Moises Hinojos
Professor Acosta
English 2322
9 November 2015
Dr. Faustus: New vs Old
It is not difficult to discern the moral and overall theme of the play The Tragical History
of Dr. Faustus written in mid-sixteenth century by Christopher Marlowe. It is quite simple and
clear: Good vs Evil. God is good and the devil is evil. Granted, this is an over simplification, but
this theme is essentially what the play is centered around. The better question to ask is: who or
what makes the determination of what is good and what is evil? It is obvious that the author
makes this determination, but why does he make the choices that he does? In Dr. Faustus the
audience sees the very traditional representation of good and evil via the devils, angels, and other
supernatural creatures. It is all based on very Christian roots, but why is it significant to the story
and to the audience? James Ross Macdonald attempts to answer this question when he says,
“The religious upheavals of the sixteenth century defined the cultural boundaries within which
such questions could be considered” (823). The significance of these Christian roots is that they
are tied to social conventions of the time, which influence the definitions of “good,” “bad,” and
“evil”.
Taking into account the period in which this play is written, one does see how Marlowe
was influenced by the heavy presence of religion in society in the writing and developing of this
story. From the beginning of the play, the audience is introduced to the chorus, and is given one
key piece of information: the college where Faustus attends, Wittenberg. This is important
because a significant historical figure was a monk here, Martin Luther, who is the father of the
Protestant Reformation. Britain, at the time the play is performed, has just broken free, for the
most part, from the Roman Catholic Church. England had begun to embrace the Protestant faith
prompted by Martin Luther in Wittenberg, Germany. This is key because at the time of
Marlowe’s writing, the Protestant Reformation was preaching the promise of heaven through
salvation while the Catholic Church was preaching the promise of heaven through good works.
This was a fundamental break between the two sects of Christianity, which is touched upon
within Marlowe’s play. In the play the audience sees Dr. Faustus studying and practicing black
magic, and, as he does this, both a good and bad angel appear, trying to influence Faustus, each
respectively, to desist and continue his course. Faustus says, “Contrition, prayer, repentance:
what of them?” (5.16). The Good Angel replies, “O they are means to bring thee unto heaven”
(5. 17). This moments captures a very Protestant belief, which is in direct opposition to the
Catholic beliefs. Protestantism, as per Martin Luther, teaches that salvation through Jesus Christ
is the only way to get into heaven and this is demonstrated within this scene where Dr. Faustus
conscience is being influenced by the good and bad angels.
It is important to acknowledge that despite the time period and the author, the definition
of the terms “good” and “bad” are still defined by society. We see this in a different adaptation
of Dr. Faustus written by Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe in the late 1700’s. In Goethe’s version
of the story one sees that it is no longer a morality play, as it was in Marlowe’s time, but a play
of philosophical implications. Marlowe’s Faustus shows a man who is tempted by evil and
makes the wrong choice. It is meant as a cautionary tale, while Goethe’s version of Faustus
shows a man as a pawn caught in a wager made between God and Satan. The man is caught in
the middle and must make a series of choices based on the wager. This is important to note
because Goethe was not influenced by religion as Marlowe was, but by scholars and
philosophers of the time. Times had changed from religious influence to a more intellectual type
of society. Johnathan Y. Rowe says the following about the role of wisdom in society, “It is
noteworthy, therefore, that in everyday situations people do not seem to struggle to juggle moral
goods but exhibit a fairly clear idea of which ones are more important” (645). Goethe himself
had managed to distinct himself in such a society by his works in philosophy, botany, literature,
and social position. So much so that Gabriel R. Ricci claims, “He is the liberated thinker who
thirsts not for universal truths of the pseudo-free thinkers who are harnessed to a faith, a
fatherland or a dogma, but the unattached and independent thinker who embraces the serenity of
solitude” (157). Goethe was influenced by academia, and at the height of the Romantic Period
where one was encouraged to challenge beliefs and create art for art’s sake, Goethe wrote an
adaptation of Faustus that had a similar story line but was influenced by a society one hundred
years after Marlowe.
Society’s influence on the definitions of the terms “good” and “bad” is shown in even
more modern examples. Thomas Mann wrote a very different version of Faustus in a novel
written in Germany in 1947. Mann’s version of the story of Dr. Faustus does not reflect either
Marlowe’s or Goethe’s version. In Mann’s version, the main character is a composer named
Adrian Levekuhn, who willingly contracts syphilis in order to gain better musical aptitude. In the
novel, the composer meets a character who is much like Mephistopheles and offers the composer
musical genius for a period of 24 years in exchange for his soul. Mann was influenced in his
writing by the rise of Hitler and the Third Reich. He compares Faustus’s deal for his soul to
Germany’s loss of humanity when they gave into Hitler. In his book, Mann says, in an obvious
reference to Hitler, “You will lead, you will strike up the march of the future, boys will swear by
your name, and thanks to your madness they will no longer need to be mad” (243). Mann
opposed Hitler’s views and he did so publicly by participating in anti-Nazi radio broadcasts that
he made from the United States because he had already fled Germany due to his opposition to
Nazi rule.
Many stories are universal and while different adaptations and spin-off story lines exist,
the truth remains that society dictates what one perceives as right and wrong. As little as 25 years
ago gay marriage was perceived as wrong and now society has deemed it not only acceptable but
something that ought to be celebrated and necessary, at least according to Nathan Goetting who
says, “The right to marry, and to marry a person of one’s choice, is a fundamental right and a
necessary aspect of human happiness” (138). Personal feelings and beliefs do influence our
everyday life but the pressure of social structure and behavioral expectations play an incredibly
strong role in everyday civilian life. This is so prevalent in every work of literary art that has
survived the test of time and will continue to do so, until society dictates otherwise. The various
adaptations of Dr. Faustus is a clear example of how immediate societal conventions impact the
meaning and outcome of the same story in different ways. Marlowe’s Faustus is influenced by
16th century ideas of Protestantism, Goethe’s Faustus has a philosophical spin influenced by the
Romantic Period, and Mann’s Faustus reflects social anxieties towards Nazism and Hitler.
Works Cited
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang Von, and Calvin Thomas. Goethe’s Faust. Boston: D.C. Heath, 1892.
Print.
Goetting, Nathan. “Gay Marriage is a Fundamental Right.” National Lawyers Guild Review 70.3
(2013): 137-44. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.
Mann, Thomas. Dr. Faustus: The Life of a German Composer, Adrian Leverkuhn. New York:
A.A. Knopf, 1948. Print.
Marlowe, Christopher. The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. The Norton Anthology of
English Literature. 9th ed. Vol. B. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt et al. New York: W.W.
Norton, 2012. 1128-63. Print.
Ricci, Gabriel R. “Goethe's Faust: Poetry and Philosophy At The Crossroads.” Humanitas
20.1 (2007): 152-74. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.
Ross Macdonald, James. “Calvinist Theology and Country Divinity in Marlowe’s Dr.
Faustus.” Studies in Philology 111.4 (2014): 821-44. Academic Search Complete. Web 9
Nov. 2015
Rowe, Jonathan Y. “Vision of the Good or Understanding Goods?” Political Theology 14.5
(2013): 641-49. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.