THE TWO FAUSTS

It may seem strange to pass immediately from the time of Marcus Aurelius

to Marlowe and Goethe, and yet the tale upon which these two poets

wrought is one whose roots are very deep in history, and which revives

in a peculiarly vital and interesting fashion the age-long story of

man's great conflict. Indeed the saga on which it is founded belongs

properly to no one period, but is the tragic drama of humanity. It

tells, through all the ages, the tale of the struggle between earth and

the spiritual world above it; and the pagan forms which are introduced

take us back into the classical mythology, and indeed into still more

ancient times.

The hero of the story must be clearly distinguished from Fust the

printer, a wealthy goldsmith of Mayence, who, in the middle of the

fifteenth century, was partner with Gutenberg in the new enterprise of

printing. Robert Browning, in _Fust and his Friends_, tells us, with

great vivacity, the story of the monks who tried to exorcise the magic

spirits from Fust, but forgot their psalm, and so caused an awkward

pause during which Fust retired and brought out a printed copy of the

psalm for each of them. The only connection with magic which this Fust

had, was that so long as this or any other process was kept secret, it

was attributed to supernatural powers.

Faust, although a contemporary of Fust the printer, was a very different

character. Unfortunately, our information about him comes almost

entirely from his enemies, and their accounts are by no means sparing in

abuse. Trithemius, a Benedictine abbot of Spanheim in the early part of

the sixteenth century, writes of him with the most virulent contempt, as

a debauched person and a criminal whose overweening vanity arrogated to

itself the most preposterous supernatural powers. It would appear that

he had been some sort of travelling charlatan, whose performing horse

and dog were taken for evil spirits, like Esmeralda's goat in Victor

Hugo's _Notre Dame_. Even Melanchthon and Luther seem to have shared the

common view of him, and at last there was published at Frankfurt the

_Historie of the Damnable Life and Deserved Death of Dr. John Faustus_.

The date of this work is 1587, and a translation of it appeared in

London in 1592. It is a discursive composition, founded upon

reminiscences of some ancient stroller who lived very much by his wits;

but it took such a hold upon the imagination of the time that, by the

latter part of the sixteenth century, Faust had become the necromancer

_par excellence_. Into the Faust-book there drifted endless necromantic

lore from the Middle Ages and earlier times. It seems to have had some

connection with Jewish legends of magicians who invoked the _Satanim_,

or lowest grade of elemental spirits not unlike the "elementals" of

modern popular spiritualism. It was the story of a Christian selling his

soul to the powers of darkness, and it had behind it one of the poems of

Hrosvitha of Gandersheim which relates a similar story of an archdeacon

of Cilicia of the sixth century, and also the popular tradition of Pope

Sylvester the Second, who was suspected of having made the same bargain.

Yet, as Lebahn says, "The Faust-legend in its complete form was the

creation of orthodox Protestantism. Faust is the foil to Luther, who

worsted the Devil with his ink-bottle when he sought to interrupt the

sacred work of rendering the Bible into the vulgar tongue." This legend,

by the way, is a peculiarly happy one, for Luther not only aimed his

ink-bottle at the Devil, but most literally and effectively hit him with

it, when he wrote those books that changed the face of religious Europe.

The _Historie_ had an immense and immediate popularity, and until well

into the nineteenth century it was reproduced and sold throughout

Europe. As we read it, we cannot but wonder what manner of man it really

was who attracted to himself such age-long hatred and fear, and held the

interest of the centuries. In many respects, doubtless, his story was

like that of Paracelsus, in whom the world has recognised the struggle

of much good with almost inevitable evil, and who, if he had been born

in another generation, might have figured as a commanding spiritual or

scientific authority.

Christopher Marlowe was born at Canterbury in 1564, two months before

Shakespeare. He was the son of a shoemaker, and was the pupil of Kett, a

fellow and tutor of Corpus Christi College. This tutor was probably

accountable for much in the future Marlowe, for he was a mystic, and was

burnt for heresy in 1589. After a short and extremely violent life, the

pupil followed his master four years later to the grave, having been

killed in a brawl under very disgraceful circumstances. He only lived

twenty-nine years, and yet he, along with Kyd, changed the literature of

England. Lyly's Pastorals had been the favourite reading of the people

until these men came, keen and audacious, to lead and sing their "brief,

fiery, tempestuous lives." When they wrote their plays and created their

villains, they were not creating so much as remembering. Marlowe's plays

were four, and they were all influential. His _Edward the Second_ was

the precursor of the historical plays of Shakespeare. His other plays

were _Tamburlaine the Great_, _Dr. Faustus_, and _The Jew of Malta_

(Barabbas). These three were all upon congenial lines, expressing that

Titanism in revolt against the universe which was the inspiring spirit

of Marlowe. But it was the character of Faust that especially fascinated

him, for he found in the ancient magician a pretty clear image of his

own desires and ambitions. He was one of those who loved "the dangerous

edge of things," and, as Charles Lamb said, "delighted to dally with

interdicted subjects." The form of the plays is loose and broken, and

yet there is a pervading larger unity, not only of dramatic action, but

of spirit. The laughter is loud and coarse, the terror unrelieved, and

the splendour dazzling. There is no question as to the greatness of this

work as permanent literature. It has long outlived the amazing

detractions of Hallam and of Byron, and will certainly be read so long

as English is a living tongue.

The next stage in this curious history is a peculiarly interesting one.

In former days there sprang up around every great work of art a forest

of slighter literature, in the shape of chap-books, ballads, and puppet

plays. By far the most popular of the puppet plays was that founded upon

Marlowe's _Faust_. The German version continued to be played in Germany

until three hundred years later. Goethe constructed his masterpiece

largely by its help. English actors travelling abroad had brought back

the story to its native land of Germany, and in every town the bands of

strolling players sent Marlowe's great conception far and wide. In

England also the puppet play was extremely popular. The drama had moved

from the church to the market-place, and much of the Elizabethan drama

appeared in this quaint form, played by wooden figures upon diminutive

boards. To the modern mind nothing could be more incongruous than the

idea of a solemn drama forced to assume a guise so grotesque and

childish; but, according to Jusserand, much of the stage-work was

extremely ghastly, and no doubt it impressed the multitude. There is

even a story of some actors who had gone too far, and into the midst of

whose play the real devil suddenly descended with disastrous results. It

must, however, be allowed that even the serious plays were not without

an abundant element of grotesqueness. The occasion for Faustus' final

speech of despair, for instance, was the lowering and raising before his

eyes of two or three gilded arm-chairs, representing the thrones in

heaven upon which he would never sit. It does not seem to have occurred

to the audience as absurd that heaven should be regarded as a kind of

drawing-room floating in the air, and indeed that idea is perhaps not

yet obsolete. However that may be, it is quite evident that such

machinery, ill-suited though it was to the solemnities of tragedy, must

have been abundantly employed in the puppet plays.

The German puppet play of _Faust_ has been transcribed by Dr. Hamm and

translated by Mr. Hedderwick into English. It was obtained at first with

great difficulty, for the showmen kept the libretto secret, and could

not be induced to lend it. Dr. Hamm, however, followed the play round,

listening and committing much of it to memory, and his version was

finally completed when his amanuensis obtained for a day or two the

original manuscript after plying one of the assistants with much beer

and wine. It was a battered book, thumb-marked and soaked with lamp oil,

but it has passed on to posterity one of the most remarkable pieces of

dramatic work which have come down to us from those times.

In all essentials the play is the same as that of Marlowe, except for

the constant interruptions of the clown Casper, who intrudes with his

absurdities even into the most sacred parts of the action, and entirely

mars the dreadful solemnity of the end by demanding his wages from Faust

while the clock is striking the diminishing intervals of the last hour.

It was through this curious intermediary that Goethe went back to

Marlowe and created what has been well called "the most mystic poetic

work ever created," and "the _Divina Commedia_ of the eighteenth

century." Goethe's _Faust_ is elemental, like _Hamlet_. Readers of

_Wilhelm Meister_ will remember how profound an impression _Hamlet_ had

made upon Goethe's mind, and this double connection between Goethe and

the English drama forms one of the strongest and most interesting of all

the links that bind Germany to England. His _Faust_ was the direct

utterance of Goethe's own inner life. He says: "The marionette folk of

_Faust_ murmured with many voices in my soul. I, too, had wandered into

every department of knowledge, and had returned early enough, satisfied

with the vanity of science. And life, too, I had tried under various

aspects, and always came back sorrowing and unsatisfied." Thus _Faust_

lay in the depths of Goethe's life as a sort of spiritual pool,

mirroring all its incidents and thoughts. The play was begun originally

in the period of his _Sturm und Drang_, and it remained unpublished

until, in old age, the ripened mind of the great poet took it over

practically unchanged, and added the calmer and more intellectual parts.

The whole of the Marguerite story belongs to the earlier days.

There is nothing in the whole of literature which could afford us a

finer and more fundamental account of the battle between paganism and

idealism in the soul of man, than the comparison between the _Fausts_ of

Marlowe and of Goethe. But before we come to this, it may be interesting

to notice two or three points of special interest in the latter drama,

which show how entirely pagan are the temptations of Faust.

The first passage to notice is that opening one on Easter Day, where the

devil approaches Faust in the form of a dog. Choruses of women,

disciples, and angels are everywhere in the air; and although the dog

appears first in the open, yet the whole emphasis of the passage is upon

the contrast between that brilliant Easter morning with its sunshine and

its music, and the close and darkened study into which Faust has shut

himself. It is true he goes abroad, but it is not to join with the rest

in their rejoicing, but only as a spectator, with all the superiority as

well as the wistfulness of his illicit knowledge. Evidently the

impression intended is that of the wholesomeness of the crowd and the

open air. He who goes in with the rest of men in their sorrow and their

rejoicing cannot but find the meaning of Easter morning for himself. It

is a festival of earth and the spring, an earth idealised, whose spirit

is incarnate in the risen Christ. Faust longs to share in that, and on

Easter Eve tries in vain to read his Gospel and to feel its power. But

the only cure for such morbid introspectiveness as his, is to cast

oneself generously into the common life of man, and the refusal to do

this invites the pagan devil.

Another point of interest is the coming of the _Erdgeist_ immediately

after the _Weltschmerz_. The sorrow that has filled his heart with its

melancholy sense of the vanity and nothingness of life, and the

thousandfold pity and despondency which go to swell that sad condition,

are bound to create a reaction more or less violent towards that sheer

worldliness which is the essence of paganism. In Bunyan's _Pilgrim's

Progress_ it is immediately after his floundering in the Slough of

Despond that Christian is accosted by Mr. Worldly Wiseman. Precisely the

same experience is recorded here in Faust, although the story is subtler

and more complex than that of Bunyan. The _Erdgeist_ which comes to the

saddened scholar is a noble spirit, vivifying and creative. It is the

world in all its glorious fullness of meaning, quite as true an idealism

as that which is expressed in the finest spirit of the Greeks. But for

Faust it is too noble. His morbid gloom has enervated him, and the call

of the splendid earth is beyond him. So there comes, instead of it, a

figure as much poorer than that of Worldly Wiseman as the _Erdgeist_ is

richer. Wagner represents the poor commonplace world of the wholly

unideal. It is infinitely beneath the soul of Faust, and yet for the

time it conquers him, being nearer to his mood. Thus Mephistopheles

finds his opportunity. The scholar, embittered with the sense that

knowledge is denied to him, will take to mere action; and the action

will not be great like that which the _Erdgeist_ would have prompted,

but poor and unsatisfying to any nobler spirit than that of Wagner.

The third incident which we may quote is that of _Walpurgis-Night_. Some

critics would omit this part, which, they say, "has naught of interest

in bearing on the main plot of the poem." Nothing could be more mistaken

than such a judgment. In the _Walpurgis-Night_ we have the play ending

in that sheer paganism which is the counterpart to Easter Day at the

beginning. Walpurgis has a strange history in German folklore. It is

said that Charlemagne, conquering the German forests for the Christian

faith, drove before him a horde of recalcitrant pagans, who took a last

shelter among the trees of the Brocken. There, on the pagan May-day, in

order to celebrate their ancient rites unmolested, they dressed

themselves in all manner of fantastic and bestial masks, so as to

frighten off the Christianising invaders from the revels. The Walpurgis

of _Faust_ exhibits paganism at its lowest depths. Sir Mammon is the

host who invites his boisterous guests to the riot of his festive night.

The witches arrive on broomsticks and pitchforks; singing, not without

significance, the warning of woe to all climbers--for here aspiration of

any sort is a dangerous crime. The Crane's song reveals the fact that

pious men are here, in the Blocksberg, united with devils; introducing

the same cynical and desperate disbelief in goodness which Nathaniel

Hawthorne has told in similar fashion in his tale of _Young Goodman

Brown_; and the most horrible touch of all is introduced when Faust in

disgust leaves the revel, because out of the mouth of the witch with

whom he had been dancing there had sprung a small red mouse. Throughout

the whole play the sense of holy and splendid ideals shines at its

brightest in lurid contrast with the hopeless and sordid dark of the

pagan earth.

Returning now to our main point, the comparison of Marlowe's play with

Goethe's, let us first of all contrast the temptations in the two.

Marlowe's play is purely theological. Jusserand finely describes the

underlying tragedy of it. "Faust, like Tamburlaine, and like all the

heroes of Marlowe, lives in thought, beyond the limit of the possible.

He thirsts for a knowledge of the secrets of the universe, as the other

thirsted for domination over the world." Both are Titanic figures

exactly in the pagan sense, but the form of Faustus' Titanism is the

revolt against theology. From the early days of the Christian

persecutions, there had been a tendency to divorce the sacred from the

secular, and to regard all that was secular as being of the flesh and

essentially evil. The mediæval views of celibacy, hermitage, and the

monastic life, had intensified this divorce; and while many of the monks

were interested in human secular learning, yet there was a feeling,

which in many cases became a kind of conscience, that only the divine

learning was either legitimate or safe for a man's eternal well-being.

The Faust of Marlowe is the Prometheus of his own day. The new knowledge

of the Renaissance had spread like fire across Europe, and those who saw

in it a resurrection of the older gods and their secrets, unhesitatingly

condemned it. The doctrine of immortality had entirely supplanted the

old Greek ideal of a complete earthly life for man, and all that was

sensuous had come to be regarded as intrinsically sinful. Thus we have

for background a divided universe, in which there is a great gulf fixed

between this world and the next, and a hopeless cleavage between the

life of body and that of spirit.

In this connection we may also consider the women of the two plays.

Charles Lamb has asked, "What has Margaret to do with Faust?" and has

asserted that she does not belong to the legend at all. Literally, this

is true, in so far as there is no Margaret in the earlier form of the

play, whose interest was, as we have seen, essentially theological. Yet

Margaret belongs to the essential story and cannot be taken out of it.

She is the "eternal feminine," in which the battle between the spirit

and the flesh, between idealism and paganism, will always make its last

stand. Even Marlowe has to introduce a woman. His Helen is, indeed, a

mere incident, for the real bride of the soul must be either theological

or secular science; and yet so essential and so poignant is the question

of woman to the great drama, that the passage in which the incident of

Helen is introduced far surpasses anything else in Marlowe's play, and

indeed is one of the grandest and most beautiful in all literature.

"Was this the face that launch'd a thousand ships,

And burned the topless towers of Ilium?

Sweet Helen, make me immortal with a kiss.

* * * * *

O, thou art fairer than the evening air,

Clad in the beauty of a thousand stars."

Still, Marlowe's _motif_ is not sex but theology. The former heretics

whom we named had been saved--Theophilus by the intervention of the

Blessed Virgin Mary, and Pope Sylvester snatched from the very jaws of

hell--by a return to orthodoxy. That was in the Roman Catholic days, but

the savage antithesis between earth and heaven had been taken over by

the conscience of Protestantism, making a duality which rendered life

always intellectually anxious and almost impossible. It is this

condition in which Marlowe finds himself. The good and the evil angels

stand to right and left of his Faustus, pleading with him for and

against secular science on the one side and theological knowledge on the

other. For that is the implication behind the contest between magic and

Christianity. "The Faust of the earlier Faust-books and ballads, dramas,

puppet shows, which grew out of them, is damned because he prefers the

human to the divine knowledge. He laid the Holy Scriptures behind the

door and under the bench, refused to be called Doctor of Theology, but

preferred to be called Doctor of Medicine." Obviously here we find

ourselves in a very lamentable _cul-de-sac_. Idealism has floated apart

from the earth and all its life, and everything else than theology is

condemned as paganism.

Goethe changes all that. In the earlier _Weltschmerz_ passages some

traces of it still linger, where Faust renounces theology; but even

there it is not theology alone that he renounces, but philosophy,

medicine, and jurisprudence as well, so that his renunciation is

entirely different from that of Marlowe's Faustus. In Goethe it is no

longer one doctrine or one point of view against another doctrine or

another point of view. It is life, vitality in all its forms, against

all mere doctrine whatsoever.

"Grey, dearest friend, is every theory,

But golden-green is the tree of life."

Thus the times had passed into a sense of the limits of theology such as

has been well expressed in Rossetti's lines--

"Let lore of all theology

Be to thee all it can be,

But know,--the power that fashions man

Measured not out thy little span

For thee to take the meting-rod

In turn and so approve on God."

So in Goethe we have the unsatisfied human spirit with its infinite

cravings and longings for something more than earth can give--something,

however, which is not separated from the earth, and which is entirely

different from theological dogma or anything of that sort. In this,

Goethe is expressing a constant yearning of his own, which illuminated

all his writings like a gentle hidden fire within them, hardly seen in

many passages and yet always somehow felt. It is _through_ the flesh

that he will find the spirit, _through_ this world that he will find the

next. The quest is ultimately the same as that of Marlowe, but the form

of it is absolutely opposed to his. Goethe is as far from Marlowe's

theological position as _Peer Gynt_ is, and indeed there is a

considerable similarity between Ibsen's great play and Goethe's. As the

drama develops, it is true that the love of Faust becomes sensual and

his curiosity morbid; but the tragedy lies no longer in the belief that

sense and curiosity are in themselves wrong, but in the fact that Faust

fails to distinguish their high phases from their low. We have already

seen that the _Erdgeist_ which first appeals to Faust is too great for

him, and it is there that the tragedy really lies. The earth is not an

accursed place, and the _Erdgeist_ may well find its home among the

ideals; but Wagner is neither big enough nor clean enough to be man's

guide.

The contrast between the high and low ideals comes to its finest and

most tragic in the story of Margaret. Spiritual and sensual love

alternate through the play. Its tragedy and horror concentrate round the

fact that love has followed the lower way. Margaret has little to give

to Faust of fellowship along intellectual or spiritual lines. She is a

village maiden, and he takes from her merely the obvious and lower kind

of love. It is a way which leads ultimately to the dance of the witches

and the cellar of Auerbach, yet Faust can never be satisfied with these,

and from the witch's mouth comes forth the red mouse--the climax of

disgust. In Auerbach's cellar he sees himself as the pagan man in him

would like to be. In Martha one sees the pagan counterpart to the pure

and simple Margaret, just as Mephistopheles is the pagan counterpart to

Faust. The lower forms of life are the only ones in which Martha and

Mephistopheles are at home. For Faust and Margaret the lapse into the

lower forms brings tragedy. Yet it must be remembered also that Faust

and Mephistopheles are really one, for the devil who tempts every man is

but himself after all, the animal side of him, the dog.

The women thus stand for the most poignant aspect of man's great

temptation. It is not, as we have already said, any longer a conflict

between the secular and the sacred that we are watching, nor even the

conflict between the flesh and the spirit. It is between a higher and a

lower way of treating life, flesh and spirit both. Margaret stands for

all the great questions that are addressed to mankind. There are for

every man two ways of doing work, of reading a book, of loving a woman.

He who keeps his spiritual life pure and high finds that in all these

things there is a noble path. He who yields to his lower self will

prostitute and degrade them all, and the tragedy that leads on to the

mad scene at the close, where the cries of Margaret have no parallel in

literature except those of Lady Macbeth, is the inevitable result of

choosing the pagan and refusing the ideal. The Blocksberg is the pagan

heaven.

A still more striking contrast between the plays meets us when we

consider the respective characters of Mephistopheles. When we compare

the two devils we are reminded of that most interesting passage in

Professor Masson's great essay, which describes the secularisation of

Satan between _Paradise Lost_ and the _Faust_ of Goethe:--

"We shall be on the right track if we suppose Mephistopheles to be what

Satan has become after six thousand years.... Goethe's Mephistopheles is

this same being after the toils and vicissitudes of six thousand years

in his new vocation: smaller, meaner, ignobler, but a million times

sharper and cleverer.... For six thousand years he has been pursuing the

walk he struck out at the beginning, plying his self-selected function,

dabbling devilishly in human nature, and abjuring all interest in the

grander physics; and the consequence is, as he himself anticipated, that

his nature, once great and magnificent, has become small, virulent, and

shrunken. He, the scheming, enthusiastic Archangel, has been soured and

civilised into the clever, cold-hearted Mephistopheles."

Marlowe's devil is of the solemn earlier kind, not yet degraded into the

worldling whom Goethe has immortalised. Marlowe's Mephistophilis is

essentially the idealist, and it is his Faust who is determined for the

world. One feels about Mephistophilis that he is a kind of religious

character, although under a cloud. The things he does are done to organ

music, and he might be a figure in some stained-glass window of old. Not

only is he "a melancholy devil, with a soul above the customary hell,"

but he actually retains a kind of despairing idealism which somehow

ranks him on the side rather of good than of evil. The puppet play

curiously emphasises this. "Tell me," says Faust, "what would you do if

you could attain to everlasting salvation?" "Hear and despair! Were I to

attain to everlasting salvation, I would mount to heaven on a ladder,

though every rung were a razor edge." The words are exactly in the

spirit of the earlier play. So sad is the devil, so oppressed with a

sense of the horror of it all, that, as we read, it almost seems as if

Faust were tempting the unwilling Mephistophilis to ruin him.

"Why, this is hell, nor am I out of it;

Think'st thou that I, who saw the face of God,

And tasted the eternal joys of heaven,

Am not tormented with ten thousand hells

In being depriv'd of everlasting bliss?

O Faustus, leave these frivolous demands,

Which strike a terror to my fainting soul!"

Among Famous Books · 第 11 / 35 题