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.
I think you unfairly demonize the narrator in your essay, but I understand your reasons for it. I actually found him very human indeed, but comfortable within the bureaucratic machine of modern industrialized society, unlike Bartleby. The conflict within the narrator's mind epitomizes the feelings of most us when confronted with an individual who doesn't conform to society's norms.
ReplyDeleteThat said, you did a very good job supporting your position with selections from the story. Your thoughts are presented clearly, and you summarized very neatly at the end.
On the flip side, there are some grammatical and sentence errors here and there, but those are pretty easy to spot and correct. I always suggest that a writer read his work out loud to himself, or perhaps have someone else read it to him, because it allows us to find the rough patches and incorrect wordings that sometimes occur.
Interpretation is subjective. Thanks for your input.
DeleteI enjoyed the way you viewed Melville's story. I had a similar take on the narrators denial and avoidance. I thought that you're thesis statement was very clear. I also thought that your last paragraph wrapped up the essay well. I did however find your use of the word "narrator" a bit repetitive. It seemed to be in every other sentence, I am not sure how else you could put it. I also thought in paragraph six that the word "states" was repetitive. Overall however I enjoyed your essay and thought that you analyzed it very well paragraph by paragraph. I am not a great essay editor but I hoped this help some.
ReplyDeleteI like that the references you make to the book are short and to the point. Plus you do a great job with using points from the entire piece, instead of in just one spot, which I think helps solidify your thesis. Your view on compassion and emotion being traded in for production and profits is great. I also liked how you tied the industrial revolution into it. It made the essay flow very well.
ReplyDeleteI liked that your essay was completely from a different view from mine. I enjoyed reading about something else after contemplating mine for so long.
ReplyDeleteI don't feel like I write very well at all and with that in mind I feel a bit uncomfortable telling you what I think you might change. With that being said I did feel as if you said the narrator so often it distracted me a bit from what I was reading. I also felt as if some of the paragraphs were a bit repetitive.
I enjoyed how well written it was. I also liked that it flowed well and was easy to follow. It was interesting how you were able to add your view in as well.
As always I really enjoyed reading your post. Your ideas are always unique and interesting. Although I so disagree with your stand on the portrayal of the narrator. You use "the narrator" in your paper very frequently. It is a little repetitive. Good job though
ReplyDelete