The Theme of Civil Disobedience in Melville's "Bartleby the Scrivener" - Essay Sample

Introduction

"Bartleby the Scrivener" was the first long Wall Street Story published in 1853 by Melville. The departure from his earlier fiction and apparent nihilism make many people consider his work puzzling; however, some consider it a masterpiece of earlier tales (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). Notably, Bartleby's unresolvable character ambiguities were extracted from pathos and fusion of comedy, reinforcing the central theme of the Melville's narration. Civil disobedience is one theme that the author intended to present; however, many criticisms have erupted relating Bartleby with self-resistance and individual rule (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Notably, the author relates the act of Bartleby refusing to adhere to his employer's demand and choosing to utilize the individual role with challenges to corporatist ideologies and capitalist; this can be affirmed by the phrase "I prefer not to" used by Bartley to resist duties (Melville,1853, pp.20). This paper will strive to analyze how the theme of civil disobedience is presented using character and setting as the significant elements of fiction as well as considering critics from both Naomi Reed's and Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King's work.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Understanding Civil Disobedience

The two speeches by Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King's (MLK) presents a real definition of civil obedience (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Firstly, Gandhi presented two countering injustices; smashing the injustice people's heads and the Satyagraha approach that involves peaceful public resistance to the rule of law. The second approach defined civil disobedience, where the sovereign (government) has to be pushed to ensure justice and love to its subjects. In this case, the subjects represent the citizens oppressed by the system by undermining their opinion and concerns; this triggers misunderstanding between the two parties. Secondly, civil disobedience was later simplified by the Birmingham Jail Letter, where MLK considered it a public-nonviolent opposition to the system's law on conscience grounds. Additionally, MLK considers the unjust law as power compelled by the majority and obeyed by minority groups (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Using character and setting as the elements of fiction, Melville highlighted civil disobedience essential in American society while trying to fight capitalism; however, his efforts are considered inefficient.

Element of Fiction

Character

Bartleby's nonviolent actions and repudiating to comply with the employer's requests are presented as civil disobedience; however, his behavior does not portray moral aspects as expected by civil disobedience notions (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Notably, Bartleby appears to be a lonely guy who is ready to boycott work using his individual-rule; this is practical injustice to the working environment and cannot be termed as civil disobedience rather a self-resistance. What Bartleby considers injustice is morally unacceptable since no unjust work is assigned by the boss instead of an easy paper compiling task that he dismissed by his nonviolent and innocent tone, "I prefer not to" (Melville,1853, pp.45). The idea of passive resistance is embodied by Bartleby's actions making him the antagonist to the productivity goals of the lawyer. Bartley, who is used as the element of change, appears to be inherent of failure; this can be affirmed by his previous work of destroying undelivered letters and lost (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). Compared to the government and subjects' motives, Bartleby's character may be perceived as undefined since he is resisting all the lawyer's efforts to solve the issue without a single demand.

Based on MLK's interpretation of unjust laws, the lawyer's characterization does not match the injustice of the oppressors; thus, civil disobedience, in this case, is considered unnecessary (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Based on Bartley's presented character traits, placing injustice against him cannot change anything since his need pushes him to acquire a place to live than work. Failure to weigh the issue of immorality and morality in the assigned tasks defines Bartleby as a man with no interest in working and interacting with others for a common goal; this is contrary to what authors have defined as civil disobedience. Notably, freedom of the subject is not provided instead it is demanded through amicable and nonviolence boycotts, which starts with a yearning for freedom; this is contrary Bartleby's actions and believes, which seems to be centered on personal benefits rather than future concerns (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). Lastly, civil disobedience is not intended to evade the law and duties; instead, it targets on reshaping the law to meet the demand of the majority group.

According to Reed (2004, pp. 247-273), Bartleby's appearance created dramatic tension amounting to the eventual climax that presented a different character trait as it first appeared; this suggested a stranger possibilities while narrowing down the civil disobedience theme. Bartleby's work follows critical genealogy; many reviewers considered it a portrait from life and Marxist criticism. After Bartleby stopped working, the lawyers continued paying him; this is perceived as a parable that strives to explain capitalism's danger, which fundamentally misleads the text (Melville, 1853, pp.33). Thus, Bartleby's employer cannot be categorized as a heartless capitalist since capitalists produce surplus profits from the systematic exploitation of their employees. However, Bartleby appeared as a "motionless young man" (Melville, 1853, pp.19); his stranger inertness later transformed into a situation of a matter of life and death; this characterization does not comply with civil disobedience ethos; instead, it centered on the exploitation of what is perceived as capitalism.

Setting

Bartleby's story was published in New York when centers of commerce were booming: The settings form the basis for understanding the context of the story (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). Two odd men in an unprofessional relationship run the law office in which the story takes place. The characters' impersonality presented is insignificant in the business environment, undermining civil disobedience's central motive. Additionally, the story falls within the context of capitalist expansion in the United States, which experienced great civil disobedience. Bartleby considered the structures imposed on him as "modernizing world interest" based on collective strategies reinforcing his self-resistance to safeguard his interest (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). By considering individual rule, Bartleby considered living outside the idea's mainstream that is upheld in many civil disobedience attempts. The archetypal clerk task is attached to many responsibilities. Thus, Bartleby was expected to portray high reliability and compliance level just as the system law. Based on MLK's letter, Bartleby can relate to the allegory of modern United States law and its inability to preserve its citizen's freedom and right (Gandhi and MLK, 2020). The story also portrays the political consequence of operating in a highly alienated level of consumption and production.

There are remarkable similarities between Bartleby's apparition and weird capital story, and both stories seemed to be centered on the capitalist context (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). Commodity appearance in capital tale concerts with Bartleby appearance in the Wall Streets. Notably, Marx considered society's wealth as the dominant mode of capitalist production. By using the commodity as a sensuous and complex thing, Marx reincorporated the physical invisibility of commodity, explaining capitalist exploitation. The commodity is considered as the value attached to any struggle to liberate individuals of an oppressive culture and unjust law. Through his varied refusals, "I would rather..." Bartleby's registered his critique of capitalism and labor. However, Bartleby may be considered a lazy man; his refusal goes beyond the copyist task to refusing to eat while in prison "Will he dine today, either?" (Melville, 1853, pp.45). The behavior Bartleby is related to the expression of self-control and market-place repudiation (Reed, 2004, pp. 247-273). Lastly, the story's setting-period explored the exploitation of capitalism in the United States that triggered divided opinions forcing the majority to declare civil obedience at the expense of their safety.

Ultimately, a comprehensive analysis of the theme of civil disobedience has been reviewed and analyzed based on characterization and setting. Firstly, Bartleby's character trait has been compared with Gandhi and MLK's definition of civil disobedience compliance. Thus, the character portrays self-resistance that is personal and different from civil disobedience, public, and nonviolence. Secondly, the story set falls within the time of capitalism booming in American, where many individuals engaged in civil disobedience to safeguard communal commodities from capitalists. Similarly, by refusing to work and eat, Bartley took the responsibility of initiating a change at the expense of his own life; this has been evident in civil disobedience acts where leaders like Gandhi and MLK stood for the right until their death. Lastly, there are many traces of the fusion of comedy and pathos used by the author that should be avoided to align the character with the central theme of civil disobedience.

Work Cited

Gandhi, Mohandas, K., and MLK. "Civil Disobedience." (2020). Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/document/197062516/4-8-civil-disobedience on 9/26/2020.

Melville, Herman. "Bartleby, the Scrivener (1853)." Nineteenth-Century Fiction 31 (1976): 187.ESTED LEARNING STRATEGIES: KWL, Discussion Groups,

Reed, Naomi C. "The Specter of Wall Street: "Bartleby, the Scrivener", and the Language of Commodities." American Literature 76.2 (2004): 247-273.