here.
> Please use your intelect and your knowledge from the books you read to better the people who don't have a degree, don't challange them.
It was never to challenge anyone. It started as a thing I was doing to help a friend get through the book for her English class. It was for fun, a lark. I had other friends who asked about it, so I put the text online for them to read. I don't know that anybody was *bettered* by it, but Laine got through the book and did well on the exam. I wasn't challenging anyone or claiming that only certain pre- approved groups should be reading Melville, just helping out a friend, and then I got emails from people going, "Where do you get off being mean to Melville like that! It's a great book, an awesome book, and all YOU do is make fun of it! Who the hell do you think you are, anyway? What gives you THE RIGHT to snark at this wonderful work of literature?" I got a lot of emails like that. So I added the part about me being allowed to participate in literary criticism and now I get emails like yours.
The whole thing has been a lively and vibrant education in the futility of trying to please everyone.
> Or you got your degree at West-Point ?
Nope, I got it from Penn State, which is hardly a bastion of higher education. It's not an ivy league school or anything like that, just a college.
> Jorn
> Holland
Congratulations on advancing to the round of sixteen in the World Cup! (We were not so lucky, ourselves, having lost to Ghana the other day.) *sigh* I was in Amsterdam a week ago for vacation, had a delightful time -- lovely weather, nice people, very enjoyable visit.
Jessica
And the person in Holland wrote back again:
hey Jes,
You know I stumbled accross your site because I was looking for information on 'Moby Dick'. In the first chapter there is something I do not understand.
quote
Whalehunting by someone called Ismaël.
Bloody battle in Afghanistan.
I can not understand why a bloody battle of afghanistan is compaired with the hunt for the unreacheable. And was there battle in afghanistan in the 17th century ?? Perhaps you can give me some answers
So I wrote back again.
> Whalehunting by someone called Ismaël.
> Bloody battle in Afghanistan.
> I can not understand why a bloody battle of afghanistan is compaired with the hunt for the unreacheable.
I don't think it is being compared. *sigh* You're going to want me to go get the book out, aren't you? Okay, then. Hang on a minute.
Right. A bigger hunk of the passage you're looking at goes "And, doubtless, my going on this whaling voyage formed part of the grand programme of Providence that was drawn up a long time ago. It came in as a sort of brief interlude and solo between more extensive performances. I take it that this part of the bill must have run something like this:
Grand Contested Election (blah blah)
Whaling Voyage by One Ishmael
Bloody Battle in Afghanistan (blah blah)"
Part of what Melville is doing here is telling you when the voyage took place. The "Grand Contested Election" was the 1840 presidential election that Wm. Henry Harrison won. The "Bloody Battle in Afghanistan" was in 1842 (British vs. Afghans, First Afghan War). Ishmael's voyage, then, took place between these two events.
The other thing that Melville is doing here is calling his Ishmael's whaling voyage "a sort of brief interlude and solo"... the list of events that Melville has Ishmael give us is, uhm, like when you go to see an orchestra and they have a paper handout with the stuff that the orchestra is going to play. It's like that kind of a listing, sort of a schedule, and he's claiming that it's the programme of Providence. Providence can be thought of as Fate -- the predestined thing, where outcomes were all determined in advance and an individual doesn't have any real choice because the end has already been determined already. This view was, iirc, popular with a fair bunch of early American clergy. I think (I don't do religion, so this is a bystander's opinion) that modern ecclesiastical thought is more in favor of the doctrine of free will, but back when Melville was writing, predestination was still a very popular viewpoint.
Anyway, by calling Ishmael's voyage a brief interlude, I think Melville is trying to downplay the importance of the voyage or something -- it looks like he feels the other two events are bigger
and more important and more memorable. It's kind of ironic, isn't it, that the "event" that has really endured the longest in the mind of the common man is the fictional voyage of our humble narrator.
> And was there battle in afghanistan in the 17th century ??
Quite so. First off, it wasn't the 17th century -- that always confuses me, too, but if it's 1800's, that's the 19th century. 1700's is the 18th century. 1600's is the 17th century and that
would be a timeframe more suitable to Shakespeare than to Melville.
Melville published the book in 1850 or thereabouts -- that's the 19th century. The battle in Afghanistan that the book talks about, as far as I can tell, refers to The First Afghan War (British & Indians vs. Afghan tribes) in 1842. (More information available here: http://www.britishbattles.com/first-afghan-war/kabul-1842.htm) Interestingly, the Brits had such fun with the Afghans that they went back some thirty years later for The Second Afghan War, but that was after the book was published.
Hope that this helps. Melville isn't an easy read for me and I speak English as a first (and pretty much only) language. I can't imagine what it would be like to attempt him in a second language. Are you reading him in the original, or in translation?
Jessica
And that's what my email looked like today. It's not all porn over here. Quite a bit of my online life revolves around clarifying minor points in Moby Dick. I think mostly that's because, even though I'm an insufficient authority, I'm a Real Live Human Being (tm) and therefore useful for the asking-of-questions. I should probably find some way to get paid for this...
The first email:
quote: You don't like my interpretation, fine. I have a Phi Beta Kappa key and an English Literature degree that says I'm qualified to read literature. What do you have ?
Is your selfesteem so low you have to let the world now, and perhaps more yourself, you have a degree or whatever. You almost imply that having no degree in literature, people are not allowed to comment on literature or give opinion for that matter.
Please use your intelect and your knowledge from the books you read to better the people who don't have a degree, don't challange them. Or you got your degree at West-Point ?
Greet
Jorn
Holland
I replied:
> You don't like my interpretation, fine. I have a Phi Beta Kappa key and an English Literature degree that says I'm qualified to read literature.
> What do you have ?
> Is your selfesteem so low you have to let the world now, and perhaps more yourself, you have a degree or whatever.
That got added because I got a bunch of email from people telling me that I had no right to discuss things of a literary nature. I figured that including some credentials (which I do, indeed, have) might ward off further unsolicited comments about how I was not qualified to discuss literature. This has had mixed results.
> You almost imply that having no degree in literature, people are not allowed to comment on literature or give opinion for that matter.
I'm sorry if that was the reading you took from it. That wasn't really what I was going for. I am all in favor of people reading and thinking about and commenting on literature for themselves. That's what folks are SUPPOSED to do with literature and why I feel there is merit even in discussing popular culture stuff that isn't very high- brow. I actually think that strongly enough to have written an essay in defense of fannish interaction with fluff. See here: http://www.bedford.net/teep/guilty.htm
In the stuff you quoted, I was going for "Please don't email me and tell me I'm not *allowed* to write stuff about literature" because people did that, fairly regularly, until I added the blurb. Now I
get email from people who think I'm being arrogant and closing the doors of literary interpretation to others. *sigh* I can't win for losing, here.
> Please use your intelect and your knowledge from the books you read to better the people who don't have a degree, don't challange them.
It was never to challenge anyone. It started as a thing I was doing to help a friend get through the book for her English class. It was for fun, a lark. I had other friends who asked about it, so I put the text online for them to read. I don't know that anybody was *bettered* by it, but Laine got through the book and did well on the exam. I wasn't challenging anyone or claiming that only certain pre- approved groups should be reading Melville, just helping out a friend, and then I got emails from people going, "Where do you get off being mean to Melville like that! It's a great book, an awesome book, and all YOU do is make fun of it! Who the hell do you think you are, anyway? What gives you THE RIGHT to snark at this wonderful work of literature?" I got a lot of emails like that. So I added the part about me being allowed to participate in literary criticism and now I get emails like yours.
The whole thing has been a lively and vibrant education in the futility of trying to please everyone.
> Or you got your degree at West-Point ?
Nope, I got it from Penn State, which is hardly a bastion of higher education. It's not an ivy league school or anything like that, just a college.
> Jorn
> Holland
Congratulations on advancing to the round of sixteen in the World Cup! (We were not so lucky, ourselves, having lost to Ghana the other day.) *sigh* I was in Amsterdam a week ago for vacation, had a delightful time -- lovely weather, nice people, very enjoyable visit.
Jessica
And the person in Holland wrote back again:
hey Jes,
You know I stumbled accross your site because I was looking for information on 'Moby Dick'. In the first chapter there is something I do not understand.
quote
Whalehunting by someone called Ismaël.
Bloody battle in Afghanistan.
I can not understand why a bloody battle of afghanistan is compaired with the hunt for the unreacheable. And was there battle in afghanistan in the 17th century ?? Perhaps you can give me some answers
So I wrote back again.
> Whalehunting by someone called Ismaël.
> Bloody battle in Afghanistan.
> I can not understand why a bloody battle of afghanistan is compaired with the hunt for the unreacheable.
I don't think it is being compared. *sigh* You're going to want me to go get the book out, aren't you? Okay, then. Hang on a minute.
Right. A bigger hunk of the passage you're looking at goes "And, doubtless, my going on this whaling voyage formed part of the grand programme of Providence that was drawn up a long time ago. It came in as a sort of brief interlude and solo between more extensive performances. I take it that this part of the bill must have run something like this:
Grand Contested Election (blah blah)
Whaling Voyage by One Ishmael
Bloody Battle in Afghanistan (blah blah)"
Part of what Melville is doing here is telling you when the voyage took place. The "Grand Contested Election" was the 1840 presidential election that Wm. Henry Harrison won. The "Bloody Battle in Afghanistan" was in 1842 (British vs. Afghans, First Afghan War). Ishmael's voyage, then, took place between these two events.
The other thing that Melville is doing here is calling his Ishmael's whaling voyage "a sort of brief interlude and solo"... the list of events that Melville has Ishmael give us is, uhm, like when you go to see an orchestra and they have a paper handout with the stuff that the orchestra is going to play. It's like that kind of a listing, sort of a schedule, and he's claiming that it's the programme of Providence. Providence can be thought of as Fate -- the predestined thing, where outcomes were all determined in advance and an individual doesn't have any real choice because the end has already been determined already. This view was, iirc, popular with a fair bunch of early American clergy. I think (I don't do religion, so this is a bystander's opinion) that modern ecclesiastical thought is more in favor of the doctrine of free will, but back when Melville was writing, predestination was still a very popular viewpoint.
Anyway, by calling Ishmael's voyage a brief interlude, I think Melville is trying to downplay the importance of the voyage or something -- it looks like he feels the other two events are bigger
and more important and more memorable. It's kind of ironic, isn't it, that the "event" that has really endured the longest in the mind of the common man is the fictional voyage of our humble narrator.
> And was there battle in afghanistan in the 17th century ??
Quite so. First off, it wasn't the 17th century -- that always confuses me, too, but if it's 1800's, that's the 19th century. 1700's is the 18th century. 1600's is the 17th century and that
would be a timeframe more suitable to Shakespeare than to Melville.
Melville published the book in 1850 or thereabouts -- that's the 19th century. The battle in Afghanistan that the book talks about, as far as I can tell, refers to The First Afghan War (British & Indians vs. Afghan tribes) in 1842. (More information available here: http://www.britishbattles.com/first-afghan-war/kabul-1842.htm) Interestingly, the Brits had such fun with the Afghans that they went back some thirty years later for The Second Afghan War, but that was after the book was published.
Hope that this helps. Melville isn't an easy read for me and I speak English as a first (and pretty much only) language. I can't imagine what it would be like to attempt him in a second language. Are you reading him in the original, or in translation?
Jessica
And that's what my email looked like today. It's not all porn over here. Quite a bit of my online life revolves around clarifying minor points in Moby Dick. I think mostly that's because, even though I'm an insufficient authority, I'm a Real Live Human Being (tm) and therefore useful for the asking-of-questions. I should probably find some way to get paid for this...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-06-25 01:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-25 03:04 am (UTC)