Bartleby Draft Essay

I prefer not to.

“At present I would prefer not to be a little reasonable” (Melville par 110). Oh that we could all say this when needed at our jobs and in the workplace. Bartleby had a point and a reasonable one at that. Bartleby is the hero of Melville’s story in his refusal to participate in a workplace that represents the sad, dreary atmosphere of a bureaucratic, industrialized society. In the pure essence of his being Bartleby refuses to participate in life in general the way those around him expect him to. 

Our society places a great deal of clout on being cheerfully industrious. Melville says “I should have been quite delighted with his application, had he been cheerfully industrious” (Melville par 18). But no he wasn’t “he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically” (Melville par 18). Bartleby is not nice or sweet, he doesn’t conform to societies expectations of what makes a person a good person. Melville even says later on “he means no mischief, it is plain he intends no insolence” (Melville par 53). Yet he lacks a cheerful institution and therefore he is unacceptable in his labors.

Bartleby also refuses to look and interact in a way that is approved by others. He is lean and long and white and gaunt, Melville even goes so far as to call him cadaverous. He is oblivious to everyone around him and doesn’t really care what people say about him. Ginger nut says “I think sir, he’s a little luny,” (Melville par 47). He is respectful and slow and mild in his speech. Yet, again Melville says “the passiveness of Bartleby sometimes irritates me” (Melville par 53). So although his is meek and mild, respectful in his speech and mannerisms Bartleby is not acceptable  because he doesn’t behave as others. 

“I prefer not to” (Melville par 81). He does what he prefers to and that is to copy. He is good at what he does and works very hard at it. “His steadiness his freedom from all dissipation, his incessant industry, his great stillness, his unalterableness of demeanor under all circumstances” (Melville par 84). At some point Bartleby decides he doesn’t’ want to copy anymore, maybe it’s the strain on his eyes maybe her just decides he prefers not to. He refuses to answer questions, he refuses to leave, and in the end he refuses to eat and continue on in this life. Up until the very end he does only what he prefers to.

What is expected of us as humans to be productive and acceptable in our society? Bartleby doesn’t succumb to the opinions of others. He carries on in his own mild and cadaverous way unnoticing and uncaring of his boss’s and coworker’s disapproval. He refuses to adhere to society’s standards of being cheerful all the time. Bartleby refuses to do what he prefers not to do. He stands by his choices up until the very end. When asked by Melville he gives us the question we should all ask ourselves “Do you not see the reason for yourself” ( Melville par 130).

Bartleby

"At present I would prefer not to be a little reasonable," was his mildly cadaverous reply.

I chose this passage because I love it! I can relate to this. It is something I would love to say every day! I believe this sentence is so important and holds so much meaning for this story because it is the essence of Bartleby. This is the life he has chosen, only to do what he prefers and when pressed to not even have to be a little reasonable.

It is a choice we make every day to do what is reasonable. On some level society decides what is reasonable for us. Is it truly reasonable to set at a desk for 12 - 14 hours a day copying papers for someone else? I can see how it would seem to me to be more reasonable for myself to desire to stare out the window and daydream of being somewhere else or someone else.

Yes in the end he does refuse to eat and lets his body weaken to the point of passing away.  Isn't that what he preferred to do? He chose what he wanted to do, he chose not to eat and he chose to pass into the next life. That is what he preferred to do.

Maybe he decided he would like that a great deal better that working for minimum wage or less for the rest of his life copying boring papers for someone else.

Maybe he read this.

 As far as the language in this sentence, I question "his mildly cadaverous reply" the story tells us he himself was cadaverous, was his reply cadaverous or just mild?

Image from:

Summary Vs. Annalysis

The way I see it!  Analysis vs. summary.

When I analyze a book or an article, I go through and see what it is that the author is trying to say to me. I read and reread looking to see what the point is?  Am I getting the point and or is something other than the purpose of the author coming to me. I enjoy analyzing. I appreciate being able to pick apart each part of a reading and see does the author know what he/she is talking about? Is the author credible? Do I agree with what the author is presenting? Do I understand where the author is going and to who this might be agreeable to?

A summary on the other hand is telling you exactly what the material is about. It gives you the complete abbreviation of what the actual material would be telling you if you read it yourself. A summary is without emotion because it leaves you no room to have an opinion. It is just the facts of what the author is trying to tell you.

One of my favorite books right now is A New Earth; I find it a bit of a difficult read. But, if I were to analyze it I would tell you all the things that I things Mr. Tolle is trying to get across. I would also tell you if I felt like he was reaching his audience with what I thought he was trying to say, and if this was the time to say it. Is the world ready for this now?

If I were to give you a summary of A New Earth, I would tell just what the book was all about. I would try to give you a feel for what you would be reading if you were to read the book yourself.  I would do that now but I’m not sure I’m there yet. :)

Just in case you want to check into it.

Image from: http://contemporarylit.about.com/od/philosophyreligion/fr/aNewEarth.htm

Is it truly a Modest Proposal?

1    

The problems Swift identifies in his society are the poor, the young leaving the country to fight for a dethroned king, the starving of thousands, abortions, murdering of bastard children, lack of jobs, lack of money exchange, the greed of landlords, the oppression of religion, lack of earned goodwill by squires from tenants, Dublin’s extreme lack of morals, non-existent  care for the elderly, the unlawful taking of corn and cattle, lack of money flow, domestic violence, neglect of children, over population and cheating shop keepers. He wants to set up a system to sale and eat children. I don’t think Dr. Swift is actually serious about eating small children, I do think he is very serious about the problems he sees in his country and the complacency of his fellow man. I think he does a great job of mocking everyone involved in the situation with even a bit of mockery towards himself. I do think he is thinking of this very logically. He has contemplated what he can say to cause such a shock in those around him that they will realize that they are on a path leading to more atrocities because of lack of concern. He completely outlines exactly the mess his country is in, giving evidence that although his proposal is at first shocking, people should have been shocked into reacting long before it had to come to writing this.

I found some of his explanations a bit distracting from the point though, one being 9lbs is rather big for a new born. The average birth weight being 7lbs. In a society where starvation and begging were prevalent the average birth rate to poor malnutritioned women likely having other children would be closer to 5 lbs.

My last comment is Why, why why does it have to be the “American” friend who has experience in eating children?