[On October
18, 1851, the first edition of Herman Melville’s
epic novel Moby-Dick was
published in London (under its initial
title, The Whale). So this week
I’ll AmericanStudy Melville’s novel and other histories and stories related to
the book’s ostensible subject, the world of whaling. Leading up to a special
weekend post on a wonderful colleague at the New Bedford Whaling Museum!]
On the perils
and necessities of highlighting disgraced histories.
The week’s series
is far from over, of course, but since for the final two posts I’m going to
focus on first a literary (Melville’s novel) and then a contemporary (Japanese
whalers and Greenpeace activism) subject respectively, I wanted today to take
up a historical question that I raised briefly in Monday’s post but really
colors this entire series and topic. I wrote there, about Lewis Temple’s new
harpoon, that “‘Temple’s toggle’ is a fraught invention, one that principally
made it easier to kill and consume large numbers of innocent creatures (a point
worth considering throughout the week’s posts, to be sure). But you can’t tell
the story of America without the story of whaling, and you can’t tell that
story without Temple’s invention forming a key chapter.” I certainly still
believe that the first clause in that last sentence is accurate and important;
but at the same time you could advance a reasonable critique that in my first
two posts for the week I have largely set aside the violence and horrors of
whaling, in a way that I would not if (for example) I were writing posts about
the histories of lynching, Native American genocide, or other such
human-centered horrors. (I should add that, for what it’s worth, I will focus
my final post of the week very fully on the violence and horrors of whaling.)
Again, that
would be a reasonable critique, and I don’t really have a great response. There’s
no doubt that animal rights and animal studies have not been
main threads of my work here on this blog (or anywhere else in my career,
although I have gone vegetarian over the last year for reasons both
health-related and ethical), and thus that when I’ve written about histories or
stories that involve violence or cruelty toward animals (such as the
Southwestern and local color humor tales I highlighted in
this post), I haven’t foregrounded or perhaps even addressed at all those
issues in the same way I would with violence and cruelty toward humans. I hope
it’s clear that I don’t in any way support or endorse such animal cruelty, not
only in extreme and now generally disgraced situations such as whaling (on
which more in a moment) but even in more socially acceptable ones such as
hunting or the meat industry. But nonetheless, I know I haven’t highlighted
those issues much in this space, and I promise that if and when they are
relevant to topics, I’ll work to include and engage with them more fully (as I
hope this post is doing for this week’s topic).
But at the same
time, I think there’s at least one more significant point to be made when it
comes to writing about a topic like whaling in 2018. There is now widespread
consensus that whaling is a disgraced and deplorable practice that should be
outlawed (although it is still part of our world, as I’ll discuss in Friday’s
post). But for the vast majority of the decades and centuries when whaling was
at the heart of American industry and (at least in New England) society, that perspective—and
really any sustained consideration of the whales’ rights and status—was almost
entirely absent from the conversation. To my mind (and please as always correct
me if you have a different take!), that is, whaling did not generally engender in
its own eras the kinds of debates and critiques that human horrors such as slavery
and Native American genocide did, which would mean that to write back into
those prior eras our own modern (and quite correct) critiques would in that way
impose upon history a quite distinct 20th and 21st
century perspective. Perhaps we can and should do just that—but I would argue
that we must also seek to understand the perspectives and narratives present in
historical moments and communities, not out of any necessary agreement but
instead out of the vital project of recovering and learning from them.
Next whaling
post tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Other whaling contexts or connections you’d highlight?
No comments:
Post a Comment