I noticed similarities between the narrator in Melville’s “Bartleby, the Scrivener” and the narrator in “William Wilson. A Tale”. To begin with, I was struck with the decision of the narrator in “Bartleby, the Scrivener” to never disclose his name. In the first paragraphs, the narrator gives a description of himself but instead of a formal introduction vaguely begins with, “I am a rather elderly man” (Melville, 1469). It seems intentional that the narrator leaves his name out of the story as he feels shame for the eventual death of Bartleby. Similarly, in “William Wilson. A Tale” the narrator explicitly conceals his true identity for fear that the page be “sullied with [his] name” (Poe, 642). In both instances, it appears that to convey the shame the narrators feel, (or shame they want their audience to think they feel) their names are purposefully kept from the account.
Furthermore, in “Bartleby, the Scrivener” , the narrator is constantly contradicting himself. At the forefront of the story, in discussing the forced abrogation of his office, the narrator establishes, “I seldom lose my temper; much more seldom indulge in dangerous indignation at wrongs and outrages; but I must be permitted to be rash here” (Melville, 1470). Throughout the entirety of the account, the narrator is constantly disproving this claim. For instance, he becomes almost immediately outraged when Bartleby refuses to examine a paper with him. Similarly, while William Wilson attempts to convey accountability for his “unspeakable misery, and unpardonable crime” he tries to find excuses for his behavior (Poe, 642). He cites his parents’ failed job at raising him as the cause for his personality deficits. Both narrators struggle with taking full accountability for their actions. In contradicting themselves, they display that their accounts are somewhat unreliable.
Lastly, I was intrigued with how similar the titles of the two short stories are. Both titles convey that the narrative will be an account of someone else and not the narrator. However, in actuality, in speaking respectively about Bartleby and William Willson, the reader learns more about the inner conscience of the narrator. The title seems to show the lack of awareness that the narrators have. They choose to title the story after the person they claim to be discussing when in reality they give an account of their own experiences.
I agree with your analysis, and picked up on many of the same parallels! I do think it is particularly interesting that the narrator remains unnamed. It emphasizes his role as an observer and a chronicler of Bartleby’s story, as you mention, rather than a central character with his own identity. Yet still, as you point out, so much of this story is really about him, and we don’t get a clear view into Bartleby’s inner thoughts or perspectives. I wonder if the narrator’s anonymity also is Melvilles attempt at creating a more universal character who readers can more easily project themselves into, in order to empathize with other characters and themes. It’s possible this made the story more impactful and relatable for various audiences. I also wonder if this was Melville’s attempt to continue to emphasize the way that the workplace is absolutely dehumanizing. In a way, this story shows readers what happens when individuals are reduced to mere workers, or cogs in the bureaucratic machine, so maybe this impersonal touch was intentional for those reasons.