Draft Essay # 2

David Hubbard
Eng.102
Feb. 18, 2012

                                                                     Lack of Humanity

                The Industrial Revolution threw away empathy, compassion and understanding for a better profit margin. This ethical and moral shift, never left the minds’ or the hearts’ of the wealthy and elite. In today’s work place, it is sad to see but profits and productivity trump the worker. The worker is merely a pair of hands or an annoyance, in the case of Bartleby. Industrialization, and now globalization, is stripping away the humanity of the world.   

 Emotional bonds and personal connects were prevalent and necessary in pre-industrial apprenticeships. To take an apprentice was to invest in a long-term relationship.  With the pace of mass production and the large, cold factories people got lost in the crowd and often forgotten or ignored. It was too much work to become emotionally involved with staff and in many cases undignified. Bartleby is society’s cry for help. In contrast, the narrator is the industrial revolutions’ coldness and aloofness.

The narrator introduces his subordinates in a negative light, focusing on their faults and referring to them by humiliating and offensive nicknames. With these actions he is setting a president of superiority by belittling them. He describes Turkey as an incompetent aging drunk with afternoon withdraws. Nippers also an alcoholic, discontent in life and work mirrors Turkey; “their fits relieved each other like guards” ( par.13). The narrator subtly mocks and jokes about these men’s lives being train wrecks, but justify it by the fact they get some work done in the office. He expects respect, but refuses to return it. He feels control and power through demeaning his employees and removing himself personally. 

   Upon hiring Bartleby, the narrator is shocked, when his authority is challenged. Unable to handle this insubordinate action, the narrator chooses to ignore it. The narrator chooses not to deal with it because he does not know how to. He like many business owners inherited his success and did not earn it.  This, have and have not society, leads to a superiority and often incompetence.  When his authority is questions a second time, he asks his subordinates what they recommended. They replied, “Fire him.” The narrator was hoping that peer pressure would do the job, that he is unable to do.

Problems escalate in the office with Bartleby, but still the narrator chooses to ignore. It is easier for him to ignore Bartleby, then confront him and get to the root of the problem.  The narrator justify ignoring him, by stating, “he means no mischief…he intends no insolence” ( par. 53). The narrator lets this issue fester and has an “evil impulse,” leading to the a rising temper and still no results ( para. 53). The narrator is confused as to why a man produces nothing and is almost envious of this fact. Bartleby goes against the grain of society, and this perplexes the narrator. The narrator is a machine; he continues without stopping and cannot understand why others don’t.

The narrator discovers that Bartleby is sleeping in the office and states an unfamiliar feeling of sympathy.  He states, “Happiness courts the light, so we deem the world is gay; but misery hides aloof” (par 89). The narrator was content living his life of grandeur and vacations, and never thought of the others. He was content being oblivious. Now the narrator has to address undesirable feelings. The narrator is beginning to see employees as people with needs, but chooses to ignore this and not get involved. The narrator is losing productivity in his office, by allowing Bartleby to stay, and the narrator is unable to identify and address his feelings towards Bartley. 

The narrator finally gains the courage to address the office issue, not the personal issue of Bartleby. When Bartleby refuses to leave, the narrator fantasizes about “diabolical murder for sweet charity’s sake” (par.165). Still he cannot acknowledge the problem and tries desperately to find quick solutions to cauterize the issue. The narrator in a final act of desperation attempts to leave the problem, by moving the office. He hopes he will be able to leave this problem and never address the issue. He is still refusing to acknowledge Bartleby as a person.

Once Bartleby is arrested, the narrator finally realizes the gravity of the situation and steps outside of the industrial mindset. He sheds the machine and desperately tries to repent for his mistakes. Unable to in time, Bartleby dies a sad and lonely death. The narrator finally realizes that life is far more important than production.  The narrator seems perplexed and annoyed at humanity and this inconvenient awakening.

The narrator’s denial, justification, and avoidance is that of a machine. He is a privileged business owner who does not have the time or the capacity to express sympathy or empathy. A persistent problem, forces the narrator to finally awaken and become human-open, compassionate, and vulnerable. Traits that are foreign to industry. 

Response to Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-Street

"I prefer not to" a phrase that rings throughout the text when Bartleby replies to others. This reading was slightly dry for my taste, but it kept the reader interested to find out why Bartleby behaved the way he did. The story brought up many human emotions when pondering what must be done to this poor man, who lost all will to work or even live. Its a sad story with pigments of humor and suspense, and leaves the reader drooling at the end for some more information on Bartleby, which the narrator gives a modest hint, though still leaves no real explanation. Overall I really appreciated this work of literary art, especially because it brought about so many emotions and really made you reflect yourself how you would react if this situation presented itself to you.

The characters are full of life and his descriptions really portray a richness in human traits. The narrator even gives them unique nicknames based on specific traits he deemed worthy to use as identifying them. We have Ginger-nut, a boy who eats ginger nuts, Turkey is an alcoholic elderly man who has a bobbling hand in the afternoon making ink blogs on copies, and lastly Nippers, who is a young man who is also an alcoholic and is very grouchy in the mornings, but pleasant in the afternoon. Nippers and Turkey played a comic relieve in this story with their distinct personalities that the narrator paints vividly and their at times humorously crude remarks.

When Bartleby is introduced in this story, you get a picture that he is aloof to the world, devoted only to doing his job. You admire him for his seriousness and laugh when he is asked to do little things like walk to the post office, only responding with "I'd prefer not to". The narrator is perplexed by Bartleby, the reader as the story unfolds further, begins to join the narrator in Bartleby's complexities wanting an explanation. The further the reader digs the more you know less about Bartleby, it is a unique story that leaves much debate.

My summary of this story will end with that, I really enjoyed this piece and its sadness has struck me with bewilderment, that I will seldom ever forget. The narrator is a very kind man, as well as a intellectual. He views his environment critically, seeking explanations for why the world is the way it is. I found a passage that really hit me internally, rattling my core and exposing light onto my being. It is one sentence, that can bring about the whole meaning of this story of Bartleby, and haunt you for life.

"Ah, happiness courts the light, so we deem the world is gay; but misery hides aloof, so we deem that misery there is none". (Bartleby par. 89) I was amazed by this passage, as we all can relate to it in our life, as well as understanding the moral of this story about Bartleby. Its perplexing to think about, we see happiness and forget of misery. Misery is all around us, but it hides in the shadows. Sometimes the shadow of misery, is cast over you and you find yourself shocked, as if it came out of nowhere. Its hard to respond to something you have little understanding of as well, as in the case of Bartleby. The narrator points out, misery is always around us, we just tend to not notice it until we have no choice. I feel like he dug out a trench in the soul of how we perceive good and evil, right and wrong, happiness and misery. When this phrase burns into your brain, you read further of this story and the pieces of what conspires only adds to this eternal comprehension and agonizing moral struggle.

I now contemplate what I would have done with poor Bartleby. As a reader you ache to for him to open himself up and expose the demons within that are decaying his body and soul. You are saddened that you never have a chance to get to know why Bartleby gave up on life, you just know he did. You debate it feverishly within your mind, playing out scenarios and still have little to add for explanation. This story causes the reader to look inside themselves, something rarely found when reading. I am glad to have been able to have read this piece, I enjoy all the emotions I was forced to experience. The deeper meaning I found in this story I will not forget.

 "Ah Bartleby! Ah Humanity!". (Bartleby par. 250)

After reading this story, this link adds to your foundation of the context and deeper understanding of Bartleby. Learn a little more here!

-David

WORKS CITED

Melville, Herman. "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-street." Bartleby. N.p., 2011. Web. 18 Feb 2012. <http://www.bartleby.com/129/>. 

Summary = Observation Analysis = Arguement

Greetings!

      I am writing to express my understanding of the following; summarizing versus analyzing. Before I begin to explain the differences between the two, I would like to state when appropriate, a summary is just as important as an analysis. We must first decipher when we are required to use one or the other. As well know the difference between the two when we are trying to interpret a piece of reading, if its observing something or if its making connections to something bigger based off those observations. I don’t want you to think that I trying impose that one may seem more user friendly than the other, or more important. They are equally valuable for a writer and a reader when the time to use either of them presents itself within the literature at hand. If I am looking to read a summary of a movie, I will not want to read an analysis. I just want a brief overview of key points that might interest me enough to spend my time to read or watch it. On the other hand, if I am looking for a much deeper understanding of that movie/novel, to see if anyone has brought about any hidden meanings that I might have overlooked, I would look for a detailed analysis, not a summary.

     A summary is as I said, an “observation” of a writing, movie, article and is summed up for the reader to get the key points across. In a summary, there is no thesis statement, there is no argument for why these events or settings took place. Its simply just a panoramic picture of what took place within the text or film. When one summarizes, they merely take what they think is important in their observation and shares it with others. If I were to summarize “a Winters Bone” by Daniel Woodrell‘s. I wouldn’t go into why the story unfolded the way it did, or make statements like “Ree, a heroine, battles against the world of drugs, deceit and poverty. Her affection towards her family is so deep that she does anything to keep them safe, with a roof over their head. Crystal meth is a huge problem for people all over the United States, this book captures a glimpse into the horrifying affects of drugs and the secrecy that enshrouds people who produce and use them.”  That kind of statement is analytical, so I would have to go about it differently if I was making a summary. Something like “Ree is a young women who cares for her two brothers and her mentally unsound mother in the back woods of the Ozarks in southern Missouri. Her father is a meth cook and has a court date that if he doesn’t show up for, can allow the state to take possession over the land Ree’s family lives on. Her father disappears, and its up to Ree to find him ect.”

     I am not digging deeper for better understanding with a summary, I am just stating the obvious. So key things to remember when dealing with a summary is it tells you what happens in the story. Its detailed information about the events that took place, specific accounts of scenery and the characters within the story. Our English teacher Mrs. Cline simplified summaries as reporting. So if we look at it that way, its hard to confuse summary with analyzing. Mrs. Cline also gives us hints to recognize to decipher if it’s a summary or not, with words like “about”  and “is”. Also, we are told to ask the question “Can this be wrong?” if what your reading when asked this question, answers “No” then what you are reading is most likely a summary.

     Analyzing is wonderful for really obtaining a deeper understanding to something, whether a novel or a film, or short story, or newspaper article. Mrs. Cline refers to this as “close reading”. When we analyze something, we ask questions and find ways to dissect the text into basic parts, avidly trying to understand the context, the true meaning behind each element. Analyzing adds much more significance to events and context than summarizing, it’s the threshold before one can make speculation to what it is the author is intending. We aren’t looking at the story as a story anymore, we are looking at it as a formula, with complex molecules that when combined make up that story. I like to view analyzing as using a scientific approach to understanding what it is your reading or watching. We break apart those molecules (sections from the text), to unravel the atoms in which they were composed from (images, scenery, events, characters ect), then the tiny atomic particles that make up the atom(their significance, the meaning behind them), until we feel that we might have a sense to what the author was intending, what he/she was thinking. At this point we have what it takes to comprise an argument.

     Our instructor Mrs. Cline gives us many tools in her power point presentation describing the differences of Summary and Analysis. I hope you were all able to learn and benefit the abundance of knowledge she shared with us on this matter. One last thing, that I thought was important to remember is that a literary analysis is made from summary and description, then going to analysis, then enabling you to make your argument based off your analysis and observations.  In literary analysis you can’t have one without the other, they are chemically bound together. You need a little summary/observations to support your analysis/argument. Here is a helpful link that covers more about the differences and roles of a summary and a analysis. Thanks for reading and take care!

-David