Hobbes and CM

[Ffrangcon Lewis]

Dear all,

            Thanks to Stephen for reminding me that Melville called at Rio twice, and for his sense of Melville's dual narrative voice.  Thanks also to Phil for getting things going again, and to Hardeman for his contributions.  I wonder if anyone will mind me quoting at some length from Thomas Hobbes' 'Introduction' to his 'Leviathan'?  Written two centuries and a bit before 'The Confidence-Man', it nevertheless shares an anxiety about civil war and a concern with how we are to interpret ourselves, our books and our fellow humans.

'... whosoever looketh into himself, and considereth what he doth, when he does think, opine, reason, hope, feare, &c, and upon what grounds;  he shall thereby read and know, what are the thoughts, and Passions of all other men, upon the like occasions.  I say the similitude of Passions, which are the same in all men, desire, feare, hope &c;  not the similitude of the objects of the Passions, which are the things desired, feared, hoped, &c:  for these the constitution individuall, and particular education do so vary, and they are so easie to be kept from our knowledge, that the characters of mans heart, blotted and confounded as they are, with dissembling, lying, counterfeiting, and erroneous doctrines, are legible onlie to him that searcheth hearts.  And though by mens actions wee do discover their designe sometimes;  yet to do it without comparing them with our own, and distinguishing all circumstances by which the case may come to be altered, is to decypher without a key, and be for the most part deceived, by too much trust, or by too much diffidence;  as he that reads is a good or evil man.

'But let one man read another by his actions never so perfectly, it serves him onely with his acquaintance, which are but few.  He that is to govern a whole Nation, must read in himself, not this, or that particular man;  but Man-kind;  which though it be hard to do, harder than to learn any Language or Science;  yet, when I shall have set down my own reading orderly, and perspicuously, the pains left another, will be onely to consider, if he also find not the same in himself.'

         Though Melville seems to have had some very different attitudes to authority from those of Hobbes, and though 'The Confidence-Man' was written  in foreboding of civil war rather than, as with Hobbes, in its wake, nevertheless the quotation suggests a good deal of common ground.  How far Melville's Whale may be seen as a riposte to Hobbes' Leviathan (look upon this head, and on this) may be uncertain, but it is striking that counterfeiting, diffidence and too much trust crop up here, just as they do in Melville's 1857 novel 'The Confidence-Man' which might perhaps also be understood as the encounter (collision?) of an 'Artificiall Man' with a 'Christian Common-wealth'.  Maybe the uncompromising nature of Hobbes' ambition - to encourage or entice the reader to read Mankind even as he is himself being read - helps to explain why Melville in his turn claimed that in 'Moby-Dick' he had written  a wicked book, and yet felt spotless as a (black?) Lamb.

Best wishes,

Ffrangcon Lewis

[Stephen Hoy]

Thanks for this quote from Hobbes about empathy, especially the bit about the leader of a whole nation. 

One slight emendation: HM uses the definite article: "spotless as the lamb," as Parker colorfully reminds us in "Melville Biography: An Inside Narrative." Hard to forget once you've read it.

[Ffrangcon Lewis]

Dear Stephen,

                       You are right of course about 'the Lamb'.  I hope I wasn't misquoting exactly but rather trying - too hard, perhaps - to force a link between 'Moby-Dick', 'Leviathan' and 'The Confidence-Man'.  What happens to Melville's texts if he thinks that he might die in the gutter if he is minded to write a gospel truth?  Can the Lamb redeem?  Is the Lamb a lost black sheep?  Those sorts of questions were in my mind, I suppose, and led to an incoherence.

Thanks for the response,

Ffrangcon Lewis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ishmailites" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ishmailites...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ishma...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ishmailites.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Stephen Hoy]

Ffrangcon et al:

A lot has been written about Moby-Dick and Leviathan. I am not on top of this topic, so I don't have anything to add. I am sure there will be lots of fruit on the vine for anyone who pursues it.

With regard to C-M, am I correct that Hobbes relied heavily on the Scholastics, particularly Thomas Aquinas? At worst, Aristotle will be a common root.

In re: "Though I wrote the Gospels in this century, I should die in the gutter." HM added "I have come to regard this matter of Fame as the most transparent of all vanities." Perhaps HM was thinking of how little Fame did for other authors. For example, despite acclamation for their greatest works, Camoens and Cervantes each died in abject poverty.

[Ffrangcon Lewis]

Dear Stephen and all,

                       Thanks for your helpful comments, and not for the first time. If you or other Ishmailites come across anything recent on Melville and Hobbes, I'd be glad to hear about it.

Best wishes,

Ffrangcon Lewis

[Hardeman]

Ffrangcon,

I am not sure what you mean by recent but I came upon these through my interest in  Israel Potter.

Leon Craig's <The Platonian Leviathan> 2013 notes “How carefully, how thoroughly and thoughtfully

 must Melville have read Hobbes” based on his “profound appreciation of Hobbes's special brilliance [] 

made most explicite in Israel Potter”

He quotes, “Franklin all over is of a piece. He dressed his person as his

periods; neat, trim, nothing superfluous, nothing deficient. In some

of his works his style is only surpassed by the unimprovable sentences

of Hobbes of Malmsbury, the paragon of perspicuity. The mental habits

of Hobbes and Franklin in several points, especially in one of some

moment, assimilated. Indeed, making due allowance for soil and era,

history presents few trios more akin, upon the whole, than Jacob,

Hobbes, and Franklin; three labyrinth-minded, but plainspoken

Broadbrims, at once politicians and philosophers; keen observers of

the main chance; prudent courtiers; practical magians in linsey

woolsey.”

Craig mentions several scholars who debated Melville's intentions. One perhaps of interest to this discussion that I have not read is A. P. Martinich who he says in a footnote “is one of the few Hobbes scholars who recognizes the philosopher's presence in Melville's writing.” “Two Uses of Thomas Hobbes's Philosophy in Melville's The Confidence-Man,” ANQ 16, no. 3, 2003

Craig thinks Martinich underrates Hobbes's influence on Melville.

“Platonian Leviathan” was Ishmael's term which inspired Craig's research

“take high abstracted man alone; and he seems a wonder, a grandeur, and a woe.

But from the same point, take mankind in mass, and for the most part, they seem a mob of unnecessary duplicates, both contemporary and hereditary.” MD

Hardeman

[Ffrangcon Lewis]

Dear Hardeman,

                         Many thanks for your prompt and helpful response to my query about Hobbes and Melville.  Both references you give sound interesting.  I also like your quotation from Melville himself.

Best wishes,

Ffrangcon Lewis