Bartleby, The Scrivener : A Tale Of Wall Street

In both stories, after the characters are introduced, one begins to see situational changes within the characters. Bartleby, who once was a skillful, efficient worker and a valuable asset to the lawyer, has now ceased working and his superficial façade is none changing. He presents his employer with a constant and passive answer of “I would prefer not to” to all request and inquiries presented by the lawyer. He unwilling leaves the premises of his job and the lawyer try to put up with him but he finds his annoyance of Bartleby’s actions unbearable. Such as when he found that Bartleby was staying the office after all others had gone home and refusal to do any work and take any money from the lawyer and leave. Even the lawyer seems to be walled in by Bartleby and Bartleby’s

In a speech by Mary Elizabeth Lease, “Wall Street Owns The Country”, she mentioned that this nation is a nation of inconsistencies. The main things she wanted to state was the nation’s economics and political woes because of the government was ruled based on the monetary value by wall street that cause people to suffer. Furthermore, she said that the welfare of the people was no longer considered by the government as a priority but money was. Most of the actions made by the government did not benefit people anymore. The government asked people to go to work and raise a big crop. So the people did as the government said, but the crops were still not enough because the people were “overpopulated”, according to the government. Therefore, people

The secondary title for the novel, A Story of Wall-Street, sets the stage for what has become another moral dilemma of man — the importance of commerce placed over the importance of life. Melville plays with the role of commerce continuously throughout this work, which takes place inside of a Lawyer's office on Wall Street. The Lawyer states, very simply, that he is "a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best," revealing that at the very core of his being is an ideal that anything strenuous he may come across in his path should be quickly avoided, as to not cause any disturbance in his daily routine (Melville 1). This accurately sums up the general mindset of those on Wall Street at the time, and perhaps America as a whole -- that anything out of the ordinary was considered a nuisance to those focused entirely on the generation of wealth. The Lawyer recognizes this, and even considers himself a part of this crowd. However, he has taken the time to write this account of Bartleby, the Scrivener that arrives one day to fill a position in the office. While Bartleby may represent this "nuisance" exactly, the Lawyer finds himself drawn towards the mysterious quality he brings, unaware whether he will be beneficial to the firm or

The lawyer is not able to focus on anything because Bartleby will not move from the office or do any work. The lawyer then decides to pay Bartleby a “twenty-dollar bill over and above whatever [is in Bartleby’s account] and tell him his services” are not necessary (674).The lawyer throws money at Bartleby instead of handing it to him in his hands. The lawyer is trying to get rid of Bartleby to let the law firm make money. Melville portrays a constant war of conscience in the lawyer's mind regarding Bartleby's actions and the lawyer's reactions. The lawyer goes to church regularly yet does not show the Christian beliefs and ethics.

This lack of information is amplified onto the reader and even before his death, Bartleby is already a haunting figure in the text. Interestingly, Bartleby is the complete opposite of the narrator, in that we know a great deal about the life of the narrator, but almost nothing about Bartleby. The narrator is also shown to be a man with purpose, though self-serving, whereas Bartleby exists as an aimless being. “He ran a day and night line, copying by sun-light and by candle-light. I should have been quite delighted with his application, had he been cheerfully industrious. But he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically” (Melville 6).

The style of this story was not the greatest in the beginning, but got better the further into the story I got. As a reader, I found it very hard to concentrate on the first few pages because it had a very slow start to it. Once Bartleby was introduced, however, it was much easier to concentrate. The author created a great sense of mystery around Bartleby, and that is what pulled me into the story. I wanted to figure out who Bartleby was, where he came from, and why he behaved the

Paragraph 95 proceeds with the Lawyer contemplating on what to do with Bartleby. Here, readers gain insight on the Lawyer’s perspective concerning morality and moral responsibility. The Lawyer feels a sense of helplessness and is convinced that he can no longer be accountable for Bartleby. He realizes that he “could not reach” (137) Bartleby’s soul and Clark explains that he is unable to make that connection because “like the money in his

When the lawyer finds out Bartleby never leaves the office and has made it his home he says, “Before, I had never experienced aught but a not unpleasing sadness. The bond of common humanity now drew me

There are many ways someone can interpret “Bartleby the Scrivener”. I think throughout the story the narrator (the Lawyer) is the more sympathetic character.

In Bartleby, The Scrivener, Bartleby serves as the main character with his distinct nature that everyone is trying to decipher. Despite the attention around Bartleby, much of the story also revolves around the narrator, the lawyer, who tells the story through his perspective; this implies that the lawyer’s ideology and perception of societal norms shape the interactions between the lawyer and Bartleby but also how the story is told. Take for example, if the lawyer disregards Bartleby and fires him on the spot, this story would have ended rather quickly and been much different than it actually is. With this said, the lawyer’s peculiar attraction to Bartleby’s strange behavior can be explained by the lawyer’s innate ideas of social norms and instruction that stems from the behavior of the other scriveners and his own experiences.

Have you ever seen a person so disconnected from society and from what is considered to be normal that he or she made you question their sanity? If so, you could relate with the lawyer in the story “Bartleby, the Scrivener.” In this story, the narrator, who is a lawyer, has a simple man named Bartleby respond to a job opening as a scrivener. Unbeknownst to the lawyer, Bartleby did not act in the manner the lawyer would have expected. Bartleby is so outside of what is expected that it is almost as if he had died and no longer had to live up to society’s standards. In this story, Bartleby is portrayed as a lifeless zombie and is alone with nowhere to go, no one to see, nowhere to be, and no purpose to live for.

Is there such a thing as abstract literature? Melville definitely puts some weigh in favor of this argument by writing Bartleby the Scrivener: a Wall Street Story. Bartleby is a short story left literary critics wondering the true meaning of this bizarre story while only having as a clue the author’s point of view about the times the story was written, the 1850s. Melville uses his characters as tools to show his opinion of capitalism in its beginnings. Bartleby and its characters offer a snapshot of could be considered Melville stance about capitalism and all the calamities it brings to people like selfishness, arrogance, and hopelessness.

Bartleby tells his own boss and owner of the law office to leave his own property while he remains inside. This event solidifies the fact that the boss has no backbone for himself or the company. The boss cannot stand up for himself and tells Bartleby to leave, but rather takes the command of one of his incompetent workers. Bartleby at this point has gained complete control over his own boss.

The narrator went to great lengths to avoid a confrontation. When Bartleby refused to leave the office after being fired, the narrator chose to move his office to a different location instead of removing the eccentric man by force. The narrator informs the reader of this idea when he says, “ No more then. Since he will not quit me, I must quit him. I will change my offices.” (2422) By doing so, the narrator displays just how far man is sometimes willing to go to avoid conflict. The final theme is man’s desire to have a free conscience. Melville reveals this theme through the actions of the narrator as well as the new tenants of the office. The narrator attempts to appease his conscience by giving Bartleby money above his wages when he fired him. The new tenants of the office try to put the responsibility of dealing with Bartleby back on the narrator, but they are denied and eventually have the man removed from the premises by law officers. Herman Melville uses the actions and reactions of the characters in “Bartleby the Scrivener” to disclose three important themes, alienation, man’s desire to avoid conflict, and man’s desire to keep a free conscience. In doing so, he gives us an inside look into the workings of the human mind. The reader is left with the impression that all people, including lawyers, have compassion for other humans, and at some point, that

The lawyer himself says his goal was to remove the sight of him, but not the employment: “I procured a high green folding screen, which might entirely isolate Bartleby from my sight, though not remove him from my voice” (Melville). The narrator also makes Bartleby out be some sort of loner who does not like company. We are told scriveners usually work in pairs: “Where there are two or more scriveners in an office, they assist each other in this examination, one reading from the copy, the other holding the original” (Melville), but Bartleby is an exception to this normalcy “I cannot credit that the mettlesome poet Byron would have contentedly sat down with Bartleby to examine a law document” (Melville). We see that the narrator makes Bartleby a hard to work with person in this statement thus isolating himself from the rest of his colleagues. He is also dehumanized in his way of work, where he worked methodically, but there was no change in the way he worked. The lawyer describes him as an emotionless robot-like being: “I should have