Moby-Dick as an Absurdist Text

Herman Melville’s novel Moby Dick and Albert Camus’s idea of Absurdism share the same philosophical core. This core consists of the absurdity of the individual’s role in the quest for meaning. While Moby Dick and Camus are separated by a century’s worth of literary and cultural changes, the very same ideas present in Camus’s work are also found in Moby Dick. The readings of The Myth of Sisyphus and The Stranger,—two of Camus’s major works—are in their own facet, related to the themes of determinism and individual meaning present in Moby Dick. With regard to determinism in Moby Dick, Camus’s essay The Myth of Sisyphus offers up its own case for the motives behind Ahab’s vengeance and concludes that Ahab must therefore be an Absurd hero. While in Camus’s novel The Stranger, the idea of individual meaning is examined by comparing the protagonist, Meursault’s existential ambiguity to Ishmael’s own lack of characterization. These examples illustrate that Albert Camus’s writings not only lend credence to but also share the same philosophical backbone as Moby Dick; in order to understand Moby Dick, one must first understand Absurdism.

Johannes Silentio explained the concept of Absurdism best in his forward to Fear and Trembling “The Absurd [Absurdism] refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek inherent meaning in life and the human inability to find any” (Silentio 17) The main distinction between this belief system and all of its predecessors is that Absurdism is first to say that an inherent meaning to the universe has yet to be detected. It makes no claim as to whether or not meaning exists. And this is the central point being an Absurd hero, an acceptance of ignorance but still traversing on through life.

In Moby D...

... middle of paper ...

...the boulder with the intent of being free from his task, so too, Ahab did not pursue the white whale with the intent of finding meaning. He hunts Moby Dick to find choice.

Up until now, all the similarities between Sisyphus and Ahab have been in their justification for their actions, yet not necessarily in their causes. As stated, Sisyphus was condemned to push his boulder, but no such stated axiomatic limitation was placed on Ahab. So then, what, external to Ahab, caused him to continue his pursuit? The answer lies within idea determinism. Indeed, Melville hints that the men aboard the Pequod are not there of their own volition. “[D]oubtless, my going on this whaling voyage, formed part of the grand programme of Providence that was drawn up a long time ago. It came in as a sort of brief interlude and solo between more extensive performances” (Melville Chapter 1)