"Bartleby the Scrivener" and Germinal - The Virtue of Refusing Labor
The relationship of man to his labor is tied inextricably to his relationship with society; the way in which he handles the responsibilities given to him is often a reflection of how he reacts to the world around him. When man chooses to stop his work, it is often in resistance to a particular set of circumstances or events: for example, the way labor is rewarded in a society. If it is insufficient, either monetarily or metaphysically, one may simply decide to stop working. This relationship is often explored in literature - Emila Zola's novel Germinal and Herman Melville's short story "Bartleby the Scrivener" both explore what happens to those who choose to stop working, and how those around them react to that decision. Viewing the decision to work from the perspective of the worker and the employer shows two distinct perspectives that show the class differences between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie; the worker very clearly wants agency and rights in exchange for his work, while the employer appears confused, the workers' motivations seeming selfish and self-destructive from their perspective.
The disruption of labor, for whatever reason, is often centered around Marxist ideals of a socialist working class system where the proletariat (the oppressed lower class workers) and the bourgeoisie (the middle class establishment) are not on equal footing. Since the bourgeoisie do not have to work, the proletariat are often forced to do labor for ostensible masters. Therefore, when work is stopped, it is usually as a gesture of resistance toward the bourgeoisie - they feel they are being treated unfairly, and as such they cut them off from the labor that allows their system to keep working.
Herman Melville’s “Bartleby the Scrivener” seems to buck this trend, or at least present it in a more unconventional manner. Here, a poor, strange young man is taken in by a lawyer to help take copies at his law firm. Despite things working out well at first, Bartleby soon takes to increasingly erratic and strange behavior, including refusing to proofread a document several times over. As he works less and less, and starts living at the office, the lawyer becomes worried about him, until Bartleby just gets imprisoned, only to starve to death some time later. The character of Bartleby is an interesting and enigmatic one; the mystery of his behavior is at the crux of the story. Bartleby's refusal to work is not seemingly borne out of a desire for more - he does not ask for more from the lawyer, and the lawyer is seemingly considerate of Bartleby's well-being - but of an existential desire to not work or take action in any way. This leads to his eventual death by starvation.
The relationship between the lawyer and Bartleby is one of a patron and his ward – the lawyer sees how melancholy Bartleby is, and hires him in order to make himself feel productive and charitable; “To befriend Bartleby will cost me little or nothing, while I lay up in my soul what will eventually prove a sweet morsel for my conscience” (Melville 62). In effect, the intention behind hiring Bartleby is fairly karmic, as he wishes to do a good deed for the sake of it. However, this charity soon shows itself to carry little benefit to the lawyer; Bartleby does increasingly little work, and eventually just lives in the office without doing anything, all because the lawyer does not want him to starve. This kindness ends quickly as soon as it is clear that business will be affected by Bartleby’s presence, opting instead to move offices. The story’s view on charity is very pessimistic; according to Melville, trying to help someone down on their luck will often do nothing for both parties, as the person may not be overly receptive to that charity. Viewing the stopping of labor from the employer's perspective, the decision to stop working looks all the more perplexing - the lawyer seems to be confused as to how to get the young man to work: "Nothing so aggravates an earnest person as a passive resistance" (Melville 72). He cannot understand the motivations behind Bartleby's decision, and does not sufficiently inquire as to what the man truly wants.
The reason Bartleby would “prefer not to” do a lot of things could be, as seen by the lawyer, due to what today we would call his clinical depression. According to the narrator, Bartleby is unmotivated, sullen, and inactive; these are all classic symptoms of depression, even to the point where he stops eating once he is in prison. He starves himself to death simply because he does not care enough about himself to take nourishment. We also find later that he used to work in the Dead Letter Office at Washington, which leads the employer to understand the dehumanizing nature of labor somewhat more: "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?" (Melville). Bartleby takes no fulfillment or initiative within the chance that the lawyer gives him, instead effectively taking the offer for granted and losing all motivation to do the work for which he was hired. Because of his depression, Bartleby is painted as a strange, odd figure that it would be best to avoid, particularly by his coworkers: ""He simply wanted to go down the mine again, to suffer and to struggle" (Zola 71).
Emila Zola's novel Germinal is a much more straightforward treatise on labor, though it is no less potent in its messages of resistance and what it means to stop one's work. Here, Etienne Lantier, a worker who begins working with others in the town of Montsou in a mine. The pit itself, Le Voreux, "lay lower and squatter, deep in its den, crouching like a vicious beast of prey, snorting louder and longer, as if choking on its painful digestion of human flesh" (Zola). Etienne eventually comes to relate to the common man and advocate for the working class; his relationship with the Russian anarchist Souvarine leads him to start rebelling against the bourgeoisie. This leads to a violent strike that forces the workers to actively take action to pursue their own desires. Unlike Bartleby, who passively resists the pressure of labor through the absence of action, the workers fight for their own agency and equality: "“And then there are always clever people about to promise you that everything will be all right if only you put yourself out a bit" (Zola 421). Instead of viewing the disruption of labor from the perspective of the confused boss, who sees employment as a piece of goodwill and charity in whatever way, the laborers are the focus in Germinal. Here, they dream of a better future, one where they are not put-upon and oppressed - this is what they fight for in the end. Compare that to Bartleby, who fights in his own way (to a lesser level of success) against the state of employment he is virtually forced into under the guise of helping him.
Eventually, the workers are able to maintain the hope of a better (socialist) tomorrow, where the workers would be given equal consideration as the bourgeoisie: "Beneath the blazing of the sun, in that morning of new growth, the countryside rang with song, as its belly swelled with a black and avenging army of men, germinating slowly in its furrows, growing upwards in readiness for harvests to come, until one day soon their ripening would burst open the earth itself" (Zola 524).
In conclusion, Germinal and “Bartleby the Scrivener” both show the reasons for (and the effects of) the worker refusing to work, demonstrating their bosses' various reactions to their decision as multiple ways to approach this philosophical question. Melville's story is a tale both warning about the dangers of depression and the hazards that can incur when one extends their hand to help other people, often for the stereotypical need to do good deeds for selfish pride. The lawyer seeks to make himself look and feel like a benevolent soul, though this is still apparently not enough for Bartleby. Bartleby's existential refusal to do work, for reasons that are not elucidated in the story; they seem to satisfy Bartleby, but the lawyer is absolutely perplexed as it runs counter to everything he knows (life = doing and/or working). On the other hand, the workers in Germinal strike out of a desire to embrace socialism and advocate for workers' rights; Etienne and others wish to work, but they want the proper rewards for that work. Both of these works explore, in different ways, the effects of the worker who stops working; the employers react, either with confusion or with violence. These gestures, however, come from the same stance of rebelling against dedicating life to the bidding of others without getting anything in return.
Works Cited
Melville, Herman. "Bartleby the Scrivener." Putnam's Magazine, 1853. Print.
Zola, Emile. Germinal. G. Charpentier, 1885. Print.
