Barletby; is everyone's ID

Barletby is everyman’s ID

Barletby and the other scriveners in the narrator’s office do not exist. Instead they are a representations of the narrator’s ID, Superego and Ego defense mechanisms. The narrator attempts to use his Ego defense mechanisms, Turkey and Nippers, to balance his ID, Barletby, in order to become a more efficient and industrious worker.
The narrator describes Nippers and Turkey, as having different work ethics. Turkey being a good worker early in the day but a drunk in afternoon (Melville par.6), and Nippers was a good worker in the afternoon and was very irritable and difficult to work with in the morning (Melville par. 11). The Fact that they were able to work well at opposite times insured that things progressed all day, but they could not work alone (Melville par.16).
Prior to Barletby’s manifestation, Turkey was suppressing the narrators’ ID during the early part of the day. By the afternoon, the narrator’s ID would have over come Turkey, hence the manifestation of Nippers. Nipper, as an Ego defense mechanisms, would then keep in check the narrator’s ID for the rest of the day.
Upon reception of the master’s office, the narrator’s work load increased (Melville,par.15). I believe this to be the catalyst for the narrators’ continued break with reality, in the creation of Barletby. At first the creation of Barletby proved successful. The first three days of his employment he worked non-stop day and night completing an “extra ordinary quantity of writing” (Malville, par18).
Barletby, as a manifestation, was the narrator’s last ego defense mechanism. . “I would prefer not to” (Melville, Par.21), becomes Barletby’s motto and the tool that the ID uses to take control of the narrator. His failure to suppress the narrator’s ID, lead to a series of events, concluding with Barletby transformation from Ego defense mechanism to an avatar of the ID.
“All who know me consider me an eminently safe man” (Melville par 3). “had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method” (Melville par 3). These two quotes lead me to believe that the narrator is the embodiment of the Ego making him the opposite of Barletby. In the narrator’s attempt to gain control of Barletby, the narrator is actually trying to gain control of his own ID. This tug of war continues for sometime. After repeated attempts by the narrator to get Barletby to become productive again, he concludes that it will be best to move locations leaving Barletby behind (Malville par.175). This ends the responsibility the narrator feels towards Barletby.
The landlord of the building the narrator used to conduct business out off, then comes to him asking for help in removing Barletby from the old premises (Melville par.189) This to me is a manifestation of the Superego using the conscience of the narrator to reconcile the ID and the Ego (Barletby and the narrator), brining them together again. The narrator’s failure to convince Barletby to be productive or to leave the premises eventually leads to Barletby’s arrest and relocation to the Tombs. The continued failure of the Superego in reconciling the Ego and the ID, leads to more and more obvious and desperate attempts. The evidence is presented in the text when the narrator feels guilt and is drawn to the Tombs to visit Barletby leading to the final show down.
The final shown down between of the ID and the Ego takes place between Barletby and the narrator in the Tombs. The Tombs are now a metaphor for another defensive mechanism of the Ego to control the ID. In the Tombs Barletby confronts the narrator, “ I know you and I want nothing to say to you” (Melville par. 220), being said by the ID towards to Ego, shows evidence of the surrender of the ID. The narrator argues that Barletby himself is to blame for his imprisonment(Melville par.221) .
Barletby maintains his it like qualities by having no rationalization for the things that have happened to him. The narrator shows that he is beginning the reconciliation process by again assuming responsibility for Barletby’s nutritional wellbeing. The narrator does this by paying out of pocket to the grub man for better quality food for Barletby (Melville par. 227).
The story ends with the death of Barletby from the lack of eating (Melville par.250). The way he died tells us that the ID was in full control stubbornly not eating because he preferred not to. Barletby’s death also signified the union of the ID with the Ego. The ID being in perfect balance with the Ego within the Superego makes it unnecessary for the ID to exist separately from the narrator.
After writing this essay I have found better understanding of Sigmund Freud’s ideas of the ID, Ego, Superego and how they work together. After carefully describing the evidence, I found that non of the scriveners in the narrator’s office ever existed. I believe Barletby was a manifestation of the defense mechanism of the Ego and transformed into the avatar of the ID. I also believe that Turkey and Nipper’s were also manifestations of the defense mechanisms of the Ego. Had they not failed, or the increased work load that came with the master’s office had not been a catalyst for a further mental break down, Barletby would have never been created. Furthermore, the death of Barletby to me signified the narrator’s healing process and showed the reunification of the ID and the Ego. The narrator did in fact succeeded in mastering his ID and became a more efficient and industrious worker.