The narrator is a prudent and methodical lawyer, who neverreveals his name, possessor of a legal office that requires the help of fourscribes and copyists. His business describes him as a model of routineoperations and for the storyteller owner there do not seem to be any challengesor problems to fulfill his activity. The discreet and paternal personality ofthis narrator deserves bewilderment, as his behavior is quite erratic; it’seven a very suitable pair for the maddening Bartleby. Praisefully, Deleuzetreats him as the prophet who is the only one able to glimpse the original(virginal, almost celestial) trait of the scribe, at the same time, who is atraitor with guilt for his inability to overcome the challenge received.
The characterization offers a special difficulty,because the text offers a story about someone who does not know enough and alsothere is nothing relevant to do. The lawyer narrator meets the clerk for a joboffer and accepts it without asking anything important; then it does not makereferences to its origin and background.Then he draws a writer without trajectory or ambitions, food, impervious to the passions andamusements, without love or nostalgia, staring behind the window, without goingout into the street, or pretending to gain advantages, without projects orgrudges, without family or friends .
.. it is the succession of negations abouthis being, an angelic antihero. In the beginning he is an exemplary employee,too hard working but silent and with anair of perpetual sadness, reserved and not at all conflictive until themechanism of conflict in the narrative is unleashed and his conversion into aprotagonist of inaction.
In this story we must feel tenderness and compassionfor the scribe; his maladaptive acts are explained by a disease of the spirit,but a childish air that invites protection appears. This character is made in aperiod before the use of mental illness for an easy explanation. On thishypothesis of the behavior of “poor Bartleby” the story is very consistent,but allows the reader to accompany the narrator in his constant bewilderment infront of a simple refusal that repeats without stopping: “I would prefernot to do it”. From the point of view of the inactive subject, inaction isa kind of imprisonment of the being; From the external point of the person whoreceives continuous negatives, there is a complementary obsession with so many”not” well demarcated, although soft