Katie Curtis

Goldman

Engl. 364

4 December 2016

Preference or Resistance?

Preference is a commodity in this world that is highly valued, but often ignored and

rarely fulfilled. In this economic world, people must put away their preferences and accept the

tasks, jobs, or situations they are given. There is risk in voicing preferences or even saying no

to something that is not ones preference; a risk of being denied, being fired, being reprimanded.

In Herman Melvilles short story, Bartleby the Scrivener, preference is the only option

acceptable to the character of Bartleby. However, it is possible that Bartlebys actions might not

truly be a matter of preference, but rather his actions may actually be a resistance to the growing,

oppressive power of Wall Street and capitalism. The lawyer that Bartleby works for makes his

business on the growing economy and issues of legality in America. He and his employees push

paper all day: proofing, reading, and copying legal documents for businesses. Bartleby is the one

employee of the lawyers that cannot be influenced to push papers or even to do any work

whatsoever. If Bartleby was exhibiting simple laziness, the threat of having no money to live

would jumpstart him to do his work. If he was simply trying to skirt by without doing his work,

then the requests of his employer would have eventually gotten to him and he would have begun

to do at least some work. However, Bartleby actively isolates himself from everything involving

the work the lawyer does. He refuses to do even the simplest, least-demanding jobs. This

complete isolation suggests that Bartleby is not merely lazy; he is making a statement about Wall

Street and the business the lawyer makes his money on. I will further argue in this essay that
 2

Bartlebys lack of motivation to do his work is actually a powerful statement against the power

Wall Street was obtaining in America and the influence it had over the economy of the working

class.

Wall Street in New York City is the financial center of the world, home of the New York

Stock Exchange and NASDAQ. Melvilles text is set in New York in the mid-1800s as the

economy of America was rising and as the influence of Wall Street was taking its hold on the

working class of America. As Wall Street grew, its control over the flow of money became

stronger and the working class of America began to suffer. Bartleby the Scrivener characterizes

some of these struggles within its narrative. Though it is not specifically stated, Bartleby

experiences the struggles that were started with the progression of the economy. The lawyer

reflects on Bartlebys presence in his office, making some revealing realizations about his quirky

employee:

I had never seen him reading no, not even a newspaper; that for long periods he would

stand looking out, at his pale window behind the screen, upon the dead brick wall; I was

quite sure he never visited any refectory or eating house; while his pale face clearly

indicated that he never drank beer like Turkey, or tea and coffee even, like other men, that

he never went anywhere in particular that I could learn; never went out for a walk, unless

indeed that was the case at present; that he declined telling who he was, or whence he

came, or whether he had any relatives in the world; that though so thin and pale, he never

complained of ill health (Melville 14).

It is suggested, through the lawyers observations, that Bartleby is struggling financially. Though

many critics have interpreted this passage as a simple sign of Bartlebys depression and suicidal
 3

feelings, I will argue that this passage is suggestive of Bartlebys destitution, one that has been a

result of Wall Streets takeover of the economy.

Bartleby was left with few options as to employment. He had previously been stuck in

what was suggested by the lawyer as an unsatisfying job in the Dead Letter Office. The lawyer

received this rumor months after Bartlebys death, which claimed that Bartleby had been a

subordinate clerkfrom which he had been suddenly removed by a change in the

administration (Melville 29). He was able to find work again with the lawyer; however, by that

time he had learned that his energy had not been valued in his previous position and likely would

not be in this new position. As a way of fighting back, Bartleby adopts an attitude of

noncompliance that manifests itself in his preferring not to do the things that his employer

requests of him. Even when the lawyer simply asks him to hail one of the other employees,

Nippers, Bartleby calmly replies, I prefer not to (Melville 11). Bartleby takes it to the extreme

though as he begins to resist every function of the American economy (Reed 255). He lives in his

employers office rather than contributing to the real estate economy. He does not eat or drink

and, therefore, does not contribute to the economy of the food industry. He did not participate in

reading, which could send him news of Wall Street or the stock market and even refused to go

for walks down the literal street that Wall Street makes its home on.

Bartlebys refusal to even leave his employers building is a representation of the way the

economy of America treats the lower classes. The economy, more importantly the rulers of the

economy, work to hide these people and the problem they present; this problem being the lower

classes causing detrimental damage to the stability of the economy. Wall Street and the leaders of

the economy push what they deem as a problem under the rug; they try to avoid it and hide it.

You cannot erase people though. They are like ghosts, they are present but consistently ignored
 4

and unseen because of fear that acknowledging the lower class would mean acknowledging the

wrongs being done by the economy. Bartleby tries to fight these wrongs by haunting the building

of his employer, like a ghosthe appeared at the entrance of his hermitage (Melville 11). The

only way he can fight against the power of the economy and of capitalism is to literally do

nothing until he eventually dies and disappears for real (Reed 256). This is the only way for

Bartleby to make his stand. Capitalism wants people to live, to exist. It wants people to live so

that they will continue feeding into the economy and perpetuating the growth of capitalism.

Accepting capitalism and feeding the economy distracts people from realizing the way capitalism

functions and imbues a sense of liberty and choice. In truth, capitalism and the economy only

work to hide the reality of the lower class and the struggles created for them by the economy.

However, the character of Bartleby shows that through making the choice to do nothing he is

exercising his right for agency. The right that capitalism imbues in its people, but doesnt truly

fulfill especially for members of the lower class.

Bartleby exercises this right of choice from the beginning to the end of the short story.

However, he did not always exercise that right in the form of refusing to do anything. As the

lawyer details, Bartleby began his employment working incredibly hard for his employer. The

lawyer writes:

At first Bartleby did an extraordinary quantity of writing. As if long famishing for

something to copy, he seemed to gorge himself on my documents. There was no pause for

digestion. 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).

Bartleby evolves quite suddenly from this attitude of willing diligence to preferred isolation. As
 5

the lawyer reports, Bartleby was an incredible copier. He did the best work out of all the

employees in the office. The long famishing for something to copy can be supposed to arise

from his experience working in the Dead Letter Office, which we discover in the latter part of the

short story. Clerking in a job that suggests death and forgotten memories, as a place where letters

go to die tends to do, would have greatly influenced Bartlebys motivation to copy the lawyers

papers so vigorously. Bartleby would finally be interacting with and copying papers that still

live, in a sense. Papers that still have a purpose and that will go on to interact with other

businesses or officials. The life that would have lived in these pages, for Bartleby, would have

given him comfort after the time he spent in a places that breathed death. We must ask ourselves

then, why would he suddenly retire his work for the lawyer? This evolution is critical to how we

view Bartleby and his motivations or, rather his lack of motivation.

One reading of this question is to posit that Bartleby recognized that the work he was

doing did not have the life he believed it did as compared to the dead letters. These pages were

just as lifeless as the others, in the sense of the Wall Street business they dealt with, and were just

a members of a continuous circulation as Reed suggests in her article (Reed 11). According to

Reed, Bartlebys evolution is actually his attempt to break out of these circuits of exchange, to

disrupt circulation (11). Reed is not the only one with an opinion on this question and on

Bartlebys evolution. Some of those who look at these problems within the short story provide a

much different analysis than Reed.

In their article Id Prefer Not To. Bartleby and the Excesses of Interpretation, Armin

Beverungen and Stephen Dunne suggest that Bartlebys evolution into preference is a

characterization of the plight of the working class. They argue that the choice Bartleby makes in

preferring not to do anything is the power of a worker to affirm that he or she is not simply, only
 6

and always a worker (Beverungen and Dunne 174). This claim highlights the struggles that Wall

Street presents for the members of the working class. Members in this specific class are the

backbone of capitalism, however due to the financial situation of their class status these people

are subject to being over-worked and under-payed. As Beverungen and Dunne suggest, Bartleby

is attempting to fight against this reality by denying his employer the power of control over his

choice.

The physical barriers constantly present in the story are just another representation of the

social and economic barriers Physical divisions are created to separate the characters from each

other and from the other aspects of life around them. The brick wall outside the window of

Bartlebys corner of the office separates him from any world outside his own and outside the

office that he makes into his habitat. The densely developed city divides the office building and

its inhabitants from the nature beyond the suffocating urban center (Kuebrich 386). Possibly the

most essential barrier is the one that divides one half of the office from the other. On one side lies

the lawyer, and later Bartleby, while on the other lies Nipper, Turkey, and Ginger Nut. These

divisions or barriers represent the separation of the capitalist elite, the middle class, and the

working class. The leaders of Wall Street characterize the capitalist elite, the lawyer characterizes

the middle class, and the copyists characterizes the working class.

The area that becomes convoluted is the placement of Bartleby. As a copyist he is a

member of the working class. However, instead of being on the side of the in-office barrier that

belongs to Nippers, Turkey, and Ginger Nut he is on the side of the lawyer; the side that

represents the middle class rather than the working class (Kuebrich 385-386). This placement of

Bartleby in the office could be suggesting that Bartleby exists somewhere in between the two

classes, not a middle classer, but not quite in the working class with his fellow copyists. This
 7

deviation from the placement of people in the office may well be one of the reasons Bartleby

decides to take action against the functions of capitalism and against his own boss, who strictly

upholds the values of separation between classes. Except when it comes to Bartleby. This

exception could have triggered the rise in Bartlebys decision to fight against the rigid and

unreasonable values of capitalism and explore the gift of preference.

We have identified that the preference that we see in Bartleby is really an act of resistance

against the powers of the economy and of capitalism. Many critics have labeled the choices

Bartleby is making as simple refusals to his employer. However, if we look closely at the

language that is used within the short story, as is analyzed in by Graham Thompson in his article

Dead Letters!...Dead men?:The Rhetoric of the Office in Melvilles Bartleby the Scrivener,

we will see that the way Bartleby uses his language is essential to understanding the action he is

taking against Wall Street. It has already been established that Bartlebys mantra is Id prefer

not to, but I want to look specifically at the use of these words and what they truly mean versus

what they suggest or become interpreted as. Even Thompson, in his article on rhetoric, describes

Bartlebys actions as an initial refusal...to readto speak about himself (Thompson 405).

However, we must come away from connecting preference with refusal. The English Oxford

Dictionary defines preference as the greater liking for one alternative over another or others.

Using this definition we can analyze that Bartleby has a greater liking to do nothing, but does not

ever specifically declare that he will refuse to do that which he does not prefer. Yet, many critics

and the lawyer himself make the assumption that Bartlebys statement is a statement of refusal

rather than a statement of preference. If this is an experiment on Bartlebys part, then it is an

excellent one for he succeeded in not participating in actions by simply not refusing them. Now,

if only every underpaid and overworked individual could escape their job duties with a simple
 8

Id prefer not to.

Bartlebys actions begin to be imparted to the lawyers other employees as well, though

not in quite the same manner. The lawyer himself begins to characterize his own preferences in

his speech. A conversation ensues shortly after Bartleby begins to express his preferences

between the lawyer and his other employees, Nipper and Turkey, over the use of the word prefer:

I would prefer to be left alone here, said Bartleby, as if offended at being mobbed in his

privacy. / Thats the word, Turkey, said I"thats it./ Oh, prefer? oh yesqueer

word. I never use it myself. But, sir, as I was saying, if he would but prefer/ Turkey,

interrupted I, you will please withdraw.Oh certainly, sir, if you prefer that I should.As

he opened the folding-door to retire, Nippers at his desk caught a glimpse of me, and

asked whether I would prefer to have a certain paper copied on blue paper or white. He

did not in the least roguishly accent the word prefer. It was plain that it involuntarily

rolled form his tongue. I thought to myself, surely I must get rid of a demented man, who

already has in some degree turned the tongues, if not the heads of myself and clerks. But

I thought it prudent not to break the dismission at once. (Melville 17)

The lawyer realizes that Bartleby is having an influence on the language of his office. Now all of

them are using the word, both intentionally and involuntarily, as the lawyer puts it. It is ironic

that Turkey who claims He never use[s] it [him]self then proceeds to use it in his very next

comment. Whether this is meant to be a purposeful irony by Turkey is not clear, but it is apparent

that Bartleby has had a great effect on the office for them to even proceed to have a conversation

about this specific word. The lawyer describes this new usage of the word as a form of infection

or contagion. When Nippers uses the word while describing a suggestion to help Bartlebys
 9

attitude, the lawyer responds with, so you have got the word too (Melville 16). The difference

in how the word is used by Bartleby versus how it is used by the others in the office is the

behaviors it is targeted towards.

When Bartleby uses the word, as we have already determined, it is for the purpose of

fighting against the power of Wall Street and capitalism. When the other employees use it, it is

directed towards the preferences of the lawyer and what they can do for him as his employees.

One example of this is present in the above quote when the lawyer relays that Nippers at his

desk caught a glimpse of me, and asked whether I would prefer to have a certain paper copied on

blue paper or white (Melville 17). The lawyer uses the word when asking for something or

delegating jobs to his employees, such as when he tells them Id prefer that you would

withdraw for the present (Melville 16). The word, preference, has a very different meaning in

this context than it does when Bartleby utilizes it. Instead of continuing the fight against the

powers of the economy, the lawyer and his employees are purporting the attitudes and pressures

of Wall Street, the economy, and capitalism. The employees follow and even request to perform

tasks according to the lawyers preference and the lawyer continues to be concerned more

extensively with his own preferences then the preferences of the people he employs.

Contrary to what many critics would suggest, Bartleby the Scrivener is not a tale of

refusal or a tale of simple objection to the inner workings of a single employer. This short story is

a tale of the woes of Wall Street, the economy of America, and capitalism. One man does what is

interpreted as a ridiculous, unstable, depressive act against the piteousness of his life. This

interpretation, however, is falling short of the true motivations of Bartleby to do nothing. It also

misses the critical realization that doing nothing is more powerful than what is commonly

believed. Bartleby is not simply doing nothing. He is actively choosing not to do something. This
 10

choice demonstrates that his own preference affects the fabric of an entire business and the

businesses around it. Rumors of Bartleby, who he was and what he did, circulated long after his

death (Melville 29). This makes it clear that Bartlebys actions did not go unnoticed by others

working on Wall Street. Though it is not outwardly suggested in the short story that these actions

influenced how people interacted with capitalism or the plight of the working class, as readers

we can acknowledge that what Bartleby was doing stretched father than just one small office

building. He silently fought for the treatment, conditions, and attitudes towards the working class

who were being subject to the overwhelming and rising power of Wall Street in America at that

time. Unfortunately, Bartleby dies preferring to have people recognize the true motivations

behind his behavior and actions. Yet critics are still puzzled over and debating on the true

meanings of Melvilles text. Meanwhile, Wall Streets power grows and the economy continues

to thrive from it, while the working class crumbles underneath it.

Works Cited
 11

Beverungen, Armin; Dunne, Stephen. Id Prefer Not To. Bartleby And The Excesses of

Interpretation. Culture and Organization 13.2 (2007): 171-183. Academic Search

Premier. Web. 21 Nov 2016.

Kuebrich, David. Melville's Doctrine of Assumptions: The Hidden Ideology of Capitalist

Production in Bartleby. The New England Quarterly, vol. 69, no. 3, 1996, pp. 381

405. www.jstor.org/stable/366781.

Preference. The English Oxford Dictionary. Web.

Reed, Naomi C. The Specter of Wall Street: Bartleby the Scrivener And The Language of

Commodities. American Literature: A Journal of Literary History, Criticism, and

Bibliography 76.2 (2004): 247-273. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 21 Nov 2016.

Reichardt, Dosia. The Man of Laws Tale: Bartleby, Augustine, and The Economy of

Salvation. AUMLA: Journal of the Australasian Universities Language and Literature

Association 112 (2009): 39-51. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 21 Nov 2016.

Thompson, Graham. Dead Letters!... Dead Men?": The Rhetoric of the Office in Melville's

Bartleby, the Scrivener. Journal of American Studies, vol. 34, no. 3, 2000, pp. 395

411. www.jstor.org/stable/27556857.