“Self-Reliance vs. Bartleby” – Literary Explorations I @ IMSA
The comforts of life and their necessities are questioned. Is it true that humans can live with no luxuries in their habitats? With support from Emerson’s “Self-Reliance” and Melville’s “Bartleby,” it can be concluded that tangible object are not needed for life’s happiness. Instead, it is what a human feels within them that is important. Individualism brings out the true inner self of all the humans. It allows the humans to see what is truly vital in their lives and what is something that just exists for comfort.
However, upon further investigation, differences can be found even between Emerson and Melville. Their individualistic points of views contrast in numerous ways, and their views on necessities are not the same. As one person’s definition of individualism is different from another’s, these two documents contradict in specific details of true individualism. However, both define individualism as the best way to live life.
In Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” three major topics about individualism are covered: the importance of self-reliance, the role of self-reliance as an individual, and the contribution of self-reliance to the society. Together they form an overall impression of independence and nonconformity.
The importance of self-reliance comes when someone is faced with a tough decision to make. Many adults that are well educated may contradict their own thoughts and think them over multiple times before they ever choose to follow them. However, when children make decisions, they do not know enough to question their thoughts and do what their instinct tells them to. According to Emerson, this instinct or gut feeling is the best way that someone could make a choice. This way, he ensures that a person will be lead to success in all aspects.
When looking at Melville’s “Bartleby,” the overall idea of the story is seen as being selfish towards others in a considerate way. Bartleby refuses to do anything for other people, giving the excuse of “I prefer not to.” Although it is a polite and undemanding way of responding, the effects are firm and powerful. Instead of disrespecting others in the society, he declines others’ requests of favors in a passive way. Instead of giving into other people’s requests, he follows by his own, individualistic decision.
Turning back to Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” it states that one should feel ashamed of owning lots of property instead of feeling better than others. He believes that having lots of property or lots of luxuries in one’s life gives birth to corruption and dishonesty towards other people. In addition, people may attempt to defeat other people’s statuses by gaining this property or wealth in dishonesty ways. In this case, Emerson believes that one should feel guilt for all the property that they own due to the possibility that they could have cheated systems or broken laws to be able to get the property.
Comparing to Emerson’s point of view of feeling ashamed of having lots of property, Melville greatly contrasts. Bartleby shows no signs of being ashamed for anything that he does; instead, his views towards society only reflect that he does not care about others. There is no mention at all about how much property he owns, or how much this status makes him more socially advanced than others.
Instead of worrying about how much property he owns, Bartleby goes about his own business, not minding about his luxuries or anything that is self-comforting. He purchases what he needs to be able to live his life without any troubles. However, he does not embellish himself with technologies that may induce his laziness. He limits himself and his comforts to what is necessary and a little bit more. Although he is contributing to society when he purchases these products from retailers, he does not think very significantly of it. He uses his money when it is necessary to improve his individualistic lifestyle. He only contributes to society when it is necessary for himself. When others request for his additional contribution to the society, he politely says “I prefer not to,” and declines their request.