I read Bartleby but had never heard of Zizek.

So of course I had to FIND out.

According to Žižek, the crucial point of “I would prefer not to” is that it affirms a non-predicate (here, he is utilizing Kant's distinction between negative judgments and infinite judgments). If what I prefer is not to, then I'm preferring a pure negativity. I'm preferring a pure refusal.

I Would Prefer Not To: Žižek’s Bartleby Politics

The Dangerous Maybe

In his refusal of the Master’s order, Bartleby does not negate the predicate; rather, he affirms a non-predicate: he does not say that he doesn’t want to do it; he says that he prefers (wants) not to do it. This is how we pass from the politics of “resistance” or “protestation,” which parasitizes upon what it negates, to a politics which opens up a new space outside the hegemonic position and its negation. We can imagine the varieties of such a gesture in today’s public space: not only the obvious “There are great chances of a new career here! Join us!” — “I would prefer not to”; but also “Discover the depths of your true self, find inner peace!” — “I would prefer not to”; or “Are you aware how our environment is endangered? Do something for ecology!” — “I would prefer not to”; or “What about all the racial and sexual injustices that we witness all around us? Isn’t it time to do more?” — “I would prefer not to.” This is the gesture of subtraction at its purest, the reduction of all qualitative differences to a purely formal minimal difference.”

(The Parallax View, pp. 381–2)

Oh MY. There's a LOT here to dive into.

See you guys in a few weeks it looks like.