MovieChat Forums > Moby Dick (1956) Discussion > Call me Ishmael

Call me Ishmael

posted 18 years ago by eansor-1
29 replies | jump to latest

This line from the book and movie has always captivated me.

First off, let me say that without equivication, this film is, to me, the finest film ever made. I, like many of you, have very fond memories of watching this movie on television when I was a kid. I was born in 1954 and this movie came out 2 years after I was born, so I did not get a chance to see it at the theatre...although it is the kind of movie that my dad, who had a profound love of film, would have definately taken me to, if had been old enough at the timethat is...my love of movies I got from my dad. Thank you father.

I love this movie. I can not think of any other that touches me so deeply. It will forever be my favorite. If you are here and reading this you may agree and understand that of which I speak. Digme, pygmy?

So back to the point. Think about the opening scene of this film. Richard Basehart is following a mountain stream down to the sea. He says, "Call me, Ishmael." What did Melville mean by this remark?

Clearly Ishmael is not a common name. The only pre-Melvillian reference I can really come up with is obviously from the Bible. In Genesis, Abraham and Sarai are desperate to have a child. Both are old and their attempts are fruitless. Sarai is barren. Abraham choses, outside of God's will, to bed with Hagar, Sarai's handmaiden. The result of that extra-marital union is Ishmael. Ishmael existed outside of God's plan for Abraham and Sarai, and eventually Ishmael and Hagar were shunned and sent away from the tribe. Ishmael was to become the father of Arabic peoples - many tribes worth and, of course, Abraham and Sarai - now renamed Sarah - was to become the father of the Judaic peoples through his son Isaac.

How does this jibe? Is there some metaphorical or allegorical connection? I sure don't see it or understand it. Can someone help me with this because I would really like to understand what Melville meant. If you have an insight to this please either post it here or send me an email. [email protected]

I'd love to hear what you think about this.

Eansor

[–] wrfarley 18 years ago

I think it has more to do with the biblical Ishmael being cast out. In Moby Dick (novel and film), Ishmael is wandering, much as the his biblical counter-part did before he begot the Arabic race.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] icdedpeeple888 18 years ago

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Tsar. The only thing that I would add is that by asking the reader to "Call him Ishmael," the narrator of the novel leaves open the possibility that Ishmael is not his real name. In effect, the narrator could be asking the reader to call him Ishmael because he himself feels a bond between himself and the alienated son of Abraham.

[–] randyparr1952 17 years ago

I think that is correct. As I recall from the book, the only direct reference to the narrator's name was that opening line. Like, "my name is unimportant, you might as well call me Ishmael". HOWEVER, in the scene in the movie where he and Quegueg sign aboard the Pequod, he clearly signed on as "Ishmael". It is right above the mark that Quequed made when HE signed.

I don't have to show you any stinking badges!

[–] Aidy 12 years ago

Ishamael's name is used a few times in the book.

[–] murdoch1111 10 years ago

@Aidy » Mon Feb 20 2012 AND OTHER READERS OF THE THREAD "CALL ME ISHMAEL":

You remark, "Ishamael's name is used a few times in the book."

Readers of this thread might be interested to know that in the novel "Cat's Cradle" author Kurt Vonnegut alludes to Melville's first sentence. The opening sentence in "Cat's Cradle" is "Call me Jonah."

[–] murdoch1111 10 years ago

@ icdedpeeple888 » Fri May 19 2006

You remark, ". . . by asking the reader to 'Call him Ishmael,' the narrator of the novel leaves open the possibility that Ishmael is not his real name."

That's exactly right. I've thought the same thing.

[–] wendytoga 8 years ago

Such a big fish, will be missed

[–] thethirdmanlives 18 years ago

Ishmael might be Melville, no?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thethirdmanlives 18 years ago

Yes, I was aware… I think that is why the book is so timeless. It is based on a real experience, Melville’s real experience… and the characters… they are real people. The old axiom, “fiction” verse “non fiction” argument. Remarkable. I think Melville was having it. Is it possible Melville was dealing with his experience by putting it down on paper? Was he attempting to recreate the modest success of, “Billy Bud”? I think not…. He was dealing with the blood of his situation and wanted to convey that maybe, just maybe, man isn’t the highest species… your thoughts?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] snapmcnasty 18 years ago

In my opinion the white whale represents nature/God. Thus no matter how much man tries to defy either nature or God, man can never win. Ishmael, is the same in Moby Dick as in the Bible. He was cast out in the Bible and he was cast out of the Pequad (the sinking).

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] themadstork 17 years ago

Ishmael fits; he's cast himself out of society and he wanders without a real home. Ahab's the one who doesn't deserve his name. Ahab in the Bible is a putz; he seems bad man but he's not the terror Captain Ahab is. Sometimes Elijah scares him good and he straightens out for a bit but then his wife manipulates him in the most obvious ways. Ahab's nothing if not strong and as Bildad says he's not entirely without his humanities. Most importantly he's the opposite of the biblical Ahab; in the face of signs that God himself is against him he continues resolutely on. In fact sometimes he even sees Moby Dick as stand in for God himself. His stubbornness is precisely what's wrong with him. Could it be that the choice of a name for Ahab is meant to be ironic? Or is it just that no one would conceivably give their child the (angelic and demonic) name that fits Ahab's character better? And by the way I don't see the name Ishmael as all that odd given the time. Biblical names, even one's that strike us as rather odd, were much more common then.

[–] icdedpeeple888 17 years ago

I don't think that there is any irony in Ahab's name due to this one point: the biblical Ahab was obstinate in that he was always brought back to God's disfavor by Jezebel. He was an evil king who only flattered Elijah's stern warnings. His continued disobedience testifies to an overall hard-headedness that makes him an appropriate namesake for the good Captain.

By the way, I was noticing the spoiler alert on this thread. Is it possible to spoil a book that is almost 150 years old?

[–] themadstork 17 years ago

As to the spoiler, yeah, people are illiterate. On the one hand you're right Ahab does fit in a way; they perservere in the face of God's displeasure. But it doesn't really fit as the Ahab of the novel simply has more character. He's absolutely resolute in his course unlike the biblical Ahab. Not only that he's simply above temptation. Starbuck tries once to warn him (which does no good at all) and another time to "tempt" him (with the thought of his young wife no less) and the second almost works, but Ahab ultimately resists. Ahab lacks the very frailty that made his biblical counterpart liable to temptation, and the irony is that that's precisely why he flouts the will of God. I see several layers of irony here I must say.

[–] jtyroler 16 years ago

The book "Moby Dick" can be intimidating - it's a pretty thick book and it's a book that people write about for advanced degrees. But "Moby Dick" isn't that difficult to read once you start actually read it. There are reasons why many people consider this the "great American novel".

I'm glad that I checked this thread out - as an agnostic, I know very little of the biblical connotations.

[–] Django6924 17 years ago

"Ishmael" is the prototype of all wanderers--people not content to stay in one place, but travel the earth, knowing no home.

Melville could not have been attempting to "recreate the modest success of 'Billy Budd'" as "Moby Dick" was written some 40 years earlier and "Billy Budd" wasn't published until over 30 years after Melville's death.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cthulhulurks 12 years ago

Lol that's a very good one

my vote history:
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=27424531

[–] mam13143 12 years ago

Cute story Valentine.

[–] Aidy 12 years ago

> He says, "Call me, Ishmael." What did Melville mean by this remark?

I know people on IMDB have a tendency to other-think and over-analyse movies...but seriously? You need it explained? Um, ok...he was introducing himself, and his name is Ishmael. No more, no less. They will have put it in the movie as it is the opening line of the book and is considered to be one of the "classic" opening lines.

[–] thornsthorns 11 years ago

Well for one thing, it is only a modern understanding that Hagar was not Abraham wife, in order to promote Jewish claim to Isaac as being Gods chosen. Since according to the Jews, god's promise to Abraham was to make the descendents of his first born son a great nation that would populate all the lands of what we now call the modern middle east.

Jews claim lineage from isaac, whilst the arabs from Ishmael. So Jewish accounts whilst acknowledging Ishmael as the first born, made him an illegitimate son, by not recognizing Hagar as Abraham's legitimate 2nd wife. So as to lay claim to God's promise.

Ironically a jewish rabbi on youtube even acknowledges this, as he mentions if God gave the middle east to Isaac's descendent, then he has played a cruel joke on them, as he has filled that land with Arabs, Ishmael's descendents.

The bible in many places, actually recognizes Hagar as a legitimate 2nd wife of Abraham, and Ishmael as the first born son. Contradicting modern revisionist interpretations of it.

The following is an Islamic account of Hagar and Ishmael as the Jewish tradition doesn't go very deep into their story for obvious reasons.

When Sarah gets jealous of Hagar, she forces Abraham to abandon her and Ishmael in the desert. Abraham concedes to his first wife's demands, after a heavy bit of monologue with God and talking it through with Hagar.

Hagar with the baby Ishmael is left abandoned to wander in the desert. effectively orphaned and alone since middle east is patriarchal society (excluding his mother, he has no father or any other human beings around him). He grows up there in the deserts wandering alone for most of it. Much like how Ishmael in the book is a wanderer alone in america, and then in the desert that is the sea.

Anyway, back to baby Ishmael. After a while the food and water runs out and Hagar gets desperate as the baby Ishmael starts crying. Ishmael in Jewish means "him who God hears", which also might be a reason why he tells the story to the reader in moby dick, so you can hear him. As well as if you consider moby dick and nature to be a metaphor for god, god hears Ismael's cry and saves him in end of story by not drowning him like the rest.

Anyway she hagar runs between two sets of hills, looking for help praying to the Abrahamic god. God then sends down an angel (Gabriel i think) who hits his heels into the ground, from which sprouts forth the well of zamzam to feed Ishmael with. This becomes the source of hagar's and Ismael's survival. As this well, source of fresh water turns into an oasis for animals. And in hundreds of years in future caravans start stopping at this place, which ultimately turns into a city called mecca, populated by his descendents.

Which also might be a play on how the sea feeds ishamels in the book, whilst in the desert the well of zamzam water does the same to the biblical Ishmael.

Abraham visits every now and then, once Ishmael has grown up. together with him they build a house of worship to God there, which turns out to be the Kaaba.

[–] ronniehrubin 9 years ago

I wonder if the company Starbuck's is named after the character in this movie / novel?

[–] etsis 9 years ago

There is some disagreement about that. At least according to Wikipedia, and I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of their article.

Originally the company was to be called Pequod, after a whaling ship from Moby-Dick, but this name was rejected by some of the co-founders. The company was instead named after the chief mate on the Pequod, Starbuck.

However, Bowker has a different recollection of how the company got its name. He recalls that the co-founders were desperately close to naming the company "Cargo House" until Heckler mentioned that he thought words that began with "st" were powerful ones. That led Bowker to make a list of "st" words, and somebody somehow saw the old mining town of Starbo in an old mining map.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbucks#History

The first explanation makes more sense to me.

[–] Etherdave (162) 2 years ago

The line may be unintentionally more controversial than Melville intended. Since the beginning of the story is being related by a narrator having already survived the ordeal of the Pequod, 'me alone having lived to tell thee', is his name actually Ishmael, or has he slyly concocted the moniker to evoke the biblical character (Biblical Ishmael was turned out into the desert, but by Providence saved from death by thirst... Melville's Ishmael is turned out into the sea, but by Providence saved from drowning)? If so, is there any more of this rather tall tale of the Big Fish That Got Away that is invented? Is the narrator a reliable narrator, or is he attempting to cover from some other, more disturbing catastrophe, such as a mutiny or a shipwreck? Is the narrator truly an 'Ishmael' or is he more of a 'Jonah' as described by Father Mapple in his sermon?