Herman Melville’s short story “Bartleby, The Scrivener” was originally published anonymously in 1853 by Putnam’s Magazine, and was later included in Melville’s collection of short stories The Piazza Tales in 1856. “Bartleby” was written by Melville in what Lewis Mumford refers to as Melville’s “miserable year”, citing the underwhelming success of the massive and draining work Moby Dick in 1851 and the commercially and critically derided Pierre in 1852 — which left him in a financial strain that was complemented by an inability to land a government job (Mumford 57). The biographical context of Melville’s life during the writing of “Bartleby” offers insight into the formulation of the eponymous character’s eccentricities, as well as the satirical elements of the story.
Melville’s social life had drifted away during the writing of “Bartleby” and his sense of isolation clearly seeps into the themes of the story. Egbert Oliver notes that a common view of “Bartleby” among Melville scholars is that “it is a picture of Melville’s mind” (Oliver 61). Supporting this idea, David McCall points out connections between Melville’s eye troubles and Bartleby’s alleged eye troubles, as well as Melville’s lack of diet while writing the story and Bartleby’s lack of desire to eat (McCall 37, 39). Moreover, Bartleby’s self-induced hermitage offers a faint impression of Melville’s own mindset while writing the story, and mirrors his own self-imposed hermitage at “Arrowhead” — the name for his property in Pittsfield, MA. Extensive borrowing of money and the commercial failure of Moby Dick and Pierre forced Melville into writing short stories for magazines (Sealts 477). Melville was pressured by friends and family to “go into business and make a good living, or at least write the sort of books that the public would read” (Mumford 60), a course that parallels the routine and monotonous demands placed on Bartleby by his social environment.
A striking difference between Melville and Bartleby is that while Melville had no original intention to write for periodicals, and would seemingly prefer not to (Sealts 482), financial strain and the flow of social necessity pushed him to the work, whereas Bartleby obstinately refuses to do anything at all, his individualism pushing him towards his own demise. This difference highlights the satirical aspects of the story that stem from Melville’s anti-transcendentalist views. Oliver suggests that in his isolation, the writings of Henry David Thoreau would have left some impression on Melville and that there are numerous parallels between Thoreau’s Transcendentalist philosophies and Bartleby’s actions (Oliver 64-65). Namely, Bartleby’s nearly absurd perseverance and his repetition of “I would prefer not,” which almost directly leads to his death by starvation, mirrors and mocks elements of Thoreau’s “Resistance to Civil Government” such as when Thoreau is requested by the state to pay a sum: “‘Pay,’ it said, ‘or be locked up in the jail.’ I declined to pay” (Thoreau).
McCall, David. The Silence of Bartleby. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989. Print.
Mumford, Lewis. “Melville’s Miserable Years.” Ed. M. Thomas Inge Bartleby the Inscrutable. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1979. Print.
Oliver, Egbert. “A Second Look at Bartleby.” Ed. M. Thomas Inge Bartleby the Inscrutable. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1979. Print.
Sealts, Merton. “Appendix: Historical Note.” From: Melville, Herman. The Piazza Tales. Chicago: Northwestern University Press, 1987. Print.
Thoreau, Henry David. “Civil Disobedience.” (1849) The Thoreau Reader. The Thoreau Society, Web. 12 Aug 2013. <http://thoreau.eserver.org/default.html>.
103A: American Literature from 1789 to 1900 
These biographical details are very interesting and perhaps shed some light on the very enigmatic story. The “assumption” vs. “preference” conflict in the story is curious, as the reader hears the story from the lawyer who is ostensibly on the side of assumption. The preference not to do something (notably, never outright refusal) clearly inspires some feelings of sympathy or even admiration in the narrator — he decides not to call the police or use force to remove Bartleby, and repeatedly offers him aid in the form of money or staying with him — though ultimately he must separate himself from Bartleby and return to normal society. We romanticize lives of famous artists, but most of us would not actually prefer theirs to our own.
A biographical (or somewhat allegorical) reading of the story is certainly suggested by the profession of scrivener, Bartleby representing the writer, whether Melville specifically or writers more generally. In the first part, he expresses his wish not to do any activity other than write, perhaps representing the writer’s desire to stay true to himself and his aesthetic beliefs (for Melville, not writing periodicals). However, when he no longer wishes to write, the story becomes more problematic, a reading where Bartleby has “writer’s block” seems not entirely convincing. The scrivener is an absurd stand in for the writer, of course, because his work requires no creativity, possibly comical/ironic self-deprecation on the part of Melville.
I had mixed feelings about Bartleby as a character because I was unsure what to make of him, such as what motivated him to take a job as a scrivener in the first place and why he continued to linger on the premises for as long as he did. Reading the story and viewing Bartleby as a stand-in for the author makes things much more clear in terms of why he acts the way he does, but I do not feel entirely sympathetic towards him since he could have avoided his own demise had he but taken measures to find a way to provide for himself, much as Melville had done, even though it was not what he wanted to do.
I also questioned Bartleby as a character considering his uncanny behavior. Upon reading Melville’s background information, however, it seems as though Melville uses Bartleby as an exaggerated representation of his opinion on his own career. Melville’s main motivation for continuing his writing career was to make money, and his decisions on what to write on was malleable according to what was in greater demand. It seemed as though Melville disliked his career because what he wanted to do didn’t help him make a living. In this way, Bartleby comes to represent Melville in that Melville would “prefer” to write what he wanted, but in the end, couldn’t. Bartleby’s eccentric behavior may also mirror Melville’s lack of enthusiasm and enjoyment, and also represent his feeling of exhaustion and lifelessness.
The identification of Herman Melville as Bartleby could also be supported through the comparison of Melville’s adaptation of literary genre to Bartleby’s change of occupation. Like how the Dead Letter Office forced Bartleby to pick up a mundane and mechanized job as a Scrivener, financial dependencies converted Melville to write more popular short stories; therefore providing insight onto Melville’s opinions towards his reluctant writing change. However, the parallel of Melville and Bartleby raises the question about Melville’s views on his own previous works. The comparison between the Melville and Bartleby, therefore, leads to the conclusion that Melville’s previous works of Moby Dick and Pierre correlate with working at a dead letter office.
I also had confusion with the character of Bartleby and what his significance was in relation to the story. His character was described in a ghostly manner, in which it seemed as if his body was present, but his mind was in a distant place not intact with everyone else. The use of Bartleby in this ghostly manner in which he seems distant and unfamiliar to the lawyer relates, in my mind, to the time in which Melville’s “miserable year” left him without a job and isolated from the world of his profession. It seems as if Bartleby is outside of society in an alone state that where he is seen as an outsider because he is only present in his occupation when there is something to be done. Other than that, Bartleby is constantly seen as distant and alone. This relates to the occupation in which Melville takes for financial reasons in which he is distant from the desired work he wants to do but instead must write short stories because of the dilemma that is present. The two represent at state of distance from the society, exemplifying the state of aloneness.
By including the financial strain and the way the economy was struggling during that time period, helped me to understand Bartleby’s story better. The idea about the American Dream is to be successful and live a happy and fulfilling life, to make a difference and better one’s self. In Bartleby’s situation, he was living the complete opposite of the American Dream, an American Nightmare. He was alive to exist, and he existed only to die. Bartleby demonstrated a financial struggle by living in the office, but he did not do much to escape from the struggles. His refusal to do what was asked of him got him sent away to basically die.
Your post about the similarities between Bartleby and Melville made the entire story make more sense to me. The fact that everyone was pushing Melville to write things that he didn’t want to write or go into a business he didn’t want to go into most likely made him want to tell these people that he would prefer not to as Bartleby repeats throughout “Bartleby the Scrivener.” I’m curious if Melville saw the character of Bartleby as a hero going against the established rule or a much more depressing and bothersome version of himself. Either way the story becomes so much more interesting.
I felt that this post offered a great deal of insight into Bartleby’s character. While attempting to evaluate the character, I was initially confused as to what he was meant to stand for, and perplexed as to why he persisted in turning down offers of help from the narrator, and “preferring” not to do anything. Upon learning of Melville’s own state of mind and situation at the time he was writing “Bartleby, the Scrivener,” however, I felt I was much better able to understand the character. Melville’s own isolation and unhappiness seem to have come out in the character of Bartleby, and it seems clear that Bartleby is meant to act as a stand-in for Melville himself (the inclusion of Bartleby’s eye problems, which paralleled Melville’s, make this rather obvious). Perhaps’ Bartleby’s obstinate resistance to all that he would “prefer” not to do is a representation of what Melville wishes he himself had had the moral courage (or insanity) to do, rather than being pressured into writing short stories for periodicals to alleviate his financial strain.
Understanding Melville’s life at the time the story was written really helps to understand the character of Bartleby. While reading it is hard to make out what kind of person Bartleby is and where the idea for this sort of character could come from. The similarities you have drawn between the character gives for a better understanding of Bartleby and what he his purpose is. As was mentioned, Melville was forced to do what he would rather not do while Bartleby didn’t do the things that he preferred not to do. This difference seems, to me, to be a way for Melville to explore an alternate possibility for his own life. A common practice in psychology is to have a patient use writing as a form of confronting past demons or current issues. It seems that Melville used this kind of tactic ( whether intentional of not) to work out some of his own issues. He uses Bartleby to play out his life if he only did what he pleased and wasn’t forced to do things he did not wish to do, this of course leads to the demise of Bartleby. Melville can then see that he must do things which he does not want to do in order to be successful and prosper, and not to end up like Bartleby.
I find this background knowledge of Melville to be extremely helpful in analyzing the character of Bartleby. It seems in a way, that Bartleby is an extension of how Melville thinks of himself. Melville feels as though he is being forced into doing work that he isn’t passionate about, and after writing so many failed novels, perhaps he feel drained and depressed, and would like to just do nothing at all for a bit and stare at the walls as Bartleby does. Perhaps, due to the lack of success of his two previous novels, Melville feels purposeless and alone in the world, as Bartleby is. And as you mentioned, the fact that this was written during his “miserable year,” might contribute to the melancholy ending of this story. Although imagining Bartleby as a projection of Melville’s desires may be an awfully depressing way to think about this short story, this background into Melville’s life provides us with a picture of his mind-set as he was writing this story. As you mentioned, we can also see a link between how Melville was pressured into writing short stories, and how Bartleby was pressured into trying to find a job that he might like in order to earcn some money. Perhaps Bartleby’s refusal to choose a job that he did not enjoy mimics what Melville wishes he could have done, in preferring to do nothing at all.
It seems to me that instead of Bartleby being a direct reflection of how Melville perceived himself, Bartleby was a sort of alternate-self that could only have existed had Melville, fittingly enough, not pursued his writing career. There are absolutely many similarities between Bartleby and Melville – the failing eyesight, the dietary problems, the hermitage – but the biggest difference between the Melville of reality and the Bartleby of fiction is that Melville was able to find the passion and motivation to continue writing, whereas Bartleby had no such desires. Writing, or really, any sort of creation of content, requires creativity and resolve, and the very act of Melville creating “Bartleby, the Scrivener” sets him apart from his less-creative counterpart. In a way, the story could be Melville showing to the world what they were pushing him to be, and what would have resulted had he followed its advice. The story itself takes place in a stale environment; stale job, stale people, stale lifestyle, yet so many people yearned for that sort of thing. Writing literature, on the other hand, is anything but stale, or orthodox; the creation of this story signified Melville’s usage of his obnoxious expectations and turning them into something along the lines of a mockery, but something that still fit his interests.
If Bartleby was a reflection of Melville’s possible clinical depression, it would explain Bartleby’s death. Symptoms of clinical depression include withdrawal, loss of appetite, and thoughts of suicide. All of which was reflected in Bartleby. What was tragic was that no one understood Bartleby’s depressive mood. The narrator tried to but could only that it was because Bartleby had worked at the dead letter office. Bartleby died without ever being understood, which could be what Melville had felt when he wrote the story.