Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlowe, was selected as our Monthly Short Story for May 2020. The discussion thread is located in the Monthly Short Story Folder:

Beware Short Story Discussions will have Spoilers.

I am so glad that I have read so many classics and myths that this references. Helps to know what is going on. Wish I knew more Latin.

Katy wrote: "Wish I knew more Latin."

Me too, Katy. I know the notes have the translations but it is very frustrating having to flip back and forth constantly.

I have the Oxford World Classics collection of Marlowe's plays. It has the A & B texts for Dr Faustus. I read the A text. Not sure what everyone else is reading.

I enjoyed the beginning of the play. I felt that the presentation of the Seven Deadly Sins in Act 2 Scene 3 seemed a little rushed and ultimately it didn't really add much to the plot.

Overall, I felt that there was no build-up or tension in the circumstances that lead to Faustus' moments of regret. Essentially he just goes back and forward about regretting his choice but you never really feel that he genuinely repents the decision. Only that he doesn't want to die on the allotted date that he had prescribed.

I think part of the problem was the way that Marlowe chose to have Mephistopheles explain that hell wasn't an actual place but that "all places shall be hell that is not heaven". So from Faustus' perspective, there was no torture or pain in making the choice that he makes. The only punishment is that you don't get to go to heaven.

I have to admit that I was a little disappointed with this play. I think that Tamburlaine and Edward II are better works.

What version are we reading?

There are two different versions:
The 1604 quarto and The 1616 quarto. "The 1616 version omits 36 lines but adds 676 new lines, making it roughly one third longer than the 1604 version. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_...

Project Gutenberg has the The Quarto of 1604:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/779/77...

I just finished the 1616 quarto this afternoon!

I definitely didn't find it engrossing or surprising like I do (forgive me the inevitable comparison) Shakespeare. But the way it bends reality really intrigued me––not so much the seven sins bit, but the way Faustus so often invokes the ancient world, first when demonstrating his powers to the Emperor, and later as he's struggling with his devilish oath and contemplating forfeiting it. I have to say my opinion of the tension much aligns with yours, Liesl––for all the ways this play waxes poetic, there sure isn't much buildup. And I think that might really be a shame, because I would love some deeper reasons for all of Faustus' transgressing the boundaries of earthly knowledge: in Frankenstein, we get a really brief but rather powerful description of Victor's lifelong pursuit of alchemy and powerful glimpses of his fear of death, and that really adds to the tragedy at the end. Here, I get someone who tells me all of those things directly as he's just about to summon Mephistophilis, and his objectives don't really stick.

I did enjoy the comedic relief, though. Maybe more than I was supposed to.

I agree with you Pippin about the comic relief! Sometimes I thought it was a comedy. The tragic part is only tragic in the sense that Faustus goes to hell - not even in his last hour he´s able to repent. There´s not much build-up, as you all said. I thought it remarkable that gluttony had the most lines of the Seven Deadly Sins - perhaps what Marlowe most hated or was addicted to?

It was my first Marlowe, but I guess Edward II. is better. I read the longer version, though it mentions that the shorter is better, and adds some parts of quarto A. In B obviously some other authors were involved.

I liked your point on gluttony in the Seven Deadly Sins bit! I might have to go revisit it, because the way some of them were depicted surprised me. I've thought a bit more about the way that this play has so many instances of personification: not just is Mephistophilis supposed to embody hell in the real world, but there's a good angel/bad angel motif intended to take his internal conflict out and put it on stage where we can look at it. It's an interesting idea, but as this play marinates in my head, I start to suspect that maybe it interferes with the structure of the character arc: if Marlowe is so eager to externalize Doctor Faustus' feelings, maybe it either creates or reveals the problem that we don't see a sophisticated deliberation happening within him in the first place, at least until the very end. Despite this, I really like his last monologue, just as its own thing––might tuck that away into my monologue repertoire!

Also, I hadn't considered the possibility that there might be other authors entangled with this work: considering how collaborative the process of writing and mounting a play can be, my experience tells me that it could be possible.

A note––has anyone seen/listened to/read other adaptations of this story? Are there any that stand out? I like Lizst's symphony, although it's based on the Goethe version, rather than this one. Anyone read it?

We read Faust, First Part at school, so a long time ago. I didn´t like it so much, though it puts a lot of questions. Always liked Friedrich Schiller´s tragedies better. ;)

There´s also a novel called Doctor Faustus by Thomas Mann, which I haven´t read, but which deals with a musician and Germany selling its soul, an allegory to the rise of the Third Reich.

Related is his son Klaus Mann´s novel Mephisto which - hardly veiled - deals with the rise of actor Gustav Gründgens in Nazi Germany. It was made into a great film with Klaus Maria Brandauer.

Those sound really interesting! Thanks for the recommendations!

I just finished the 1604 quarto from Project Gutenberg. What first struck me was that the play seemed so short and underdeveloped. Like others, I wish I knew more Latin. And this is not very sophisticated but it was a treat to me to read the origin of the quote “the face that launch’d a thousand ships”!

I felt the same way, honestly. And about the Latin! I looked it up the first few times I encountered it, but eventually stopped trying. I enjoyed the Iliad references too––it's so interesting that Marlowe turned there instantly when called to offer examples of extremes, from beauty to violence. I had no idea that Marlowe was behind the "face that launch'd a thousand ships" bit either!

Finished the 1604 version. Also found the mixture of tragedy (in the title) and the satirical elements a bit confusing.

His first command is for Mephistophilis is to fetch him a wife and explain to how the universe works (in that order). A promising start. But after that he never really asked for anything worth while. Is that the tragedy: he has sold his soul for power unlimited - and then wastes it away.

It did not seem to me that any of the people in the play had any personality worth mentioning except Faust. Shakespeare could have done better.

Faust seem to be quite a sloth.
"my heart pants and quivers to remember that I have been a student
here these thirty years, O, would I had never seen Wertenberg,
never read book! "
So he “studied” but never actually read a book?
Also it seems to be mostly Mephistophilis who controls what Faust power is used for.

I liked Goethe’s Faust better because the way it was written with the punchy rhymes.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Faust seem to be quite a sloth.
"my heart pants and quivers to remember that I have been a student
here these thirty years, O, would I had never seen Wertenberg,
never read book! "
So he “studied” but never actually read a book? ..."

Marlowe is using the subjective tense. The "never read a book" follows on from the "Would I had" used in the first part of the phrase. So it is actually an expression of his regret that he did read because he blames being a student in Wertenberg for his greed, and perhaps also for acquiring the knowledge to summon Mephistophilis.

Liesl wrote: "Marlowe is using the subjective tense."

Thank you for explaining. That makes sense.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Liesl wrote: "Marlowe is using the subjective tense."

Thank you for explaining. That make sense."

I'm glad it was helpful.

The only copy I could find of this was a LibriVox recording. It was the 1616 version of play. Multiple persons playing all the characters. The narrator spelling out the actions (i.e. Faustus enters, Faustus exits, Faustus turns toward...). It was good and put me right there but I would like to see this performance in person. The story's premise.... don't make a deal with the devil.

I was very late to this.
I also like Goethe's Faust better.

I felt like this was just the beginning of an idea, something that was waiting to be revised and fleshed out more.

There seemed to be so many things that just didn't go anywhere.
It felt very rushed.

I really like the premise, but feel like it ultimately just didn't live up to what it could have been.

Annette wrote: "I just finished the 1604 quarto from Project Gutenberg. What first struck me was that the play seemed so short and underdeveloped. Like others, I wish I knew more Latin. And this is not very sophis..."
That maybe an unconscious comparison to Shakespeare's work which tends to the over-long. Most plays by every playwright at the time ran about 2 hours uncut. One of the arguments FOR Shakespeare writing his plays to be read as well as performed was he wrote them to clock in at over 3 hours, some at 3.5 to 4 hours. This was not because the audiences had better attention spans or liked standing in the mud for 4 hours, and ours is not the only "short-attention-span" generation. Bill's plays were routinely cut to 2 to 2.5 hours during his day. Marlowe's "Faustus" was the norm as far as length.