In Lois Lowry’s award-winning novel “The Giver,” the main character, Jonas, asks 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 in which he lives, a controlled society free of fear, pain and burden. Conformity ensures safety, but, as Jonas will discover, it condemns individual thought and expression. This theme also resonates in the story “Bartleby, the Scribe”. Here, Herman Melville examines man's struggle to maintain individual identity in a world that demands conformity. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayWhen the story begins, the narrator, who introduces himself as a man in his late sixties and a lawyer in his thirties, basks in the comforts and guarantees provided by his conventional lifestyle. The tone is complacent as he celebrates the fact that he is an “eminently confident man” (Melville 85). Rejecting the dangers and uncertainties that come with ambition, the narrator confides: “I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, nor in any way attracts the applause of the public; but, in the cool tranquility of a welcoming retreat, do quiet business among rich men's bonds, mortgages, and title deeds” (85). The lawyer favors the conveniences of compliance over the distinction of individual recognition. In contrast, lawyer employees value their individuality. The first copyist, self-indulgent and hostile Turkey, 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 really believe that buttoning up such a soft, blanket-like coat had a pernicious effect on him – on the same principle that too much oats are bad for horses. For just as a fiery, restless horse is said to feel the oats, so the Turkey felt its fur. 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 desire to further distinguish himself. “The ambition manifested itself in a certain intolerance of the tasks of a mere copyist, in an unjustifiable usurpation of strictly professional affairs, such as the original drafting of legal documents” (87). Turkey and Nipper's eccentricities make each unique: the former has a "strange, inflamed, agitated, flighty unconsciousness of activity around him" (86) in the afternoon, while the latter, particularly in the morning hours, displays a "nervousness and sneering irritability” (87) and a constant dissatisfaction with the height of his table. The fact that the narrator portrays them with warmth and humor suggests that he recognizes and embraces their idiosyncrasies. He comments: “I've never had to deal with their eccentricities at the same time. Their attacks relieved each other, like guards. When Nipper was on, Türkiye 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 confident man” (85) employs the scribe Bartleby, “a man of such singularly sedated appearance…[who] could work beneficially on Turkey's fickle temperament and on Pince's fiery one -Nez” (88-89). Ironically, the scribe is hired, in part, to provide coherence to the disparate personalities in law firms and create a relaxing atmosphere the “stability… of Bartleby has itmade it a valuable purchase” (93). In contrast to the noise and movement that is constantly generated by Turkey and Nippers, “not a crease of agitation ruffled him” (90). Bartleby speaks "moderately" (91) and is described as having "great quiet" (93) about him. Initially, the scribe embodies the notion of conformity. As a result, it is disturbing when Bartleby emerges as an independent spirit. On the third day of work, he began to refuse the requests of his employer, who comments: “Imagine my surprise, indeed, my dismay, when, without moving from his privacy, Bartleby, with a singularly mild and firm voice , he replied, "I'd rather not." I sat for a while in perfect silence, gathering my astonished faculties” (89). Bartleby's individuality is emphasized by his refusal to step out of his privacy and his firm tone of voice. As time passes, as the scribe continually refuses to comply with even the most basic wishes of his employer, the lawyer becomes increasingly perplexed and unstable. The “high green screen” (89) that physically separates Bartleby and his employer in the work room begins to take on a symbolic value. Neither seems to see or understand the other. The scribe's view, in fact, is completely blocked by the screen on one side and by a brick wall immediately 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 home, family, or friends. The discovery that the scribe lives as well as works at the law firm deeply touches the narrator. He comments how “the thought occurred to me, what miserable friendship and loneliness reveal themselves here! His poverty is great; but his solitude, how horrible! » (88). Bartleby's circumstances disturb his employer and distract him from the complacency of his “singing retreat” (85). His previous feelings of anger and frustration give way to those of compassion and social conscience. Initially, these independent thoughts are kept in check by his need for social acceptance and conformity. First, the lawyer is forced to get rid of Bartleby once he realizes that his own reputation is tarnished by the association. The reader is told: “I realized that throughout the range of my professional knowledge there was a whisper of wonder, in reference to the strange creature I kept in my office. This worried me greatly” (102). The need to conform to social expectations forces the lawyer to move his business to a new location and abandon Bartleby. Second, when later confronted by the angry landlord and his tenants about Bartleby's refusal to leave the former lawroom, the lawyer is quick to disown Bartleby for fear of social condemnation. “In vain did I insist 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 conform to society's demands, he begins to distinguish himself by approaching Bartleby with kind offers of help and support: financial assistance, references, 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 death. As his isolation increases, his spirit weakens: he becomes more inactive, his eyes are “dimmed,” (90) he is seen as “a real ghost,” (93) and is later discovered in “a of his deepest moments of death." mural reveries” (102). Ultimately, Bartleby is imprisoned in the Tombs due to his inability to conform. Ironically, he is allowed to,.