To scan the lines of his face, or feel the bumps on the head of this
Leviathan; this is a thing which no Physiognomist or Phrenologist has as
yet undertaken. Such an enterprise would seem almost as hopeful as for
Lavater to have scrutinized the wrinkles on the Rock of Gibraltar, or
for Gall to have mounted a ladder and manipulated the dome of the
Pantheon. Still, in that famous work of his, Lavater not only treats of
the various faces of men, but also attentively studies the faces of
horses, birds, serpents, and fish; and dwells in detail upon the
modifications of expression discernible therein. Nor have Gall and his
disciple Spurzheim failed to throw out some hints touching the
phrenological characteristics of other beings than man. Therefore,
though I am but ill qualified for a pioneer, in the application of these
two semi-sciences to the whale, I will do my endeavor. I try all
things; I achieve what I can.
Physiognomically regarded, the Sperm
Whale is an anomalous creature. He has no proper nose. And since the
nose is the central and most conspicuous of the features; and since it
perhaps most modifies and finally controls their combined expression;
hence it would seem that its entire absence, as an external appendage,
must very largely affect the countenance of the whale. For as in
landscape gardening, a spire, cupola, monument, or tower of some sort,
is deemed almost indispensable to the completion of the scene; so no
face can be physiognomically in keeping without the elevated open-work
belfry of the nose. Dash the nose from Phidias's marble Jove, and what a
sorry remainder! Nevertheless, Leviathan is of so mighty a magnitude,
all his proportions are so stately, that the same deficiency which in
the sculptured Jove were hideous, in him is no blemish at all. Nay, it
is an added grandeur. A nose to the whale would have been impertinent.
As on your physiognomical voyage you sail round his vast head in your
jollyboat, your noble conceptions of him are never insulted by the
reflection that he has a nose to be pulled. A pestilent conceit, which
so often will insist upon obtruding even when beholding the mightiest
royal beadle on his throne.
In some particulars, perhaps the most
imposing physiognomical view to be had of the Sperm Whale, is that of
the full front of his head. This aspect is sublime.
In thought, a
fine human brow is like the East when troubled with the morning. In the
repose of the pasture, the curled brow of the bull has a touch of the
grand in it. Pushing heavy cannon up mountain defiles, the elephant's
brow is majestic. Human or animal, the mystical brow is as that great
golden seal affixed by the German Emperors to their decrees. It
signifies- "God: done this day by my hand." But in most creatures, nay
in man himself, very often the brow is but a mere strip of alpine land
lying along the snow line. Few are the foreheads which like
Shakespeare's or Melancthon's rise so high, and descend so low, that the
eyes themselves seem clear, eternal, tideless mountain lakes; and above
them in the forehead's wrinkles, you seem to track the antlered
thoughts descending there to drink, as the Highland hunters track the
snow prints of the deer. But in the great Sperm Whale, this high and
mighty god-like dignity inherent in the brow is so immensely amplified,
that gazing on it, in that full front view, you feel the Deity and the
dread powers more forcibly than in beholding any other object in living
nature. For you see no one point precisely; not one distinct feature is
revealed; no nose, eyes, cars, or mouth; no face; he has none, proper;
nothing but that one broad firmament of a forehead, pleated with
riddles; dumbly lowering with the doom of boats, and ships, and men.
Nor, in profile, does this wondrous brow diminish; though that way
viewed its grandeur does not domineer upon you so. In profile, you
plainly perceive that horizontal, semi-crescentic depression in the
forehead's middle, which, in a man, is Lavater's mark of genius.
But
how? Genius in the Sperm Whale? Has the Sperm Whale ever written a
book, spoken a speech? No, his great genius is declared in his doing
nothing particular to prove it. It is moreover declared in his
pyramidical silence. And this reminds me that had the great Sperm Whale
been known to the young Orient World, he would have been deified by
their child-magian thoughts. They deified the crocodile of the Nile,
because the crocodile is tongueless; and the Sperm Whale has no tongue,
or at least it is so exceedingly small, as to be incapable of
protrusion. If hereafter any highly cultured, poetical nation shall lure
back to their birth-right, the merry May-day gods of old; and livingly
enthrone them again in the now egotistical sky; in the now unhaunted
hill; then be sure, exalted to Jove's high seat, the great Sperm Whale
shall lord it.
Champollion deciphered the wrinkled granite
hieroglyphics. But there is no Champollion to decipher the Egypt of
every man's and every being's face. Physiognomy, like every other human
science, is but a passing fable. If then, Sir William Jones, who read in
thirty languages, could not read the simplest peasant's face in its
profounder and more subtle meanings, how may unlettered Ishmael hope to
read the awful Chaldee of the Sperm Whale's brow? I but put that brow
before you. Read it if you can.
Yet another chapter on the head of the sperm whale. This time, Melville uses the practice of phrenology, which is the study of the size and shape of a skull to determine the character and intelligence of a creature. After several paragraphs, he seems to conclude that it is impossible to read the sperm whale skull phrenologically. He leaves it up to the reader, saying, ""I but put that brow before you. Read it if you can."
Of course, phrenology is no more an actual science than palm reading or crystal ball gazing. More superstition and premonition than analytical inquiry. The shape and size of the skull is no more a gauge of a person's moral/intellectual makeup than hand size is an indication of a man's physical endowments (although, for Donald Trump, I believe there is a direct correlation). If I want to know a person's character, I need to spend some time getting to know him or her.
I have a friend who frequently says to me, "You have a million-dollar brain and a ten-cent mind." She means that I'm really intelligent, but sometimes lack common sense. This friend is joking with me, but she makes a good point. Some of the smartest people I know completely lack basic life skills. For example, I have a friend who can speak three languages, has taught at several universities, and can wax philosophic on subjects ranging from postmodernism to cubism. Yet, she can't change a flat tire or run a snowblower. Million-dollar brain. Ten-cent mind.
Just as intelligence is not a measure of basic common sense, going to church doesn't necessarily make you a good person. For example, I have sat in a roomful of Christians and listened to them talk about putting homeless people on buses and "sending them back where they came from." On the other hand, I have a friend who identifies herself as a Wiccan witch, and she volunteers in soup kitchens and spends Thanksgiving serving turkey dinners to indigents.
As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. I don't care if you're Christian, Wiccan, atheist, or Trumpist. I care whether you will stop some kids from bullying an autistic child. I care whether you spend the weekend building a Habitat for Humanity house. Or offer a ride to someone whose car is broken down on the side of the road. These things tell me that you're a good person.
I don't think all Trump supporters are Nazis. I think they're misguided and misinformed. And I don't think all Democrats are Mother Teresa or Francis of Assisi. Nobody is perfect. Least of all, me. It's the striving to do what is right and just that makes a person "good." It's when we make blanket generalizations that we get into trouble. Illegal immigrants aren't rapists and drug dealers because they are illegal immigrants. Republicans don't represent family values because they are Republicans. And Democrats don't hold a monopoly on standing up for the working class because they are Democrats. It's not that easy.
I don't dislike Donald Trump because he is Republican. I don't dislike him because he calls himself a conservative. I don't support Donald Trump because his actions have shown to me that his values and my values are diametrically opposed. As I said a little while ago, actions always speak louder than words. If Donald Trump suddenly supported universal healthcare and women's rights, if he stopped talking about building walls and started talking about fixing roads, I would probably start supporting him and his agenda. The chances of that happening are about as slim as me being named "Sexiest Man Alive" by People Magazine.
Saint Marty is thankful tonight for the people who helped rescue 12 young boys and their soccer coach from a water-filled cave in Thailand these last three days. They truly are making the world a better place.
No comments:
Post a Comment