Herman Melville's 1853 short story, "Bartleby, the Scrivener," presents a character whose steadfast refusal to perform his duties poses a profound interpretive challenge. Bartleby, the titular scrivener, initially a model of industriousness, gradually succumbs to a passive resistance, famously reiterating his unwillingness to do anything beyond what he "prefers." This enigmatic stance, particularly his final, absolute "I would prefer not to," leaves the narrator, a Wall Street lawyer, and by extension, the reader, grappling with its meaning and implications. The story is not merely an account of an uncooperative employee; it is a potent exploration of alienation, the limits of empathy, and the unsettling nature of absolute negation in a world predicated on action and exchange.
The narrator's initial fascination with Bartleby stems from his perceived efficiency. He describes Bartleby as "a man of few words, and those always to the point." This efficiency is quickly replaced by a disturbing inertia. When asked to proofread documents, Bartleby responds, "I would prefer not to." This is not a direct refusal, but a softened, polite evasion that makes it all the more disarming. The narrator, accustomed to a hierarchical workplace where commands are followed, finds himself disoriented. He attempts to reason with Bartleby, to understand the why behind his actions, but Bartleby offers no explanation. This lack of justification amplifies the mystery and the narrator's frustration. He tries to frame Bartleby's behavior within conventional understanding—laziness, illness, or even a hidden grievance—but none of these labels truly fit. Bartleby’s resistance is not an active rebellion; it is a quiet, unyielding withdrawal.
As Bartleby’s refusal escalates from specific tasks to broader demands, the narrator's attempts at comprehension become increasingly strained. He tries to appeal to Bartleby's self-interest, suggesting he leave and find work elsewhere. Yet, Bartleby simply occupies the office space, a silent, immovable presence. The narrator’s attempts to involve others, such as his other scriveners, Turkey and Nippers, reveal their own eccentricities but offer no solution to Bartleby's paralysis. The story starkly contrasts Bartleby's passive existence with the narrator’s own engagement with the world of commerce and social obligation. The narrator’s constant internal monologue reveals his struggle to reconcile Bartleby’s state with his own understanding of human motivation. He witnesses Bartleby sleeping at his desk, staring blankly at a brick wall, and eating ginger cakes, all actions devoid of apparent purpose. This purposelessness is what most unnerves him, as it stands in direct opposition to the capitalist ethos of productivity that defines his own existence.
The climax of the story occurs when the narrator, unable to bear Bartleby’s continued presence in his office, attempts to resolve the situation by moving to a new location. He hopes that by leaving, he can escape the problem. However, Bartleby’s inertia follows him. He is found lingering in the new office, still refusing to leave. This persistence, this refusal to be erased by relocation, forces the narrator into a more direct confrontation. He seeks out the landlord, who has Bartleby arrested and taken to the Tombs, the city's jail. The narrator visits Bartleby there, offering to provide food and ensure his release if he agrees to leave. Even in this dire situation, Bartleby’s response remains consistent: "I would prefer not to." His final, solitary death in the jail, surrounded by prisoners, is a chilling testament to his ultimate withdrawal from all forms of obligation and human connection. The narrator’s concluding observation, "Ah Bartleby! Ah humanity!", suggests a universal resonance to Bartleby's plight, implying that his enigmatic refusal speaks to a deeper, perhaps unacknowledged, aspect of the human condition.
"Bartleby, the Scrivener" resists easy categorization or singular interpretation. Bartleby’s refusal can be seen as a radical act of protest against the dehumanizing forces of modern capitalism, a critique of alienated labor, or a profound existential statement about the futility of action. The narrator’s inability to comprehend Bartleby highlights the limitations of a society that values productivity and conformity above all else. His repeated, polite "I would prefer not to" becomes a potent symbol of resistance, a quiet defiance that confounds and ultimately defeats a system built on the expectation of compliance. Melville masterfully uses Bartleby’s passive resistance to question the very foundations of societal order and individual agency, leaving readers to ponder the unsettling implications of a will that simply prefers not to participate.