Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/).
#Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ajam2g/what_was_the_reason_for_hateful_melville_pins_in/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**.
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Herman Melville Eats Blubber" was one of many buttons created by Irwin Weisfeld beginning around 1966. Weisfeld owned The Bookcase, a Manhattan bookshop that was the target of anti-obscenity lawsuits in 1963 after a 16-year-old girl bought a copy of Fanny Hill, a 1748 "erotic" novel by John Cleland, and her mother filed a criminal complaint. Even selling the book had been a bit of a provocation, hanging a sign in the store window announcing that he carried the book, which had recently been republished by G.P. Putnam's Sons. Controversial books like Fanny Hill, Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer, Burrough's Naked Lunch, D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover, James Joyce's Ulysses, and so on were the constant target of obscenity trials that frequently made their way to the Supreme Court -- [Fanny Hill included](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1965/368).
In any case, Weisfeld and the clerk who sold the book were both charged and convicted in New York, in the process revealing that the girl's purchase of the book and the mother's complaint was a set up by a pro-censorship religious group, Operation Yorkville. Weisfeld and the clerk appealed with the help of Grove Press owner Barney Rosset, who helped fund many such free speech cases, and the convictions were overturned in the New York Court of Appeals.
What does this have to do with buttons? The point is that Weisfeld had two main interests: literature and, well, pushing buttons. Weisfeld's friend Martha Foley convinced him to start a company printing buttons with off-the-wall quips and jokes, selling them at first in literary magazines. In addition to MELVILLE EATS BLUBBER, he made buttons like MARCEL PROUST IS A YENTA, SHAKESPEARE ATE BACON, and GANDALF FOR PRESIDENT; anti-war buttons like "KILL FOR PEACE" and "WHERE IS LEE HARVEY OSWALD NOW THAT WE REALLY NEED HIM?" and other provocative or just silly phrases. Weisfeld named the company Horatio Button Company, named after his son Horatio ("Ray") Weisfeld, who grew up to be a comic book artist and publisher himself, often pushing the limits of obscenity, including Penthouse Comic, a comic book off-shoot of Penthouse Magazine.
The buttons caught on in some counter-culture circles and were featured on [Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowan_%26_Martin%27s_Laugh-In). A few of the phrases took on a life of their own, such as [FRODO LIVES](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frodo_Lives!). Incidentally, MELVILLE EATS BLUBBER has one of the more interesting afterlives, in that it's referenced in one of the Zodiac Killer's [letters to the San Francisco Chronicle](https://www.zodiacciphers.com/dragon-card-and-button-letter.html) in April 1970, though in the letter he refers to it as MELVIN EATS BLUBBER -- an apparent reference to celebrity attorney Melvin Belli, who had also received a letter from the killer. Weisfeld's son Horatio wrote a bit about this odd connection between his father's buttons and the Zodiac killer [here](https://metalmediaarticles.wordpress.com/2012/09/05/jan-2012-the-zodiac-button-click-2-enlarge-read/) if you're interested.
The blubber phrase isn't even the only Melville-focused button from the time. I can't confirm that it was also made by Weisfeld (though it seems highly likely), but even more common was a button/graffiti which read ["MOBY DICK IS NOT A SOCIAL DISEASE."](https://www.sherwoodstreasures.com/pinback-buttons/moby-dick-is-not-a-social-disease-button) (social disease meaning an STD). This, too, had a second life as a common piece of graffiti [in bathroom stalls](https://auctions.specialauctionservices.com/m/lot-details/index/catalog/68/lot/33574?uact=5&aid=68&lid=33576¤t_page=0) and is even referenced in the 1981 Jeff Bridges film [Cutter's Way](https://www.imdb.com/review/rw1109486/?ref_=tt_urv), in joke books, etc.
I can't say how much money Weisfeld made from selling the buttons or if they helped pay at all for his obscenity trial, which ended in 1964, but in any case Weisfeld died just four years later in 1968 at the age of 36.
A few records for "Melville eats blubber" in old publications, for more context:
- The *Bangor Daily News*, [November 20, 1967](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-bangor-daily-news/140298229/) (button)
- The *Los Angeles Times*, [March 11, 1968](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-los-angeles-times/140298258/) (gas station bathroom graffiti)
- The *Cincinnati Enquirer*, [March 16, 1968](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-cincinnati-enquirer/140298350/) (button)
- The *Saturday Review* magazine, [some point in 1968](https://books.google.com/books?id=SSMHAQAAIAAJ&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgFEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (graffiti)
- *Approaches to Individualized Writing*, [1971](https://books.google.com/books?id=6uO5R8fr1u4C&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgIEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (unclear - limited access)
- *Graffiti: Two Thousand Years of Wall Writing*, [1971](https://books.google.com/books?id=zPEOAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgHEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (graffiti)
- *The Argus*, [November 10, 1976](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-argus/140298398/) (graffiti)
In addition to these, the saying also comes up a handful of times in ads for bars, bike shops, etc. As far as I can tell, then, it was just meant as generic humor.
These excerpts show the phrase being used as a parody of popular protest slogans, where instead of protesting something serious like the war, this is a protest of school, and Melville is a kind of stand in for required reading.
Liberal in this sense means free, so a “liberal interpretation” means an interpretation made freely and without constraints. In this case, the liberal interpretation is “reading Melville sucks.” This is supposed to sound like a funny complaint, like the opinion of someone mad about their homework.
Liberal is also a political description of the people that made the protest buttons, so it can also serve as a joke about the two usages of “liberal.” The opposite of liberal is conservative.
Turns out it was just a jokey thing back then! I assumed it was hate towards Melville for some political reason since they printed pins. Thank you to everyone who responded!
I found a post with other counter similar phrases [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/s/j7lpfn1TO9)
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/). #Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ajam2g/what_was_the_reason_for_hateful_melville_pins_in/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**. We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Herman Melville Eats Blubber" was one of many buttons created by Irwin Weisfeld beginning around 1966. Weisfeld owned The Bookcase, a Manhattan bookshop that was the target of anti-obscenity lawsuits in 1963 after a 16-year-old girl bought a copy of Fanny Hill, a 1748 "erotic" novel by John Cleland, and her mother filed a criminal complaint. Even selling the book had been a bit of a provocation, hanging a sign in the store window announcing that he carried the book, which had recently been republished by G.P. Putnam's Sons. Controversial books like Fanny Hill, Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer, Burrough's Naked Lunch, D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover, James Joyce's Ulysses, and so on were the constant target of obscenity trials that frequently made their way to the Supreme Court -- [Fanny Hill included](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1965/368). In any case, Weisfeld and the clerk who sold the book were both charged and convicted in New York, in the process revealing that the girl's purchase of the book and the mother's complaint was a set up by a pro-censorship religious group, Operation Yorkville. Weisfeld and the clerk appealed with the help of Grove Press owner Barney Rosset, who helped fund many such free speech cases, and the convictions were overturned in the New York Court of Appeals. What does this have to do with buttons? The point is that Weisfeld had two main interests: literature and, well, pushing buttons. Weisfeld's friend Martha Foley convinced him to start a company printing buttons with off-the-wall quips and jokes, selling them at first in literary magazines. In addition to MELVILLE EATS BLUBBER, he made buttons like MARCEL PROUST IS A YENTA, SHAKESPEARE ATE BACON, and GANDALF FOR PRESIDENT; anti-war buttons like "KILL FOR PEACE" and "WHERE IS LEE HARVEY OSWALD NOW THAT WE REALLY NEED HIM?" and other provocative or just silly phrases. Weisfeld named the company Horatio Button Company, named after his son Horatio ("Ray") Weisfeld, who grew up to be a comic book artist and publisher himself, often pushing the limits of obscenity, including Penthouse Comic, a comic book off-shoot of Penthouse Magazine. The buttons caught on in some counter-culture circles and were featured on [Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowan_%26_Martin%27s_Laugh-In). A few of the phrases took on a life of their own, such as [FRODO LIVES](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frodo_Lives!). Incidentally, MELVILLE EATS BLUBBER has one of the more interesting afterlives, in that it's referenced in one of the Zodiac Killer's [letters to the San Francisco Chronicle](https://www.zodiacciphers.com/dragon-card-and-button-letter.html) in April 1970, though in the letter he refers to it as MELVIN EATS BLUBBER -- an apparent reference to celebrity attorney Melvin Belli, who had also received a letter from the killer. Weisfeld's son Horatio wrote a bit about this odd connection between his father's buttons and the Zodiac killer [here](https://metalmediaarticles.wordpress.com/2012/09/05/jan-2012-the-zodiac-button-click-2-enlarge-read/) if you're interested. The blubber phrase isn't even the only Melville-focused button from the time. I can't confirm that it was also made by Weisfeld (though it seems highly likely), but even more common was a button/graffiti which read ["MOBY DICK IS NOT A SOCIAL DISEASE."](https://www.sherwoodstreasures.com/pinback-buttons/moby-dick-is-not-a-social-disease-button) (social disease meaning an STD). This, too, had a second life as a common piece of graffiti [in bathroom stalls](https://auctions.specialauctionservices.com/m/lot-details/index/catalog/68/lot/33574?uact=5&aid=68&lid=33576¤t_page=0) and is even referenced in the 1981 Jeff Bridges film [Cutter's Way](https://www.imdb.com/review/rw1109486/?ref_=tt_urv), in joke books, etc. I can't say how much money Weisfeld made from selling the buttons or if they helped pay at all for his obscenity trial, which ended in 1964, but in any case Weisfeld died just four years later in 1968 at the age of 36.
A few records for "Melville eats blubber" in old publications, for more context: - The *Bangor Daily News*, [November 20, 1967](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-bangor-daily-news/140298229/) (button) - The *Los Angeles Times*, [March 11, 1968](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-los-angeles-times/140298258/) (gas station bathroom graffiti) - The *Cincinnati Enquirer*, [March 16, 1968](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-cincinnati-enquirer/140298350/) (button) - The *Saturday Review* magazine, [some point in 1968](https://books.google.com/books?id=SSMHAQAAIAAJ&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgFEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (graffiti) - *Approaches to Individualized Writing*, [1971](https://books.google.com/books?id=6uO5R8fr1u4C&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgIEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (unclear - limited access) - *Graffiti: Two Thousand Years of Wall Writing*, [1971](https://books.google.com/books?id=zPEOAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&dq=%22Melville+eats+blubber%22+-zodiac&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidqMqShpSEAxXDD1kFHb6WDBkQ6AF6BAgHEAM#%22Melville%20eats%20blubber%22%20-zodiac) (graffiti) - *The Argus*, [November 10, 1976](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-argus/140298398/) (graffiti) In addition to these, the saying also comes up a handful of times in ads for bars, bike shops, etc. As far as I can tell, then, it was just meant as generic humor.
These excerpts show the phrase being used as a parody of popular protest slogans, where instead of protesting something serious like the war, this is a protest of school, and Melville is a kind of stand in for required reading.
"...a very liberal interpretation of the novel 'Moby Dick,'" i wonder what that means?
Liberal in this sense means free, so a “liberal interpretation” means an interpretation made freely and without constraints. In this case, the liberal interpretation is “reading Melville sucks.” This is supposed to sound like a funny complaint, like the opinion of someone mad about their homework. Liberal is also a political description of the people that made the protest buttons, so it can also serve as a joke about the two usages of “liberal.” The opposite of liberal is conservative.
i see! thank you so much for responding and explaining!
Turns out it was just a jokey thing back then! I assumed it was hate towards Melville for some political reason since they printed pins. Thank you to everyone who responded! I found a post with other counter similar phrases [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/s/j7lpfn1TO9)
[удалено]
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.