For creative instructor

Leo Marx asserts this by comparing a few texts, Hawthorne’s “Ethan Brand”, and Melville’s “Moby Dick”. Melville having written his novel after reading “Ethan Brand” lends some of the latter novels symbolism to the former. In “Ethan Brand”, Marx discusses the symbolism as it pertains to the individuals of a crowd from a village, each in its description a derelict, deprived of vocation, and “victims of the fires of change” (Marx, 35). This theme, found amongst various writings, Marx describes as dissociation with nature, a detachment within man between nature and machine as though a knife is driven in man’s mind. Industrialism was seen to further disconnect the relationship people have with wilderness. That technology is a divider, causing “an individual cut off from the real of experience said the be an indispensable source of life’s meaning” (Marx, 36)

Marx asserts that imagery used to describe pastoral range is the use of the “Garden” or “Space”, with the “natural sun” maintained as the rejuvenating energy of nature. In contrast, the machine of industrialism is the “hot furnace”, fueled by man’s use of nature, which provides this “artificial” energy in the absence of the natural sun. This occurs at night, upon the mountain in “Ethan Brand”. However, it is apparent that in its context, industrialism is seen as tempting man from nature. Many of Hawthorne’s villains are associated with fire, with lairs hidden from the sun. Other writers, Marx writes, also represent the sun as the “primal source of redemption”. In “Moby Dick”, the furnace reappears as light in the night and the means to render fat, Ishmael declaring “believe not the artificial fire…tomorrow, in the natural sun, the skies will be bright…the only true lamp-All others but liars”. Once again, Marx illustrates the author’s perception of industrialism.

I found the article intriguing. To convey his perspective, he didn’t jump straight into his interpretations of the symbolism within the books contemporary to the advent and growth of industrialism, but rather set up a platform, a foundation, in which he ascribes the historical changes and their reactions, referencing the author’s personal experiences with industrialism leading up to their literary works, so as to be more in the mind of the author in understanding the how their experiences and feelings about the world around them would have influenced their works. It was especially reinforcing when discussing the imagery in “Moby Dick” that Melville had read “Ethan Brand” prior to completing his novel, and was impressed by Hawthorne, having written him.

I thought Marx’s point was well made, and we can see the author’s perception of the advent of industrialism through their texts, indicating a more romantic feeling towards pastoral lands, one of need. Just like wilderness was necessary for man to be invigorated and alive, the pastoral land was attributed this attribute. I find it interesting that as pioneers fell forests and gave way to pastoral land, romantics many have respected the civility man needs in taming the wilderness to some degree, but now they see it is the pastoral land, the rural nature, that is being “tamed” by industrialism. However, the impression seems more fearful; that they seem to feel the machine is a step further in disconnecting us with nature and our lands. The machine, a disconnection with the invigorating and rejuvenating life given by the sun, a disconnection that grows as we replace nature with the machine born solely from man’s imagination.

In the end, Marx writes that “Moby Dick” warns of the “great disasters in store for worshippers of fire”, which I agree rings true today. Our reliance on technology, without “wisdom” and “experience” has created many environmental problems today. The advent of gasoline powered automobiles and coal burned for electricity are good examples. But in gaining experience from the use, and applying wisdom, perhaps we can as we have been, continue to reshape our use of technology into one that uses fire to help the sun.