University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2012 The hiC ldren of Cain: Melville's Use of the Abject Lineage from the Bible Joseph Matthew eM yer University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the American Literature Commons, Biblical Studies Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Meyer, Joseph Matthew, "The hiC ldren of Cain: Melville's Use of the Abject Lineage from the Bible" (2012). Theses and Dissertations. 312. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/312 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE CHILDREN OF CAIN: MELVILLE’S USE OF THE ABJECT LINEAGE FROM THE BIBLE THE CHILDREN OF CAIN: MELVILLE’S USE OF THE ABJECT LINEAGE FROM THE BIBLE A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English By Joseph Matthew Meyer St. Joseph’s College Bachelor of Arts in English, 2000 Hofstra University Master of Arts in English, 2005 May 2012 University of Arkansas ABSTRACT This study looks at how the abject lineage—consisting of Cain, Ishmael and Esau—has played an influential role in the works of Herman Melville. While many critics have exploredthe relationship between Melville and these characters in the past, my study proposes that the author was intimately aware of the differences between these characters and their relationship to God and used these differences to compose his works. Ultimately, Melville struggled with the need for an abject lineage, and this struggle manifests itself most prominently in the evolving silence of Christ from Mardi to “Bartleby.” This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. Dissertation Director: _______________________________________ Dr. Charles Adams Dissertation Committee: _______________________________________ Dr. Robert Cochran _______________________________________ Dr. Sidney Burris ©2012 by Joseph Matthew Meyer All Rights Reserved DISSERTATION DUPLICATION RELEASE I hereby authorize the University of Arkansas Libraries to duplicate this thesis when needed for research and/or scholarship. Agreed _____________________________________ Joseph Matthew Meyer Refused ____________________________________ Joseph Matthew Meyer ACKNOWLEDGMENTS When someone pursues a Ph.D. in anything, it is never in a self-contained space. Energy that is used to obtain the degree is drawn from other areas of one’s life: family, friends, loved ones, etc. It requires a great deal of patience on the part of those with whom you share your life. I am grateful that those I love most dearly have had—and continue to show—patience with my, at times, seemingly selfish, monomaniacal pursuit of my own white whale. This dissertation has been brewing within me for quite some time. It feels good to finally see it on the page. There are a great many people to thank for this endeavor: my family, for their love and support; my friends, for their constant reminder that there is more than just the academic world; my colleagues, for their often invigorating—and sometimes just good-old- fashioned complaining—conversations, which helped to keep me focused on the task at hand; those professors who did not simply teach the texts but loved them and taught me to love them; and my Eve, who gives me her love and support even when she doesn’t know she’s doing it. Lastly, I thank Herman Melville, whose constant struggle with Christianity on the pages allowed me to better reflect upon my own relationship with God off of them. May this study do you justice. DEDICATIONS I dedicate this dissertation to my family. Their constant support throughout my pursuit of a Ph.D. never let me forget that I am and always will be simply their son and brother. As I move forward in my life, I hope to never forget this. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. CHAPTER 1: MARDI 28 III. CHAPTER 2: MELVILLE’S CAPTAIN CAIN 61 IV. CHAPTER 3: ISHMAEL: A SPECIAL CASE OF THE ABJECT 100 V. CHAPTER4: THE SECOND ESAU 127 VI. CHAPTER5: THE PROBLEM OF THE ABJECT 157 VII. CONCLUSION 180 VIII. WORKS CITED 186 1 God try and forgive me and bless my mother….I do not repent the blow I struck. I may before God but not to man. I think I have done well, though I am abandoned, with the curse of Cain upon me. When if the world knew my heart, that one blow would have made me great, though I did desire no greatness. (qtd. in Rhodehamel and Taper 155) The above quote sounds as if it could have come from any number of the dark Romantic poets who so influenced many of the works of Herman Melville. This quote, however, is actually taken from the diary of John Wilkes Booth, dated Friday, April 21 st , 1865. The reason why I begin with the words of a man whose deplorable act still reverberates in our minds today is because of the bifurcating tone with which Booth speaks. He does not feel remorse for his actions; he feels justified in them. Booth concludes this entry in his journal with an allusion to Shakespeare’s Macbeth . He writes, “I do not wish to shed a drop of blood, but ‘I must fight the course’ Tis all thats [sic] left me” (qtd. in Rhodehamel and Taper 155). These final sentiments indicate that he has become a man who is burdened by two diametrically opposing visions of the Divine: His omnipresence, in the form of the metaphorical mark Booth now feels upon his brow; and the simultaneous sense of loneliness in the form of the chasm that now exists between the murderer and his maker. Booth’s use of Cain acts as a self-reflective admission that what he has done is a deplorable act. Cain also laments his actions before God, which is essentially what Booth admits to, that he may regret his action “before God, but not to man.” Booth does not directly ask God for forgiveness; he merely hopes for it. To ask God for forgiveness directly would be to solicit an answer, and Booth is either not ready to hear what that answer will be, or he already knows in his heart what the answer is. He has become an abject figure, and he uses the familiar biblical character of Cain in order to make others understand this internal struggle that will forever shape 2 his life. Melville understood just how powerful of an ethos this was, and he used it throughout his literature. In Omoo , Melville mentions a “renegado from Christendom and humanity—a white man” (353) among the Tahitians who is “tattooed in the face” with a mark that was “Far worse than Cain’s” (353). What is interesting about this section is that later in his works Melville will use similar references to Cain as a way to explore the idea of predestination. However, in Omoo the horror is not that God has marked this man, but that “he had voluntarily submitted to this embellishment of his countenance” (353). There is a sense of autonomy in Melville’s abject figures that gives them a type of power. In relation to their position to God, however, this power is virtually useless. It is, in a Calvinistic sense, little more than an illusion. As Melville must have learned early on in his dealings with Calvin’s doctrines, the all-encompassing will of God can never be subverted; therefore, a rebellious spirit does little more than create a show of force, a theatrical event. It is perhaps with this in mind that Melville gives us his stage direction in Moby-Dick. Cain is the progenitor for what I am simply calling the abject lineage of the Bible. They are the first-born sons of the great early patriarchs of Genesis, consisting of Cain, Ishmael and Esau. The abject sons carry with them the blood of the elect, but they do not share in their respective brothers’ election. They are exiles, orphans in both flesh and spirit, and yet these figures help shape the history of the Bible and the elect line. Melville was not the only author in his time to write about the impact of these figures on society. Hawthorne too understood this concept when he wrote in the Scarlet Letter, “Hester Prynne came to have a part to perform in the world. With her native energy of character, and rare capacity, it could not entirely cast her off, although it had set a mark upon her, more intolerable to a woman’s heart than that which 3 branded the brow of Cain” (190). Melville internalized the abject ethos even more than Hawthorne, for his most charismatic antiheroes all display the fiery vigor of Cain; the longing for a strong patriarchal bond, like Ishmael; and the willingness to sell their birthright for a pot of lentils, like Esau. This study proposes that Melville understood the intricacies of these figures, and that this internalization of the abject ethos significantly shaped the arch of his literary canon. Part 1: Arriving at the term “Abject”: Kristeva and Milton Considered Kristeva’s Powers of Horror I use the term “abject” throughout my study. I would be remiss if I did not at least mention Julia Kristeva’s book, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection . Although my use of the word is somewhat different from Kristeva’s, I would like to highlight portions of her book that helped me to better understand the term “abject” in regard to literature.