Beyond the lawyer's delicious self‑approval : Melville's "Bartleby，the scrivener
著者（英） Kanako Matsumoto
journal or
publication title
Core
number 24
page range 29‑48
year 1995‑03‑15
URL http://doi.org/10.14988/pa.2017.0000015017
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approva :lMelville'sBartleby， the Scrivener" 29
Beyond t h e Lawyer's D e l i c i o u s Self‑Approva l : M e l v i l l e ' s B a r t l e b y ， t h e S c r i v e n e r
門K a n a k o M a t s u m o t o
I
Although the enigmatic silence of Bartleby has provoked a great deal of controversy， not so much consideration has been given to the relationship with the narratorial character， the lawyer who retrospectively tells the story from the first‑p巴rson point of view. As the title Bartleby， the Scrivener" shows， it is a story about Bartleby， who came to work at the lawyer's office as a scrivener and finally died in prison after a strange de‑ nial of all the essential actions of human beings. However， we should not overlook the fact that the story is told through an extremely limited point of view， by the narratorial character who does not see the whole life of Bartleby nor understand the meaning of his eccentric behavior. Moreover， this lawyer‑narrator who gives us all the information about Bartleby does not observe the sequ巴nceof events from an objective and detached view‑ point， but is fully involved in these events; sometimes he feels fear and loses his temper， and at other times he expresses sentimental compassion for forlorn Bartleby. As some critics focus on this unreliable narrator and point out the unconscious self‑exposure in his narrative act，l this work is also a story about the lawyer in which he recollects the strangest exp巴[1‑
ence he ever had and exposes his inn巳rdisturbance and qualms of con‑
30 Beyond th巴Lawyer'sDelicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
science by defending himself from the accusation of responsibility for his employee's miserable death. The whole story of Bartleby， the Scriven巴r"
consists of not only the explicit content of the lawyer's narrative， but also the implicit exposure of his own character and consciousness as the result of his narrative. Thus，Bartleby， the Scrivener" has two aspects: the per‑ sonal history of Bartleby and the confessional story of the lawyer. We should not neglect either of them，丘ndin the correlation between these two aspects， there might be a k巴Yto an understanding of the whole work
E
If we read Bartleby" straightforwardly， the whole narrative is the story about Bartleby which is retrospectively t61d by the lawyer who witnessed Bartleby's self‑destructive process toward death. Bartleby was the strangest scrivener whom the lawyer has ever met， and the lawy巴rtells about this employee's enigmatic behavior and subsequent death at a cer‑ tain interval after the death of Bartleby. From this viewpoint， the pro‑ tagonist of the story is Bartleby the scrivener; a central theme of this work might be regarded as a pessimistic V1SlOn of the human predicament in which nothing but a suicidal passive resistance is possible， and Bartleby is considered to be a modern hero， an unconquerable nay‑sayer who pro‑ tests against the world of absurdity. On the other hand， the significance of the lawyer is no more than that of the function of the first‑person narrator.
First， the lawyer's first‑person narrative lends the verisimilitude to the story of Bartleby: the framework story in which the lawyer recollects Bartleby has an effect to give the realistic appearance to the inside story of Bartleby as if the lawyer really experienced and witn白 S巴dit. Although the story of Bartleby is too eccentric for most readers to believe， the
Beyond the l;awyeピsDelicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scriver ordinary setting of the framework story prevents it from flying to some other world of fantasy目 Atthe very beginning of the work， the lawyer‑ narrator announces that his long career in the field of law "has brought [himJ into more than ordinary contact with . . . the law‑copyists or scrive‑ ners，" and he will write a few passages in the life of Bartleby， who was a scrivener the strangest 1 ever saw or heard of" (13).2 Here he insists on the truthfulness of the content of his narrative as well as its fictional back‑ ground.
In the second place， his totally subjective viewpoint makes it possible to emphasize a certain impression of Bartleby. F or example， from the first encounter， he describes Bartleby as motionless and pale:
In answer to my advertisement， a motionless young man one morning， stood upon my office threshold， the door being open， for it w昌ssummer. 1 can see that figure now‑pallidly neat， pitiably respectable， incurably forlorn! It was Bartleby. (19)
As the story goes on， Bartleby's motionlessness reaches to the point at which he is described as if he were gradually petrifying; for example， Bartleby' s inhumanness， his immovable" countenance， and his whit巴
attenuated mouth" are associated with the marble statue of Cicero (21， 30) In another place， the lawyer compares the mute and solitary standing of Bartleby to the last column of some ruined temple" (33). This imagery of petrification continues to the end where Bartleby finally dies with his head touching the cold stones" (44)， as if he were assimilated into the stonewall. Repetitiv日andsometimes even excessive usage of the word pale" also creates a peculiar impression of Bartleby; for instance，he wrote on . . . palely" (20)， "a pale young scrivener" (25)， and so thin and
32 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
pale" (28). The lawyer even imagines that [tJhe scrivener's pale form appeared to [himJ laid out， among uncaring strangers， in its shivering winding sh巴et"(28). This corpse‑like image of Bartleby is also enhanced by the oximoronic use of the word cadaverous" such as cadaverously gentlemanly nonchalance" (27) and mildly cadaverous reply" (30). Through‑
out the whole work， the narr<;ltor accumulates such static， silent， cadaver‑ ous， and ghost‑like images of Bartleby. Bartleby is described，" Dilling‑ ham points out，in imagery that suggests that h巴isalready dead.，，3 It might be concerned with not only the lawyer's impression on Bartleby in the past， but also his knowledge that Bartleby is a1ready dead at the time of his narrativ巴 pastimpression and present impression a日 effectively mingled in the mind of the narratorial character. Mysteriousness， forlorn‑ ness， and dignity are other characteristic attributes emphasized by the nar‑ rator's personal view of Bartleby目4
The third characteristic of this first‑person narrator is that he is con‑ scious of the existence of the audience. He is apparently a self‑conscious narrator who begins the story by introducing himself and delineating his office for readers' better understanding of the situation. Not only reporting what he witnessed， he officiously adds his own commentary and explana‑ tion to these reports. In this sense， he consciously bears the role of guid‑ ing readers in the right direction for perceiving the story of Bartleby. Although these three characteristics offer the basic tone and framework of the whole work， they are nothing more particular than the general function of a first‑person retrospective narrator.
Consideration of the lawyer's character reveals another effect of adopt‑ ing the first‑person narratorial character who is both a narrator and partici‑ pant. The lawyer is "an eminently safe man" who is proud of his pru‑
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sB訂tleby，the Scrivener" 33 dence" and method" (14). He always tries to maintain himself as a man of common sense， generosity， and practical management; all these inclina‑ tions come from his great conviction on reason， Christian benevolence， and the unwritten law of society. N orman suggests that readers associate themselves with the narrator when he shows great generosity to the poor Bartleby，because it is admirable to be sympathetic with a less fortunate person."5 Although her method of examining the work through the readers' sympathetic participation is severely criticized by Shusterman as th巴
affective fallacy，6 at least it can be said that the narrator's reaction丘san ordinary man of common sense helps readers to accept the strange story of Bartleby. Everything which the lawyer believes and on which his motiva田 tions depend， such as generosity and prudence， is what is considered to be
right" and good" in society. Apparently， the lawyer's reasonable way of thinking is closer to that of commOn readers that Bartleby's is， just as Ishmael's way of thinking in Moby‑Dick is more familiar to ordinary people than Ahab's is. The narrative structure of Bartleby" and Moby‑Dick is quite similar: both narrators had some relation to the persons whom they talk about， witnessed their death， and begin to tell the stories at a certain interval after their death. Unlike Pierre in which the impersonal omnis‑ cient narrator reports all the inner description of the eccentric protagonist， such mediation of the rational and limited viewpoint makes it easier for ordinary people to understand and sympathize with the whole narrative. If Bartleby had directly told the story from the first‑person point of view， it would have become too eccentric for general readers to accept， just as Ahab's first‑person narrative would have been too impious and monoma‑
niac for common people to feel sympathy with. However， we should not easily conclude that the purpose of this mediatory narrator is only to gain
34 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
wide acceptance in the literary market. The function of the lawyer‑narrator is not a mere device to mask or soften the incurably dark V1SlOn with which Bartleby is possessed; further significance seems to lurk in the clos巴relationshipbetween the narrator and the common r巴ader
E
Since the whole narrative is limited to the lawyer's first‑person point of view， there is no inner description of Bartleby himself̲ Consequently， the death of Bartleby remains enigmatic silence， not only to the narrator but also to readers. The only clue which is given to readers is the rumor about the Dead Letter Office; after the inside story about Bartleby is finished， the time of the narrative goes back to the present when the lawyer nar‑ rates， and he reveals one rumor that Bartleby worked for the Dead Letter Office. Although the lawyer himself says that the truthfulness of the rumor has not been ascertained， he seems to find some answers for the enigmatic behavior of Bartleby in this rumor:
When 1 think over this rumor， hardly can 1 express the emotions which seize me. Dead letters! does it not sound like dead men?
Conceive a man by nature and misfortune prone to a pallid hopelessness， can any business seem more fitted to heighten it than that of continually handling these dead letters， and assorting them for the flames? (45)
In a sense， he does not care whether the rumor is true or not; it is impor‑ tant because it does help him to understand the eccentric behavior of Bartleby. He also believes that his readers are puzzled by the story of Bartleby just as he is， and offers a possible explanation of Bartleby's in‑ curable despair:
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approva :lMelville'sBartleby， the Scrivener" 35 Upon what basis is rested， 1 could never ascertain; and hence， how true it is 1 cannot now tell. But inasmuch as this vague re‑ port has not been without a certain strange suggestive interest to me， however sad， it may prove the same with som巴others;and so 1 will briefly mention it. (45)
It is apparent that the narrator has some intimacy with his readers; he seems to believe that he且ndhis read巴rsshare the same viewpoint and the same way of thinking. Although the narrator's tone is a little bit sen‑ timental， it is easy for common people to accept this巴xplanationbecause his reasonable way of thinking is close to that of most rational and good‑ natured people. People of common sens巴 mightthink that there must be some painful experiences which cause Bartleby to fall into despair， and it is not surprising that th巴yassociate the rumor of the Dead Letter Office with his despair and then pity the unfortunate plight of poor Bartleby. Shusterman suggests that the central fallacy of Norman's read巳r‑response criticism depends on her basic assumption that the reader will always react in the way that N orman says he is supposed to: that Melville presup‑ poses an ideal reader who is fated to react in a particular way.，7 ， It might be a fallacy， if we confuse common people with Melville's ideal readers. However， 1 do not mean that Melville supposes that the narrator perfectly represents his actual readers， and th巴irreaction to Bartl巳byis totally the same as his. It is necessary to distinguish readers supposed by the first‑ person narrator from actual readers. As 1 have mentioned before， this work has the fictional appearance that the first‑person n丘rratortalks intimat巴ly to his readers; they are the readers supposed by the narr且tor，neither the readers supposed by the author nor actual readersIt is out of the qu巳stion whether individual readers will react just as the narr呂tordoes or not; what
36 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approva1: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
is important here is whether the vi巴wpointis close to the so‑called man of common sense or no.t The lawyer is a typical middle‑agεd American who has established considerable social status and has been convinced of his own rational thinking and proper perception. Moreover， he is fully con‑ scious of his trustworthiness and self‑satisfyingly says [a]ll who know me， consider me an eminently safe man" (14). He seems to believe that his solution to the mystery of Bartleby is unobjectionably agreed on by his supposed readers who share his common sense. In this way，Bartleby， the Scrivener" is assumed to be a story in which the good‑natured narrator talks about the pitiful tragedy of Bartleby to his good‑natured readers.
Let us now look in more detail at the significance of the D巴adLetter Office to which the lawyer attributes Bartleby's desperation. Bartleby's re‑ fusal astonishes the lawyer so strikingly because the lawyer lives in the world of assumptions， implicit but absolut巴 understandingsof social life; he does not have a bit of doubt about the authority of assumptions which control human society. The lawyer assumes that Bartl巴bywould never re‑ fuse his order because it is an implicit but absolute consensus that em‑
ployees always obey their employers' orders So he plans the following procedure to get rid of Bartleby: 1 assumed the ground that depart he must; and upon that assumption built all 1 had to say" (34). However， it is the procedure which is only available in theory，" not in practice" (34) As his assumptions have betrayed him many times， the lawyer gradually begins to recognize that the assumption has nothing to do with Bartleby:
It 'was truly a beautiful thought to have assumed Bartleby's de‑ parture; but， after all， that assumption was simply my own， and none of Bartleby's The great point was， not whether 1 had assumed that he would quit me， but whether he would prefer so to
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville's Bartleby， the Scrivener" 37 do. He was more a man of pref巴rencesthan assumptions. (34)
For Bartleby， the preference is superior to the assumption; if you want to make him do something， you must make him prefer to do so. It is a great shock for the lawyer whose view of the world fully depends on what he calls the doctrine of assumptions" (35). In contrast to the lawyer's world thoroughly controlled by assumptions， the Dead Letter Office is the place where assumptions are destroyed. Those who send letters剖sumethat they will be received， but this assumption is d巴stroy巴d because for some reasons the letters do not reach their receivers. Usually these unreceived letters are assumed to send back to their senders， but this assumption is not realized， too. This office is the place where letters that are dangling between the unknown senders and unknown receivers are collected and burned. Moreover， Bartleby who had worked for this office had been sud‑ denly removed by a change in the administration" (45). The lawyer sur‑ mises that this sudden discharge is another painful experience for Bartleby; even though he had worked in a place where the doctrine of assumptions is destroyed， he still assumed that he could keep working there. Then his assumption w昌sdestroyed， and he came to have no place to go just like the dead letters which he dealt with
Besides the problem of assumptions， the lawyer's description of dead letters is exceedingly sentimenta .1Part of the passage has already b巴巴n quoted but it runs:
Dead letters! does it not sound like dead men? Conceive丘man by nature and misfortune prone to a pallid hopelessness， can any business seem more fitted to heighten it than that of continually handling these dead letters， and assorting them for the flames?
38 Beyond th巴Lawyer'sDelicious Self‑Approval: Melvil1e's Bartleby， the Scrivener"
For by the cart‑load they are annually burned. Sometimes from out the folded paper the pale clerk takes a ring:一 品efinger it was meant for， perhaps， moulders in the grave; a bank‑note sent in swiftest charity:‑he whom it would relieve， nor eats nor hungers any more; pardon for those who died despairing; hope for those who died unhoping; good tidings for those who died stifled by unrelieved calamities. On errands of life， these lett巳rsspeed to death. (45)
These dead letters which would have conveyed full of affection or kind‑ ness to receivers are burned in a quite businesslike manner. When Bartleby， who well knows the cruel fate of these letters， finds himself fall‑ en in the same situation， it is natural for the sentimental narrator to im‑ agine that Bartleby thinks that his only fate is to speed to death." Bart‑ leby is also a dead letter in the sense that the lawy巴rcannot communicate with him; since he breaks with social communication and insulates himself from human society， the lawyer's kindness cannot reach him nor can the lawyer send him to som巴 appropriateplace. Just as a dead letter，he had declined telling who he was， or whence he came， or wheth巴rhe had any relatives in the world" (28)， and also refus白 tosay what he wants to do and where he wants to go.
All these things are explanations of the tragedy of Bartleby from the lawyer's point of view， the lawyer's explanations addressed to his sup‑ posed readers. At the D巴ad Letter Office， Bartleby experienced the absurdity of the universe wh巴renothing exists but unreliable assumptions which are often betrayed. From this point of view， the lawyer's sen‑ timental cry，Ah Bartleby! Ah humanity!" (45) might be regarded as only the exaggerated expression to show his pity for poor Bartleby. It is doubt‑
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sB紅tleby，the Scrivener" 39 ful that he uses the word humanity" in the sens日thatthe dark VlSlOn which causes Bartleby to fall into despair is not only the personal problem of Bartleby but also the universal one of human b巴ings;irreparable pes‑ slmlsm is only Bartleby's VlSlOn developed in his particular circum‑ stances， neither the lawyer's nor his supposed readers'. In this sense， Bartleby's incurable gloom has nothing to do with the view of the world which the lawyer believes he shares with his readers. It is quit巴natural that， as the first‑person narrator whose character is a man of good nature， he ends his narrative of the tragedy of wretched Bartleby with the ex‑ aggerated sentimental cry. F or the optimistic lawyer who trusts the au‑ thority of Christian benevolence and the social doctrine of assumptions， Bartleby is the kind of man who is most worthy of being pitied. By pitying Bartleby as a wretched outsider， the lawyer regains his optimistic reliance on the doctrine of assumptions， and at the same time， he can share the cheap purchase of a delicious self‑approval" (23) with his readers
N
When we extend our focus from the consentient relationship b巴tween the fictional narrator and his supposed readers to the whole work， there arises the question of whether we can rely on this first‑person n旦rratoror not. As 1 have mentioned before， the story of Bartleby is narrated from a totally subjective and extremely limited point of view. We cannot deny another possible motive for revealing the rumor: the lawyer mentions the Dead Letter Office not only because he intends to offer a clue to an under司
standing of this tragedy for the puzzled readers， but also because he tries to shirk his responsibility for the death of Bartleby. Although the lawyer
40 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
always emphasizes his generous attitude toward Bartleby， it is he who abandons Bartleby and causes him to be sent to the prison. Could he be really unaware of this crucial fact? Of course， to neglect the purpose and effect of his own behavior is the characteristic disposition of the lawyer who always concentrates on the deliberate method. Such a disposition is well expressed in his words，my masterly management in getting rid of Bartleby" (33); he is proud of his own diplomatic sense and gentle manner， and does not mind that the purpose of this masterly management" is to get rid of Bartleby" and in effect， it causes Bartleby's wretched death However， we should not overlook the fact that the lawyer who retrospec‑ tively tells the story knows the final result of the behavior of his past self. In this situation， it is difficult to think that the lawyer at the moment of narrating believes he is perfectly free from accusations of having aban‑ doned Bartleby
The whole inside story of Bartleby is recollectively told in the past tense， but there is one passage which is told in the present tense
1 believe that this wise and blessed frame of mind would have continued with me， had it not been for the unsolicited and un‑ charitable remarks obtruded upon me by my professional friends who visited the rooms. But thus it often is， that the constant fric‑ tion of illiberal minds wears out at last the best resolves of the more generous. (37)
Apparently， it expresses the narrator's feeling at the time when he tells the story at a certain interval after Bartleby's forlorn death. At this time， the narrator knows what happened as a consequence of his abandoning Bartleby， and defends himself by emphasizing that he was forced to make a decision under the pressure from his professional friends. However， his
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener" 41 excuse for causing Bartleby's death ironically exposes his regret and qualms of conscience. In this sense， the whole work of Bartleby" can be regarded as the lawyer's confessional story as his self‑revelation. As Bick‑ ley says， the lawyer is both the genia ，lsentimental anecdotist who enjoys painting sk巴tchesof character or social settings， or writing familiar essays about himself" and the ironic protagonist who， in a sense， becomes t白h巴
victim of his own s討to白ry."
Th巴 tragedyof the lawyer is that he confronts a di丘ff臼icultsituation in which he haおst初ochoose e白it仙h巴白rmoral ethics or business et出hi犯cs.9Although they are essentially incompatible each other， the lawy巳rhas cunningly ad‑ justed them in his usual theoretical manner. He has assumed that his scriveners enjoy working at his comfortable office and he himself is an ex‑ tremely generous employer. However， Bartleby does not adjust himself to this assumption， as the lawyer says，1 should have been quite delighted with his application， had he been cheerfully industrious. But he wrote on silently， palely， mechanically" (19‑20). He also denies joining what the lawyer calls the interesting group" (21)， which is actually the group of te‑ dious proofr巴ading.Still the lawyer does not dismiss eccentric Bartleby because of his practical viewpoint which judges Bartleby as useful" (23) and his fear of moral accusation. He hesitates to discharge Bartleby be‑ cause he might be denounced as a villain if [heJ dared to breathe one bit‑ ter word against this forlornest of mankind" (30). After long perplexity， what he final1y chooses is busin白 sethics; under the pressure from his professional friends， he abandons Bartleby who has become no longer use‑ ful to him. However， on the other hand， he is not entir巴lyfree from moral ethics. 1t can be seen at the moment when he leaves Bartleby alone; he says，something from within me upbraided me" and 1 tore myself from
42 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
him" (39). 1n a sense， it is not Bartleby， but his own conscience from which the lawyer tries to run away.
1t is ironical that the lawyer receives the work of the master's office"
(19)， the Court of Chancery. 1n contrast to the lawyer's office which origi‑ nally deals with legal documents， the Court of Chancery d巴alswith small quarrels and individual complaints which cannot be solved by the law. This work seems to be suitable for the lawyer who tries to manage his problems in ordinary life depending on freedom， justice， and equity just as the Chancellor does. In order to make up the extra work for this court， the lawyer n巴edsanother scrivener besides his original employees. Then he hires Bartleby. Ironically， this pale scrivener is the most difficult task im‑ posed on the lawyer， which can never be solved by any laws. The lawyer cannot succeed in dealing with this newcomer by any considerable means that he has been used to depend on. The law， assumptions， reason， com‑
mon sens巴， and business ethics are all entirely ineffective to Bartleby. N ow the lawyer reveals his limitation and weakness: he cannot solve any‑ thing without depending on written or unwritten laws， and also extremely fears to be accused by people of inability and irresponsibility目 Although the lawyer is proud of his management of the problems of others， once he himself confronts the difficulty and recognizes that it is beyond the limits of his own ability， he gives all his attention to shirking the accusation of being irresponsible and ungenerous rather than carrying out his principles of freedom， justice， and equity.
When the lawyer narrates the story at a certain interval aft巳rthe event， he has to deceive not only his own conscience but also that of his readers. Dillingham argues that the lawyer does not intend to deceive readers de‑ liberately， but his fear of accusation unconsciously makes him distort the
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener" 43 story of Bart1eby10 Although this opinion is quite reasonable to a certain extent， it is debatable to apply the psychological method to fictional char‑ acters. This narrator is a fictional character created by the author， not an actual person to whom we can apply psychology目 Whatis important here is not the question whether his duplicity is unconscious or not， because in the text itself， there is no clue to ascertain it. All we can do is to recog‑ nize that the narrator who observes and analyzes Bartleby is unreliable， and to consider the whole work with the correlation between this unreli‑ able narrator and Bartleby who offers no explanation for his o̲wn behavior
V
We shall now consider the significance of Bartleby's death beyond the narrator's point of view. Ironically， the lawyer's description of Bartleby re‑ veals that he does not understand Bartleby at all. He tries to perceive Bartleby within the limits of his own understanding， and fails in c昌pturing the true figure of Bartleby; for instance， when Bartleby stops copying， the lawyer thinks out a comprehensible reason that his eyes are damaged， but Bartleby refuses to do it even after the considerable interval for recovery (32). Although the lawyer finally attributes the reason of Bartleby's de‑ spair to the De丘dLetter Office， we should notice that Bartleby's self‑ destruction began after he came to the lawyer's office， not at the time when he worked for the Dead Letter Office， nor when he was dismissed from i t.All his efforts to rationalize and categorize the enigmatic behavior of Bartleby end in failure
It is worth while considering the difference between the Dead Letter Office and the lawyer's office. The Dead Letter Office is， as 1 have dis‑ cussed before， the place where assumptions are destroyed. On the other
44 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
hand， the lawyer's office which seems harmless at first sight is the place where there is nothing but assumptions. Bartleby cannot overlook the emptiness of the lawyer's office beneath the peaceful surface. In a sense， his experience at the Dead Letter Office is not so painful as that of the lawyer' s office because the former is an excεptional place where assump‑
tions are destroyed and everybody knows that it is an exception. However， the latter has the appearance of the sympathetic world. Therefore， to find its emptiness is a more critical experience for Bartleby than that of the Dead Letter Offic巴.The hypocritical lawyer's forceful pressure in the dis‑ guise of generosity has a much more destructive effect on Bartl巴bythan the experience at and sudden discharge from the Dead Lett巴rOffice町 The contrast between the hypocritical lawyer and stubborn Bartleby is well ex‑ pressed in the conversation as follows:
And to you， this should not be so vile a place. N othing reproach‑ ful attaches to you by being here. And see， it is not so sad a place as one might think. Look， there is the sky， and here is the grass.
I know where I am，" he[Bartleby] replied，・・町 (43)
Even when Bartleby is in the prison surrounded by the dead‑walls， the lawyer assumes that it is not so vile for Bartleby and tries to persuade Bartleby into being satisfied with his present state. In contrast to Bartleby who gazes at the solid walls steadfastly， the lawyer urges him to see the sky upward and the grass downward in order to divert his attention from the wal1. Moreover， the lawyer does not notice that it is this hypocrisy represented by himself which makes Bartleby refuse to live. What the lawyer did to relieve the despair of Bartleby is only to enhance his dark
Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener" 45 vision of emptiness by showing another examples of hypocritical generos‑ ity̲ The tragedy of Bartleby is， after all， that of the person who cannot overlook the evil hypocrisy behind s巴巴minglyharmless society and whose agony is never understood by the world.
Now Bartleby， the Scrivener" reveals a much more universal vision than that of a tragedy occurred under a particular circumstance， the tragedy of Wall‑stree. tAlthough this work is subtitled A Story of Wall‑ Street" and most events take place on Wall‑street， it should not be simply taken as the criticism against the center of the growing capitalism in nineteenth‑century America. Actual Wall‑street is the place which is often associated with inhuman capitalism and hypocritical昌ssumptions，but this subtitle might be rather concerned with the chief imagery of this work: the image of dead‑walls.ll This image is emphasized not only by th巴punon wall，" but also by the fictional setting of the lawyer's office; Bartleby's desk was placed at a small window and [w)ithin three feet of the panes was a wall， and the light came down from far above" (19). Through this window， Bartleby was absorbed in his dead‑wall revery" (31). If we think about [t)he surrounding walls， of amazing thickness" (44) at the Tombs， we will find that for Bartleby， th巴reis not so much difference between the lawyer's office and the Tombs. Moreover， in the lawyer's office， Bartleby finds that not only the lawyer's office， but also every other place is not so different from the desolate Tombs. So he would prefer not to" do every other job that the lawyer suggests (41); law‑copying on Wall‑street is not the only task that he r巴fusesto do， just as the lawyer's office is not the only place with which Bartleby is disappointed. Bartleby cannot overlook the hypocrisy or forlornness which exists everywhere， hidden behind de‑ ceiving appearances. All human beings have fallen into the same predica‑
46 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville'sBartleby， the Scrivener"
ment， but most people are not aware of this dark truth. It is this vision of annihilation which destroys Bartleby. Thus， the case of Bartleby is not a tragedy which is only peculiar to Wal1‑street; "A Story of WalrStreet" is one of the examples to represent the universal plight of human beings as we can see in the concluding sentence，Ah Bartleby! Ah humanityl" (45).
Now we come to the last point at which we should reconsider the mean‑
ing of this concluding sentence of the whole work目 1tsreal meaning is preg‑ nantly ambiguous. While it sounds like only an exaggerated sentimental cry of the hypocritical lawyer who is supposed as the limited first‑person narrator， another possible meaning cannot be denied; it is a more imper‑ sonal one， the voice of the viewpoint of the whole work which is far beyond the limits of the supposed narrator. 1n this sense， it expresses the deep sorrow for the human predicament and also the compassion for those who cannot help surrendering such a self司destructivevision of blackness The sentence itself is exaggeratedly sentimental， but this very fact is the most ironical point in this work. Although it dramatical1y summarizes the dark truth of human plight which has been implicitly suggested through‑ out the whole work， it stil1 keeps the explicit appearance of the sen‑ timental story which is told by the good‑natured but ignorant narrator; from the beginning to the end， the lawyer cannot underst
: a
nd Bartleby and what he can do is only to express sentimental pity for this poor scrivener目 At the same time， this exclamation does not lose th巴 possibilityof the lawyer's hypocritical duplicity to conceal his own guilt; by sentimental1y linking the tragedy of Bartleby with general humanity， he evades the accusation of being ungenerous. Whether honest or hypocritical， the lawyer's limited point of view shows the irreparable distance between him and Bartleby; the more eagerly he tries to approach Bartleby， the moreBeyond the Lawy
， :
r's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville's Bartleby， the Scrivener" 47 rigid and difficult to understand Bartleby becomes. Aft巴rall， this sugg巴s‑ tive ambiguity of the concluding sentence splendidly summarizes the cen‑ tral irony of the whole work: the dark irony which is revealed through the deceptive appearance of the world， and which is beyond the lawyer's view‑point and A Story of Wall‑Street."
Notes
1. Kingsley Widmer stands on the assumption that the function of Bartleby is nothing more than the unsolvable enigma to emphasize the perceptive 1imita tions of the lawyer， and focuses his full attention on the lawyer (Kingsley Widmer，Melville's Radical Resistance: The Method and Meaning of Bart leby，"必udiesin the Novell [1969J: 444‑458). See also William B. Dillingham， Melville'sSJwrtFiction， 1853‑1856 (Athens: U of Georgia P， 1977) 54ー55. 2園 HermanMelville，B昌rtleby，th巴Scrivener: A Story of Wall‑Street，" The
Piazza Tales and Other Prose Pieces 1839‑1860， ed. H且rrisonHayford et a ，.lvol. 9 of The Writings of Herman Melville， The Northwestern‑Newberry Edition (Evanston: Northwestern UP and Newb巴rry Library， 1987). All quotations from Bartleby" are taken from this edition， and subs巴quentreferences appear in the text by page numbers only.
3. Dillingham 48.
4. This narratorial device might be close to what Booth argues as ma且ipulat‑ ing mood" By the simple expedient of creating a character who experienc巴S
the rhetoric in his own person， it has been made less objectionable. Every adjective and detail intended to set our mood is a part of the growing mood and experience of the central character; the rhetoric now seems functional， 'in‑ trinsic川 (WayneC. Booth， The Rhetoric of Fiction [Chicago: U of Chicago P， 1961J 200‑205).
5園 LianeN orman，Bartleby and the Reader，" New England Quarterly 44 (1971): 29
6. See David Shusterman， ，The 'Reader Fallacy' and Bartleby the Scrivener ，' New England Quarte均 45(1972): 118ー124
7. Shusterman 120
8. R. Bruce Bickley， J.， r The Method of MelviZたきShortFiction (Durham: Duke
48 Beyond the Lawyer's Delicious Self‑Approval: Melville's Bartleby， the Scrivener"
UP， 1975) 44
9. John P. McWilliams， Jr.'s interesting analysis of this work is based on the irreparable discrepancy between Christian principles and business ethics in nineteenth‑century America (John P. McWilliams， J ，.rHawtlwrne， Melville， and the American Character: A Looking‑glass Business [Cambridge: Cambridge UP， 1984]180‑181)
10. According to Dillingham， the lawyer is a fraud who is not fully aware of his duplicity" (Dillingham 19).
11. Widmer says，Melville's Wall Street does not serve in its later propagan distic function as an image of financial power and manipulation but as a metaphysical metaphor of confinement and of barriers to understanding，" and it
should not primarily be taken in its political sense because in the description Melvill巴playsupon the pun rather th呂nthe economics" (Widmer 447‑449)ーI mostly agree with him， but we should not n巴glectthe original meaning which Wall‑street represents. Wall‑street is not a mere metaphysical metaphor"
which has no realistic tie with the actual world. but one of the most suitable examples to show the deceiving appearance of the hypocritic society as well as the mechanicallabor presented by scriveners
