Ambiguity in Melville

While Melville is traditionally considered quite dense and at times nigh unreadable by high school and college students, he is a respected author whose work has remained important after many years. This is not because dense works are simply assumed to hold value, but because Melville skillfully weaves together his tales while appearing to present no judgement. His characters are real, and three-dimensional, and there is not always an easy solution for the difficulties that a character faces. This freedom allows a reader to take away a much more personalized view of the story and of the world than is possible with authors who insist upon a moral, and only one moral, for a work.

Frequently in Melville, the narrator is not in reality the main or most important character. The character that holds the most interest and life is often one who is described to the reader by the narrator. In this way, the reader can accept the facts about who that particular character is, and how he behaves, while inventing their own reasons and justifications for this behavior. If this is to be the case, and if the reader is to successfully become the character in question, then Melville must prevent both the narrator and the character from divulging or supposing any information which might contradict the ideas formed by the reader.

Melville's works are alive, and do not exist well merely as letters on a page. Even in Moby Dick Melville presents stage directions for Ahab, bringing the work one step closer to the life of the reader. While Billy Budd's effect on those around him is presented in great detail, his past is left blurry, and his thoughts on internal matters are almost never revealed. Right up until his death, the reader must ascribe for themself the significance of Billy's last words "God bless Captain Vere."

Often in literature, characters reveal their inner thoughts through dialogue with other characters. However, in both Billy Budd and "Bartleby the Scrivener," this is not the case. While both characters engage in dialogue (Billy more so than Bartleby) this is not the sort of conversation that gives the reader an insight into what makes the character think and act the way he does. The dialogue is simply realistic (though sometimes bizarre) and contains no hidden insights. It is used to progress the story. When Barleby repeats for the twentieth time that he "prefers not to," the reader is not only shouting in frustration but considering why he prefers not to. What, the reader asks himself, would cause me to prefer not to?

By not presenting judgement on the actions of a character, not offering a motive, the difficulty of assigning blame and determining who has behaved correctly is thrown onto the shoulders of the reader. Then the reader must consider what they would do in this situation, whether they could see the right choice, and whether or not they could then make that choice. It is popular at present to assume that all human beings have in them some measure of good and evil, and that allowances can be made for even the most depraved of characters.

However, Poe leaves this to the reader. He creates characters which are real and consistent, and resists any urge to place judgement, explain away actions, or console the reader. Thus, the reader experiences a living work, and gets back from it what they themselves put into it. It is entirely possible, in this fashion, to conclude that the only way Claggert could have behaved the way he did was if he was an embodiment of Evil. Of course, it is just as possible to realize the tensions and torments that may have existed inside the mind of the master at arms, and forgive him entirely his assumed crimes.

By allowing the reader free reign to live his works and make their own judgements, Melville forces them in to situation they would likely not encounter in life, and to make decisions about those situations. This leaves the reader with a greater sense of self, and a greater ability to objectively consider the world around them.