In Lois Lowry's award-winning novel "The Giver," the main character, Jonas, wonders incredulously, "How could anyone not fit in?" The community was so meticulously ordered, the choices so carefully made” (Lowry 48). Jonas refers to the community he lives in, a controlled society, devoid of fear, pain, and burden. Conformity provides security, but, as Jonas will discover, it condemns individual thought and expression. This theme also resonates in the short story “Bartleby, the Scrivener.” Here, Herman Melville examines man's struggle to maintain his individual identity in a world that demands conformity. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essay When the story begins, the narrator, who introduces himself as a man in his sixties and a lawyer in his thirties years old, enjoys the comfort and security that his conventional lifestyle brings him. The tone is complacent as he celebrates the fact that he is an “eminently reliable man” (Melville 85). Rejecting the dangers and uncertainties that accompany ambition, the narrator confides: “I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never address a jury, nor in any way attract applause from the public; but, in the cool tranquility of a comfortable retirement, do comfortable business among the bonds, mortgages, and deeds of rich men” (85). The lawyer favors the comfort of conformity over the distinction of individual recognition. On the other hand, the lawyer's colleagues value their individuality. The first copyist, Turkey, indulgent and rowdy, rejects his employer's offer of a quality coat, refusing to conform to his boss's preferred dress code at work. The narrator comments wryly: "I sincerely believe that buttoning up in such a fuzzy, blanket-like coat had a pernicious effect on him – on the same principle that too much oats are bad for horses." In fact, just as they say a rash and wayward horse smells its oats, Turkey smelled its coat. It made him insolent” (87). Like Turkey, the second copyist, Nippers, is comfortable with his own distinct identity. In fact, unlike his employer, Nippers has ambition and a desire to distinguish himself further. “Ambition manifested itself in a certain impatience with the duties of a simple copyist, an unjustified usurpation of strictly professional matters, such as the original drafting of legal documents” (87). Turkey and Nipper's eccentricities make them unique: the former has a "strange, fiery, restless, volatile activity" (86) in the afternoon, while the latter, particularly in the morning, exhibits "a nervousness and irritability smiling” (87) and a constant dissatisfaction with the height of her table. The fact that the narrator portrays them with warmth and humor suggests that he recognizes and embraces their idiosyncrasies. He comments: “I never had to deal with their eccentricities at any given time. Their crises rose, like guards. When Nipper's was on, Turkey's was off; and vice versa” (88). Through careful management, the lawyer produces compatibility between individuality and conformity. It is with this in mind that the "eminently secure man" (85) employs the editor Bartleby, "a man of so singularly calm appearance...[that] he might operate beneficially upon the fickle temperament of Turkey and on Nippers' fiery temperament” (88-89). Ironically, the editor is hired, in part, to ensure consistency of personalitiesdisparate law firms and create a calming atmosphere. The employer notes that “Bartleby’s stability…made him a valuable acquisition” (93). Unlike the noise and movement constantly generated by Turkey and Nippers, “not a wrinkle of agitation wrinkled him” (90). Bartleby speaks “gently” (91) and is described as having a “great tranquility” (93) about him. At first, the scrivener embodies the notion of conformity. Troubling when Bartleby emerges as an independent spirit. From the third day of work, he began to refuse the demands of his employer, who comments: "Imagine my surprise, even my dismay, when, without moving from his privacy, Bartleby, in a singularly soft and firm voice, replied, 'I would prefer not to.' I sat for a moment in perfect silence, collecting my astonished faculties” (89). Bartleby's individuality is emphasized by his refusal to leave his privacy and his firm tone. Over time, as the editor continually refuses to comply with his employer's most basic wishes, the lawyer becomes increasingly perplexed and unstable. The “big green screen” (89) that physically separates Bartleby and his employer in the workroom begins to take on a symbolic value. Neither seems to see or understand the other. In fact, the editor's view is entirely blocked by the screen on one side and a brick wall directly outside his window. His “hermitage” (91) personifies his isolation and individualism. This idea of ​​Bartleby's isolation is reinforced by the knowledge that he is without a home, family, or friends. The discovery that the editor lives and works at the law firm deeply affects the narrator. He recounts how “the idea came to me, what miserable friendship and loneliness are revealed here! His poverty is great; but his solitude, what horror! (88). Bartleby's situation disrupts his employer and pulls him from the complacency of his “sung retirement” (85). His old feelings of anger and frustration give way to those of compassion and social awareness. Initially, these independent thoughts are held back by one's own need for social acceptance and conformity. First, the lawyer is forced to get rid of Bartleby once he realizes that his own reputation is being tarnished by the association. The reader is told: “I became aware that throughout the circle of my professional acquaintances, a murmur of wonder was going around, referring to the strange creature I kept in my office. This worried me a lot” (102). The need to conform to social expectations forces the lawyer to move his business to new premises and abandon Bartleby. Second, later confronted by the angry landlord and his tenants regarding Bartleby's refusal to leave the old law office, the lawyer is quick to disown Bartleby for fear of social condemnation. “In vain I insisted that Bartleby was nothing to me” (104). The lawyer is torn between social acceptance and the need to act as an individual. As the lawyer continues to comply with society's demands, he begins to stand out by approaching Bartleby with kind offers of help and support: financial assistance, referrals. , and even later, an invitation to share his home. It is Bartleby's stubborn refusal or inability to cooperate and comply that leads to his demise. As his isolation increases, his mind weakens: he becomes more inactive, his eyes are "dull", (90) he is considered "a veritable ghost" (93) and he is later discovered in "the one of his most profound undead. wall reveries” (102). Eventually, Bartleby is imprisoned in the Tombs in,.