Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

This is the discussion thread for Faust by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, our Old School Classic Group Read for March 2018.

Spoilers allowed here.

Please feel free to discuss anything you wish, relating to the book and let us know what you thought :)

About 24 pages in and a little confused. The rhyming, at first, was a little hard to get used to. Now that I've read more it kind of flows like a song, I like it. The monologues of Faust are a little tedious. The beginning as well I was a little foggy on. Was he conjuring up the Earth spirit?

I've just started, but I love it. I'm just in the prologue in front of the theater. It's amazing how witty it is.
Here's one of my favorite parts so far. I read it in German (my mother tongue), so I looked up the translation of those few lines on project gutenberg in order to post them here, but I was severely disappointed. So, I translated those lines myself. I did not even try to make them rhyme. I instead, I tried to capture the witticisms and plays on words. In the scene, the theater manager/director, a writer/poet and an actor discuss what makes a play a good play. The poet wants to make something that lasts and speaks to generations. The theater director answers:

But importantly, let there be enough that's going on [on the stage].
People come to watch, they want to see.
If you give them a good show,
so that the crowd has something to gawk at,
then you win across the whole width/range,
[then] you are a well-loved man.
The masses you can only defeat by mass,
everybody chooses something for themselves in the end.
If you bring much, you'll bring something to many,
and everyone goes home happy.
If you present a [theater] piece, serve it up in pieces!
You have to manage such a ragout.
Serve it light/digestable, it's just as light/easy to come up with it [i.e. not necessary to spend too much thought on it]
What's the good in presenting a whole piece
if the audience will rip it apart anyway.

I find it interesting that Göthe is so sober and pragmatic about it, commenting on the struggles he must have been facing himself: should you write a money-maker, something that lasts or can you do both?

Petrichor wrote: "I've just started, but I love it. I'm just in the prologue in front of the theater. It's amazing how witty it is.
Here's one of my favorite parts so far. I read it in German (my mother tongue), so ..."

I agree with you, the beggining is witty! Goethe says som truth like:

* What grows too fast is close to finish,
But a late laurel grows in the future.

* A theater audience don’t want the author of the play to show them a painting, they want the author to show them a mirror where they can see themselves every night.

* If you do nothing, please why do you tell us what must be done?

Sorry for my English, I read Faust in French in the BEAUTIFUL translation by Gérard de Nerval, French poet from the 19th, admired by Goethe himself. How lucky I am!

By the way, I already finished it, here's my review

Rivalic wrote: "Was he conjuring up the Earth spirit?"

Yes, he did! He even succeeded, but because of that he became megalomaniac and pronounced himself equal to the spirit. As a response, the latter ridiculed him and left, which left Faust humiliated and more depressed than before.

Petrichor wrote: "Rivalic wrote: "Was he conjuring up the Earth spirit?"

Yes, he did! He even succeeded, but because of that he became megalomaniac and pronounced himself equal to the spirit. As a response, the lat..."


Oh okay! I got a little lost at the parts with Faust talking to himself. Wagner is Faust's servant or right hand man, but does that mean Faust is of high ranking? On the back of my copy, translated by David Luke, it says Faust is a wandering conjuror. Is he just a normal everyday citizen? Then again, if you've read this far Petrichor or anyone else, in the scene: Outside The Town Wall, the old peasant gives Faust a drink and toasts to him. That would mean he's well known right?

I always got the impression that Faust is a scholar because he has students that come for lessons in his study. He is well known in the town and Wagner is his companion.
He is curious about sorcery and has a thirst for knowledge.

Rosemarie wrote: "I always got the impression that Faust is a scholar.

I guess I haven't read that far to know he had students. It seems though Faust belittles Wagner. Like Wagner is the sidekick but less appreciated.

Wagner is not his equal, for sure.

Right ha! He also calls him Sir, but he lives with him I suppose. So, they must be buddies.

Rosemarie wrote: "I always got the impression that Faust is a scholar because he has students that come for lessons in his study. He is well known in the town and Wagner is his companion.
He is curious about sorcery..."

Rivalic wrote: "Petrichor wrote: "Rivalic wrote: "Was he conjuring up the Earth spirit?"

Yes, he did! He even succeeded, but because of that he became megalomaniac and pronounced himself equal to the spirit. As a..."

Dr. Faust was first a real person: he would have lived from about 1480 to 1540, in Germany.
Faust is a scholar. He has or had, "students" who came to him to learn from him, as it was usual at this time.
Wagner is his servant. This doesn't mean that Faust was rich. In his time, having a servant was not as much "expensive" as it is today. People who had no servants were at the bottom of the social ladder. For example, a baker and his wife could have a maid. It was all the more common, because the work (tasks?) in a home, without running water, without central heating, without a washing machine was huge!

Faust is an old man. Wagner probably serves him for years. That's why they look like "friends". Even if they are not at the same level, they respect each other's work. As Wagner would like to learn, they probably both had already long conversations which leads to a kind of complicity.

The Faust legend is so old and mixed with mythical elements. It's been retold so many times that it feels more mythical than legend.

I'm curious about Wagner's name, if anyone knows why Goethe named him Wagner. Was he actually Dr. Faustus' caretaker, just a common name at the time? I have to be extra nosey and wonder about Richard Wagner who wrote the famous "Wagner's Ring" symphony. He also wrote a symphony called Faust's Overture. And his last name is Wagner O.O Is there any connection?

Thank you for translating the opening lines ^.^ Stuart Atkins translates them:
"I know what counts for popularity,
and yet I've never been quite so uneasy --
of course they are not used to anything first-rate,
but still they've done a lot of reading." (Lines 43-46)

The manager is just so nervous here!! He's so confident in this theatre production, is smug at the crowd of folks because he thinks he understands them well but then balks at how well read they all are.

I don't think there is any relation between Goethe's Wagner and the composer Richard Wagner, mainly because Richard Wagner was only 19 at the time of the posthumous publication of part 2, and had not been born when the earliest version of part 1 was written (sometime between 1772 and 1775, per Wikipedia).

Maybe he was just going for a "common sounding" name, a sort of German version of "Smith" maybe? Or perhaps that was the name given to the servant in one of the earlier versions Goethe borrowed from, and he just kept it?

Thanks! That makes sense ^.^

I did a quick Wiki read on the Faust myths. It was worth the time, I definitely need to get moving on this play.

I can't speak for the time back then, but Wagner is a quite common name in the german-speaking world. It means wagon-builder and is one of the many many occupation-related family names. There are also names which translate to tailor, farmer, shoe-maker and so on. However, the name does not imply that people with that name were in that occupation.

I would not say that Wagner is Faust's servant. More like a companion of lower rank. He is far too knowledgeable and well-read to be "just" a servant. He is definitely on his way of being a kind of scientist or professor of some kind himself. But I think they live together, because he shows up wearing his nightgown in the middle of the night when Faust made some noise conjuring up the earth spirit.

Katy wrote: "I did a quick Wiki read on the Faust myths. It was worth the time..."
Thanks for the hint! I'll check it out! I guess you meant this page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust

Rivalic wrote: "Outside The Town Wall, the old peasant gives Faust a drink and toasts to him. That would mean he's well known right?"

Yes, he seems to be. But more importantly, he is not just well known, but highly respected. His father seems to have saved a lot of lives and Faust, a young man at that time, didn't shy away from visiting people suffering from the black death and helping where he could.

German text: (view spoiler)[
_Alter Bauer._

Fürwahr es ist sehr wohl gethan,
Daß ihr am frohen Tag erscheint;
Habt ihr es vormals doch mit uns
An bösen Tagen gut gemeynt!
Gar mancher steht lebendig hier,
Den euer Vater noch zuletzt
Der heißen Fieberwuth entriß,
Als er der Seuche Ziel gesetzt.
Auch damals ihr, ein junger Mann,
Ihr gingt in jedes Krankenhaus,
Gar manche Leiche trug man fort,
Ihr aber kamt gesund heraus,
Bestandet manche harte Proben;
Dem Helfer half der Helfer droben.

_Alle._

Gesundheit dem bewährten Mann,
Daß er noch lange helfen kann! (hide spoiler)] (copied from here)

English text: (view spoiler)[
OLD PEASANT

Ay, truly! 'tis well done, that you
Our festive meeting thus attend;
You, who in evil days of yore,
So often show'd yourself our friend!
Full many a one stands living here,
Who from the fever's deadly blast,
Your father rescu'd, when his skill
The fatal sickness stay'd at last.
A young man then, each house you sought,
Where reign'd the mortal pestilence.
Corpse after corpse was carried forth,
But still unscath'd you issued thence.

Sore then your trials and severe;
The Helper yonder aids the helper here.

ALL

Heaven bless the trusty friend, and long
To help the poor his life prolong! (hide spoiler)] (copied from here)


Edit: this might also be worth mentioning:

Just a little later, Faust admits to Wagner that he feels their acclaim more like derision, because he feels that neither him nor his dad were worth the glory. They barely knew what they were doing and Faust even implies that they even caused some deaths rather than prevent them.

German text: (view spoiler)[
Der Menge Beyfall tönt mir nun wie Hohn.
O könntest du in meinem Innern lesen,
Wie wenig Vater und Sohn
Solch eines Ruhmes werth gewesen!
Mein Vater war ein dunkler Ehrenmann,
Der über die Natur und ihre heilgen Kreise,
In Redlichkeit, jedoch auf seine Weise,
Mit grillenhafter Mühe sann.
Der, in Gesellschaft von Adepten,
Sich in die schwarze Küche schloß,
Und, nach unendlichen Recepten,
Das Widrige zusammengoß.
Da ward ein rother Leu, ein kühner Freyer,
Im lauen Bad, der Lilie vermählt
Und beyde dann, mit offnem Flammenfeuer,
Aus einem Brautgemach ins andere gequält.
Erschien darauf, mit bunten Farben,
Die junge Königin im Glas,
Hier war die Arzeney, die Patienten starben,
Und niemand fragte: wer genas?
So haben wir, mit höllischen Latwergen,
In diesen Thälern, diesen Bergen,
Weit schlimmer als die Pest getobt.
Ich habe selbst den Gift an Tausende gegeben,
Sie welkten hin, ich muß erleben
Daß man die frechen Mörder lobt. (hide spoiler)]

English text: (view spoiler)[
The crowd's applause assumes a scornful tone.
Oh, could'st thou in my inner being read,
How little either sire or son,
Of such renown deserves the meed!
My sire, of good repute, and sombre mood,
O'er nature's powers and every mystic zone,
With honest zeal, but methods of his own,
With toil fantastic loved to brood;
His time in dark alchemic cell,
With brother adepts he would spend,
And there antagonists compel,
Through numberless receipts to blend.
A ruddy lion there, a suitor bold,
In tepid bath was with the lily wed.
Thence both, while open flames around them roll'd,
Were tortur'd to another bridal bed.
Was then the youthful queen descried
With varied colours in the flask
This was our medicine; the patients died,
"Who were restored?" none cared to ask.
With our infernal mixture thus, ere long,
These hills and peaceful vales among,
We rag'd more fiercely than the pest;
Myself the deadly poison did to thousands give;
They pined away, I yet must live,
To hear the reckless murderers blest. (hide spoiler)]

Oh, wow. There's a lot of back story I am not grappling onto here. Thank you though.

When Faust traps Mephistopheles, he says he can't get out because Faust drew a pentagram on the floor. When asked how he got in the first place he says,

"It's not well drawn; look closely sir! . . . You see? the lines do not quite meet." Then he goes onto to say the poodle skipped in unnoticed, because he wasn't in demonic form. So, couldn't he just turn back into a dog and walk back out?

If being the dog is the ticket that got him into the study, why does it matter if the pentagram is badly drawn? If it weren't all connecting lines he could essentially walk out no problem, I'm assuming.

I thought the same when I read it the first time, years ago.

However, this time I understood it this way:
two lines of the pentagram don't line up: the ones pointing outside. So, he can come in from the outside (where the lines are not properly drawn), but he can't go out again (because the lines are properly drawn on that side).
What the poodle missed is that he wouldn't be able to get out again. He didn't think ahead.

But I love that scene! It's a really funny one. At first, Faust does not understand why Mephisto asks for permission to leave, then he can't believe his luck, thinking he made the jackpot while Mephisto has to admit his stupid mistake. But when Faust tries to make some profit out of the situation and makes too many claims, he gets sung into sleep by some spirits Mephisto calls upon and Mephisto escapes by letting a rat nibble at the pentagram :-D
I love the mind games between those two.

German text: (view spoiler)[
_Faust._

Das Pentagramma macht dir Pein?
Ey sage mir, du Sohn der Hölle,
Wenn das dich bannt, wie kamst du denn herein?
Wie ward ein solcher Geist betrogen?

_Mephistopheles._

Beschaut es recht! es ist nicht gut gezogen;
Der eine Winkel, der nach außen zu,
Ist, wie du siehst, ein wenig offen.

_Faust._

Das hat der Zufall gut getroffen!
Und mein Gefangner wärst denn du?
Das ist von ohngefähr gelungen!

_Mephistopheles._

Der Pudel merkte nichts als er hereingesprungen,
Die Sache sieht jetzt anders aus;
Der Teufel kann nicht aus dem Haus. (hide spoiler)]

English text: (view spoiler)[
FAUST

The pentagram thy peace doth mar?
To me, thou son of hell, explain,
How earnest thou in, if this thine exit bar?
Could such a spirit aught ensnare?

MEPHISTOPHELES

Observe it well, it is not drawn with care,
One of the angles, that which points without,
Is, as thou seest, not quite closed.

FAUST

Chance hath the matter happily dispos'd!
So thou my captive art? No doubt!
By accident thou thus art caught!

MEPHISTOPHELES

In sprang the dog, indeed, observing naught;
Things now assume another shape,
The devil's in the house and can't escape. (hide spoiler)]

I can't help it. To me the dialog seems much more easy-going and witty in the German version.

Where would perfectionism fit into this scheme? I heard somewhere that perfectionism is actually evil tool of the devil. (Not sure where I picked that up.) So I wonder if Mephistopheles can always use that as an out for himself.

And yes, I giggled hysterically at that part!! Their banter is the most fun, 2 smart fellows with agendas & rampant insecurity-arrogant complexes ^.^

So that's the story behind Wagner's name! Thanks, it makes so much sense!

Faust's dad's backstory, I missed it on the 1st reading also ... so distracted by the beautiful descriptions, hilarious banter & 1000's of references to other works!

That makes much more since. I wasn't picturing the pentagram that way in my head. I have found it easier to understand the play if I read it aloud. For some reason it flows better.

Is anyone confused about the woman Faust wants to get with? Maybe it's my translation by David Luke, but she's both called Gretchen, and Margareta. Even in the stage directions it will say so. It makes no sense! When Margareta had her first lines I assumed her name, even though no one ever said it aloud. Then when's she visiting Martha, she calls her Gretchen.

Maybe Margareta is hiding her true name, because it can't be a nickname. (Anyways who would want the nickname Gretchen :p) Then I thought it might be a last name, even though it's an odd one, but her friend wouldn't call her something so formal. . . . .

Gretchen is a form of Margareta, generally used among friends and family. Just like Maggie comes from Margaret.

Yeah, it's actually the opposite of formal, like Elizabeth becomes Liz or even Lizzie. Adding -chen denotes a little or cute informal version, kind of like when we add -y to the end of names. Like mein Liebchen is my little darling. When we were exchange students, we would add -chen to all kinds of words, just for the fun of it. Here's a link where they are even using it to sell a quick flight from Berlin to Liverpool.

http://www.aidanorourke.com/the-magic...

Biblio wrote: "Where would perfectionism fit into this scheme? I heard somewhere that perfectionism is actually evil tool of the devil. (Not sure where I picked that up.)"

Interesting. I wonder if that's because if you pursue perfection you will always fail, and failure (fear of, or discouragement by) is maybe the foot-in-the-door for the devil?

Petrichor wrote: "phisto escapes by letting a rat nibble at the pentagram :-D"

Was anybody else reminded of the TV show Supernatural and their demon-barrier salt lines? They're always getting scuffed or walked over or the wind hits them, thus allowing THE EVIL to enter/escape :)

Jerome wrote: "Yeah, it's actually the opposite of formal, like Elizabeth becomes Liz or even Lizzie. Adding -chen denotes a little or cute informal version, kind of like when we add -y to the end of names. Like ..."

Why don't they just use Margie. Sounds like her name. Gretchen, just sounds totally different. Or they could have used Marchen. (Okay that's totally not a name, but makes sense.)

Russian names are also complex with lots of informal nicknames taken from the full name. To English speakers, it doesn't make sense. But in the original language, it's just a natural part of it.

My old Korean students were baffled by our English nicknames (Daniel/Danny, Elizabeth/Beth). They are learning them by memorization when they meet someone with a nickname. But it's not natural sounding for them, yet fun to see them experiment with new possibilities. It's because in Korean, they don't really have a nickname system like we do in English.

With their system, they have 3 'syllables' or character blocks. The first is the family name (which can be 1 or 2 blocks) Then their middle name would share with a generation in their family (and maybe cousins of the same generation, it depends on the family how they want to work it. That's personal & fun to learn.)

Each block in their name is paired with a Chinese Character which carries the meaning. (red medicine, flying bird). Each person gets 3 Chinese characters. The family name is shared with everyone of course & and 2nd name with their generation. But they get 1 that's unique to them.

The parents/friends/family would always call them by the 2 blocks: their own & the generation they're associated with. (The same as 'Lisa', not Lisa Smith) In the rare case if the family name has 2 block sounds, they may only get their own name, not one for their generation. I don't know the details of how that works because it's pretty rare. 3 blocks just looks & sounds pretty to the Korean ear.

The article on -chen is great O.O Thank you for sharing!!

Actually Elizabeth is a great example to explain where Gretchen comes from:

ElizaBETH - Betty
MarGRET - GRETchen

I'm sure they left the name Gretchen as in the original, because it is quite strongly associated with the play in the German language. In the same way you can't think of Romeo without thinking about Shakespeare, you can't hear Gretchen without thinking of Faust.

Her name also became the origin of an idiom: A "Gretchenfrage" (translated: Gretchen-question) is a question which asks about the core of a problem. No embellishment, just asked straight up, right to the point. This is based on her asking Faust what his opinion on religion is.

There are many phrases and idioms based on Faust. Another one which kind of fits here is "Das also war des Pudels Kern" (en: "So this is what was the poodle's core"). You use the phrase when something that was a mystery suddenly became clear to you. I think it's pretty obvious which scene this originates from.

I am certain that most people who use those phrases (and many more) have no idea that they originate from Faust.

References to Other Literary Classics:

Macbeth by: William Shakespeare
Faust seeing Gretchen as a phantom = Macbeth seeing Macduff & Kind Duncan phantoms

The Scarlet Letter by: Nathaniel Hawthorne
Gretchen comes town whore & has a child = Hester Prynne has a child out of wed lock, making her a whore

The Crucible by: Arthur Miller
Gretchen believes her place is in the cell= John Proctor believes he must hanged

Romeo and Juliet by: William Shakespeare
Mestpho kills Valentine, Gretchen’s brother= Romeo kills Tybalt, Juliet’s cousin

I found this kind of interesting, after reading the play.

The Scarlet Letter and The Crucible were written after Faust. So, Goethe could not have referenced them. Maybe the other way round?

In any case, having a child out of wedlock was considered a bad thing at that time. I don't think that is necessarily a literary reference.
Did Gretchen really become a prostitute? I don't remember that from earlier reads, but I can't say for sure, I didn't get that far yet with my current read. I'll pay special attention to any signs.

"With one begin'st thou secretly, Then soon will others come to thee, And when a dozen thee have known, Thou'rt also free to all the town."

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Faust (Kindle Locations 2146-2147).

She was compared to one by her brother, and her mother called a pimp! Such was the shame of birth out of wedlock as discussed by Gretchen and Lisbeth about their friend Barbara.

Petrichor wrote: "The Scarlet Letter and The Crucible were written after Faust."

I wasn't saying Goethe references those plays/books in his writing. I was saying those were the same themes I saw from my own experience when I was reading the play. Based on other classics I have read I was better to understand this tricky play.

Was just saying, both The Scarlet Letter, and Faust both had children out of wedlock. Of course it's a terrible thing back then, and sometimes it's frowned upon now. Nonetheless, both the authors chose it as one of there themes. Just the parallel of two is all I am making.

I believe she did become a whore. Of course, not to herself, and us as readers, but to the whole town. We knew Gretchen as an innocent young girl. Even when she was getting involved with Faust she knew it might not be the best choice, therefore having a conscience of right and wrong. Having everyone know she conceived a child before marriage is the largest factor that makes everyone think she is a whore. Just as Jerome said above, Lisbeth said the same thing about Barbara, who also had a child out of wedlock. It wouldn't have mattered if Gretchen never had sex with another guy. The mere fact that she had a child marks her forever.

Rivalic wrote: "I wasn't saying Goethe references those plays/books in his writing."
In this case I simply misunderstood you. I thought you meant they were referenced. Sorry.

Rivalic wrote: "It wouldn't have mattered if Gretchen never had sex with another guy. The mere fact that she had a child marks her forever."
In this case I absolutely agree. In the eyes of the town (and her brother) she was a whore. But I do not think she really did sleep with anyone else.

Petrichor wrote: "But I do not think she really did sleep with anyone else. "

Yeah, I don't think either. I mean, she probably only really loved Faust. Also, I wonder how long it was from the time Faust killed her brother, and when she was in prison at the end of the book. She probably didn't have any time to do anything, since she also killed her mother with the potion Faust gave her.

Finished. Time for overreaching commentary:

Goethe is known as a Romantic, someone who elevated and wanted to return to the values and aesthetic of the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations, including pagan beliefs. Faust seems to flow most naturally during the description of the pagan Walpurgisnacht. The rigid beliefs of Valentin reflects the strictures of resociety and Christian civilization that condemns both his mother and his sister, ultimately dying at the hands of the devil.

It seems that Goethe depicts a German character that, contrary to the stereotype of cold efficiency, calls to the natural world and emphasizes passion and emotion over "dry theory". Goethe called back to the roots of paganism and gave them artistic and intellectual heft. The emphasis on emotion over intellect, however, is out of balance if there are no restraints, and yet the cold intellect of Faust can renew its spirit with youth, innocence, and love as represented by Gretchen when expressed outwardly toward love and concern for others, rather than emphasis on competition, power, or self-involved hedonism.

Why could Margarete (Gretchen) not take that last step?

Petrichor wrote: "Her name also became the origin of an idiom: A "Gretchenfrage" (translated: Gretchen-question) is a question which asks about the core of a problem. No embellishment, just asked straight up, right to the point. This is based on her asking Faust what his opinion on religion is."

Fascinating! Thank you for sharing!

Petrichor wrote: "Actually Elizabeth is a great example to explain where Gretchen comes from:

ElizaBETH - Betty
MarGRET - GRETchen

I'm sure they left the name Gretchen as in the original, because it is quite stron..."

I love the "poodle's core" idiom.

@Ashley & Suki: I'm glad you enjoyed those little tidbits about my native language :-)

I found an English Wiktionary page about the Gretchenfrage. It brings up a point that I failed to mention: It's not just about the core of a problem, it's also "a crucial question that usually has a difficult or unpleasant answer".
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Gretchenfrage

It's always difficult to explain/capture all the facets of a figure of speech.

I read Faust twice, but both readings are now a good while ago, and I must say the second part went right past me. I remember the major happenings and realize that there Goethe really had the space for philosophical questions etc. - but nevertheless, the story I'll always remember is the story of Gretchen. It's not for nothing that her name always evokes these associations.

Rivalic wrote: "If being the dog is the ticket that got him into the study, why does it matter if the pentagram is badly drawn? If it weren't all connecting lines he could essentially walk out no problem, I'm assuming."

Could it be that Mephisto is trying to trick Faust into thinking that Faust has power over him – acting humble and helpless - and to show that he must obey some laws – make way for a later deal?

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Rivalic wrote: "If being the dog is the ticket that got him into the study, why does it matter if the pentagram is badly drawn? If it weren't all connecting lines he could essentially walk out no p..."

I totally think that!! He's all grovelling, trying to make himself seem insignificant & Faust is the almighty one. I think Mephisto likes letting folks feel powerful because he's immortal and we're not. It just heightens his own feeling of power.

I've only read Part 1, but to recap:
Faust has Mephistopheles at his bidding and decides to...
seduce a woman
isn't this thinking a bit small?

Goethe was a Romantic :-) !

I just finished reading Marlowe's Doctor Faustus after finishing Parts One and Two of Goethe's Faust: A Tragedy, and, while they are obviously based on the same legend, there are profound differences between the two versions. The most immediately obvious is the length of the two stories-- Marlowe's drama is 83 pages long, while Goethe weighs in at 442 pages (not including notes). Marlowe's work was written and performed as a drama-- the Elizabethan stage would have been very stripped down, with very little in the way of scenery. Goethe, on the other hand, puts me in mind of an exceedingly lush and extravagant opera. There are aspects of Part Two that would be more or less impossible to portray as written without use of CGI. I'm glad that I read Part Two, because Part One ends on something of a cliffhanger.

The cover of my edition announces Faust as a tragedy: in fact, the real tragedy is the effect that his actions had on other people; notably, Margarete/Gretchen in Part One, and Baucis, Philemon, and the Traveler in Part Two.

(view spoiler)[
The ending of Part Two of the play is more of a romance than a tragedy for Faust because he is literally snatched from the jaws of hell by the love that Margarete/Gertrude has for him.
(hide spoiler)]

The thing that drove me nuts about the end of the play (SPOILER if you haven't read Part Two) was

(view spoiler)[
the fact that, after Faust literally renounced his faith and did everything that would damn his soul to Hell forever, he was saved by the angel that had been Margarete/Gretchen in Part One. He got her pregnant, destroyed her reputation, turned her own family against her, and didn't stay around for her even though she was in love with him, and she ended up being executed because she killed their baby. That takes forgiveness to an incredibly hard-to-swallow level in itself. Then add on to that the fact that Faust is saved even though he himself never repented or sought forgiveness for his evil doings. For me, that ending kind of ruined everything that the play had tried to establish.
(hide spoiler)]

These are SPOILERS for Marlowe's Doctor Faustus and also Part Two of Goethe's Faust:

(view spoiler)[
Marlowe's ending made a lot more sense to me that Goethe's did-- Doctor Faustus's time runs out, and Hell claims him in a very violent, bloody fashion.

Some of the differences in cast were very interesting to me, too. There was no Margarete/Gretchen in Marlowe's version. There was none of Goethe's incredible cast of characters from Part Two in Marlowe's play except for Helen, but she has no speaking part-- she is treated as more of an object.

Marlowe's Doctor Faustus seems to indulge in more wailing, breast-beating "oh woe is me, what have I done" than does Goethe's Faust, but he still will not seek forgiveness or redemption-- in fact, at Mephistopholes' request, he writes out his contract with Satan in his own blood a second time.

I think I preferred Marlowe's version to Goethe's simply because it made more sense to me. The whole play tracks his downward spiral, and his end is inevitable. I never understood what was so special about Goethe's Faust that made his soul worth all the angels confronting the demons. Faust broke all of God's laws (and the impression I got of God was the Old Testament angry and vengeful God, not the Jesus-loves-you-and-forgives-you God). I don't understand why he was exempted from the rules, especially when his own selfish behavior caused the suffering and deaths of Margarete/Gretchen, and also the old couple, Baucis and Philemon, and their Traveler guest. Ironically, the latter three perish in fire, while Faust was saved from the eternal fire. The ending really did not ring true for me; it was as if Goethe had changed the ending to appease someone.
(hide spoiler)]

Finished part I.

I have not read part II (and I don't plan to, but I am very interested in hearing options), so it feels a bit strange judging Faust having only read a part.

I liked both a the style rhymes with punch and the content. I read the story as Faust being lead by the demon. A clever and highly manipulating demon. Mephistopheles is simply evil, and compared to him Faust is not. While Faust often means well – like collecting knowledge to cure diseases and help the peasants – the demon's advice leads him to do only evil to others. Him not being evil and he's good intentions end up not mattering - only the actions.

Gretchen does evil too, but in the end she takes responsibility for her own actions, and that makes all the difference.

Wiki has an interesting bit about the ending:
Faust and Mephistopheles flee the dungeon, while voices from Heaven announce that Gretchen shall be saved – "Sie ist gerettet" – this differs from the harsher ending of Urfaust – "Sie ist gerichtet!" – "she is condemned."

If anyone want to read Marlowe and/or Mann's Faust, I will be happy to nominate or second.

Goethe's Ending, part 1& 2
(view spoiler)[Faust did have a lot of freedom, but many times throughout the play, Mephistopheles offered more to him but Faust said no. He never asked for a castle, billions of piles of gold or the love of all women who see him. His requests are selfish but they are fairly reasonable compared to the excesses he could have asked for.
Granted, he could have asked for peace, food for the starving and other good things. That could be an interesting discussion. So because he didn't ask for heavens & he repented, he was saved. And he's a dude (I think)

Gretchen's fall ... it's tragic, no doubt. She asked for nothing, was jailed & fell from grace, no questions asked. She's a tragic figure for sure in this. And her treatment wasn't fair, Faust did abandon her for no reason. I think it reminds us of patriarchy & double standards.

Most (or all) branches of Christianity are heavily patriarchal. A widely accepted form of the Adam & Eve story (throughout history) is it's Eve's fault, she caused the fall of man. Adam was a bystander. Today, this interpretation is changing, less blame is on Eve, they're both seen as equally guilty, & Lilith has creeped back up.

Patriarchy in Goethe's time ... I can't see Goethe just plain hating on women. It must be a commentary of their time's perception of women. It must have caused some outrage? Old 1800's wives grumbling to their husbands... see, it's always us that get the short end. It would be interesting to learn how the ending was received back then or how it was interpreted by those who saw it. (hide spoiler)]

Marlowe & Goethe's take are very different. It's hard to believe they're about the same story. I can't believe Marlowe's was actually preformed because of some dialogue. Some of it shocked me & I'm not religious O.O Marlowe is bad*ss!

I'm up for Mann's Faust!

This took me awhile to read. I wasn't a big fan of this one but I'm not a great lover of reading plays or of philosophy or of poetry so it was unlikely that I would love this one.

I read the Randall Jarrell translation and it made it mainly understandable, although I still missed bits. For example, I didn't understand that the potion Gertrude gives her mother to make her sleep actually killed her until I read a synopsis of the story.

As it was mostly about philosophy/religion and there wasn't much to the actual story I found it a bit dull.

I've reread parts one and two but I don't feel I've finished reading this and will come back to it.

There were many moments that as a read this felt disjoined but then again Goethe did write this over a long period of time, I think it was decades.

What I want to say is that it's amazing how different part two is, reading part one on its own it was harder to see how important Gretchen's story is, even though she has very small part in part two.