In Herman Melville’s “Bartleby, the
Scrivener” we are introduced to the title character by an elderly narrator who
crossed paths with the “scrivener”. Through
the narrator, a lawyer from Wall Street, the reader is given insight into Bartleby’s
story and his oft use of the phrase “I would prefer not to” (27). From his first introduction, Bartleby is
somewhat of an enigma, the narrator describing his first impression, “a
motionless young man one morning stood upon my office threshold… pallidly neat,
pitiably respectable, incurably forlorn!” (25). However, little is known about Bartleby, the
narrator himself stating that “Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing
is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and, in his case, those are
very small” (20). Knowing so little
about Bartleby, the question arises as to why the narrator chooses to tell
Bartleby’s story. Does the narrator
really come to know who Bartleby is and what he represents? What does he
represent? Does he represent nothing? In this case, does representing nothing
mean something? Amidst all the questions however, what Bartleby represents to
himself is irrelevant. Bartleby’s whole history is something the narrator and
readers alike will never know. So what
makes a man of whom which little is known so important that an elderly lawyer decides
that he must share what he knows of Bartleby and insists that the things
unknown about him “is an irreparable loss to literature” (20)? Although the question
of who Bartleby is remains, Bartleby’s importance is not rooted in his own
gauge of himself, but rather what he means to those who cross paths with him.
The elderly narrator makes a
conscious decision to tell the tale of Wall Street, not through the stories of many
scriveners who he worked with for extended periods of time during his career,
but rather through a scrivener, of whom in comparison to others, he had little
interactions with. Though only having
worked with Bartleby for a short period of time, what sets him apart from the
others is the way that he challenges the narrator’s faith in society. In an article by Todd F. Davis, aptly titled “The
Narrator’s Dilemma”, the author states that “It is Bartleby's lack of
productivity that begins the narrator's journey into a strange world he has
never cared to know… The entrance of Bartleby and his refusal to do the tasks
set before him force the narrator to question his past rules for living.” Bartleby first appears as an efficient worker,
having done “an extraordinary quantity of writing” (26). However, once prodded “to verify the accuracy
of his copy, word by word”, Bartleby does the unthinkable, firmly replying “I
would prefer not to” (27). As much as
this unsettles the narrator, he also finds that “there was something about
Bartleby that not only strangely disarmed me, but in a wonderful manner, touched
and disconcerted me” (28). Bartleby’s irreversible stance on doing more work
provokes the narrator to question his stance on society informed conduct, “It
is not seldom the case that, when a man is browbeaten in some unprecedented and
violently unreasonable way, he begins to stagger in his own plainest faith.”
(28). By simply refusing to give an
expected reply, Bartleby effectively challenges the very strict rules of
conduct that narrator has clung to.
 |
| Evening on Karl Johan Street (1892), Edvard Munch. Bergen Art Museum, Norway. image source |
What makes Bartleby so important is
that he serves as a mirror to world, the reflection of which shows the horrors
of modernity. In the painting “Evening on Karl Johan Street” by Edvard Munch, one
immediately sees an image of a community walking one direction, and a
mysterious enigma, a lone mysterious man, walking resolutely in the opposite
direction. Melville’s Bartleby
undoubtedly fits this description of the lone man walking away from the crowd,
whilst the crowd may well be the lawyer, the other scriveners, and everyone
else Bartleby encounters. In the
foreground, we see a crowd walking with eyes round and trance like, as if under
the spell of modern society. Each person
walking either shares a similar transfixed expression, or is worse, completely faceless,
in both cases they are no longer individuals.
The man’s face walking in the opposite direction also cannot be seen. Just like Bartleby however, it is not so much
who he is to himself, but rather what he means to the crowd. Much like Bartleby, little is known about the
man, other than he doesn’t fit into society; hence he walks to a different
rhythm, ultimately walking in a different direction. If someone in the crowd were to spot this
mysterious figure, he might just stop walking, finding himself intrigued, and
yet perplexed by the man walking in the opposite direction, ultimately
questioning his own. Therein lies
Bartleby’s importance, especially to the narrator. Bartleby’s power is that he is able to show
the narrator a reflection of a man struggling to fit in and blindingly following
society’s direction towards modernity.
Although Melville’s work is titled “Bartleby,
The Scrivener”, the importance of the story is not so much what happens to
Bartleby from beginning to end, but rather how the narrator himself reacts to
whole of Bartleby’s story. Bartleby challenges the very societal traditions and
norms the narrator has clung to prior to meeting Bartleby. After each failed
attempt to coerce Bartleby is some form action, the narrator each time relies
on his own routine, to comfort him against the perplexed state Bartleby leaves
him. In “Bartleby the Socratic” by Andre Furlani, the author writes that when
the narrator is faced with Bartleby’s passive aggressive replies, “ The
inveterate habit of fleeing into habit or domestic comfort becomes his only
recourse, since he refuses either to dismiss Bartleby or bravely to face the
self-examination that the scrivener's conduct compels.” Although the narrator
finds himself compelled and riveted by Bartleby’s story, the urgent need to
hold on to his own traditions and justifying Bartleby’s withdrawal from society
becomes even stronger.
As Bartleby’s story comes to an end,
the narrator still finds himself drawn towards Bartleby. The discovery of a
wasted Bartleby, dead and having died alone, results in the narrator
acknowledging that when he goes to feels Bartleby’s hand, “a tingling shiver
ran up my arm and down my spine to my feet.” (49). Andre Furlani, notes that “At
this point the reader might expect the story to move toward a quite different
resolution--the attorney awakened to a sense of his own presumption, his
ignorance, and to a sense that insights issue from there. He appears to have
reached the apex of his crisis… Yet, with the growing realization of ignorance
comes its anodyne: a "prudential feeling" of melancholy merging into
fear, of pity into revulsion, as well as a cogent psychological rationalization
for such a feeling.” In fact, the narrator finds himself compelled to “divulge
one little item of rumor… that Bartleby had been a subordinate clerk in the
Dead Letter Office at Washington,” (50), justifying that perhaps Bartleby’s
quick path towards solidarity and death was spurred on by his experience working
there. Rather than admit that society
has not been kind to Bartleby, he instead justifies Bartleby’s failure to
thrive due to a past occupation. In
essence, though shown a different path and challenging his way of thinking and living
by Bartleby, the narrator instead finds himself regressing, opting, preferring, not to act.
“Bartleby, the Scrivener” although
humorous at times, is ultimately a tragic tale. On the surface, one might feel
pity towards Bartleby, but upon deeper reflection, the pity falls on the narrator. Bartleby, though not necessarily exceptional,
is special in that he’s able to challenge and bring to light the flaws of
modernity and society. The tragedy
however, is that the narrator, who seems to have been brought into the light by
Bartleby himself, blatantly refuses to acknowledge this, opting to not make
change simply because he would prefer not to. The brilliance of Melville’s work
however, is that he allows the reader to take this journey with the narrator
and Bartleby. Ultimately, Melville doesn’t ask us to choose either the narrator
or Bartleby’s path, rather he leaves the reader the choice to reflect, look
inside, and ask whether preferring not to is enough.
Works
Cited:
Melville, Herman. "Bartleby, the Scrivener. A Story of Wall Street." Literature: A Portable Anthology. Ed. Janet E. Gardner et al 2nd Ed. Boston: Bedford, 2009. 20-50. Print.
Davis,
Todd F. "The Narrator's Dilemma In "Bartleby The Scrivener": The
Excellently Illustrated Re-Statement
Of A Problem." Studies In Short Fiction 34.2 (1997): 183. Academic Search Premier. Web. 14 May 2012.
Furlani,
Andre. "Bartleby The Socratic." Studies In Short Fiction 34.3 (1997):
335. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 14 May
2012.
