Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Moby-Dick: Interpretations never end
Herman Melville (1819-1891) is a 19th-century American novelist, short story writer, essayist and poet. He is best known for his Moby-Dick; or, The Whale (1851). “No American writer has been more puzzled over and written about, more lambasted and lionized than Melville” (Robertson-Lorant 1996: xiv). Melville’s fame in literary history has undergone a rollercoaster ride in the past 150 years.
Melville gained much contemporary attention for his first novel Typee (1846). His second book, Omoo (1847) was also well-received. But after a booming literary success in the late 1840s, his popularity declined dramatically in the mid-1850s. Mardi (1849) was considered a critical and commercial failure. Then Redburn (1849) and White Jacket (1850) followed suit. Moby-Dick (1851), though demonstrated Melville’s great artistic techniques and imaginative powers, was poorly received by the Americans. When he died in 1891, he was almost completely forgotten. Some of his poems and a short story Billy Budd (1924) were left unpublished.
Moby-Dick, which is generally recognized as the first Great American Novel,[1] has been read by both the highly educated, sophisticated literary experts and those with little formal education, and can be well deemed as Melville’s masterpiece. However, the reception of it is rather dramatic. When it was published in 1851, the majority of the reviews were perfunctory or even negative. During the next decades, this novel, along with other works by Melville, was seldom mentioned in American and English literary journals. This public neglect and disfavor were not terminated until 1921 with Raymond Weaver’s publication of Herman Melville, which announced the “Melville Revival” in the 1920s. From then on Moby-Dick has drawn numerous attentions and been read with numerous interpretations.
The formidably long book tells an obsessive pursuit of Moby Dick, the white whale, by Ahab and his crew on Pequod. The book was ambiguous, symbolic and metaphoric in nature and even a minor character or the name of a negligible inn invites different interpretations, let alone the whole allegorical adventure. D. H. Laurence (1923), E. M. Forster (1927), and Virginia Woolf (1929) all published articles on their understanding of this sea chase. Along with the aspects of philosophy, religion, characters, structure, narrative, almost every detail of the novel has been dealt with since then. More recent studies have applied fashionable academic approaches, including Freudian, Marxist, New Critical, reader-response, New Historicist, etc. to find new meanings of the sea epic.
However, these studies are far from reaching a consensus, even on the smallest trifles. What does Moby-Dick represent, God, Evil, Truth, or something else? Is Ahab more of a Faust, a King Lear, a Macbeth, or an anti-hero of Job? Does Moby-Dick show racial prejudice? What is Melville’s attitude toward women? Was it friendship between Ishmael and Queequeg or homosexual partnership? Is it an ecocentric or anthropocentric novel? Critics give contradictory answers to each of these questions. Melville packed as much into the narrative as he could, and the novel appears to be fragmented and unorthodox. Therefore, it seems quite unlikely that one can supply a satisfactory answer.
“I look, you look, he looks; we look, ye look, they look” (Melville 1967: 434). Just as Pip repeats, to get a purely objective looking (or interpretation) is impossible. However, just because of this, the novel fully demonstrates how one objective text can invite multitude of understandings.
1.2 Allegory, symbol, metaphor and literary interpretation
All narratives are allegories because any reading of a narrative will produce not only what a narrative does not say but also what the writer does not mean to say. Therefore, the interpretation of the narrative will always be a misreading for it will always refer to something other than itself. De Man calls this effect of language “allegory” because it involves a gap between reference (the word or text) and referent (the thing referred to) (McQuillan 2001: 34-5).
Frye also points out that allegory is a structural element in literature and “it has to be there, and cannot be added by critical interpretation alone” (1957: 53). To Frye, allegory should be grounded on the stability of text. When a work of fiction is written or interpreted thematically, it becomes a parable or illustrative fable which is like an allegory in nature. “All formal allegories have, ipso facto, a strong thematic interest, though it does not follow, as is often said, that any thematic criticism of a work of fiction will turn it into an allegory” (1957: 34).
Jameson argues that readers of literature have a natural tendency toward allegory. In the opening chapter, “On Interpretation” of Political Unconsciousness, he proposes an allegorical approach to hermeneutics, and set up a groundwork for a theory of interpretation that depends on a narrative-based conception of allegory. He also notices the importance of culture to allegory (Jameson 1981).
Allegory[2] is critical to literary interpretation. However, allegory alone cannot explain how meaning is produced. Allegories are always allegories of metaphors and symbols. The example that De Man presents to illustrate allegory is “Dove” for “Peace”. It is worth noting that this actually is not an allegory, but a symbol instead. That is to say, to De Man and deconstructionists, symbol and allegory are used interchangeably. In Rhetoric terms, allegory cannot be separated from metaphor either. Allegory is a narrative of metaphors. Metaphors produce striking languages and symbols form the clues of an allegation.
Moby-Dick is full of metaphors and symbols. They are the keys to understanding its theme. By attaching meanings to metaphors, symbols, Moby-Dick is allegorized differently in each reader’s mind. Each of them will find their own symbols and metaphors in Moby-Dick and a clash of different meanings will be generated. In this book, “allegory runs amok, through the limitless polysemy that opens these texts to innumerable future interpretations, making them the first open work of the modern west” (Moretti 1996: 88). Different interpretations to metaphors, symbols and allegories give rise to these clashes of meanings.
1.3 Cognitive linguistics and metaphor, symbol and allegory
Cognitive Linguistics is a modern school of linguistic thought and practice that attempts to investigate the relationship between human language, mind and experience (Evans 2007: 2). It is rooted in in the emergence of modern cognitive science in the 1960s and 1970s, as the result of discontent with formal approaches to language. By the early 1990s, cognitive linguistics has grown into “a broadly grounded, self-conscious intellectual movement” (Langacker 1991: xv).
Cognitive linguists attempt to describe and account for the systematicity, the structure, the functions of language and more importantly, how these functions are realized by the language system. They assume that language reflects patterns of thought and the study of language is to study patterns of conceptualization. Language study provides insights into the nature, structure and organization of thoughts and ideas.
Cognitive linguistics with its new progress sheds more light on the mapping processing of metaphor, symbol and allegory. In the due course, different approaches of literary criticism are integrated to give a fuller account of that process. This comprehensive model may well account for how literary texts like Moby-Dick produce so many controversial interpretations and to what extent they are acceptable.
1.4 A new model for interpretation
This book mainly focuses on the mapping process of metaphors, symbols and allegories in Moby-Dick, and how they jointly produce a justifiable allegorical interpretation.
The study of readers’ interpretations has grown into a big issue in literary studies. Is there only one correct reading of a piece of literature or more? How are they constructed and how to evaluate them? To provide answers to these questions, the intention of the author, the structure and language of the text itself, readers’ affect and literary competence, all should be taken into consideration. The rise of cognitive linguistics, especially mapping theory offers a possible solution.
One of the most prominent themes in cognitive linguistics is the idea of mapping. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) first propose that language reflects systematic “mappings” (conceptual metaphors) between abstract and concrete conceptual domains. Gentner (1983) sets forth the view that analogy entails finding a structural alignment, or mapping between domains. Fauconnier (1994, 1997) emphasizes the role of mapping. He thinks that mapping builds the local connections between distinct mental spaces which are the conceptual “packets” of information built up during the “on-line” process of meaning construction. Mapping theories provide a new insight in explaining the process of meaning construction over metaphors, metonymy, and other analogical models.
Metaphor, symbol, and allegory are key concepts in analyzing literary works. They are closely related and sometimes it is difficult to set a clear demarcation between them. They have one thing in common: All are related to mapping between corresponding domains. The only difference lies in their mapping processes. Metaphor is a kind of fixed analogical mapping. Symbolism, however, is more arbitrary. Allegory involves an event-related systematic mapping process.
Metaphorization, symbolization and allegorization are the three critical mapping processes of literary critics. Metaphors and symbols are pervasive in literary works, especially in works of romantic school. For instance, poems of Whitman, and Dickinson, fictions like Moby-Dick, Lord of Flies, The Scarlet Letter, Animal Farm and The Great Gatsby are all rich in meaning. Metaphoric and symbolic language are abundant. The interpretations to them largely rely on the understanding of these devices. For Melville, “the metaphor, the symbol, the allusion, and the analogy — all fundamental poetic methods to establish relationships and extend meaning — are genuine ways of understanding” (Ward 1958: 172). Therefore, understanding the true meaning of Moby-Dick relies on metaphors, symbols and alluded analogies, or allegory in another word.
Metaphor, symbol and allegory are basically all mapping processes in the cognitive perspective. Mapping theories can present a model for how to explain what has happened in the process of literary understanding. Metaphors, symbols and allegories on the one hand can be traced to the text and on the other hand can be used to perceive the author’s production and the reader’s reception. Interpretations of the themes and meanings of literary works often attach primary importance to them.
Context also plays a role in providing different understandings of the same text. In this book, contextual background refers to the immediate cultural contexts and the issues proposed by the post-literary approaches, for instance, the relationship between human beings and nature for eco-critics, the social stratum between classes, races, and genders for social political readers. Therefore, the study of metaphor, symbol and allegory can bridge author, text, context and reader together and give a full picture of literary explanation.
In order to bring these concerns into a holistic picture, the book attempts to reach the following objectives.
The first one is to provide an integrative cognitive analytic model (mapping based, metaphor, symbol and allegory centered) for stylistic analysis, which can bring author, text, reader, and context together and with considering literary theory, give a new perspective for literary understanding and interpreting.
The second is to shed light on how interpretations of literary works are constructed. The study will take Melville’s highly symbolic and multi-interpreted masterpiece as a case to show how the model can be applied. Critics have contributed countless interpretations and allegorization to the novel, which makes it a perfect sample to analyze meaning construction. Analyzing the novel in multi-perspectives will show how a meaningful interpretation comes into being, and give reasons to why there are so many literary interpretations.
Thirdly, the study will try to provide a more convincing criterion on how to evaluate the interpretations. As there are many readers, so will there be many interpretations to the meaning of a piece of literary work. Again, take Moby-Dick as an example, ecocritics will find it a book of nature, social political readers will read human relationships, and gay critics will find homosexuality or homoeroticism in it. Even critics in the same group do not see eye to eye with each other. As for whether Moby-Dick reflects an androcentric attitude or ecocentric one, Ecocritics do not hold a unanimous opinion. This study will make efforts to explain this phenomenon and justify sounder interpretations according to the criteria provided.
1.5 Questions to answer
Based on the previous discussion, the present study will focus on the following specific questions:
(1) Why are there so many contradictory interpretations of Moby-Dick?
(2) How are these interpretations constructed by the readers?
(3) What role do metaphors, symbols and allegory play in the meaning construction process?
(4) How do we judge and evaluate these interpretations?
The book departs from these questions and attempts to find answers in the intersections of cognitive linguistics and literary criticism with the specific linguistic, rhetoric and narrative symbols, metaphors and allegories.
1.6 Methodology to apply
In this book, we will adopt a descriptive and interpretative approach. That is to say, we firstly try to find the metaphoric mappings in Moby-Dick according to the literary critical requirements, and then find out the symbolic meaning of the key symbols in the novel. The description of striking features of these symbols will be mapped into another more abstract domain. Finally, a literary interpretation will be produced, after seeing from literary critic’s point of view with cognitive linguistics as the tool to achieve an allegoric mapping.
Therefore, this approach reflects the recent trend in American literary studies that is an overt concern for social and cultural milieu. This approach also combines a textual analysis as the basis so as not to make the interpretation too subjective and groundless.
1.7 Significance of the study
Accordingly, this study is significant both theoretically and practically.
Firstly, the study attempts to set up a theoretical model for cognitive poetics[3] to explain the cognitive process of literary interpretation which includes author, reader, text and context. This model is suitable to explain and evaluate the symbolic novels like Moby-Dick, The Great Gatsby, Lord of Flies, and poems of the same nature. Bridging literary criticism and cognitive linguistics, the model tries to present a cognitive account of the process of literary interpretation based on textual facts in the light of literary critical theories. Therefore, it supplies a convenient and convincing model to explore the underlying conceptual on-line working of the author and the reader.
Secondly, the study gives a criterion for literary critic evaluation. Mapping as the core of literary interpretation can serve as an important index to how convincing the reading is. Metaphoric mapping exists in the literary discourse. Spotting out the metaphoric mapping will make great contribution to how the power relationship is encoded in the language. The more metaphoric mappings are found, the more persuasive the reading will be. The symbolic mapping is more suggestive and goes beyond the text. The elements in the symbol and the meaning that is constructed should have analogical mapping correspondents, or the symbol will not meet the expectation of the reader. These symbols should also form a narrative allegory to get a systematic interpretation. If the allegory has many inconsistencies in the blending, the interpretation will fall out.
Thirdly, the study also has strong pedagogical significance. Literary interpretation is essential to literary competence. This model is able to help the literary students to master a method to construct interpretations of literary works. Metaphoric mapping and symbolic mapping are easy to be located and after mastering this, literary students will be able to build their own version of reading the novel with the help of different literary approaches.
Finally, this model offers a new way of interpreting Moby-Dick’s multi-meaning. Critics have analyzed the themes, characters, symbols, philosophy, and author. Even biologists play a role in reading the novel as a cetological encyclopedia. Postmodern literary theories like feminism, post-colonialism, gender studies, ecocriticism, cultural studies, also provide more perspectives for the readers on how to interpret the novel. The study tries to offer a systematic way to investigate the meaning construction of the novel.
1.8 Organization of the book
The book is divided into seven chapters.
The first chapter briefly introduces Moby-Dick and its acceptance in the literary history. Mappings in Moby-Dick are abundant in three major forms: Metaphoric, symbolic and allegoric, all of which help to contribute the meaning construction process. This chapter also states the purposes, scope, objectives and methodology of this study, and finally it points out the theoretical and practical significance.
Chapter two provides a comprehensive review of cognitive stylistics and the study of readers’ interpretation. Literary critics start to pay attention to the readers’ role in literary interpretation since the Formalist movement. The rise of postmodernism and reader’s response theory raise the reader’s role to the center. Cognitive stylistics sheds light on the process of reading with the instruments that previous criticisms could not have equipped. Metaphor, symbol and allegory are key concepts in literary understandings. The cognitive mapping theory provides new insights to understand the nature of these traditionally rhetoric tropes. Recent studies on Moby-Dick in the United States and China are also included in this chapter.
Chapter three presents a model based on mapping process of metaphors, symbols and allegories while taking literary criticism into consideration. The nature of metaphoric mapping, symbolic mapping and allegoric mapping is pointed out with the help of cognitive linguistic theory. Metaphoric mapping is used as a covering term to refer to all the linguistic metaphors, similes or metonymies that can activate a mapping process. This mapping process in both domains is spelled out by the text. While symbolic mapping is also metaphoric in nature, the target domain is not specified in the text. It has to be dependent on the reader’s construction in the social cultural context to find a correspondent. For conventional symbols, the referent is fixed. However, literary symbols are intangible and rely more on individual person’s experience and schema knowledge. The metaphoric mapping within the text and symbolic mapping from text to cultural context will route to an allegorical construction with the principle of alignment and blending.
These three mapping processes jointly help to map a piece of literature into various interpretations in the context of different literary approaches of criticism. Whether these mappings are systematic, consistent and coherent between the text event structure and contextual event structure will judge the legitimacy of the reading.
Chapters four, five and six attempt to apply the model from the perspective of Ecocriticism, social political criticism and queer theory criticism respectively to the analysis of the novel, each of which will result in controversial or even opposing interpretations of Moby-Dick.
Chapter four identifies the metaphoric mappings between the human race and nature, finds out that both domains serve as source and target domain for each other, and reveals the attitude that human and nature are analogical to each other which is against the prevalent anthropocentric idea that man dominates nature. Mapping the key symbols of Moby-Dick into human and nature relationship can get a clearer picture that the novel reveals to us. The pursuit of Moby-Dick becomes a parable that human beings’ ambition to conquer nature is doomed from the beginning. Only by returning to the pantheism of respecting nature can man get a Noah of survival.
Chapter five presents a social political reading of the story. Metaphoric mappings of human and human relationship are demonstrated and explained. These mappings show that Melville builds a hierarchical society on the ship away from the land but subverts the authority by underlying unparalleled mappings. The symbolic mappings in Moby-Dick of the social political perspective are also abundant. This book holds that only by fixing these symbols into a systematic and consistent allegorical reading of the major plot can the real target domain be figured out. A social political allegorical reading is provided by the author then.
Chapter six provides a queer critical reading. The metaphoric mappings between Ishmael-Queequeg relationship and marriage are analyzed. The key symbols in the novel should be remapped into a domain of homoeroticism. Moby-Dick then is a symbol for homosexual worshipping phallus and Ahab, as the antihero, then represents the subconscious homophobia. Queer critic allegorization is also provided. In the end of the chapter, some drawbacks and inconsistencies that undermine this way of reading are also presented.
By locating metaphoric mappings in due domains and interpreting symbols as connecting clues, clearer pictures of allegory will be mapped out. The allegorized interpretation needs to find more evidences to justify its validity. Good interpretations will find more corresponding mapping elements; poor ones, on the contrary, less.
The last chapter serves as a conclusion, pointing out the strong points and limitations of the research and what aspects should be reinforced. It also provides insights on what can be carried out in future studies.
[1]The Great American Novel is often shortened as GAN. The pursuit of a GAN is the dream of American early critics. Herbert B. Brown (1935), George Knox (1969), Sergio Perosa (1983) and Lawrence Buell (2008) comment on this subject at different periods.
[2]Allegory refers to a piece of literary work that has another interpretation other than the literal meaning. It is the unique character of literature and art, and it is closely related to literary interpretation (Zhang 2003).
[3]Cognitive poetics as a branch of interdisciplinary study is firstly proposed by R. Tsur (1983). Prof. Liu Shisheng suggests that when the purpose is mainly to find language features, it is more appropriate to use the term cognitive stylistics, and when it is to study literary structures, cognitive poetics serves better.
