Laine Walston

October 19, 2016

ECM 2510
Essay Two

The two methods that I will choose to discuss are new criticism and reader response.

New criticism focuses on the work itself rather than the reader. The work must stand on its own

as an artistic object. On the other hand, reader response is the reaction in part to some problems

and limitations in new criticism. Reader response criticism focuses on the reader rather than the

text itself. Without readers, it seems safe to say, there would be little reason to talk about litera-

ture; it is the reader who brings the text to life, who gives it meaning (Lynn, 24). Bartleby,

The Scrivener: A Story of Wall-street is interpreted through new criticism and reader response

criticism by focusing on the readers reaction as well as the work being considered as an object.

When interpreting this short story through new criticism, it is easy to relate to this work

as an artistic object. New criticism was found in this reading through close readings and doing

an analysis of each example in the text. From doing a close reading of this text, it is easy to un-

derstand from the lawyers point of view what makes this a favorable short story. Just within the

beginning pages of the text there are many examples. The first sentence of the story says I am a

rather elderly man (Melville, 1). This one line sets a more ambivalent tone for the story be-

cause it could either have laid out a negative or positive connotation to the rest of the story. It

goes on to say [t]he nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more

than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of

whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written:I mean the law-copyists or scrive-

ners (Melville, 1). This draws attention to the introduction of these characters within the text.

The lawyer then goes on to say how he has known very many scriveners both in a professional

and private sense, but there is one named Bartleby who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever
saw or heard of (Melville, 1). At this point it is unclear to whether Bartleby being strange is a

good thing or a bad thing. Melville describes Bartleby was one of those beings of whom noth-

ing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small (Mel-

ville, 1). The wording of this sentence has a more negative aspect to it. The way Melville says

Bartleby was one of those beings makes it sounds as if nobody likes that type of person.

The lawyer starts to describe the space in which him and his employees work in, he says

[a]t one end they looked upon the white wall of the interior of a spacious sky-light shaft, pene-

trating the building from top to bottom (Melville, 2). The way he described the color and length

of the wall creates some imagery. Then he says [t]his view might have been considered rather

tame than otherwise, deficient in what landscape painters call life (Melville, 2). This gives in-

sight to what a typical Wall Street office building would be described as. The fact that the land-

scape painters are calling that view life shines light into their world too. The way it is de-

scribed sounds as if they are dreaming of having a job such as the lawyer has and a view out of

his office that is as nice as the one they are looking at. They would rather be doing anything else

than painting. A few sentences later, the lawyer describes the other side of the building as my

windows commanded an unobstructed view of a lofty brick wall, black by age and everlasting

shade (Melville, 2). This shows that there is more than just the luxurious lifestyle of Wall

Street. The lawyer could also be describing himself within that view when he says black by age

and everlasting shade The older he gets, the more his personality becomes darker and the ev-

erlasting shade can refer to the more stressful work has become especially since Bartleby has

started working for him. which wall required no spy-glass to bring out its lurking beauties,

but for the benefit of all near-sighted spectators, was pushed up to within ten feet of my window

panes (Melville, 2). The way the text says that the no spy glass brings out all of its lurking
beauties creates some imagery of the opposite side of Wall Street, which includes all of the law-

yers new employees.

When the lawyer starts to describe his workers, this is where reader response criticism

comes into play. The reader response criticism focuses on the reading process that might be oc-

curring. This type of criticism is more about knowing how to read people, therefore you will

know how to respond because there is an understanding of how people think. The lawyers em-

ployees go by the names of Turkey, Nippers, Ginger Nut, and the most known Bartleby. First

off, it stands out to readers that the only worker that doesn't have a nickname is Bartleby. This

evokes a reaction that Turkey, Nippers, and Ginger Nut may not be as important to the lawyer as

Bartleby is. This can set off to the readers that they may not need to pay as close attention to

them as they need to Bartleby. The lawyer starts off describing Turkey as a short, pursy Eng-

lishman of about my own age, that is, somewhere not far from sixty (Melville, 2). Seeing that

there is a similarity in age with Turkey and the lawyer, this would cause the reader to think that

they would have a close connection. Once he starts to describe Turkey a bit more by saying he is

reckless in his work, his face becomes flamed with blazonry, and he is often times unpleasant, it

is clear to see why he was given a nickname and is not favored by the lawyer. The next em-

ployee to be described is Nippers. He starts off by saying I always deemed him the victim of

two evil powersambition and indigestion (Melville, 3). This description makes the reader

think that he has potential to be a good worker and maybe he could be important. When the law-

yer goes on to say occasional nervous testi- ness and grinning irritability, causing the teeth to

audibly grind together over mistakes committed in copying; unnecessary maledictions, hissed,

rather than spoken, in the heat of business (Melville, 3-4) this shows that Nippers is not capa-

ble of handling the pressure that comes with working on Wall Street. This causes the readers to
start feeling eerie towards Nippers reactions to situations. Lastly, there was Ginger Nut. Learn-

ing that he is only as young as twelve years old, the reader might start to think that he does not

do much in the office. When the lawyer says [h]is father was a carman, ambitious of seeing his

son on the bench instead of a cart, before he died. So he sent him to my office as student at law,

errand boy, and cleaner and sweeper, at the rate of one dollar a week (Melville, 5) this evokes

an emotion of sympathy. The line after that, the lawyer said [h]e had a little desk to himself

(Melville, 5) which creates imagery of this boy. When reading that, it is easy to picture a young

boy working hard to pursue his fathers dream for him. He is described as alacritous which only

adds on more to the sympathetic joy the reader is feeling for him.

When the lawyer starts talking about Bartleby, he says [a]t first Bartleby did an extraor-

dinary quantity of writing (Melville, 6). The way the lawyer says at first leads the reader into

thinking that Bartleby has gone downhill with his work. A page later, is when the lawyer starts

to talk about Bartlebys descent. The lawyer stated to Bartleby what he wanted him to do;

namely, to examine a small paper with me (Melville, 7). When Bartleby replied, Bartleby in

a singularly mild, firm voice, replied, I would prefer not to ( Melville, 7). This not only took

the lawyer by surprise, but the readers as well. I sat awhile in perfect silence, rallying my

stunned faculties. Immediately it occurred to me that my ears had deceived me, or Bartleby had

entirely misunderstood my meaning (Melville, 7). The confusion that is going through the law-

yers head right now is sever due to the fact that Bartleby had done everything the lawyer had

asked prior to this moment. This triggers something within the readers also. Realizing that this

is Bartlebys descent to becoming a more lackadaisical worker, theres a thought that Bartleby

could also become less important to the lawyer. From the readers point of view, it seems like
there could be a chance that Bartleby may end up with a nickname just like Turkey, Nippers, and

Ginger Nut which implies less importance to the lawyer.

This example from the text of working on Wall Street from a new criticism point of view,

and reading into the workers of Wall Street from a reader response criticism point of view evoke

very different meanings. From the new criticism point of view, the short story itself had literary

elements, such as imagery, different tones, and allegory when talking about the daily work life of

Wall Street. While on the other hand, reader response criticism had more of a focus on how the

reader reacted to the situations that the lawyer had to deal with.

In conclusion, the reader can decide to look at a work as an object within itself as a new

critic, or focus on the reaction that is provoked by using reader response criticism. Either way,

there is going to be either an emotion that comes form the story or a new way to look at literary

elements when reading.

Works Cited

Lynn, Steven. "Chapter Two." Texts and Contexts: Writing About Literature with Critical The-

ory. Seventh ed. N.p.: Pearson Education, n.d. 24. Print.

Melville, Herman. "Bartleby, The Scrivener: A Story Of Wall-Street." The Piazza Tales. N.p.:

Dix & Edwards, 1856. 1-7. Print.