Faust, the Devil, and Tom Walker: Character Comparison
A Lithuanian proverb goes like this, “As one devil goes out, another one comes in.” Faust by Johann Wolfgang Goethe and The Devil and Tom Walker are all famous literary pieces based off of the classical Faust Legend. The main character of both stories lusts for something beyond them, knowledge, in the cast of Faust and wealth, in the case of Tom Walker. They all suffered from serious consequences afterwards.
Goethe’s Faust follows an elderly scholar, who believes he has reached the limits of knowledge, and lusts more. In heaven, Mephistopheles, the Devil, complains about the corruption and insanity of mankind. He bets with God that he could turn one of God’s servants, Faust over to sin and evil. God, however, believes that Faust will remain a loyal follower. Mephistopheles descends to earth, where he temps Faust with visions of transcendence and enlightenment.
Faust, however, accepted this offer, and was tricked by the Devil into loving a mortal girl, Margaret, Gretchen for short. They profess their love for one another one night, and consummate their relationship afterwards. Gretchen was impregnated by Faust, and her brother Valentine, finding out about her licentious behavior, tries to exact revenge on Faust, but was stabbed in the heart by the now scholar-turned-murderer. In the end, Faust discovers that Gretchen has killed their infant son, then falls into insanity.
This version of the story is markedly different than the tale told by Washington Irving. Goethe’s Faust is an epic play taking place in Wurttemberg, while Tom Walker is a short story taking place in Boston, Massachusetts. The two protagonists share similar archetypes, both deciding to sell their soul to the devil for worldly pleasures. The Devil, in both cases, out-witted the two men, and “wrecked their lives.”
Goethe’s version of the Faustian legend and the Irving version of the same legend had some other major differences too. Goethe’s Faust heavily relies on Christianity, while the Irving version had less references to God. Goethe’s play focuses on the drama of humanity striving to receive redemption and salvation through God’s grace. While Faust led Gretchen to her downfall in the mortal world, Gretchen still prays to the Virgin for Faust’s soul. Gretchen embodies the magnanimity of Christian mercy and forgiveness. Thus, the heavens in the final scene of Faust are full of souls ascending toward God.
Goethe spreads the word of the mercifulness and ubiquitous grace of his Almighty, which shows a stark contrast between the imperfect human life and the perfect spiritual life of God. This philosophy is very similar to the philosophy of the Great Awakening in the British colonies 60 years before the publication of Faust, Part One. This idea is not conveyed in Tom Walker, whose only mention of Christianity is when Tom was praying to God for his sins, to no avail.
This showed that, although these two literary works are all derived from one Faustian Legend, many themes occur in the literary works relating to the time period, its environment, and the outside factors.
Concept of Morality in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and Goethe’s Faust
The most prominent points in the U.S. Declaration of independence that our forefathers in my opinion were making are ; All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is what pops into everyone’s mind when we think of the Declaration. These are all important points that need to be obtained and defended. This insures everyone’s right to live free from oppression and to live their life in peace and pursue whatever they choose to do that makes them happy. It allows us to be Governed but not ruled by any man or kingdom.
Morality in Heart of Darkness is presented as a unifying set of ideas. Where morality keeps society in one piece and makes everyone equal. It is the only thing keeping chaos and destruction out of peoples’ lives. However, Conrad has made morality out to be an amorphous concept that political powers can easily exploit in order to justify any crime they may commit, specifically genocide. Heart of Darkness follows Marlow, charismatic figure, who changes morality in order to justify these crimes. Kurtz is one the imperialists who form the rules of the land to their advantage and make the crimes appear more moral through their power. The point of the imperianlism is to “civilize the Negroes” when in reality it’s just a race to claim land and a fight for ivory.
In Faust, Goethe brings to readers a view many of his opinions about good, evil, and religion. Goethe uses characters like The Lord and Gretchen in the early part of the play to set examples of goodness. Goethe uses characters like Mephistopheles to stand for evil. Dissatisfaction of Faust with the finite limits on man’s potential — the driving force that motivates him in all his adventures as he strives to find a way to pass beyond the boundaries set on human experience and perception.
The whole poem is colored by this sense of dissatisfaction and frustrated striving. Faust is like all of us: he inhabits a reality of his own creation. His life is a combination of external factors and choices he made to form his current reality — a part of the work-a-day world that no longer excites him. Therefore, in his turn to the black arts, he is looking to escape his current life. However, since his reality has left him unfulfilled and longing, he must seek to mean elsewhere and through other means. Faust embraces the verboten, the immoral, the sensuous in order to eventually find redemption.
In the conversation between the Lord and Mephistopheles in the “Prologue in Heaven,” and which is indirectly referred to at other points in the poem. The Lord acknowledges to Mephistopheles that it is natural for man to fall into error but asserts that despite this he remains able to make moral distinctions. Thus, the issue at stake in the wager made by God and the devil is whether Faust, as a representative of all mankind, will continue to be able to perceive the difference between good and evil, regardless of temptation and personal sinfulness. In the Lord’s view of human nature, it is admitted that man is imperfect and that his ability is limited, but it is also assumed that human imperfection is not absolute and that man’s potential for good can be cultivated. In this sense, Faust’s dissatisfaction and striving may be interpreted as an unconscious manifestation of man’s potential to improve himself, even though Faust is frequently misguided by his obsessive efforts to rise beyond man’s natural sphere. It is because Faust does retain his sense of right and wrong and because his eyes are constantly focused on a vision of something higher than himself, which is ultimately the cause of his frustrated despair, that he is finally rewarded by entrance into Heaven.
Considered in this philosophical context, Faust’s many adventures all communicate the message that to find happiness man must learn to conquer the lower elements of his nature and live constructively within the framework imposed on him. The concluding scenes of the drama and God’s statements in the “Prologue” illustrate that good may arise out of evil, but they do not advocate that evil should be sought after as a means for finding the good. The moral doctrine that Goethe puts forward in Faust teaches that the essential feature of all existence and the law that governs the universe is one of untiring, purposeful, and positive effort, and that man can find his place in life only through striving to participate in this vast cosmic movement, although of necessity in terms appropriate to his human capabilities.
Faust: Analysis of Modernized Version Directed by Des Mcanuff
Fantastical, gripping, emotional, and never dull, Charles Gounod’s Faust has always been an operatic favorite—but among the tweaks and liberties modern-day performances of opera take, can a modernized retelling do this classic justice? In its second revival under the direction of Des McAnuff (Winner for Best Musical in 2006 for Jersey Boys), Faust returns to the Met this spring where the titular character finds himself in an early 20th Century world, facing quite the original twist: Faust is the man responsible for the atom bomb, and in his old age, he finds himself regretful for the lives his work has cost. The cast of characters are still the same, of course—Faust still pursues his beloved Marguerite, while both ultimately succumb to the treachery enacted by the devil, Méphistophélès—but what is changed in the first act is surprisingly inconsistent throughout the rest of the opera, and it is here that McAnuff’s changes fail to make their full potential.
An opera that maintains its novelty while undergoing a modernization tends to not allow such changes to overwhelm its original story, and it is true that Des McAnuff’s Faust follows suit—yet the issue here is that the slightly revised story is so inconsistent that by Act III, I had forgotten that this version of Faust was supposed to be set in the early 20th Century. The issue with this is that, rather than having Faust just become younger, Méphistophélès actually sends him back to the days of his youth: this is not explicitly stated, but the way the characters are dressed is the revelatory factor. The townspeople are dressed in turn-of-the-century garb, but the giveaway here is what the soldiers are wearing. Dressed in the uniforms that the French army would have worn in World War I, it could be assumed that this version of Faust is set in the 1910s—thus Faust not only decreases his age by thirty-some years, he also goes back in time. Understandably, there is no way this change can be revealed in the opera’s libretto, but McAnuff is unable to express visually to why this change was made. Perhaps there is only one answer, and it all has to do with history: if this version of Faust opens post-World War II, then the theme of war is irrelevant—unfortunately for McAnuff, that is not the case, as Marguerite’s brother Valentin heads off to war during the opera’s progression, and like many directors before him, McAnuff is forced to make an important decision.
His heart is in the right place, I’ll give him that: making Faust into a nuclear physicist with one concrete source of regret allows the audience to empathize with Faust easily, not to mention the fact that his plight is almost recognizable. Aside from Act I, the only moment where McAnuff’s changes return is in the Walpurgis Night scene, where the chorus (repeatedly seen throughout as scientists with clipboards and sunglasses) observes the explosion of the atom bomb. This in itself appears to be a kind of foreshadowing to the opera’s conclusion: traditionally, Faust ends with the now-tainted Marguerite being sent to heaven while Faust himself is damned to hell. But in Act V’s very last moments it is revealed that the entire opera was, in all, actually a dream—we see Faust just as he was in the beginning of Act I, an elderly man in his laboratory, in the moments just after he has ingested the poison that he intends to kill himself with. Whereas Méphistophélès arrives in Act I to stop him, Faust emerges from his hallucination enacted by the poison in Act V barely conscious, and then ultimately, dead.
Des McAnuff’s Faust—which stars Piotr Beczala as Faust, Marina Poplavskaya as Marguerite, and John Relyea as Méphistophélès—though messy in its visuals, still is pleasant to the ears. One performance that particularly stands out is Relyea’s: I’ll admit here that I’ve never seen a performance of Faust prior to this production, but I went into the opera knowing Méphistophélès was supposed to be threatening and scary, and Relyea’s Méphistophélès was just that. In this version of the opera, Faust and Méphistophélès are dressed in suits, appearing much like men ready to hit the town or to some fuller extent conquer the world—and while I found nothing exemplary about Beczala’s Faust, it is in his shared scenes with Relyea that we know who the true star of the opera is. Relyea’s rendition of ‘The Golden Calf’—Le veau d’or—is not only sang with the passion and fire of a true operatic villain, but it is also here that this version of Faust achieves its first visual success. Whilst Relyea’s Méphistophélès delivers his aria, the townspeople—giving the scientist chorus a run for their money—respond by dancing with each other in twists and jerks, as if possessed. Bathed in a greenish light, Méphistophélès certainly appears devilish, and his position in the middle of the stage, surrounded by his recruited minions, evoked a certain sense of terror within me; though this fear was somewhat mild, I understood quite quickly that this Méphistophélès was remarkable.
I mentioned before I saw nothing remarkable about Beczala’s Faust; I’ll say again that I’ve never seen this opera before, but the opera does bear its protagonist’s name for a reason. When Faust appears with Méphistophélès, it is Méphistophélès who outshines Faust—perhaps this is the case as Méphistophélès is in a way controlling him, but even when Beczala’s Faust appears all by his lonesome, there is nothing that particularly grabs me about him. The interesting moments in his existence seemed to only be fueled by the presence of other people: Méphistophélès, of course, and then Marina Poplavskaya’s Marguerite. Popslavskaya herself seems to almost be challenging Relyea: her performance of Marguerite is quite different than any other female operatic character I’ve seen, and perhaps this has something to do with with Faust’s plot. Whereas in the original opera Marguerite appears to Faust as a spinster, she is introduced as a scientist in Faust is lab, and then later stands out as a woman bearing a rose. It is from this Faust declares his love for her, and with the help of Méphistophélès, decides to pursue her; thus, Faust spends a great deal of the opera pursuing Marguerite, and it from this that Marguerite distinctly fuels Faust’s plot. Between acts, a projection of her emotionally changing face is projected on the stage’s drawn curtains, in a fashion best described as a marriage between The Wizard of Oz and Dr. Strangelove. How Marguerite changes in mood is perhaps an easy way for the lost audience member to figure out where in the opera the characters are; this may or may not be a side effect from Des McAnuff’s messy direction, but if Piotr Beczala’s Faust dulls the opera, and John Relyea’s Méphistophélès livens things up, then it is Poplavskaya’s Marguerite who actually moves the plot along, and allows the opera to tell its story. This combination of characters is, in fact, successful. Faust is such a popular and interesting opera because its characters are very different from each other and from characters in other operas; their personalities are very distinct (even Faust himself, who I am not completely sure is supposed to be dull, but if he is, then so be it—Méphistophélès and Marguerite can just further prove these differences), and their stories intertwine to create its tragedy. With the supporting characters of Siébel (Julie Boulianne) and Valentin (Alexey Markov), it makes it easier for one to understand where the soap opera got its name—despite its directorial flaws, Faust is saved by its performances and story. The drama is incredibly fascinating and the sorrow it brings is unforgettable. It’s almost as if no matter what you can do to this opera, there’ll still be something to redeem it.
Did I like this version of Faust? I left the Met thinking I did, and I still do. I’m very much intrigued by Des McAnuff’s decision to modernize the opera, and I do think setting it between both World Wars is, if anything, the modernization that makes the most sense. The opera does fail in some sense due to the inconsistencies, and I think the whole atom bomb thing could have found its way into the plot a few more times. Still, the one thing I’m sure about the most is this: while many operas have the tendency to bore me (I’ll admit freely I’ve dozed off a time or two during other performances), Faust is one of those rare operas where each moment something exciting or intriguing is occurring. No opera can be perfect, and McAnuff’s Faust, of course, isn’t—but if an opera can be lively and cater to a variety of tastes, including those of young audiences, then it is technically a success. To take risks in the way that McAnuff did is commendable, and while the final product might have been a bit off, I can still say I enjoyed Faust very much, and that it is one of the better operas I’ve seen so far. If Des McAnuff were to direct another opera, I’d be very interested to see it—if not for the sake of opera itself, then to see what McAnuff has up his sleeve this time.
Goethe’s Faust and Indications of Romanticism
“Romanticism was a reaction against an emotionless rationality and structured literature that defined the Age of Enlightenment and Reason. Faust personifies his dichotomy on his way to becoming the Romantic hero” (Hardison, Expert Answers, Enotes, Print). Goethe’s Faust, was not entirely considered romantic writing, but shows indications of the type. Goethe finds Nature to be pure intelligence and a good foundation of mankind. Therefore Faust spoke on Nature and why he wasn’t at peace. He has harsh thoughts about not being a productive human. The sight of a skull makes him think about suicide as a solution to him problems. Nearly drinking a glass of poison, he hears church bells and singing of a choir that reminds him of Easter message of resurrection and eternal life. Although Faust doesn’t believe in these concepts, they bring back memories of his childhood religious faith and somehow build up his self-confidence. At this point, for the first time he feels a sense of a fulfilled soul within.
Faust was from various perspectives, a man of elevation. He was a specialist and had examined numerous books and held a high degree of education. Yet, no matter how much knowledge he consumed, he still felt torn and void. Unlike his understudy Wagner, Faust had picked up everything the world brought to the table in the feeling of insightfulness, but he was all he while hunting down something uncommon. Though his hopelessness and ongoing search for whatever his life was missing, regardless of whether it be God or Love, he progressed towards becoming entwined with a Soul of Dimness, Mephistopheles. Mestipho’s appearance just gave confirmation that there was something more in the universe other than science. Faust then bargains with the devil in which the wager is that the Devil will guide him through life giving him a moment of bliss and contentment with confidence that he will never want to leave. If Faust possibly experiences such a moment, he would have to basically become the Devil’s companion for all of eternity. However, if Faust does not encounter such a moment, then he would eventually be set free. A wager of this magnitude demonstrates the deepness of Faust’s despair. Faust looks at his failures to merge with the energy of the universe to be his own personal hell. Consequently, regardless of how the wager goes, Faust is still doomed. But “the reasonable Lord of Goethe’s imagining explains the Mephistopheles may try to lead Faust astray, but in the end, he will lose because, a good man still knows which way is the right one” (Faust, 632). Faust wants to be youthful once more despite his greater needs, Mephisto gives him exactly what he wants. Faust continuously ran into a young lady in the road and immediately admired her. In time Faust stands in the need of a companion as he requests to Mephisto, “get me that young lady do you hear, you must” (Faust, 686). Disappointed with his answer, Faust goes out and utilizes his opportunity and creative ability to seek out the young lady name Margarete (Gretchen) on his own. Faust states, “with several hours most, I could seduce her handily, don’t need the Devil to pimp for me” (Faust, 687). Faust and Gretchen met in a summer cabin which implicates the meeting of two different worlds. Out of the blue in their trade of adoration, Faust starts to see the significance of life past his childishness. However, as soon as Faust gains his opportunity, Mephistopheles suddenly breaks it up. Even though Faust has now observed the minute in which he would have the capacity to live a persistently happy life, he can’t achieve it.
Faust feels extremely bad for executing Margarete’s sibling in which thereafter, seals his own destiny. The blood ban that Faust faces in the city implies the stamp that Cain got after executing his very own sibling as well, Abel. Margarete’s confession in the church was indeed her way of repentance. Her destiny is a complete disaster. Rather than carrying on with a cheerful full life, she was sentenced to be executed. Faust feels amazingly regretful about what he had done to Margarete. “She is unable to benefit from the comforting influence of religion because she is conscious of her guild and fears damnation” (Cisneros, Faust, Cliffnotes) Goethe’s Faust is a work in which another sort of saint develops to fulfill the necessities of an evolving society. Following the pattern of Goethe’s contemporary advancing society, the methods by which Faust prevails with regards to achieving his objectives are, narrow minded fierce.