Where is Herman? In garden

It’s a dumb joke, this thing above. Who knows, maybe some know already what it’s going to be about.  Who knows, maybe Herman Melville himself would appreciate this joke. Or maybe not. In fact, what would he think about it is far less important than what potential reader thinks about it. So what will this text be about? Melville, for sure. But most of all about how we are perceiving texts of culture and what influences that.

Whales have layers too

Toward phenomenology of whales

There’s many theories of interpretation and meaning of literary work. If you’re curious – google such terms like psychoanalysis, phenomenology, Russian formalism, American formalism, Bachtin’s anthropology of culture and literature, hermeneutics, structuralism, semiotics, poststructuralism, pragmatism, historicism… and there are few more to add. Each one of them has different approach to the role of the reader (and the author) in the process of reading. Some seek universal pure meaning and others think any context is a good context. For sure for each their own, I can only invite you for a little reflection from the perspective of literary work as stratified formation. Mostly because it seems the most practical, especially when it comes to what I’m trying to say here.

Some trends killed the author long ago but personally I think it’s a step to far. Authors intentions can’t be ignored simply because there would be no literary work without them. It’s also hard to pretend that author existed in perfect vacuum and knowledge about the context in which he lived is unnecessary. (Of course we can ignore everything and invent anything, taking our conclusions straight outta ass and current weather. If you know answer for the old question of “y tho”, good luck. With such assumptions, discussion is pointless tho]. At the same time pretending the reader and context in which he exist is irrelevant is equally laughable. So I can be clear: I’m talking exactly about finding the equilibrium between what author wrote and what we’re reading, with specific focus on not looking for one true and only interpretation. It’s not about not wearing pink-tainted glasses but knowing we are having them on our noses.

Literary work we’re experiencing is exactly that – a mix of author’s intentions filtered by what he actually achieved and our pre-judgments - expectations, opinions, ideas – what we think the book is going to be.

We can’t get rid of pre-judgements, often we aren’t even aware of them – and the thing is to be aware of them. When we’re expecting drama and receive comedy it’s not hard to be disappointed but whose fault is that? In most cases the author didn’t try to deceive us. Of course being aware of pre-judgements doesn’t magically make us like things that we’re not impressed with, but at least it’ll help us understand why we don’t like something and that it isn’t necessarily book being bad. We should be judging things for what they are and what they’re trying to be, not what we expect them to be. We won’t be less disappointed but said disappointment will be aimed at better direction.

Bunch of guys on a fishing trip or gay sex and black masses?

It cannot be denied that different people are amused and moved by different things. Even though some styles will be more engaging than others (hello, V.C. Andrews anyone?), some will love “Walden” and others, at mere mention of it will go eat something highly processed and breathe the exhaust fumes.

What is the general stereotypical opinion about the classics or even literary fiction in general? Come on, don’t be ashamed. How is it, huh? Boring, isn’t it. And even if nor boring, then at least serious. Dead serious.

And now anyone who actually read some of it (just Dickens i.e.) will dramatically rise their arms and ask me politely what the fuck I’m talking about. Therefore the explanation: I’m not asking how thing are but how they’re perceived . Where does this belief in the seriousness and boredom of the classics come from? I think it’s the same place where “I’m not reading it because I’m told to” lives: weird mix of stereotypes, bad teaching and misdirected rebellion.

Do we have to grow up to some books? In some sense – for sure. That is: there are some themes that will resonate more with someone having more and/or different life experiences than a teenager, but kids in general are not too stupid to appreciate  things and we need to stop telling them otherwise. What I’m trying to say tho is that when it comes to reading, especially more ambitious literature (this name in itself carries a baggage of pre-judgements) our attitude, not our age, experience or even interests, is of utmost importance.

If we’re going to read Moby Dick as a novel about literal hunting down a white whale or even epic tale of vengeance, no wonder we’ll find it boring – there’s almost none of those in it. Plot in general is a stowaway in this novel, thrown over the board and dragged back on deck somewhere at the end. Obviously we’ll be disappointed looking for a traditional novel where it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t mean I think everyone will enjoy Moby Dick, I’m far from that. But we should judge it for what it is.

If we’re reading something dead set on it being serious, it’ll make no sense to us if it actually isn’t. Moby Dick is like ocean, you need to let the waves carry you away, accept everything that is happening and enjoy this shoreless insane vision. There’s place here for gay romance and black mass, for events that are indeed SPECTACULAR (the birth of Tashtego!) that Melville describes with a one of kind gusto. There are narrative choices in Moby Dick that would scare most authors of today – but Melville? He’s not afraid of anyone. Nobody, NOBODY will tell him that Ahab can’t be such drama queen every time he gets on board everything changes into drama. Down with the prose, let the stage directions rule! If the reader approaches such a book with total, crude seriousness and will treat every event completely in earnest and without certain... gusto characterizing the described events, style or even the narrator himself and his morbid fascination with whales - then of course the reader will be stranded on the shore in state of complete consternation.

That something was created long time ago doesn’t mean it was written by this scary old uncle you were afraid as a child. Sense of humor is not a new thing. And even serious matters can be discussed with levity and humor. Fathers and Sons convey some universal truths about the conflict between generations in the form of a lovable comedy. Raskolnikov kills the old hag with an axe specifically because of something we would call a meme today. Throughout the ages people didn’t really change that much. There are some cultural differences that will keep us apart but in general there’s far more that connects us. Maybe jokes were forbidden in school but it wasn’t right and we have to free ourselves from this artificial seriousness. Old book doesn’t have to be boring nor serious nor even especially wise. Classics are not holly cows. You can dislike them, you can disagree with them, you can have FUN reading them. Not high, intellectual kind of fun (though it’s obviously a valid kind of enjoyment). Dumb fun is fun too. Haha fun. Shipping the characters fun. Exploring XIXth century society the same way you’d explore elvish customs in a fantasy book fun.

 

You don’t have to like it but at least face it

Herman Melville was wild. His prose is wild. Definitely this means that not everyone will fancy it. There’s whole chapter in Moby Dick solely about whale’s tail. MAD, but – by God – he was not boring. I think most people read is a white whale chase story while Melville wrote hundreds of pages about how pointless it is (well, that’s one of the interpretations, there are many and some of them are really wild). Moby Dick is like the sea, like the ocean. Shoreless and way more powerful than us. You cannot defeat it – but you can bounce on the waves and enjoy the trip.

 

Method or madness?

It would be probably very fitting to sum up all this talk with a bunch of advice how to live, but my point is I don’t want to sell you one true solution beyond being aware of your own expectations and not blaming their consequences on other people (i.e. an author). You can read a lot about the author, the book, the context of times or you can wing it all, simply remembering that you know nothing and anything is possible. The most important thing is letting the book be whatever it likes to, not enclosing it in our expectations but letting it influence us instead.

Then again... is this a step to far?