Kamala's Post

Kamala Randjelovic
Posting for November 5th, 2007

In many ways “Bartleby” in Herman Melville’s “Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-street” is an individual who fits Simmel’s definition of metropolitan person (53) whose blasé outlook (54) and impersonal relations ( in “The Metropolis and Mental Life”) are shaped by a money economy. In a sense, Bartleby's refusal to do work is symbolic of an individual going against a system of structure. The way in which Bartleby refuses is what allows Bartleby to be seen as a “metropolitan person”; “Instead of reacting emotionally, the metropolitan type reacts primarily in a rational manner, thus creating mental predominance” (52). As Bartleby consistently refuses to work without ever blatantly saying he won’t work but instead that he would prefer not to, becomes a way in which Bartleby is able to do what he pleases without getting punished. It just so happens that Bartleby's job is located on Wall Street, a prime center for commerce and an almost iconic place which represents the economy. As Bartleby chooses to make the office his home while never doing work or what is asked of him, he almost redefines Wall Street and what it stands for, by occupying the space but refusing to participate. When Bartleby makes the statement “I like to be stationary but I am not particular” (209) to the narrator upon being encouraged to go after jobs, he is really showing the “….self preservation of certain types of personalities” which “is obtained at the cost of devaluing the entire objective world” (55). By refusing to work and being indifferent towards jobs, Bartleby is essentially disagreeing with a system in which the drive for money becomes a main objective for an individual. Simmel calls “The essence of the blasé attitude is indifference toward the distinctions between things” (55). The fact that Bartleby “Lives without dining” (247) and “…spent but half a dime a day” (164) precisely illustrates Bartleby's indifference towards the established ways of life through his rejection of external necessities such as money and food. Bartleby is someone who chose to “…follow the laws of our inner nature- and this freedom is” (57) and in doing so was able to almost mock the society which surrounded him by simply refusing to participate. In the narrator’s confusion of how to act towards Bartleby, whether to take pity and thus condone his actions or to set limits and punish Bartleby reflected the larger struggle for an individual faced with a metropolitan person to realize “it is out task not to complain or to condone but only to understand” (60).Ultimately, Bartleby was an individual who chose to not participate the life that the society around him created, instead he chose to shape his existence solely off of what he “would prefer”(37).