Bartleby, The Scrivener By Herman Melville

Abstract
The lawyer hires a Scrivener, Bartleby, to copy his notes for him. Bartleby is the best scrivener by far that the lawyer has ever had. Although Bartleby refuses to do any work, he is still employed by the lawyer until finally he is taken to prison.


Journal

“Bartleby, The Scrivener” is a story that truly shows the history of the 1850s. In this story Bartleby represents those whom are protesting for their rights. For instance, the know-nothings are represented because they are refusing to speak when asked about the group. They were told to say, "I know nothing". Bartleby seems to take on this same tactic, but why? What is the reason for this non-speaking tactic or that he states, “He prefers not to” do what he is asked? This is the common theme throughout the book that Bartleby implies. He simply doesn't want to do the tasks the lawyer gives him, in which he has, no reason behind his preference. This element of the story puzzles me. I don't understand why he won't do what he is told or tell anyone of his past. In order to keep a job you must be able to do any jobs given to you, which Bartleby definitely doesn’t do. As for his past, I feel that there may have been a tragic event that scared him for life, which effects how he deals with issues.

Bartleby is a hard worker and never stops to eat or take breaks like the others in the office. What makes Bartleby feel he has to work this hard? Is it something that he was told when he was younger that encourages him to work even harder at his job? When you think of Wall Street you think of those whom are committed to their jobs and have no time for other things in life. Is this how Bartleby feels he must be too, since he works on Wall Street?  

As the story continues Bartleby doesn’t do his work so he is asked to leave the office. The lawyer gives him six days to leave. Bartleby doesn’t leave and doesn’t explain why either. This stance that Bartleby takes is just like the issues of the 1840s through the 1850s because people were protesting for rights of blacks. Some states were changing to anti-slavery, while others stayed as slave states. If the anti-slavery states hadn’t taken a stance and stood firm on their beliefs we might still have slavery today. The real question though is why would Bartleby take a stance, he seemed pretty happy with his job because he never complained. This is something that was brought to my attention when reading this story. I just don’t completely understand why Bartleby wouldn’t do what he was told. Although there is a lot of historical meaning in this text I feel there are still some unanswered questions that leave me puzzled.