Abstract
This article examines Herman Melville’s novel Moby-Dick using the lens of care and faith, with the aim of depicting a pathological type of masculinity represented by the character of Captain Ahab. I situate Melville’s novel in a culture where liberalism, capitalism, and imperialism were dominant semiotic systems that, I argue, served as key factors in shaping and supporting a type of masculinity wherein one possesses a maniacal preoccupation with one’s goal or self-interests that is accompanied by instrumentalized, conditional care (if present), and, correspondingly, an instrumentalized and contractual faith.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
12 March 2023
The original version of this paper was updated to correct the word "toby" to "Moby" in the section heading "19th‑century semiotic systems and Moby‑Dick".
Notes
In this article, however, this third aspect is not addressed.
To explicate the idea of masculinity would be an unnecessary detour. Nevertheless, it is important to provide a brief definition. According to the Meriam-Webster dictionary, masculinity refers to a set of behaviors, attributes, and roles associated with the male gender. Implied here is the idea that masculinity, while biologically rooted, is socially constructed and thus takes on various forms and expression across time and cultures. There is, then, a fluidity to gender expression depending on the culture and era.
The name Ahab comes from the Hebrew ahavah and aheb meaning to love. As I mention below, Ahab’s mother dies when he is a young child, and the story itself reflects the distortion of love and care (Captain Ahab, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Ahab, Accessed 17 July 2019).
While I focus on Ahab’s masculinity, it is important to note that there were other expressions of masculinity on the Pequod, as well as on other whaling ships, which I allude to below. That said, Ahab’s masculinity is a trope for a particular kind or type of masculinity.
There are stories that seem to transcend time and cultures. Greek myths and the tragedies of Shakespeare are examples. However, these stories still contain representations grounded in their culture and period. For instance, Oedipus Rex displays a masculinity rooted in unquestioned patriarchy.
Horkheimer commented that “[t]he future of humanity depends on the existence today of the critical attitude” (as cited in Wolin, 2016, p. 231). This becomes crucial when cultural critics, such as Giroux (2012) and Dufour (2008), note that with the rise of neoliberal capitalism there has been an increase in the formation of subjects or citizens who are acritical of the systems that contribute to their suffering and the suffering of others.
Easterly’s (2013) work illustrates the problems that arise when personal recognition is abstract and removed from the concrete realities of persons’ lives. He documents how caring experts are determined to provide aid for people in need (e.g., Ethiopia). They devise plans and programs to address needs without asking the recipients what they need or their thoughts about how to meet these needs. This is a kind of abstract, distant personal recognition that eschews the particular experiences and ideas of those who receive aid. As Easterly points out, while theses experts are well-meaning and somewhat helpful, they often have less than the desired impact because they do not know the people who they seek to serve.
Hardt and Negri (2009), in their book Commonwealth, argue that love is an essential concept for politics because it is central in the establishment of what they call the common—the shared material and created resources. Similarly, Eagleton (2003) and Nussbaum (2013) contend that love is a necessary political concept. While I view love and care as related but distinct concepts, my focus here is on the more general term of care. Briefly, it may be helpful to say a few words about these two terms. Love includes care, but care does not necessarily include love. I can care about people I have never met while sending them aid. The Samaritan cared for the injured man, but I do not think he loved him. Some might try to make the case that he did love him, but this is love in the abstract. A physician or nurse can care for someone she thinks is despicable. There is care, but no love. Care, then, from my perspective is more a fundamental human reality and a fundamental political concept. I believe, then, that developing and maintaining caring attitudes and behaviors in society are more realistic goals than love. Care for others, for neighbors, is more likely and more common than love. See Hardt and Negri (2009, pp. 179–188) and Eagleton (2003, pp. 168–170).
In using the term “pathology” I am simply referring to those psychological conditions that are consistently self-limiting and destructive to self and others. Moreover, as noted above, psychological illnesses often have etiologies in cultural, political, and economic practices.
Later in the novel, Ahab’s fortitude and passion are emphasized. “The firm tower, that is Ahab; the volcano, that is Ahab; the courageous, the undefeated, and victorious fowl, that, too, is Ahab” (p. 970).
One might note a possible contradiction here with my earlier reference to capitalism and how it shapes and shaped masculinity. In other words, we have Ahab, who cares less about profit, and Gardner, who sets aside profit for the sake of finding his son and missing crew members. Both captains, for different reasons, have subordinated profit to a different goal. One displays a ruthless, care-less desire, while the other is care-full. Also, capitalism as a dominant semiotic system shaping masculinity does not mean care is absent or necessarily subordinate. It does mean that the goal of profit must be deliberately set aside if one is to care for one’s missing crew. In addition, Ahab’s ruthlessness and preoccupation with his self-interest to the exclusion of profit parallels the ruthlessness and preoccupation of capitalism vis-à-vis profit and markets. Ahab’s neglect of the goals of capitalism is not a contradiction but rather, in my view, a trope of the consequences of obsession with profits to the exclusion of caring about the needs and experiences of the crew, of workers.
References
Benjamin, J. (1995). Sameness and difference: Toward an “over-inclusive” model of gender development. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 15, 125–142.
Bourecht, W. (1996). To reign is worth ambition: The masculine mystique in Moby-Dick. Journal of American Culture, 9(4), 53–62.
Bubeck, D. (1995). Care, gender, and justice. Clarendon Press.
Bunge, M. (2001). The child in Christian thought. Erdmanns.
Butler, S. (1935). War is a racket. Feral House.
Clebsch, W., & Jaekle, C. (1994). Pastoral care in historical perspective. Jason Aronson.
Clinebell, H. (1966). Basic types of pastoral care. Abingdon.
Doehring, C. (2015). The practice of pastoral care. Westminster John Knox Press.
Dufour, D. (2008). The art of shrinking heads: On the new servitude of the liberated in the age of total capitalism. Polity Press.
Dykstra, R. (2005). Images of pastoral care: Classic readings. Chalice Press.
Eagleton, T. (2003). After theory. Basic Books.
Easterly, W. (2013). The tyranny of experts: Economics, dictators, and the forgotten rights of the poor. Basic Books.
Ellison, R. (1995). Shadow and act. Vintage Books. (Original work published 1953).
Engster, D. (2007). The heart of justice: Care ethics and political theory. Oxford University Press.
Erikson, E. (1952). Childhood and society. Norton.
Fanon, F. (2008). Black skin, white masks. Grove Press. (Original work published 1952).
Fanon, F. (2018). Alienation and freedom (J. Khalfa & R. Young, Eds.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Flesberg, E. (2008). The switching hour: Kids of divorce say good-bye again. Abingdon Press.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of prisons. Vintage Books.
Freis, H. (1984). Faith and knowledge. In K. Rahner (Ed.), The encyclopedia of theology: The concise sacramentum mundi (pp. 518–524). Crossroad.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press.
Gillman, S. (1985). Difference and pathology. Cornell University Press.
Gillman, S. (1991). Inscribing the other. University of Nebraska Press.
Giroux, H. (2012). Disposable youth: Racialized memories and the culture of cruelty. Routledge Press.
Gerkin, C. (1997). An introduction to pastoral care. Abingdon.
Hall, S. (2016). Cultural studies 1983. Duke University Press.
Hall, S. (2017). Familiar stranger: A life between two islands. Duke University Press.
Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). 2009. Belknap Press.
Helsel, P. (2015). Pastoral power beyond psychology’s imagination. Palgrave.
Hamington, M. (2004). Embodied care. University of Illinois.
Holifield, B. (1983). A history of pastoral care in America. Abingdon Press.
Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition. MIT Press.
Honneth, A. (2014). Freedom’s right: The social foundations of democratic life. Columbia University Press.
Kelley, M. (2010). Grief: Contemporary theory and the practice of ministry. Fortress Press.
Klein, N. (2007). Shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. Henry Holt and Co.
LaMothe, R. (2017). Care of souls, care of polis: Toward a political pastoral theology. Wipf & Stock.
LaMothe, R. (2018). Pastoral reflections on global citizenship: The political in light of care, faith, and community. Lexington.
Lester, A. (1985). Pastoral care with children in crisis. Westminster Press.
Macmurray, J. (1991). Person in relation. Humanities Press International. (Original work published 1961).
Marshall, J. (1997). Counseling lesbian partners. Westminster John Knox.
Melville, H. (1851). Moby-Dick. Ebook.
Miller, A. (2002). For your own good: Hidden cruelty in child-rearing and the roots of violence. Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Niebuhr, H. R. (1989). Faith on earth. Yale University Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2013). Political emotions: Why love matters for justice. Belknap Press.
Patton, J. (1993). Pastoral care in context: An introduction to pastoral care. Westminster John Knox.
Phillips, K. (2006). American theocracy: The perils and politics of radical religion, oil, and borrowed money in the 21st century. Viking Press.
Poling, J. (2002). Render unto God: Economic vulnerability, family violence, and pastoral theology. Wipf & Stock.
Porter, R. (1991a). The Faber book of madness. Faber.
Porter, R. (1991b). A social history of madness. Dutton.
Rahner, K. (1984). A way to faith. In K. Rahner (Ed.), The encyclopedia of theology: The concise sacramentum mundi (pp. 496–500). Crossroad.
Robinson, F. (1999). Globalizing care: Ethics, feminist theory, and international relations. Westview Press.
Robinson, F. (2011). The ethics of care: A feminist approach to human security. Temple University Press.
Rogers-Vaughn, B. (2016). Caring for souls in a neoliberal age. Palgrave.
Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage Books.
Said, E. (1994). Culture and imperialism. Vintage Books.
Sanders, C. (2017). A brief guide to ministry with LGBTQIA youth. Westminster John Knox.
Scheib, K. (2004). Challenging invisibility: Practices of care with older women. Chalice Press.
Scheib, K. (2016). Pastoral care: Telling the stories of our lives. Abingdon Press.
Sevenhuijsen, S. (1998). Citizenship and the ethics of care. Routledge Press.
Smith, A. (1982). The relational self: Ethics and therapy from a Black church perspective. Abingdon Press.
Taylor, C. (1991). The ethics of authenticity. Harvard University.
Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. Routledge Press.
van DeusenHunsinger, D. (2015). Bearing the unbearable: Trauma, gospel, and pastoral care. Wm. B. Eerdmans.
Weber, M. (1992). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Routledge Press.
White, E. (1998). Saying good-bye: A time for growth for congregations and pastors. Alban Institute.
Wilson, S. (2004). Melville and the architecture of antebellum masculinity. American Literature, 76(1), 59–87.
Wolin, S. (2016). Politics and vision. Princeton University Press.
Woods, E. (2017). The origins of capitalism. Verso.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
LaMothe, R. Literature and Social Pathologies: Ahab’s Masculinity as a Distortion of Care and Faith. Pastoral Psychol 72, 49–63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-022-01042-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-022-01042-y