The Persistence of the past in Khaled Hosseini’s “ The Kite Runner” and Herman Melville’s “Bartleby, the Scrivener” Although the setting in Khaled Hosseini’s “ The Kite Runner” and Herman Melville’s “Bartleby, the Scrivener” differs tremendously in time and place, both works portrayed male protagonists whose past persisted through into their present lives and consequently determined their future. In The Kite Runner, Amir was a young Afghan boy growing up in Kabul village in the 1970’s, while Bartleby was a young scrivener at a Wall Street law firm in New York in the mid 1800’s. Despite the differences, both characters were presented as ones struggling with the circumstances of their past in their present. In The Kite runner, the narrator acknowledged
…show more content…
In spite of that, Amir’s story ended happily while that of Bartleby ended rather sadly. Amir “felt at peace” even in the midst of a near-death experience in the hands of Assef; He felt better; He felt happy that he was able to liberate himself from his past. On the contrary, Bartleby allowed his past to hold him hostage. He protested against authority and even against himself. He refused to eat any food and ended up starving himself to death. Although their past persisted on their lives, the future identities they established from it were totally different scenarios and was the result of how they finally decided to deal with their …show more content…
In The Kite Runner, Amir’s past was made known to the readers at the beginning of the story. The narrator who in this case is also the protagonist was really harsh on himself. He never saw himself as the victim but rather the oppressor. He accepted responsibility for his past actions and constantly blamed himself for it. But, in Bartleby, it wasn’t until the end of the story and after the scrivener’s decease that the readers were made aware of the protagonist’s misfortune as a former clerk at Dead Letter office in Washington. The Narrator was sympathetic on Bartleby. He presented him to the readers as the victim of corporate injustice. He likened Dead Letter to “dead men” and even expressed his emotions that “on errands of life, these letters speed to death” (Melville
In spite of that, Amir’s story ended happily while that of Bartleby ended rather sadly. Amir “felt at peace” even in the midst of a near-death experience in the hands of Assef; He felt better; He felt happy that he was able to liberate himself from his past. On the contrary, Bartleby allowed his past to hold him hostage. He protested against authority and even against himself. He refused to eat any food and ended up starving himself to death. Although their past persisted on their lives, the future identities they established from it were totally different scenarios and was the result of how they finally decided to deal with their …show more content…
In The Kite Runner, Amir’s past was made known to the readers at the beginning of the story. The narrator who in this case is also the protagonist was really harsh on himself. He never saw himself as the victim but rather the oppressor. He accepted responsibility for his past actions and constantly blamed himself for it. But, in Bartleby, it wasn’t until the end of the story and after the scrivener’s decease that the readers were made aware of the protagonist’s misfortune as a former clerk at Dead Letter office in Washington. The Narrator was sympathetic on Bartleby. He presented him to the readers as the victim of corporate injustice. He likened Dead Letter to “dead men” and even expressed his emotions that “on errands of life, these letters speed to death” (Melville