sign in sign up
<<
Home , Deal with the Devil, Doctor Faustus (comics), Doctor Faustus (play), Mephistopheles

T.C. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Bilim Dalı

Doktora Tezi

The Faustus Myth in the English Novel

Şeyda İnceoğlu 2502020208

Tez Danışmanı Prof. Dr. Zeynep Ergun

İstanbul, 2008

The Faustus Myth in the English Novel Şeyda İnceoğlu

ÖZ

Bu çalışmanın amacı, başlangıcı on altıncı yüzyıla dayanan ve adını, gerçekten yaşadığına dair kayıtlar olan Dr. Johann Faustus’tan alan Faustus Söylencesi’ni incelemektir. Söylenceyi, başladığı yüzyıldan alarak on altıncı yüzyılda Christopher ’un The Tragical History of the Life and Death of , on dokuzuncu yüzyılda Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’nin adlı oyunu ve yirminci yüzyıl İngiliz postmodern romanında John Fowles’ın The Magus adlı eserinde, bu söylencenin değişimi ve yorumları ele alınacaktır. Bu çalışmaya, söylencenin Rönesans dönemindeki gerçek kaynağına inerek başlanacak, mitolojide Prometheus, İncil’de , Adem ve Havva’nın Cennet’ten kovulmaları ile Faustus Söylencesi arasındaki ilişki incelenecek ve Rönesans ile Aydınlanma Dönemi bilgi kuramları ve varoluşçu bilgi kapsamında Faustus’un postmodern dönemdeki yorumu incelenecektir. Rönesans döneminde ortaya çıkan bu söylence, ’un yorumunda, Faustus’un Tanrı’ya öykünmesinin bir sonucu olarak, trajik bir sonla biterken, Goethe’nin Faust’unda, Aydınlanma Çağı’nda geleneksel din dizgelerinin Tanrı’sına karşı gelmeyi desteklemesi sonucu, Faust’un kurtuluşu ile söylenceye farklı bir bakış açısı gelişir. Rönesans Dönemi’nde her ne kadar sınırları aşma, bilgiye ulaşma cesaretlendirilse de lanet kaçınılmaz oluyor. Bu dönemler arasındaki geçişler ve Avrupa’yı etkisi altına alan felsefi, coğrafik ve politik gelişmeler doğrultusunda, Birinci ve İkinci Dünya Savaşlarına sahne olan yirminci yüzyılda ise çok farklı bir Faust ortaya çıkar. John Fowles’ın romanının Faust ve karakterleri Nicholas ve Conchis üzerinden yorumlanır, fakat bu sefer roller birbirine girmiş, kimin arayış içinde olduğu, kimin şeytanı simgelediği belirsizdir.

iii The Faustus Myth in the English Novel Şeyda İnceoğlu

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to examine the roots of the origin of the legendary Faustus in Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus in the sixteenth century, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust in the early nineteenth century and the postmodern English novel John Fowles’ The Magus in the twentieth century. In this dissertation, Faustus’ striving for power and existentialist knowledge is going to be analyzed in accordance with the Faustus myth’s roots in mythological and biblical sources as well as the social, political, educational and scientific upheavals that lead to an existential crisis. Various documents from the sixteenth century support the idea that a necromancer calling himself Faust really lived in the early sixteenth century. Faustus has been recreated in every genre over and over for many centuries, thus, striving for power, knowledge, and money is not only a modern concern but has also been the concern of every century since the beginning of mankind. Starting with Christopher Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus in the sixteenth century there arose a popular literary interest in the story of Faustus in drama. Moreover, this myth has also created Faustian man in the novels of different ages. The Faustus Myth is a cycle in which it starts and ends tragically in Marlowe’s The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, ends in salvation in Goethe’s Romantic Faust, and ends in an ambiguity bordering on meaninglessness in Fowles’ The Magus.

iv PREFACE

This study involves a close analysis of Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust, and John Fowles’ The Magus, focusing on the representations of the Faustus Myth in different ages and genres. The specific claim I point out is that the Faustus Myth is a cycle which starts and ends in tragic circumstances in Christopher Marlowe’s Renaissance Faustus, in salvation in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust, and in meaninglessness, ambiguous collapses in John Fowles’ existentialist Nicholas Urfe. This dissertation falls into four chapters. Starting with an introduction to the ways in which I identify stories as myths, I place the Faustus Myth on a theoretical basis. Afterwards, I move to Chapter 1 which gives detailed information on the historical background of the Faustus Myth including the first human curiosity both in mythology and in the Bible. As I move to the Enlightenment Period I link the Faustus Myth to the theory of knowledge and continue with existentialism that existential knowledge takes us to. Chapter 2, 3 and 4 include close analyses of three texts in the following chronological order: The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, Faust, and The Magus. Finally, the conclusion consists of the concluding remarks derived from an overview of the discussion of each work. In the conclusion of my dissertation, I would like to express my deepest and sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Zeynep Ergun, for her support, patience, and encouragement throughout my postgraduate studies. Her academic and editorial advice was invaluable to the completion of this dissertation and has taught me innumerable lessons and insights on the workings of my academic research in general. Moreover, I am deeply grateful to Prof. Ergun, for sharing her invaluable remarks from her unpublished book, Erkeğin Yittiği Yerde. Besides her sharing profound experience and knowledge with me, she has also been my inspirational guide in my life and always will be. I am also deeply grateful to Prof. Esra Melikoğlu first for her invaluable friendship, and then her expert guidance, understanding, encouragement, and

v support. Her innumerable insights and comments on my study helped me focus my ideas and provide them. My thanks also go to Prof. Dikmen Gürün for providing me many invaluable comments with an intellectual stimulus and insight. My acknowledgement also goes to Assoc. Prof. Murat Seçkin for his encouragement and motivation from the beginning of my PhD studies. I am also grateful to my colleagues for their warm support. It has been great pleasure to work in the department of English Language and Literature at Istanbul University at every stage of my PhD studies. My dear friends, who have always been with me since the beginning of my PhD studies, not only have encouraged me in my studies but also have been constant of my joy even in my depressive moments. I am grateful to them for always being with me. Most importantly, none of this would have been possible without the love and patience of my family. I owe special gratitude to my mother, Nazan İnceoğlu, my father, Ahmet İnceoğlu, and my brother Altuğ İnceoğlu for continuous, unconditional support, and the interest they showed in my studies and the motivation they gave me during those tiring times. My family has been a constant source of love, concern, support and strength all these years. I would like to express my heart-felt gratitude to them. Also, my extended family has aided and encouraged me throughout this time. I have to give a special mention for the support given by my grandmother, Necla İnceoğlu to whom this dissertation is dedicated although she could not see the completion of this study. I wish I could have told her that this dissertation had already finished before she passed away. However, I am sure that she is somewhere there watching, being proud of me. With my eternal love…

vi CONTENTS

Öz…………………………………………………………………………………..iii Abstract…………………………………………………………………………….iv Preface………………………………………………………………………………v Contents……………………………………………………………………………vii Introduction………………………….………………………………………………1 Chapter 1: The Beginning of the Faustus Myth……………………………………18 1.1 The Historical Faustus………………………………………………….19 1.2 The First Human Curiosity……………………………………………..28 1.3 The Theory of Knowledge……………………………………………...37 1.4 The Roots of Existentialism in the Faustus Myth………………………43 Chapter 2: Damnation of A Hero or A Villain: Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus………..………………………49 Chapter 3: Salvation of the Modern Man in Goethe’s Faust……...……………….69 Chapter 4: ‘The Elect’: A Servant to or to ? (The of the Elect)…….87 Conclusion………………….……………………………………………………..116 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………120 Curriculum Vitae (Özgeçmiş)……………………………………………………..137

vii ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1. Peter Paul Rubens and Frans Snyders, Prometheus Bound, 1611-1612…..27

Fig. 2. Michelangelo, The Fall and Expulsion of Adam and Eve, 1510…….…..29

Fig. 3. Benozzo Gozzoli, The Fall of Simon Magus, 1461-1462…………………32

Fig. 4. Pieter Bruegel, The Fall of Icarus, 1558.………………………………….47

Fig. 5. Luis Ricardo Falero, The of Faust, 1878…………………………..48

viii INTRODUCTION

Myths are public dreams, dreams are private myths.

People say that what we’re all seeking is a meaning for life. I think that what we’re really seeking is an experience of being alive, so that our life experiences on the purely physical plane will have resonance within our innermost being and reality, so that we can actually feel the rapture of being alive. (Campbell, 1988: 5)

In this dissertation, the focus will be on the Faustus myth1 in which Faustus is an overreacher, in pursuit of self knowledge, which he will achieve by going beyond the boundaries of traditional knowledge as propagated by the Orthodox institutions in the given culture. The Faustus myth2, before being identified as a myth, was the folktale of a man named Faustus who lived in Germany. After his story became popular, he reappeared, even in contemporary culture, in different art forms such as literature both high-brow and popular, including comics, the ballet, the opera. The real historical Faustus came onto the scene as a scholar and persistently reappeared in literature assuming different identities which however, shared basically the same qualities. In this study, different versions of the Faustus myth in literature, the first text being Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragicall Hiftory of the Life and Death of Doctor Favstvs3, the second Goethe’s Faust and the third John Fowles’ The Magus4 are going to be analyzed and interpreted. These works will be analysed in the context of the Renaissance, the early nineteenth century and the postmodern

1 In this dissertation, the latinized form of the name “Faustus” will be used except in the case of quotations taken from other texts and Goethe’s Faust. 2 The Faust Myth was coined by Burkhardt in 1855 as indicated in “Survey of the Faust Theme,” in Faust: A : Interpretive Notes, trans. by Walter Arndt, ed. by Cyrus Hamlin (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000), 583. 3 From now on this text will be alluded as Dr. Faustus. 4 John Fowles’ The Magus is going to be analyzed in terms of the Faustus myth, thus, Fowles’ rewriting of canonical works in his work is not going to be discussed in this dissertation.

1 period. In this chapter, further texts that can be read as different versions of the Faustus Myth or reveal an overreacher character like Faustus are also referred to. Underneath the popularity of this myth lies the basic human instinct to trespass the limits of traditional knowledge in pursuit of self-definition, authentic knowledge and power. This search and transgression also involve the desire to exercise the right of making free authentic choices. Oswald Spengler points out that modern Western Civilization can be characterized as Faustian. In other words, according to Spengler, modern life conditions lead man from “word” to “deed” (Spengler, 1991: 411) into the world of ambitions and strivings in which there exists the will to trespass the boundaries that are set for mankind. What is limited is restricted by God, thus the Faustian characters try to assume the role of God in their stories. Faustus, thus, represents universal issues that are relevant for all human beings, which explains the reason why he has acquired mythic stature. Indeed, a most persistent myth has evolved, the appeal of which has led one writer after the other to reshape it. Now, there arises the question of what kind of stories myths actually are and how these myths are related to human beings’ lives. As shall be noticed in the first chapter of this dissertation, the Faustus myth is closely connected with the feminine and it can be argued that the Faustus is repeatedly feminized in rewritings of his myth. The focus of this dissertation, however, is metaphysical and ethical significance and the transformations that he undergoes in narratives that historicize him. Hence, this dissertation will not be concerned with feminist readings and gender centred analyses of the texts. Richard Chase in his Quest for Myth argues that “civilized man lives in the same world as the savages” and adds that “our deepest experience, needs, and aspirations are the same, as surely as the crucial biological and psychic transitions occur in the life of every human being” (Chase, 1949: 20). This assumption of a basic human nature inherent in every one would explain the immense appeal of the Faustus myth throughout history and in different cultures. Faustus’ existential search for meaning in life, knowledge and power, which involves his transgression of the boundaries set by God, results in chaos both in his and body. Dissatisfied with

2 what he learns through Orthodox books, Faustus turns to black as a means of reaching self-knowledge to take control of his own life. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language defines ‘myth’ as 1. “a story that is usually of unknown5 origin. 2. a person or thing existing only in imagination or whose actuality is not verifiable”. At this point, it is necessary to point out that as opposed to the definition given by Webster’s, the Faustus myth is of known origin and Faustus is not a person existing only in the imagination because the myth undeniably starts with a real historical person. Thus, it would be more appropriate to quote Watt’s definition of myth for the Faustus Myth: “a traditional story that is exceptionally widely known throughout the culture, which is credited with a historical or quasi-historical belief” (Watt, 1996: xii), which is best illustrated in the story of Faustus. Webster’s moreover, argues that myth is a story which is at least partially traditional, and ostensibly relates historical events usually of such character as to serve to explain some practice, belief, institution, or natural phenomenon, and is especially associated with religious rites and beliefs. Watt too emphasizes the collective nature of myth by stating that it “embodies or symbolizes some of the most basic values of a society”. However, Faustus both rebels against and symbolizes the collective values and practices of a society. He undermines the reactionary institutions and thought in his society while at the same time representing its more progressive, radical impulses. In Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus for example, the character transgresses the law of God, which is still valid in his age, thereby symbolizing the newly rising Renaissance ideal of a man-centred universe which allows for greater individualism. Joseph Campbell defines myth as “a life-shaping image, a metaphor that creates a hero out of those who heed it and as a clue to the spiritual potentialities of the human life” (Campbell, op. cit., 5-6). Indeed Faustus as the daring overreacher acquires true heroic stature. Faustus indeed attempts to discover his spiritual potentialities, however not by employing holy knowledge but , which he hopes will enable him to understand what is unknown, that is, what cannot be

5 My emphasis.

3 explained, what cannot be reached through concrete knowledge. Like Webster’s and Watt, Campbell stresses the collective and representative nature of myths which:

1) Formulate and render an image of the universe, a cosmological image in keeping with the science of the time and of such kind that, within its range, all things should be recognized as parts of a single great holy picture. 2) Validate and maintain some specific social order 3) Shape individuals to the aims and ideals of their various social groups. (Campbell, 1970: 139)

The Faustus myth however, does not fit the definition of “validat[ing] and maintain[ing] some specific social order”; rather it attempts to destroy the old order and establish a radical one in its place. Campbell goes on to argue that human beings seek meaning, an extraordinary power to influence their lives, to prove that they really exist. This power does not necessarily come from God; in other words myths do not necessarily have to be religious, traditional; they are also secular and include a motivating factor and hero for people to believe in. Motivating factors in the stories of heroes have fundamental similarities. These heroes create a myth out of their curiosity, power seeking, and ambitions; besides, they all serve the formation of the myth. Similarly, psychoanalysts ranging from Freud, Otto Rank, Karl Abraham, Sandor Ferenczi, Ernest Jones, Hanns Sachs, and Max Eitingon to Géza Roheim, Theodor Reik, and Erich Fromm agree that myth is preoccupied with the basic elements of human existence (Vickery, 1996: 291). Freud suggested that myths arise out of and appeal to man’s subconscious mind, expressing the hopes and fears of prehistoric people. Since the most basic of these hopes and fears have not changed much, the old mythic forms still have power over modern people. According to Freud, myth is a daydream symbolizing a psychological and ethno-historical reality. He claims that “the theory of the instincts is to say our Mythology. Instincts are mythical entities, magnificent in their infiniteness.” (Freud, 1965: 84). Thus, “all myths stem from the dark pool of the subconscious, into which we must delve if we want to reach down to their true psychological meaning.” (Patai, 1972: 21). The

4 symbolic meaning of myth is found in man’s unconscious life. Fundamentals of one’s own existence carry complex human problems that are also related to the collective unconscious of mankind. Carl Jung developed the theory of the collective unconscious which gave a social rather than an individual basis to Sigmund Freud’s theories. According to Carl Jung, the formation of myths is a psychological process which is an essential or vital feature of the human psyche, and which can be shown to exist equally in primitive, ancient, and modern man. Mythical motifs, says Jung, are “structural elements of the psyche”, or, more precisely, of its deeper, fundamental part, which Jung calls “the nonconscious psyche,” or, briefly, “the unconscious.” This explains why mythological ideas are often paralleled by dreams (Jung, 1949: 109).

For Jung, a myth can come alive only when reclaimed and vivified by the human psyche. A myth originates or takes on new life and meaning when an individual mind attempts, sometimes desperately, to respond adequately to pressures from the world and from the collective unconscious. The subjective factor is important in Jung’s theory and first of all a myth must have a numinous and emotional impact on the individual’s psyche in order to be experienced and understood as a genuine myth. From the Jungian perspective, myths are essentially culturally elaborated representations of the contents of the deepest recesses of the human psyche: the world of the archetypes (Walker, 1995: 4).

Mythic dreams and fantasies are sources of energy and adaptation for the individuals’ struggle for greater awareness. A myth may enter an individual’s life spontaneously at some moment of crisis and enable him or her to make decisions and take actions (ibid., 93). The world of mythology according to Jung derives from the world of the archetypes of the collective unconscious. He believed that the tendency to think in terms of the forms which he calls archetypes, is an inherited trait passed along from one generation to another as a kind of storehouse of memories. Thus, myth becomes the controlling image in the lives of human beings; as the critic and novelist, Mark Schorer indicates, it is “a large, controlling image that gives philosophical meaning to the facts of ordinary life” (Murray, 1960: 355).

5 According to Géza Roheim, an anthropologically oriented psychoanalyst, a myth is a narrative, in which the actors are mostly divine and sometimes human, which has a definite locale, is part of a creed, and is believed by the narrator. In a folktale, on the other hand, the dramatis personae are mostly human, and especially the hero is human, although his opponents are frequently supernatural beings; the actors are nameless, the scene is just anywhere: it is purely fiction and not intended to be anything else (Patai, op. cit., 21). However, as noted above, the starting point of the Faustus myth was a historical person who called himself Faustus in the sixteenth century, and this man became one of the dramatis personae of folktales. And out of these folktales, the myth was born. Another anthropologist Branislav Malinowski says that myth is and has always been a way of reinforcing all the standards of a society, and that its most important functions are “in connection with religious, , moral influence and sociological principle” (Malinowski, 2001: 16) Faustus is not only reinforcing the more radical standards of his society, he is also transgressing his body’s and soul’s limits which were set by God. In “The Structural Study of Myth”, Claude Lévi-Strauss complains that today thinking about myth is merely reduced to “a picture of chaos” (Strauss, 1996: 118). A picture of chaos in man results in a picture of chaos in society however, without chaos nothing would be solved or conveyed. Similarly, Friedrich Nietzsche says that “You need chaos in your soul to give birth to a dancing star” (Goldman and Naparstek, 2001: 28). Strauss emphasizes that first there must be a problem that bothers the individual and this problematic, traumatic situation is spread throughout society. Hence, like Nietzsche, he argues that myth does not so much uphold the traditional order, but points to a force or thought in it which disturbs this order and creates chaos in the individual and social body. This disturbance of thoughts and actions in the individual creates a myth-making traumatic situation and chaos in the individual’s unconscious mind, which indulges in illicit ambitions and hopes. As noted above, the radical Renaissance emphasis on individualism introduces a disturbance and chaos into society as well as the mind of the individual. Faustus, as a result, rebels against the order due to his desire to be in rivalry with God which

6 results in his acting as a second god, as a sub-creator in pursuit of ruling the earth, a trait that implies his Satanic quality. Faustus chooses to be the lord and master of both himself and the world since he creates his own reality which results in chaos in his myth. He thus also emerges as a proud Satanic figure. Furthermore, he makes a deal with Mephistopheles, selling his soul for knowledge and power. Ernst Cassirer regarded myths as symbolic projections of human reality and he asserted that “mythical thinking is the individual’s mode of symbolically structuring the world” (Cassier, 1961: 94). Structuring the world and restructuring his place in the world, the mythical character places himself in such a way that he will reign over this universe, belonging to nowhere but at the same time belonging to everywhere. With the chaos in his soul, Faustus tries to restructure the world to establish order according to his terms by defying God. The psychological motivation behind the myth-making process is important. For Jung and Mircea Eliade, myth functions not only to reveal the individual deeper reality but also to enable him to experience it consciously or unconsciously; he is seeking to re-experience, not just rediscover, it. For Jung the individual seeks integration with this reality since this deeper reality exists in human beings (Segal, 1986: 91). Thus, myths deal with the essential components of individual existence; our deepest experience, needs, and aspirations are the same, as surely as the crucial biological and psychic transitions occur in the life of every human being. Roland Barthes says that “the very principle of myth [is that] it transforms history into nature (Barthes, 1973: 129). He characterizes “the function of myth itself as a form of colonialism, in which polyvalent signifier is weighted with a single sense whose specificity is masked in the name of a general application: one could say that language offers to myth an open-work meaning. Myth can easily insinuate itself into it and swell there: it is a robbery of colonization” (ibid., 132). In every age, in every representation and reinterpretation of the Faustus Myth, each Faustus shares similar qualities and this is the main reason that it is a fascinating subject to be explored in all ages. What Barthes criticizes myth for is that it totalizes in a negative way by distorting reality however, the character of Faustus exists in every century. Barthes also argues that popular myths are sustained by unconscious codes which

7 structure the production of meaning. He agrees with Lévi-Strauss’ reading of myths as collective strategies for resolving the contradictions of everyday social life at an imaginary level, thereby like Nietzsche and Strauss pointing to a preceding disturbing force and idea in society and the mind of an individual, and adds that “it is not man who thinks myths but myths which think man” (Kearney, 1989: 272). In other words, an authentic quest in myth for historical depth moves man to the quest of the authentic individual in particular in the postmodern labyrinth of clashing and confusing ideas. For example, in the postmodern novel, The Magus by John Fowles, the loss of religion, tradition, identity, and meaning necessitate the protagonist Nicholas’ need to establish his own myth which is going to be analyzed in detail in Chapter 4. Nicholas, like Faustus, establishes his own myth in The Magus. As noted above, Freud referred to myth as man’s unconscious life; Jung widened the subject to the collective unconscious that gave a social basis for myths rather than an individual one. Moreover, Emile Durkheim and Branislaw Malinowski considered myth from a sociological point of view. According to Durkheim, the main function of myth was to maintain and strengthen social solidarity. Moreover, Malinowski was equally concerned with how myths maintain group solidarity; but he increased the range of such explanations by showing how myths ratify and render sacred the institutions of society, from property rights to magic (Malinowski, 1926: 56). Northrop Frye, too, presents mythology as a total scheme for interpreting the universe. He views Mythology as a kind of Esperanto of the soul, a universal language of the quest for a world more imaginative and more liberated than the one inhabited, and, accordingly, the basis for any regenerated society of the future (Gorak, 1991: 121). According to Frye myth is the central informing power that gives archetypal significance to the ritual and archetypal narrative (Frye, 1996: 111). Frye means a certain type of story by a myth; it is a story in which some of the chief characters are or other beings larger in power than humanity. Very seldom is it located in history: its action takes place in a world above or prior to ordinary time. Hence, like the folktale, it is an abstract story-pattern. The characters can do what they like, which means what the story-teller likes: there is no need to be plausible or

8 logical in motivation. The things that happen in myth are things that do not happen only in stories; they also occur in life. Hence myth would naturally have the same kind of appeal for the fiction writer that folktales have. Myths as compared with folktales, are believed to have “really happened”, or to have some exceptional significance in explaining certain features of life, such as ritual (ibid., 130). According to Frye, myths are often used as allegories of science, or religion or morality; a myth may be told and retold: it may be modified or elaborated, or different patterns may be discovered in it; and its life is always the poetic life of a story, not the homiletic life of some illustrated truism (ibid., 131). The myth of the individualistic, proud overreacher Faustus has been modified and retold throughout centuries. Faustus, in search of the discovery of the true self, his true power, transcending the physical self and material world, building a bridge between this world and the other world, craving the sublime power of God, has been one of the mythical figures associated with complex human problems. On the one hand, Faustus, being a scholar, and on the other hand being a magician with forbidden powers, appeals to human beings since most individuals suffer from intellectual contradictions resembling those undergone by Faustus. Faustus is neither a sacred character nor god or demi-god; he experiences the kind of disturbance, ambition, chaos that almost all human beings experience. This chaotic situation originates from his desire to assume power beyond that given by God, in other words to reach the secrets of this and the other world. The Faustus myth has been rewritten and reinterpreted in different narratives maintaining the basic peculiarities of the myth however, modifying the story. But the Faustian concerns remain the same throughout each era. Despite the seeming diversity of theoretical approaches which suggest that myths attest to the age they flourish in and the perception of the individual and society and their attachment to the religion, philosophy, culture, and history that society feeds on, most of the above approaches agree on the collective and representative nature of myth. The roots of the legendary Faustus are traced back to the early sixteenth century in which its origin appears to be centred on a man who called himself Dr. Johann Faustus. However, its real origin goes back far in history, since we can even see a cause of it in, for example,

9 Sumerian mythology: The Epic of Gilgamesh in which the secret of eternal life is represented by a plant. At the end of Tablet XI, Gilgamesh plucks the plant-of-life from the depths of the seas and thus holds in his hand the secret of eternal life, the means to join the immortal gods, a state of being which he has sought and suffered for. But rather than eating the plant immediately he says:

Ur-shanabi, this plant is the remedy for our sorrow; With it man will have the supreme healing. I will take it to Uru-the-Fold, I will give it to them to eat, divide it amongst them: its name shall be “the-old-man-is-young-again”; then I will it some myself, return to the time of my youth. (Foster, Tablet XI: lines, 278-83)

The power to heal, the power to control the universe, the means of holding the mysteries of eternal life is passed to human beings through a plant in The Epic of Gilgamesh. We are, moreover, confronted with Prometheus who is an overreacher in Greek mythology, becoming a rival of , the Greek God. Striving for knowledge, meaning, power and material wealth is not only a modern concern but has also been the concern of every century since the beginning of mankind. Whether these overreachers are saved or they undergo a physical or psychological hell as a result of their deeds, the myth of the overreacher has always been a fascinating subject in literature. For example, in Dante’s Inferno in The Divine Comedy, the descent into hell is a descent into Dante’s subconscious, into his past in order to understand why he is lost, why he is estranged, why he is alienated from the world. Dante is an overreacher like Faustus, and it is Dante’s own decision to descend into hell to bring Beatrice back and thereby usurp God’s power over life and death, as it is Faustus’ own determination to play the role of God. While Dante is trying to climb up the hill and reach the light, he loses “all hope of going up the hill” (Alighieri, 1962: canto I, line 54) due to the three beasts’ stopping him on his way to light and he decides to descend into hell in order to face the evil sides of his subconscious. His despair leads him onto another path but first he has to pass through hell to reach the light. In Inferno, if one dies unrepentant, one is damned forever in hell.

10 At this point, it may be useful to consider the etymological roots of the word ‘evil’: in English, the word evil has “a folk usage that derives in part from Teutonic tradition and in common with the German ‘übel’ and the Dutch ‘euvel’, derives from the Teutonic ‘ubiloz’ which refers to the root up, over; primarily meaning ‘exceeding due measure’, or overstepping proper limits’” (Pocock, 1985). In English there appears to be a strong and a weak meaning of the word evil (MacFarlane, 1985). Present definitions of evil incorporate a number of different meanings: 1a: not good morally: wicked 1b: arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct archaic; 2a: inferior 2b: causing discomfort or repulsion: Offensive; 2c: Disagreeable; 3a: Causing harm: pernicious 3b: marked by misfortune: unlucky; archaic- evil, 2. evil n. 1. Something that brings sorrow, distress or calamity 2a: the fact of suffering and misfortune 2b. Cosmic evil force n. (Webster’s Dictionary: 1996) Starting with Christopher Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus in the sixteenth century there arose a popular literary interest in the story of Faustus in drama. Moreover, with the rise of the bourgeoisie and the parallel emergence of the new genre, this myth has also created Faustian man in the novels of different ages. Although the focus in this dissertation will be on the postmodern representation of Faustus in the novel, the various representations of the Faustus myth in the English novel in general will be discussed chronologically below. The novels using the Faustus myth become popular particularly between the years 1850 and 1900, a time interval which covers the Victorian Age, an age of social, political, educational and scientific concerns, raised by the rapid progress in science and technological equipment, and the social and political problematics engendered by the era’s strict observance of Utilitarianism, clashing with stringent realities of poverty and unrest. These changes produce the disturbance in society which in turn produces chaos in the mind of the individual who is, thus, encouraged to transgress the law of God. But before these years, these overreachers are not so explicitly depicted by the Enlightenment mind, since one of the basic tenets of the age is a belief in laws governing the workings of the world as tangible reality, and since a Prime Mover, having set the motions but keeping his distance is not actually a very adequate target for rebellion.

11 This thesis is not about the rise of the novel, but nevertheless the rise of a powerful bourgeoisie brought with it a new genre of literature in the form of the novel. From its onset, we can see echoes of the Faustus myth in many works of fiction: Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, for example, is an overreacher like Faustus: he refuses the option of the Golden Mean advocated by his father and desires more of life. However, his quest is for fortune and the establishment of his own brand of social structure, not for knowledge or intellectual supremacy. His quest for the self ends in colonizing the island, and recreating, in many ways, the very structure he rebelled against initially. Romanticism as a movement was much more prone to the creation of Faustian protagonists. The Gothic, one of the texts of which will be discussed below, fully accommodated the questing, rebellious, and distraught figure in search of divine knowledge. The Victorian period, on the other hand, saw in the novels produced at the time, reverberations of the Faustus myth, where the natural and societal impediments haunting the contemporary individual acts as an insurmountable obstacle against the overreaching ambitions of the character: Dr. Lydgate in Middlemarch is a particularly tragic re-enactment of Faustus with his wings clipped by Victorian provincial/societal obstructions and conventionalism. Brontë’s Heathcliff, the neo-Gothic alternative to the stunted Victorian male character, is likewise unable to make good his initial promise, and is relegated to a ghostly existence, reminiscent of Hamlet’s father, in the fringes of life. To return to Romantic fiction and to more flagrantly Faustian narratives, in the early nineteenth century English novel, we are confronted with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus (1817) in which the protagonist, Victor Frankenstein’s Faustian ambition of “explor[ing] unknown powers” and exercising them himself is narrated.

…soon my mind was filled with one thought, one conception, one purpose. So much has been done, exclaimed the soul of Frankenstein,- more, far more, will I achieve; treading in the steps already marked, I will pioneer a new way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation. (Shelley, 1985: 49)

12 When Victor Frankenstein was thirteen years old, he read the works of Cornelius Agrippa and who were contemporaries of Dr. Faustus. Cornelius Agrippa was a magician and Cabbalist and lived between the years of 1486 and 1535. H. C. Agrippa influenced Frankenstein in his childhood. In his De Occulta Philosophia (1531: Ch. 42), he says, for example, that “Natural magic is… nothing but the chief power of all the natural sciences… - perfection of Natural Philosophy and… the active part of the same”. Another influence on the main character of Shelley’s novel, Paracelsus (1493-1541), was a “Swiss alchemist and physician who pioneered the treatment of certain diseases based on empirical observation; he also stated that human beings could be produced without mother and father by alchemical procedures.” (Shelley, op. cit., 268). The one a magician, the other an alchemist and physician, they, like the sorcerers and practitioners of black magic in the Faustus Myth, became the lords of Victor’s imagination in creating his creature. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein carries the Faustus myth a step further, allowing its protagonist Dr. Frankenstein to create life to understand it, since abstract knowledge is not enough for him. However, the shifting power relation between creator and creature breaks social taboos and thereby challenges social norms and laws. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein creates a human being, but rejects the responsibilities that a creator has to take. He plays the role of God, but fails to fulfil it. While he is very busy with his desire to control and manipulate nature, Dr. Frankenstein completely neglects the creature he has created. His attempt is paralleled by that of the frame narrator of the novel, Robert Walton, who is trying, satanically, to circumnavigate, and thus overpower, the world in his quest for the elusive passage through the North Pole. Both characters thus display the characteristic urge to defy limitations set by nature and by God upon mankind, His subjects. In 1886, Robert Louis Stevenson added a further rotation to the Faustus theme when the monster Mr. Hyde emerged from the gentle Dr. Jekyll as a result of Jekyll’s losing control of his knowledge. Here the Faustian mad scientist seems to be standing for the individual’s desire to prove his existence as in all the other texts below. The pursuit of knowledge is desirable, but, ultimately frightening in the

13 experiments of Dr. Jekyll. He takes the potion that he mixes, in order to free himself from Victorian restraints, but having risked to venture outside the bounds of acceptable science, like Faustus before him, he is destroyed. Jekyll covers his actions in the language of science, justifying them purely in terms of positivism and of scientific theory. But the human mind, the novel seems to argue, is no place for science to explore what is unknown due to the fact that the boundaries set by God are in danger of being trespassed in the process. In another Faustian novel, The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896), Wells updates the Frankenstein theme of creating monsters. Like Mary Shelley’ creature, the body parts of which are human and animal, remains collected from “[t]he dissecting room and the slaughter-house” (Shelley, op. cit., 48), Wells portrays Doctor Moreau as a scientist who creates monsters that violate the distinction between the human and the animal. Science drives the mad obsession in both Doctor Frankenstein and Doctor Moreau as well as in the alchemist Faustus. According to John R. Reed, Wells’ purpose in The Island of Dr. Moreau is to show that “Man himself is the only alienating power in the universe because he can conceive himself as separate from the bios” (Paolo, 2002: 9-10). Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Moreau, like Shelley’s Dr. Frankenstein, are irresponsible, utterly careless. Their curiosity, their mad investigations bring them to the level of obsession with their wishes and passion to be overreachers. However, these obsessions make the characters live symbolic hell in this world. In the novels mentioned here, there is a metaphorical hell in this world. Whether physical or psychological, there is no escape from hell for Dr. Jekyll, Dr. Moreau, Dr. Frankenstein and also for Dorian Gray as will be discussed below. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and The Island of Doctor Moreau were written in the nineteenth century. In the same century, we see the roots of Existentialism, which will culminate with Sartre, for example, in the twentieth century, being constituted by Nietzsche, Kierkegaard. The question of freedom of choice has a central position in Existentialism, although it is not a new concern. Freedom is defined as equal to the free choice of the individual. Then the individual is free to make a choice; however, this freedom isolates the individuals from society

14 if they cannot reach reconciliation with society. This choice must be beneficial for the whole of society as well as for the individual which thereby, involves a reconciliation between them. When an erroneous choice is made, alienation between the two sets in. It is Dr. Jekyll’s free choice to drink the potion that turns him into Mr. Hyde in the beginning. However, it is no more freedom of choice at all after the creature takes over the control of Dr. Jekyll. The question of freedom turns into an abstract ethical problem since it is not always possible for real men and women to become free by ignoring the constraints that hold them in bondage. It is the same in Dr. Moreau’s case: he chooses to be on an isolated island, which also symbolizes the self, to carry out his experiments on the creatures he turned into monsters until he is destroyed by them just like Dr. Jekyll is ruined by Mr. Hyde. Apart from the novels that portray scientist figures mad and obsessed with knowledge, another novel which covertly re-enacts the Faustus theme is Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray (1890). It is based on the theme of capturing eternal youth and beauty, bought at the price of one’s soul, and upheld through the destruction of the protagonist and others. What is significant and meaningful in this story is that the Faustus of the early twentieth century seeks something different from wisdom and enlightenment. The eternal personification of youth and beauty acts as an alternative symbolism to indicate Dorian’s point of view as an art object in his own myth of modern times. Dorian Gray is translated into an art object by the man who paints him. This Faustian character assumes the identity of an art object through which he seeks to gratify the typical Faustian desire to exercise power over life and death. Dorian’s picture, having thus assumed a utility must be destroyed in order to be purely art again. Since Dorian Gray’s beauty is fed through art, it is not considered as art anymore because Oscar Wilde says in his “Preface”: “All art is quite useless” (Wilde, 2001: 4). It has to lose its function in order to be seen as an art again. The texts that I have mentioned above were composed before mankind actually experienced its own potentials in mindless mass destruction. The boundaries between good and evil, right and wrong were still comparatively relevant. The narratives’ reworking the Faustus Myth still had certain norms to fall back upon.

15 When it comes to the postmodern era, the myth completely breaks away from the norms; the borders between fiction and reality; history, philosophy and literature collapse and the roles of good and evil are blurred. In the German novel, Thomas Mann (1875-1955) centred the Faustus myth on a modern adaptation of the pact between the Renaissance necromancer and the in his novel: Doktor Faustus: Das Leben des Tonsetzers Adrian Leverkühn, erzahlt von einem Freunde (Doctor Faustus: The Life of the German Composer Adrian Leverkühn as Told by a Friend) (1947). He transformed the myth into the tale of a syphilitic artist who makes a . This disease enables Faustus to create innovative works that are admired. We see the effects of the Second World War on the novel, because, as the war comes to a traumatic close (1943-45), Leverkühn’s career comes to an end due to the damages of syphilis after a twenty four years’ creativity the disease enabled him to enjoy. The tragic end of the novel was almost inescapable because of Germany’s position in the Second World War. Germany had become a synonym for evil due to the Nazis in the twentieth century and could never hope for salvation (Fetzer, 1996: 89). In this dissertation, the postmodern representation of the Faustus myth is going to be analyzed in detail in one contemporary English novel, John Fowles’ The Magus, with, echoing in the background, the reverberations of previous texts from previous ages. As the most influential of these, Marlowe’s and Goethe’s stand out to be taken into account. They constitute historical cornerstones indicating the reappearance of the myth in times of societal traumas and its reworkings within the conditions of three major periods in human history. Mann’s version displays affinities with Fowles’, as they are historically posited within similar problematics. In The Magus, Nicholas’ existentialist quest ends where it starts. The Faustus myth thus constitutes a cycle in which it starts and ends tragically in Marlowe’s Renaissance Dr. Faustus, ends in salvation in Goethe’s Romantic Faust, and ends in an ambiguity bordering on meaninglessness in Fowles’ The Magus. The texts mentioned above imply a break from the norms, a rebellion against God in each age in accordance with social, political, educational and scientific

16 upheavals. Human beings desire to be immortal by destroying death, and they are determined to reach the infinitude of God abolishing their own finitude. To sum up, Jung asserts that myths “have a vital significance. They not merely represent, but also are the psychic life of the primitive tribe, which instantly disintegrates and perishes if it loses its mythical heritage, like a man who has lost his soul. The mythology of a tribe is its living religion, whose loss is always and everywhere, even in the case of civilized man, a moral catastrophe” (Patai, op. cit., 23). This interpretation of Jung confirms the parallelism of the Faustus myth representations in different ages. As Frye says, myths are often used as allegories of science, or religion or morality and myths may be told and retold: they may be modified or elaborated, or different patterns may be discovered in them; and their lives as versions of the Faustus myth are not limited to only one generation. As discussed in this chapter, there are some universal passions, ambitions, hopes of human beings, and because of this universality, according to Jung, the great myths cannot be attributed to one single author and they can be rewritten again and again without losing their power. They represent truly immortal feelings and behaviour (Highet, 1996: 188). The following chapter will show how the historical Faustus has become the personification of these universal qualities. Under the light of these views, it is not a coincidence that in the Faustus myth, Faustus has been transgressing the reactionary norms of a society, or it would be better to say each society that archetypal Faustus belongs to. He has become the personification of man’s ambition for boundless knowledge, in other words, power, considering Francis Bacon’s aphorism “Knowledge is power” (Bacon, 1966: 28). In the following chapter, the beginning of the Faustus myth with a real historical person and his representation in the Faustus myth is going to be analyzed in terms of Gnosticism, theories of knowledge, and existentialism.

17 CHAPTER 1

The Beginning of the Faustus Myth

The Faustus myth starts in the Renaissance, in which scientific knowledge explodes. The invention of the printing press, the emergence of humanism, the rediscovery of ancient civilizations and the classics, and the emphasis upon the individual resulted in the questioning of faith in the Church’s authority. Human beings started to realize their importance as microcosms in the macrocosm and tried to give meaning to their role in the universe, on the one hand being quite aware of the limits set by God, and, on the other hand, trying to remove those boundaries. Thus, the individual becomes the little god of his world (Müller, 1976: 103). In other words, instead of following the rules of the Church, people either pursued scientific knowledge or knowledge beyond human limitations since the Church annihilated the possibility of human beings acting as sub-creators. Due to the anxiety of people’s awakening into consciousness, the Church banned curiositas. St. Augustine, who was one of the Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church, believed that “whatever could be classified as idle curiosity is itself an effect of the fall, and as such should be discouraged, even repressed” (Rist, 1996: 144-45). Pursuing knowledge beyond human limitations resulted in the emergence and the spread of and . The most popular and widely known example to the second group is a person who is claimed to be a real historical personage: Dr. Johann (or Georg) Faustus. Uncertainty about God’s existence, the conflict between good and evil is transferred onto this real man and this transference, unlike most myths, begins with a real historical person, Faustus, becoming the representative of human consciousness that was awakened in the Renaissance. Before the Renaissance,

In the both sides of human consciousness- that which was turned within as that which was turned without- lay dreaming or half awake beneath a common veil. The veil was woven of faith, illusion, and childish prepossession, through which the world and history were seen clad in strange hues. Man was conscious of himself only as a member of a race, people, and party, family, or corporation- only through some general category. (Burckhardt, 1990: 81)

18 According to the quotation above, in contrast to the Middle Ages, Renaissance people lifted this veil and emancipated themselves from the countless limitations and reached a higher degree of individual development due to both intellectual and scientific developments. With the Renaissance, a new way of looking at life and the world emerged, entirely different from the Middle Ages. However, this did not take place all of a sudden since the Middle Ages itself was also characterized by a return to classical pagan Greek and Roman texts on the one hand and on the other a familiarity with Christian texts and the culture of learning in the east. Nevertheless, in the Middle Ages, there was a universal order called the Chain of Being and individuals belonged to this hierarchical universe. God stood at the top, the angels followed Him, and then came the human beings. To act against this order and struggle to destroy this hierarchical universe would cause disorder and result in chaos. In the Renaissance, this unity was shattered: the questioning of belief and disbelief in God and the humanists’ claims for a higher position for human beings who would thus be in rivalry with God, resulted in the collapse of this order. Belief in the individual’s power to direct his own destiny engendered greater ambitions for ultimate power. Thus, belief in God as He was presented by institutionalized religion was shaken by ambitious individuals who looked for power beyond the limits set by God. However, acquiring immense power was not possible despite the individual’s full awakening into his intellectual capacity. White magic had always been performed and had been a part of everyday life throughout all ages. Thus, the historical Faustus studies the arts of necromancy and conjuration which enable him to reach immense power and knowledge. Faustus owes his gifts not to God but to the Devil at the price of his own soul. In magic, instead of academic knowledge, he finds an opportunity to achieve God-like power.

1.1. The Historical Faustus

The starting point of this thesis stems from a Georg or Johann Faustus, a real historical personage, who was reported to be born at Knittlingen in Germany around the 1480’s. And it is believed that from 1532 to 1536 this person practiced medical

19 alchemy and soothsaying in the Rhineland and Lower Franconia with success; and he is reported to have died in 1540 or 1541 in a village in Württemberg (Atkins, 2001: 573). Various documents from the sixteenth century support the idea that a necromancer calling himself Faustus really lived in the early sixteenth century. In 1507 the writer, the polymath, Johannes Tritheim, a friend and teacher of the occultist Agrippa von Nettesheim and abbot of a Benedictine monastery at Würzburg, wrote to his friend Johannes Virdung, who was a professor of mathematics and court astrologer at Heidelberg (Ziolkowski, 2000: 46) in reply to his inquiry of Faustus’ identity:

Georg Sabellicus... is a worthless fellow... who should be castigated to stop his proclaiming of abominable and sacrilegious doctrines... [H]e has chosen to call himself Magister Georgius Sabellicus, Faustus junior, fons necromanticorum, astrologus, magus secundus, chiromanticus, aëromanticus, pyromanticus, in arte secundus. (Atkins, 2001: 573)

Basing ourselves on the quotation above, we understand that a person who is called Faustus junior really exists and we deduct that he knew how planets and stars rule in the life of human beings and he could tell the future by using fire, he could dive deep into the water and high above the sky into the secrecies of the universe. He is in search of a spiritual quest in both this physical world and also in unsocialized infinite space. Faustus can descend into the underworld and fly above in the sky for the spark of the divine in himself, which will enable him to compete with God.

Tritheim also stated that Faustus claimed that he “acquired such knowledge of all wisdom and such a memory, that if all the books of Plato and Aristotle, together with their whole philosophy, had totally passed from the memory of man, he himself, through his own genius, like another Hebrew Ezra (a Hebrew priest, scribe, and reformer of Judaism of the fifth century B.C. in Babylon and Jerusalem), would be able to restore them all with increased beauty” (Watt, op. cit., 8). Faustus’ sense of individualism, his pride and genius together with his sense of beauty result in his perception of absolute knowledge that dominate the universe regardless of God. Due to this presumptuous claim on the part of Faustus, he was also appointed as a

20 schoolmaster, but had to flee when it was discovered that he was sexually seducing his pupils. Furthermore, Tritheim asserted that Faustus even claimed that he could perform all the miracles of Christ. As quoted before, Faustus has chosen to call himself necromancer, astrologer, chiromancer, aeromancer and pyromancer; however, he is also aware of the fact that these identities that enable him to exceed his limits determined by God cannot be accepted as equal to Christ’s miracles. Thus he claims he could even perform the miracles of Christ to rival as a performer of God. According to Heidelberg University reports on January 15, 1509, a Johannes Faustus was given a bachelor’s degree in the Faculty of Theology. It is observed that while Tritheim’s records are pointing to a Georg Faustus, the Heidelberg University records refer to a Johannes Faustus. Thus, since there is no exact reliable reference to the forename of Dr. Faustus, with the exception of the quotations, his last name will be used to prevent confusion. On February 12, 1520, Doctor Faustus came to Bamberg where he cast a horoscope for the bishop and received ten gulden in return. On June 17, 1528, “Dr. Jörg Faustus of Heidelberg” was banished from the city of Ingolstadt, and on May 10, 1532 it was recorded that the soothsayer “Dr. Faustus, the great sodomite and necromancer” ’s residence was denied by the city of Nuremberg (Butler, 1948: 122- 123). Thus, Faustus as an overreacher is officially demonized.

A full account of Faustus’ death is given in the Hellenist Melanchton’s student Johannes Manlius’ Locorum Communium Collectanea (Latin 1563, German 1565):

I know a certain man by the name of Faust from Kundling (assumed to be present day Knittlingen), which is a small place near my birthplace. When he was a student at Cracow he studied magic, for there was formerly much practice of the art in that city and in that place too there were public lectures in that art. He wandered about everywhere and talked of many mysterious things. When he wished to provide a spectacle at Venice he said he would fly to heaven. So the devil raised him up and then cast him down so that he was dashed to the ground and almost killed. But he did not die. A few years ago the same Johannes Faust was very downcast in a village in Württemberg on the day before his death. The innkeeper asked him why he was so sad, as this was contrary to his usual demeanour (for he was normally a complete rascal and prone to great wickedness. So much so that he almost died as a result of his great whoring). Whereupon he said to the innkeeper, if he should hear anything during the night, then he should not be afraid. At midnight there was a great disturbance. In the morning, Faust did not appear. And when midday came, the innkeeper in the company of

21 several men broke into his room and found him lying dead beside his bed, the devil having turned his head around to face his back. (Durrani, 2004: 40)

At that time, Cracow was considered as the centre of alchemy, magic and the beginnings of chemistry as a subject for serious study (Couling, 2005:343). As far as the relationship between alchemy and Magic and alchemy’s being the herald of chemistry is considered, it might be seen as natural that public lectures on Magic were held at those times. In this quotation, there is also the archetypal dream of Faustus, that is to say, his desire to fly like Icarus to isolate himself from other people, and to observe them from the highest point on which God stands. However, as this desire signifies a rebellion against God, he is demonized as a “rascal”. Moreover, this quotation also indicates that Faustus has foreknowledge of the time of his death. This account is the original one in the Chapbook Historia von D. Johann Fausten (1587), which has been the most popular book printed in Germany after Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible. After his death, Faustus became even more popular and the number of writings relating to his story grew. In the Medieval Age, magic stood for an alternative to the generally accepted, institutionalized religion, and was considered as a science since it supposedly allowed foretelling by considering the effects of the positions of planets and stars, the phases of the moon and it also enabled the sorcerers to predict the unstable characters of human beings. Moreover, it is believed that the activity of magic gives the opportunity to human beings to be in rivalry with God. If one knows the true character of this universe’s spirit, the secrets of both Heaven and Hell, all the principles of the ordering of nature, one can reach God who dwells beyond. Thus, sorcerers were acting as counsellors to the king in the Medieval Age. When it comes to the Renaissance, Europe was not safe anymore for those claiming magical powers because starting from the late Middle Ages and reaching to its climax after the Reformation, awareness of the devil and witchcraft increased. It reached to its climax after the Reformation because the Reformation attempts to liberate human beings while the church attempts to cow them back into obedience. Moreover, the awareness of the Devil’s power grew among the clergymen. Witchcraft was declared an increasing threat in Europe. Particularly the Dominicans, and their Thomas

22 Aquinas declared that all works of magicians were necessarily evil; men were constantly subject to the attacks of . In 1229, Gregory IX started the Inquisition and stated that all magical practices should be equated with a willing allegiance to the devil. It was not until the fifteenth century that learned authorities began to insist that such powers could only derive from some kind of pact made by the witch with the devil (Coffin, 2002: 537). In 1484, Pope Innocent VIII issued a Bull, known as Summis Desiderantes which directed all ecclesiastical authorities to assist the witch-hunting activities of the Inquisitors (Watt, op. cit., 14). Following the Bull, two years later (The Hammer against the Witches), which gave detailed information on the practices and beliefs of witches and how they could be recognized and caught, was published.

“And what, then, is to be thought of those witches who in this way sometimes collect male organs in great numbers, as many as twenty or thirty members together, and put them in a bird’s nest, or shut them up in a box, where they move themselves like living members, and eat oats and corn, as has been seen by many and is a matter of common report? It is to be said that it is all done by devil’s work and illusion, for the senses of those who see them are deluded in the way we have said. For a certain man tells that, when he had lost his member, he approached a known witch to ask her to restore it to him. She told the afflicted man to climb a certain tree, and that he might take which he liked out of the nest in which there were several members. And when he tried to take a big one, the witch said: You must not take that one; adding, because it belongs to a parish priest.” (Kramer and Sprenger, 1928: 428)

Witches are usually considered females, while sorcerers and alchemists are mostly considered males. What is interesting in this quotation is that witches collect male organs in great numbers in order to reach male power. Moreover, through many phallic symbols witches think that they will achieve male power that will make them reach God since the organ of a parish priest can be associated with Godly power. According to the Bible, evil is innate in females so females’ association with witchcraft is not an extraordinary issue; for example in the quotation below, while Martin Luther (1483-1546) claims that Faustus was captured by diabolical powers, he also mentions Faustus’ calling the Devil his brother-in-law, which indicates the female’s blood relationship and identification with the Devil.

When one evening at the table a sorcerer named Faust was mentioned, Doctor Martin said in a serious tone: ‘The devil does not make use of the services of sorcerers against me. If he had

23 been able to do me any harm, he would have done it long ago. To be sure he has often had hold of me by the head, but he had to let me go again.’ Mention was made of magicians and the magic art, and how Satan blinded men. Much was said about Faust, who called the devil his brother-in-law, and the remark was made: ‘If I, Martin Luther, had given him even my hand, he would have destroyed me; but I would not have been afraid of him, - with God as my protector, I would have given him my hand in the name of the Lord.’ (Palmer/More, 1936: 92)

Through the female’s bound with Satan, Faustus relates himself to the Devil. While witch hunting activities were at their height, Faustus was claiming magical powers freely and he was lucky not to be caught and burnt. He was seen as a threat to Christian faith by Martin Luther, however concentration was on female witches in those times because females having power through magic was not tolerable. Thus a male figure named Faustus emerged and all stories related to his magical powers and his subcreator role mythicized this figure. Faustus’ escape was facilitated by the fact that Lutherans destroyed most of the protections against witches offered by medieval . The Lutheran church was no longer offering the remedy of exorcism and reduced to minimum. Thus, the individual is, to some extent, left alone by the Church. Indeed Erasmus criticized Luther for leaving the individual alone in the world against the Devil’s terrors. It was the Lutheran counter-movement that eventually transformed the historical George Faustus into the demonized figure of myth: the individual Faustus signs a pact with his blood with the devil since he knows that what he desires will not be given by God but only by magic (Watt, op. cit., 18). Philip Begardi, a physician in Worms, stated that there were some people who claimed that they were cheated by Faustus’ black magic (Ziolkowski, 2000: 51). Though Luther said that evil could not destroy him, he believed in the existence of the Devil and that every misfortune and came from the Devil. While Luther believes in the presence of the Devil, he also uses his presence as a tool to make people believe in himself. He also claimed that the Devil was trying to stop him while he was translating the New Testament. In his Table Talk, he said that the Devil visited him from time to time and in one of these visits, Luther threw an inkpot at the Devil. This ink stain can still be traced in Wartburg Castle (Durrani, op. cit., 41). His throwing ink symbolizes the action Luther takes against the Devil, instead of

24 only uttering words. Moreover, ink symbolizes sperm, writing, and creation as opposed to Satan’s destructive nature. In spite of intellectual developments during the Renaissance, as stated above magicians still existed and they were believed to be in contact with the Devil. It is noteworthy that in an age that experiences intellectual and scientific developments, the Devil remains part of both the daily life and literature of this era. The main reason for this ‘awareness’ of evil was the publications of the new translations of the Bible. The age of the Reformation sees the deeds of Faustus as a threat. Although Martin Luther devotes his life to banishing ancient superstitions and heresy from religious life, he is also enthralled by a medieval . According to Martin Luther:

Humans are possessed by the devil in two different ways: some physically, by virtue of their external appearance and rank, others spiritually, through their minds and , as is the case with all godless people. In imbeciles and madmen, who have been possessed in body alone, the devil has merely taken over their outward physique and restricts himself to torturing their bodies, not their minds or souls, which remain unaffected and undamaged. Their can be driven out through prayer and fasting. But the enemies of God and the blasphemers are possessed in their minds, and they cannot be helped, nor can they be saved.

(ibid., 46)

For Luther, once the mind is infected, the chances of salvation are almost impossible and man is no longer free to say anything before the Devil and his promises to the Devil become binding. Faustus’ mind was so much affected by the Devil that he could not be helped in the original myth that was generally accepted as an account of his life. And soon after his death it was said that he had been ruined by the Devil with whom he claimed to have made a pact, and accordingly, many traditional tales of the supernatural became attached to his name. Some were collected around 1570 by Christoph Rosshirt, a schoolmaster, in an illustrated manuscript and from this work, the earliest published work devoted to the Faustus myth: Historia von D. Johann Fausten... Gedruckt zu Franckfurt am Mayn, durch Johann Spies. M.D.LXXXVII was published in 1587. This first Faustus Book became a bestseller soon after its publication and by 1600 it was translated into English, Danish, French, and Dutch. Johann Spies, the publisher of the German

25 Faustus Book, comments on his discovery of the manuscript in his preface to the Historia:

Everywhere, at parties and social gatherings, there is great inquiry for a history of this Faustus. Indeed, a number of modern writers have touched here and there upon the subject of this magician, his diabolic art and frightful end, but I have often wondered that, as yet, no one has presented this terrible tale in an orderly fashion and published it as a warning to the whole of Christendom. I inquired amongst scholars and learned men as to whether perhaps someone had already written such a work but I was unable to discover anything for certain until recently I received a manuscript from a good friend at Speyer. (Jones, 1994: 5)

The story of this man became the subject matter of folkloristic themes and the model of a man damned for using forbidden powers. He rejects Christianity, signing a blood pact and bartering his soul for twenty-four years of magical powers and the services of the devil Mephistopheles, who will provide both high living standards and extensive knowledge about both the world and also Hell and its torments. This service includes access to magical powers that will enable Faustus to reach the infinite and in return for this service Faustus serves the Devil eternally. Faustus’ will of reaching the infinite by using magic results in his fall. In Faustus’ time, it was believed that spiritual forces rule the world and nearly everybody believed in magic. In history until the Reformation, as stated before, magic represented an alternative to the generally accepted, institutionalized religion. The first man on record to enter a pact with the Devil with magic in the Christian era was the servant of Senator Proterius of Caesarea who was reputed to have engaged Satan’s help in order to gain his master’s daughter in marriage. According to the 4th century legend, his soul was saved through the prayer of St. Basil (Wiemken, 1961: 24). However, Faustus, both in the original source book and also in Christopher Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, is punished for trying to reach forbidden knowledge. But two centuries later, in the late eighteenth century, in Goethe’s version, his soul is saved. One of the weaknesses of humankind according to the established religion, the desire for limitless knowledge and power is emphasized and punished in the character of Faustus until Goethe.

26

Fig. 1. Peter Paul Rubens and Frans Snyders, Prometheus Bound (1611-1612)

27 WOE to thee, Simon Magus! woe to you, His wretched followers! who the things of God, Which should be wedded unto goodness, them, Rapacious as ye are, do prostitute For gold and silver in adultery!

(Alighieri, op. cit., canto XIX, lines 1-5)

1.2 The First Human Curiosity

As mentioned in the previous subchapter, the writer Tritheim refers to Faustus as “magus secundus” and links The Faustus Myth with the story of Simon Magus in the Bible. Indeed, Simon Magus is seen as the Faustus tradition’s actual originator. However, if we go back further to its mythical origin, as mentioned above, we come across Prometheus who is the creator of mankind according to Greek mythology (Graves, 1992: 143). Prometheus could be seen as a godlike figure who brings fire to mankind. On the other hand he could be identified with a sorcerer who plays with fire or a trickster who attempts to cheat Zeus. This duality is the common quality in Faustus’ character both in the Faustus Myth and also in the characters of the works that interpret the Faustus Myth, with more emphasis on the blurred, complex roles of good and evil. As a result of Prometheus’ giving fire to mankind, he and all mortal beings are punished severely through a clay woman made by the order of Zeus. The first mortal woman Pandora is created and sent to earth with a sealed jar that contains a multitude of evils (Rosenberg, 1997: 173). Thus, while Prometheus is opening the gates of civilization to mankind on the one hand, he causes the opening of the sealed jar and the spread of the multitude of evils from the sealed jar on the other. Before relating the Faustus myth to the story of Simon Magus, we should discuss the first Christian story on human curiosity and desire, which results in the ‘Original Sin’.

28 Fig. 2. Michelangelo, The Fall and Expulsion of Adam and Eve (1510)

In the Bible, before Eve was created of one of Adam’s ribs, God tells Adam that he shall not eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Furthermore, God warns Adam that on the day he eats the fruit of that tree he will surely die (Gen. 2:17). When God created Adam he was without sin, and the quality of being morally corrupt or evil was not innate in his mind; however, he was given free will which endowed him with the potential to sin. Thus, his free will enabled Adam to sin against God since he did not want to be separated from his companion, Eve. According to St. Augustine, the source of evil is in Adam’s original disobedience to God’s will. However, the possibility of Adam’s evil choice was allowed by God, otherwise it would have been impossible to talk about the quality of a free and morally responsible act. Within the framework of the patriarchal discourse, Satan reaches Adam through Eve by using her gullibility and weaker nature (as Milton implies), which involves the potential to sin. In Paradise Lost, in Book IV, Eve’s encounter with her reflection in the water is identified as a narcissistic scene according to the patriarchal discourse:

… I thither went With unexperienced thought, and laid me down On the green bank, to look into the clear Smooth lake, that to me seemed another sky. As I bent down to look, just opposite,

29 A shape within the watery gleam appeared, Bending to look on me. I started back, It started back; but pleased I soon returned, Pleased it returned as soon with answering looks Of sympathy and love; there I had fixed Mine eyes till now, and pined with vain desire, Had not a voice thus warned me: “What thou seest, What there thou seest, fair creature, is thyself: (Milton, 1996: lines 456-468)

Considering the patriarchal comment on Eve’s narcissistic nature, it could be said that evil was innate in Eve when compared to Adam who is ultimately innocent. However, according to a feminist reading, while Eve was looking into “the clear smooth lake”, she was pleased with her appearance and this pleasure is considered as a threat in patriarchal discourse. On the other hand, in fact there is an ambivalent description of the scene since it contrasts with the awakening of Eve, in other words her assertion of identity as a female. Eve is assured that she really exists by her encounter with her reflection in the water. Her pride, her stubborn desire and rebelliousness result in her spiritual birth and (re)awakening. Yet the consciousness awakened in Eve is demonized in male discourse. Thus Eve is identified with Satan and her forcing her limits and eating the fruit of the forbidden tree and proving her existence result in her fall. Moreover, in the 459th line, “…that to me seemed another sky”, there is also Eve’s awakening into another world but one not created by God. Her rebellion, her desire is to awake in another world in which God, the Christian patriarch does not reign. It is like Faustus’ awakening into a world in which he will be his own God. In Book IV, we see Eve’s subconscious relation with Satan and Satan’s first attempt to seduce Eve in her dream. Satan later uses Eve in order to tempt Adam into sin and Eve seduces Adam into disobeying God; however, Adam eats the fruit of the forbidden tree by his own will in order not to leave Eve. Eve’s rebellious curiosity and desire for knowledge as a female overreacher, is equal to Faustus’ for power and also to Pandora’s curiosity. Moreover, the comparison of Eve to Pandora in terms of seduction according to the patriarchal discourse is very obvious in Book IV, of Paradise Lost:

“More lovely than Pandora, whom the gods Endowed with all their gifts; and O, too like

30 In sad event, when, to the unwiser son Of Japhet, brought by , she ensnared Mankind with her fair looks, to be avenged On him who had stole Jove's authentic fire.” (ibid., lines: 714-719)

Faustus is more the descendant of Eve, the female overreacher, than of Adam, from the point of reaching knowledge beyond his intellectual capacity set by God. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) argues the Fall of Adam and Eve as follows:

Man’s emergence from that paradise which reason represents to him as the first abode of his species was nothing other than his transition from a rude and purely animal existence to a state of humanity, from the leading-strings of instinct to the guidance of reason-in a word from the guardianship of nature to the state of freedom. (Kant, 1991: 226)

This quotation points to the individual’s discovery of his existence through a reference to the Fall of Adam and Eve. Moreover, this could also be associated with Faustus’ transition from an unconscious state to conscious ignorance and then his attempt to achieve ultimate knowledge of the universe.

31

Fig. 3. Benozzo Gozzoli, The Fall of Simon Magus (1461-1462)

Another predecessor for Faustus is Simon Magus who was not only considered to be the father of Gnosticism but also was the magus whose identity and deeds were narrated in the Bible. He used sorcery and bewitched the people of Samaria and made people believe that he had the ‘Great Power of God’. Moreover, in Gnostic stories, Simon often appears to be flying, reflecting the idea of escape from the body, immortality and godly power. Faustus also appears to be learning to fly from Mephistopheles in the original Chapbook Historia von D. Johann Fausten:

Learn, Faustus, to fly like myself, as swift as thought from one kingdom to another, to sit at princes’ tables, to eat their daintiest fare, to have thy pleasure of their fair ladies, wives and concubines, to use their jewels, and costly robes as things belonging to thee and not unto them. Learn of me, Faustus, to run through walls, doors and gates of stone and iron, to creep into the earth like a worm, to swim in the water like a fish, to fly in the air like a bird and to live and nourish thyself in the fire like a salamander; so shalt thou be famous, renowned, far- spoken of and extolled for thy skill…Yea, Faustus, I will learn thee the secrets of nature.… (Jones, op. cit., 115)

32 In Samaria when Simon saw that the apostles were given the Holy Spirit, he offered them money in order to have it, “saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money” (Acts: 8:19-20). Although Peter asked him to repent of his wickedness, Simon refused and answered, “Pray to the Lord for me so that nothing you have said may happen to me” (Acts: 8:24). Simon is known in Latin countries by the name Faustus which means ‘the favoured one’ (Harris, 1999: 57) and he is accepted as the father of all kind of heresies, particularly, Gnosticism. Indeed Faustus undergoes a Gnostic experience, Gnosticism being summarized in the idea of “a divine spark in man, deriving from the divine realm, fallen into this world of fate, birth and death, and needing to be awakened by the divine counterpart of the self in order to be finally reintegrated” (Esler, 2004: 912). The Greek word gnosis means “discovered knowledge”. For Gnostics, self- knowledge is the chief gnosis of all and a Gnostic knows what his true self is. Religions are in varying measures God-centred; however, the Gnostic is self-centred which points to the origin of Faustus’ individualism and individual pride. More precisely, Gnostic belief states that rather than God being sought externally, he should be sought inside oneself, because the self is God. For example, Apollo, the pagan god, urges his followers to “Know Thyself” which is the basic notion of Gnosticism (Bregman&Wallis, 1992: 121). Similarly, bearing in mind that the self is God, Faustus’ attempts to transcend his limits could be associated with his identification with God. To understand the self, in other words, to know who you are, where you are and where you are going to, means knowing God. To explain the relationships between the material and the spiritual; the human and the divine, Gnostics developed a complex mythology. Though this was not necessary to Gnosticism, it was intended as an aid to self–realization and it was considered useful as long as it enabled people to understand themselves. Gnosticism is a religion of absorbing knowledge, and the ultimate knowledge is self-knowledge. Gnosticism uses mythology and mythological Gods in intricate plays that are performed by human players in order to enable them to discover their true self. A Gnostic is

33 concerned with mythological details about the origin of the universe and of mankind, but only because they express and illuminate his understanding of himself. This point is clearly expressed in the advice given by a certain Monoimus, an Arab Gnostic:

Abandon the search for God and the creation and other matters of a similar sort. Look for him by taking yourself as the starting point. Learn who it is who within you makes everything his own and says, “My god, my mind, my thought, my soul, my body.” Learn the sources of sorrow, joy, love, hate. Learn how it happens that one watches without willing, rests without willing, becomes angry without willing, loves without willing. If you carefully investigate these matters you will find him in yourself. (Grant, 1959: 9)

Faustus’ ancestor Eve also does so when regarding her reflection in the pond. As mentioned above, established religions are God-centred but Gnosticism is centred on each individual and Gnostics value the creative imagination, seeking new interpretations and avoiding tradition. In institutionalized religions people agree with the assertions of an authority but Gnostics do not yield to one single authority. They believe in the creativity that stems from freedom of thought and behaviour. They reject any kind of authority whether in the form of human laws, demons or gods. In Gnosticism, there is no demonization of knowledge. In Gnostic stories, the female plays an important role, for example, Helen of always accompanies Simon Magus when he calls her. Simon Magus’ female companion is called under four different names: Eva, Helena, Maria, and Sophia, all referring to one female figure of the Gnostic underworld (Bishop, 1995: 182). Doctor Faustus makes the spirit of fair Helena of Greece his own paramour and bedfellow in his 23rd year in the original text of the Faustus Book. Jung in his The Psychology of Transference discriminates among the following stages in the overreacher’s career, each being associated with a female: the biological stage with Eva (Eve) since she is the biological descent, the aesthetic/romantic stage with Helen(a), the religious with Maria (Mary) and the spiritual with Sophia (ibid.). The qualities of these female figures accompany Faustus in his quest.

To the end that this miserable Faustus might fill the lust of his flesh and live in all manner of voluptuous pleasures, it came in his mind after he had slept his first sleep, and in the 23rd year past of his time, that he had a great desire to lie with fair Helena of Greece, especially her whom he had seen and showed unto the students of Wittenberg, wherefore he called unto him his spirit Mephostophiles, commanding him to bring him the fair Helena, which he also did. Whereupon he fell in love with her and made her his common concubine and bedfellow…

34 (Jones, op. cit., 172)

If Faustus is considered as the embodiment of individualistic striving for finding the self that is equal to God, then we should consider the meaning of the individual and individualism. In the Oxford English Dictionary, the individual is defined as “characteristic of a single human being”, “existing as a distinct entity” and the dictionary quotes Francis Bacon: “As touching the Manners of learned men, it is a thing personal and individuall”. The word ‘personal’ is significant here because what Faustus does is to prove his existence by discovering his own real self by isolating himself from society. Similarly, the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of “individualism” seems to describe the characteristics of Faustus’ deeds: “self-centred feeling or conduct as a principle… free and independent individual action or thought; egoism”. The aspiring Renaissance mind supports the development of man’s talents and potential. And naturally the development of an individual puts an emphasis on education, which develops the individual’s talents and intellectual mind. On the other hand, when it comes to the nineteenth century, learning cannot even be compared to the genius in the individual, which is innate and authentic:

Learning we thank, genius we revere; That gives us pleasure, This gives us rapture; That informs, This inspires; and is itself inspired; for genius is from heaven, learning from man: This sets us above the low, and illiterate; That, above the learned, and polite. Learning is borrowed knowledge; genius is knowledge innate, and quite our own. (Young, 1918: 17)

Similarly, for the Renaissance Faustus who represents the ambitious Renaissance individual, human learning is not enough to pursue his worldly pleasures, thus he consults magic in order to have whatsoever he asks for in Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus:

CHORUS: Now is he born, of parents base of stock, In Germany, within a town called Rhode. At riper years to Wittenberg he went, Whereas his kinsmen chiefly brought him up. So much he profits in divinity That shortly he was graced with doctor's name, Excelling all, and sweetly can dispute

35 In th’heavenly matters of theology; Till swoll’n with cunning, of a self-conceit, His waxen wings did mount above his reach, And, melting, heavens conspired his overthrow. For, falling to a devilish exercise, And glutted now with learning’s golden gifts, He surfeits upon cursed necromancy; Nothing so sweet as magic is to him, (Marlowe, 1995: Prologue, lines 10-25)

Faustus has the flexibility of mind to discover ‘devilish exercise’ excelling all other worldly matters. It was Marlowe who made the Faustus Myth well-known. Until Goethe, besides Faustus’ individualistic striving, we see the evil character of limitless human learning and knowledge beyond human capacity and a tragic end which results in eternal damnation. Dr. Faustus makes a pact with Mephistopheles in order to experience the world for infinite knowledge, and he uses these experiences for his quest. Dr. Faustus chooses to be his own god: “A sound magician is a demi- god”( ibid., 1.1, line 61). While knowledge applies to facts or ideas acquired by study, investigation, observation, or experience, Faustus’ knowledge applies to facts by experience through magic. His acquaintance is not related to the understanding of a science, art, or technique but the understanding of what is supernatural:

MEPH. Now, Faustus, what would'st thou have me to do? FAUSTUS. I charge thee wait upon me whilst I live, To do whatever Faustus shall command, Be it to make the moon drop from her sphere, Or the ocean to overwhelm the world. (ibid., 1.3, lines 33-36)

Different phases of the moon influence people in different ways. The moon is traditionally identified with lunacy and its influence on the human body indicates the changeability of the human character, here of Faustus’. Both the moon and the ocean symbolize the infinite physical world but at the same time they stand for the spiritual world since the secrets of the moon and the ocean are only confined to God.

FAUSTUS So he will spare him four and twenty years, Letting him live in all voluptuousness; To give me whatsoever I shall ask,

36 To tell me whatsoever I demand, To slay mine enemies, and aid my friends, And always be obedient to my will. (ibid., 1.3, lines 89-94)

By differentiating between enemies and friends, Faustus is introducing his personal concept of good and evil, the acceptable and the unacceptable into his discourse. This implies a moral stance: although he wishes to destroy, he also seems to be in pursuit of aiding his friends in this dialogue with Mephistopheles. However, from the beginning till the end of the play, we never truely see such an attempt. While Christopher Marlowe’s proud Faustus rebels against God to reach knowledge and ultimate power, Goethe’s Faust appears in a new guise that symbolizes ambition and disobedient strength rather than uncertainty and failed repentance. In spite of his rebellion against God, his sinfulness and godless ambitions, he is worthy to be saved, because of his admirable striving after knowledge (Durrani, op.cit., 93). In Goethe’s work, Mephostophilis1 (in B Text of Marlowe) becomes Mephistopheles and Faustus becomes Faust which means fist and indicates power in German, and the sixteenth century’s damnation becomes salvation in the early nineteenth century. Goethe’s Faust symbolizes man’s emancipation from authority. The morality of knowledge becomes complex, and Faustus’ committing sins against the order of creation is forgiven and redeemed. As far as Faustus’ determined mind, his desire to play the role of God, within the framework of power, knowledge and the search for self identity is concerned, the theory of knowledge must be analysed.

1.3 The Theory of Knowledge

Faustus represents a man dissatisfied with the limits of earthly life, drawn by God. Although he is an educated man he cannot reach the level of abstract knowledge that will enable him to learn the secrets of the universe. However,

1 Not to lead to any confusions in the chapters, the spelling of ‘Mephistopheles’ will be used in all quotations and texts.

37 according to him, to reach what is forbidden by God is not possible with knowledge acquired through learning. With the Renaissance emerged a new conception of learning and knowledge, diverging radically from the esoteric attitude of scholasticism. According to Francis Bacon (1561-1626), the ultimate goal of the production of practical knowledge should serve to “the use and benefit of men” and the relief of the human condition. He states that knowledge is power, and when embodied in the form of new technical inventions and mechanical discoveries it is the force that drives history. Bacon also adds that Enlightenment and a better world lie within our power; in other words, they lie in knowledge; they require only the cooperation of learned citizens and the active development of the arts and sciences. For Bacon, knowledge should also contribute to the magnification of God’s glory since it is derived from divine inspiration. Faustus’ way of attaining knowledge contrasts with Bacon’s views. Bacon also adds that the knowledge of the substance of the irrational soul can and ought to be attained through natural inquiry. Faustus’ irrational soul, his mind’s distortions could only be healed through natural inquiries as far as Bacon’s views on acquiring knowledge are considered. Moreover, according to Bacon, the human mind is not a tabula rasa. “Instead of an ideal plane for receiving an image of the world in toto, it is a crooked mirror, on account of implicit distortions” (Bacon, 1901: IV, 428–34). In The Advancement of Learning (1605) Bacon explains that “the knowledge of ourselves” is “but a portion of natural philosophy.” This view of Bacon coincides with Gnosticism’s belief in the individual’s true self: that is to say, knowing yourself is the beginning of the road to the discovery of your true self, the potential divine spark all human beings have. On the other hand, John Locke (1632-1704) considers the mind as a tabula rasa and defines knowledge as the perception of the agreement or disagreement between ideas, and these ideas are basically derived from experience (Locke, 1964: III, 2). However, this does not mean that knowledge through experience can be applied to general truths; the degree of certainty cannot be attained. Faustus does not acquire knowledge through experience, his power comes through Mephistopheles. Locke accepted the limitations of human knowledge and he also believed that human knowledge is adequate for the conduct of human life. Human beings are

38 given all the knowledge they need to secure their ‘great concernments’: convenience in this life and the means for attaining a better life hereafter (ibid., xii II). However, for Faustus, the given knowledge has never been enough. Individuals have considerable (though not unlimited) capacity for acquiring self-knowledge, self-expression, and self-regulation. If we are not sure whether we know something or not, then how can we feel satisfied with what we know? How do we really know what we know? Or are we satisfied with what we know; in other words is there a limit? At this point, we should consider the dictionary meaning of knowledge:

• noun 1 information and skills acquired through experience or education. 2 the sum of what is known. 3 awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.

• verb (past knew; past part. known) 1 have knowledge of through observation, inquiry, or information. 2 be absolutely sure of something. 3 be familiar or friendly with. 4 have a good command of (a subject or language). 5 have personal experience of. 6 (usu. be known as) regard as having a specified characteristic or title: the boss was universally known as ‘Sir’. (Oxford Concise Dictionary)

Thus, considering the meaning of knowledge epistemology seeks answers to these questions:

1.What is knowledge? That is what are the essential characteristics of this concept?

2.Can we know anything at all? Or are we doomed to ignorance about the most important subjects in life?

3.How do we obtain knowledge? Through the use of our senses, or our intellect, or both?

(Pojman, 2003: 2)

René Descartes (1596-1650) upholds the mind alone, even apart from empirical experience, and asserts that it can discover its truth. He defines knowledge in terms of doubt. It is not inconsistent to hold that human beings are pursuing the truth, trying to succeed in establishing the truth in terms of certainty. Knowledge of the nature of reality derives from ideas of the intellect, not the senses. Faustus denies his intellect in order to establish his truth over God. Moreover, in Faustus’ pact with

39 Mephistopheles, the knowledge that he thinks he acquired is never certain, it is confusing since it contains illusions as well. John Locke systematically attacks the notions of innate ideas and a priori knowledge, arguing that if our claims to knowledge are to make sense they must be derived from the world of sense experience:

Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper, void of all characters, without any ideas; how comes it by that vast store, which the busy and boundless fancy of man has painted on it with an almost endless variety? Whence has it all the materials of reason and knowledge? To this I answer, in one word, from experience: in that all our knowledge is founded.

(Locke, op. cit., 121)

Faustus’ mind is filled with knowledge acquired not through experience but by magic. Owing to Mephistopheles, he does not have to go through all stages that human beings experience in their lives. Many of Descartes’ beliefs are based on his senses. So he asks whether he should trust his sensory beliefs or not. Or is it possible to doubt whether these beliefs are true? He reminds us that his senses occasionally mislead him and this gives him reason to distrust some of his sensory beliefs. According to Descartes, when he is in a condition when his perception works well, he knows that things exist on the basis of his senses. The occurrence of mistakes could be due to poor perceptual conditions. Although Faustus’ senses work well he is yet duped by the illusions presented by Mephistopheles as reality. This does not coincide with Locke’s views on human learning; he believes that human beings learn through sensations and experience. He respects the limits set by God, considering the boundaries that are determined by Christianity. Similarly Descartes affirms:

And amongst many opinions all equally received, I chose only the most moderate... For since God has endowed each of us with some light of reason by which to distinguish truth from error, I could not have believed that I ought for a single moment to rest satisfied with the opinions of another, unless I had resolved to exercise my own judgment in examining these whenever I should be duly qualified for the task.

(Descartes: 1996, Part III)

40 Thus, to go beyond what is given by God means rebelling against God and the result will be absolute punishment as in the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Bible. However, human beings, whether instinctively or not, have the desire to overreach as does Faustus. Spinoza (1632-1677) says that “in order to know there is no need to know that we know, much less to know that we know that we know” (Spinoza, 1997: 13). However, what we know or what we think that we know could be the product of the imagination or a dream, because the world does not exist in order for us to know it or, more exactly, knowledge itself is part of the illusion of the world (Baudrillard, 2005: 42). The mind can lead to illusions as well and cannot distinguish what is real and what is not. Baudrillard argues that we cannot attain certain knowledge of the world by reconciling our rationality with reality. Instead, we experience illusion or a play of reality between our flawed rationality and the mystery of the world due to the mediation of consciousness (Baudrillard, 1988: 72). Faustus’ mind is subjected to illusions by Mephistopheles and he understands that he trades his soul just for these illusions. In Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, the German Emperor asks Dr. Faustus to bring “Great Alexander” and his paramour and when he attempts to embrace them he warns the German Emperor that he is only raising the spirits by his conjuring: “My gracious lord, you do forget yourself./These are but shadows, not substantial” (Marlowe, op.cit., 4.1, lines 102-103). Knowledge, God, and reason are abstract qualities that do not satisfy Dr. Faustus. According to Spinoza, individuals who live by the guidance of reason will naturally live in harmony with one another and will reach the highest good for a human and this is the knowledge of God. Knowledge should mean a striving for understanding God. It is Faustus’ that he disregards this restraint: as a result of the prevalent trend towards decorum and moderation during this era, a Faustus does not present himself in the œuvre of the eighteenth century. When it comes to the twentieth century, Both Bertrand Russell and Roderick Chisholm believe that knowledge is accessible, the one pointing to individual experience as a means of acquiring it and the other to the importance of a methodical approach; John Fowles’ The Magus demonstrates however, that neither is a true means of acquiring absolute knowledge.

41 Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) says that “what each man knows is, in an important sense, dependent upon his own individual experience: he knows what he has seen and heard, what he has read and what he has been told, and also what, from these data, he has been able to infer” (Russell, 1997: 9). On the other hand, Roderick Chisholm, the American philosopher (1916-1999) claims that to know something, to recognize that we know something, we need a method or criterion, a process that guarantees that what we claim to know is truly knowledge. On the other hand, before we can know whether the selected method is reliable, we must be able to recognize particular instances of knowledge and he asks:

A. What do we know? What is the extent of our knowledge? (Is there any limit and who determines this limit?) B. How are we to decide whether we know? What are the criteria of knowledge? (Do we need someone to tell us that we know something?) (Pojman, op. cit., 9)

However, as will be discussed in my analysis of John Fowles’ The Magus, the extent of knowledge, the criteria of knowledge, what is defined as knowledge and what is not, cannot be fully determined since Humanism’s centring of humanity’s experience in the cosmos, and placing human beings at the epistemological centre of the knowable universe changed in the twentieth century. Considering this view, Russell sees the universe as a great machine in which man has a small place. Similarly, according to Lyotard (1924-1998), “A self does not amount too much, but no self is an island; each exists in a fabric of relations that is now more complex and mobile than ever before” (Lyotard, 1997: 15). In the text of the English Faustus Book, Faustus is raised by his kinsmen, and we do not know much about his own family. In Marlowe’s play Dr. Faustus, similarly, there is not much information about his own family. However, in Goethe’s Faust, we are given the detail of his father’s practicing alchemy. What is common in all texts is the fact that he exists within the fabric of societal and professional relations. In the postmodern interpretation of the Faustus myth, we are confronted with a Faustus personified by his solitary island in which relations are fundamentally artificial. In the twentieth century, knowledge includes not only a set of denotative statements, it also includes notions of “know-how”, “knowing how to live”, “how to

42 listen”, etc. Knowledge, then, is a question of competence that goes beyond the mere determination and application of the criterion of truth, extending to the determination and application of criteria of efficiency (ibid., 18). For Lyotard, existential knowledge can only be assessed in the effectiveness that it provides to the individual. In other words, effectiveness in the self-making, constituting authenticity in the individual determines the criteria for knowledge. Thus, knowledge becomes a tool that makes the individual what he really is, and consequently, existential knowledge becomes significant in the lives of human beings who are offered absence, rootlessness, and an unpromising future in the twentieth century.

1.4 The Roots of Existentialism in the Faustus Myth

Existence has always been part of the conception of the self. The existential individual perceives his being in relation to himself, or to God, but never in relation to a crowd, or to an institutionalized order, in other words to an organized system (Ellman/Feidelson, 1965: 803). In the introductory chapter of this dissertation, I indicated that myths are preoccupied with the basic elements of human existence. The fundamentals of one’s own existence have carried complex human problems since the beginning of human history. Although existentialism on a theoretical basis refers to the modern conception of the self in the twentieth century, the existential quest for self-knowledge has always been in the minds of human beings. The self is reinterpreted and updated according to the different centuries. Nietzsche (1844-1900), Kierkegaard (1813-1855) and Sartre (1905-1980) have been very influential in the development of existentialism in the twentieth century. However, we could find its roots back in history. As far as this dissertation is concerned, Gnosticism includes the very basic idea of existentialism. No matter whether God exists or not, the individual seeks to liberate himself, yet he must also make authentic choices that are morally correct for himself and the community. This also very much applies to Eve’s scene by the water in the Bible because Eve liberates herself from God. Kierkegaard emphasizes that when an individual makes irrevocable choices, these moments are his only real ones (ibid., 805). Even by

43 choosing wrongly, if the choice is motivated by earnestness and struggle, we prove that we really exist. Thus, Kierkegaard asserts that all essential knowledge relates to existence, or only such knowledge has an essential relationship to existence. Nietzsche comments on this understanding:

Every special human being strives instinctively for his own castle and secrecy, where he is saved from the crowd, the many, the majority, where he can forget the customary rules about “human beings”—for he is an exception to them, but for the single case where he is pushed by an even stronger instinct straight against these customary rules, as a person who seeks knowledge in a great and exceptional sense.

(Nietzsche, 2003: 26)

A human being exists when he stands for himself. In other words, he is what he purposes to be, not what he is purposed to be. Man is responsible for what he is and he has to bear the results of his actions. However, for Kierkegaard, the individual is ultimately free only in choosing God. And if God is not chosen by the individual then he will grow ill. On the other hand, for Sartre, the opposite is true: God’s non- existence is the major reason why the existing man must take responsibility for himself. Sartre stresses the importance of freedom which has a kind of universal authority over self-making. For him, existence is prior to essence. All the actions of human beings should serve for the creation of the self that he purposes to be. Consequently, the individual must take responsibility for this creation whatever the results are. The question of freedom of choice has a central position in existentialism. Freedom is equivalent to the ‘free choice’ of the individual. However, this freedom may transform the individual into an isolated, alienated and unsocialized being in society. According to Michel Foucault (1926-1984), the subject “Man” is not merely isolated, fragmented, it is also disappearing. While Faustus, in the Renaissance and in the nineteenth century, has what he desires in return for his soul after twenty-four years of Mephistopheles’ service, the postmodern Faustus floats in absence and nothingness. Descartes’ famous phrase “I think therefore I am” is no longer regarded as a conscious self-making thought. The Foucaultian “Man” is by definition a fragmented subject. The notion which defines “Man” as both the subject and object of knowledge puts “Man” in the empty centre in postmodern times. Declaring the

44 death of Man as the fate of a fragmented individual is a return to the notion that what is known is rooted in what is not known, what is thought in all that is not thought, what is present in what is absent (Foucault, 1973: 323). Being hostage to society or to one’s own self is not different. Every individual desires to break the chains, to taste what is forbidden, to acquire what is left beyond abstract knowledge, to see what is beyond this world. For Albert Camus, in the postmodern world, “[c]onquerors know that action in itself is useless. There is only one useful action, that which would remake man and the earth. I shall never remake man. But one must act ‘as if’” (Barnes, 1962: 212). To assert an identity, the goal should be the individual himself. The human being’s battle against destiny has been continuous since Prometheus. Likewise, Faustus initially attempts to transcend human potential through his pursuit of knowledge. In the introductory chapter I emphasised that there have been many lives in other words many adaptations of Dr. Faustus and this myth is interpreted through historical and social changes in the course of these 400 years, according to each era’s concerns and values. Faustus has been recreated in every genre over and over again for many centuries. Thus, striving for power and knowledge is not only a modern concern but has been the concern of every century since the beginning of mankind. In the beginning of the introductory chapter Campbell’s definition of myth as “a life-shaping image, a metaphor that creates a hero out of those who heed it and as a clue to the spiritual potentialities of the human life” (Campbell, op.cit., 5-6) was quoted and the original Faustus myth precisely overlaps with this quotation. However, in the works that interpret the Faustus myth in the twentieth century, the loss of centralized control, perplexed individuals rather than heroes, and intermingled identities are described as will be analysed in The Magus in the third chapter. In the postmodern era, what is left of the original Faustus myth is a disunited Faustian individual who is struggling or at least trying to look for a self that however, seems to belong nowhere. Ambition and seeking power have different meanings and the Faustian Man has different negative connotations in the postmodern era because there is despair beyond despair, there is nothing to accomplish, nothing to receive even if the Faustian Man barters his soul in return for the Devil’s limitless service. Though the historical Faustus is claimed to be dealing with black magic, he was the

45 symbol of the Renaissance. He was the symbol of breaking chains, transgressing boundaries. The sixteenth century damnation of Faustus, and the eighteenth century salvation of Faust are reinterpreted as the confused, broken, aimless Faustus in the Postmodern Age. While the Renaissance and the nineteenth century individual are determined to accomplish certain things, the postmodern human beings do not have certainty about their aims since there is no hope for the future. Before an analysis of the perplexed Faustus in the postmodern era, the Renaissance Faustus will be discussed in the following chapter.

46

Fig. 4. Pieter Bruegel, The Fall of Icarus (1558)

47

Fig. 5. Luis Ricardo Falero, The Vision of Faust (1878)

48 CHAPTER 2 Damnation of a Hero or a Villain: Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus

“More! More! Is the cry of a mistaken soul; less than All cannot satisfy Man” William Blake

“Heroes are the exception among men, and Faust is the exception among heroes” Harry Levin

All the paintings shown above, Prometheus Bound, The Fall of Simon Magus, The Fall of Adam and Eve, The Fall of Icarus and The Vision of Faust, both metaphorically and physically refer to the fall of those mythical characters mentioned in the titles. Among these mythical characters, only Faustus is originally a historical personage transferred from a trickster to a tragic hero whose quest for forbidden knowledge brings about his damnation. It is pointed out that the Faustus myth was made widely known by Christopher Marlowe who followed the original story of P.F. Gent’s translation of The Damnable Life and Deserved Death of Dr. Faustus from Johann Spies’ publication of the German Faustus Book. However, The English Faustus Book is not an exact translation of the Original German Faustus Book which is entitled The History of Dr. Johann Faustus, the World-Renowned Magician and Master of the Black Arts, relating how he pledged himself to the Devil for a fixed period of time, and the strange adventures that he experienced, brought about and committed, until he finally received the wages that he had earned. Collected in several parts from among his own surviving papers and prepared for publication as a terrifying example, a case-study of debauchery and a well- intentioned warning for the benefit of all arrogant, overbearing and godless individuals. As the title indicates clearly, the book is printed as a warning to the Christian reader (Durrani, op. cit., 53). As it will be explained below, due to the

49 upheavals in the years that were written, The Faustus Book is considered as a moral lesson and a warning to the Christian readers to avoid the devil and trespassing the boundaries set by God. Moreover, Christopher Marlowe followed the same moral as Johann Spies’ The German Faustus Book. In England, the only copy of the English Faustus Book appears in 1592 and the full title of the 1592 edition is The Historie of the damnable life, and the deserved death of Doctor John Faustus, Newly imprinted, and in conuenient places imperfect matter amended: according to the true Copie printed at Franckfort, and translated into English by P. F. Gent. Seene and allowed. Imprinted at London by Thomas Orwin, and are to be solde by Edward White, dwelling at the little North doore of Paules, at the signe of the Gun, 1592. According to John Henry Jones, the editor of the English Faustus Book, the translator of the book P.F. Gent, like other Elizabethan translators, felt free to improve on the original text1. He added “a flair for pungent expression”, “a vivid visual imagination” and “a taste for ironic humour” which he thought the original German Faustus Book lacks (Jones, op. cit., 12). The exact date of the composition of the text of The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus is not known. However, most modern commentators agreed that it was Marlowe’s last work before he was killed in a tavern brawl in May 1593 (Gatti, 1989: 74). But without a doubt, he wrote the play in a time of economic, political uncertainties and depression in both England and in Europe. In England, due to the victory over the Spanish Armada in 1588, the conflicts with Spain increased and the economy was not only hit by poor harvests but also by the cost of the war. This resulted in the heavy tax burden that worsened the people’s social and economic situation. Moreover, the Faustus myth portrays two major movements that challenge the cultural and religious affairs in Europe. By all means, both the Renaissance and also the Reformation brought a new spirit to both cultural and religious issues. The intellectual underpinning of the Renaissance lies in the Renaissance humanism which is greatly affected by the ancient texts of the Romans and Greeks. These texts were found, studied and printed, promoting human

1 Since The English Faustus Book is not the exact translation of the German text, all the references made in this chapter are going to be quoted from the English Faustus Book.

50 culture and education. Thus, humanism centring the man in the middle of this cultural education gave birth to individualism. Kenneth Clark referring to ‘Man – the Measure of all things’ (Clark, 1969: 57) in fact formulates the motto of the Renaissance point of view of the individual. The discovery of the self in the individuals of the Renaissance results in a creative self-consciousness, and the individuals were no longer the Other or the shadow of divine totality (Ascoli, 1987: 43). The individual’s awareness of his power, his assertion of the active and secular life coincides with the reform movements against the doctrines and the hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church. In spite of the fact that Martin Luther formulated the ‘Ninety-Five Theses’ to reform the church, the Reformation in England was dominated by political concerns. Henry VIII, by the act of Supremacy in 1534, declared himself as the head of the English Church. Thus, he became the supreme head of both the political and religious affairs of England. The king ruling over both this and the other world, entered into rivalry with God rather than the clergymen. Moreover, the liberation of the self from religious restraints was thus legitimized for the individual by the power of the supreme head of both England and the church. Therefore, these liberated beings’ curiosity and energy to explore the world both literally and metaphorically, with consequent geographical and scientific discoveries, and a revolution in educational and epistemological methods resulted in the enlargement of physical lands as well as the development of the mind (Fox, 1997: 10). (Re)Defining the role and the meaning of the individual in the universe improved the views on the potentials of human beings. Awakening potentials in the individuals, the enlargement of the intellectual mind and national territories also resulted in colonial expansion which brought with it the enlargement of geographical territories. On the other hand, there were rising Puritans who did not accept any mediators between God and human beings, their existence together with the political vagueness that in turn triggered anxiety in scholars who thus, engaged in intellectual debates, creates Faustus. During the reign of Elizabeth I (1558-1603), besides the cultural and religious changes, two important activities developed hand in hand: the rise of the commercial activities across the seas and an outburst of geographical interest. (Lim, 1998: 13) Sir Walter Raleigh (1554-1618) and Richard Hakluyt the younger (1552?-1616), argued

51 the need for further exploration and colonialism. They claimed that England needed to establish colonies if it were to survive as a beacon of Protestant truth against the Catholic darkness (Hadfield, 2000: 27). One of the biggest changes that occurred during the Renaissance was the acceptance of the heliocentric model of the universe. In 1514, Nicolaus Copernicus wrote his theory of the universe which supports that it is not the earth but the sun which is the centre of the universe. The geocentric system belief, in other words the Ptolemaic Model that put the Earth at the centre of the universe, was shaken by the heliocentric model of Copernicus. “The Geocentric universe was a prerequisite for the whole of the Church’s message about the ‘loving purposes of God in Christ’. Having created the whole universe, God has chosen the earth as the focus of His attention, and had therefore regularly to forgive and excuse the appealing behaviour of his creatures” (Hunt, 1999: 82). The idea that the earth was only one of many planets was blasphemous for the church since it would shake its authority. The Renaissance age was not shaped all of a sudden; it was a transition period, transition from the dogmatic authority of the medieval church and the human beings’ influence under the scholastic thinking to a sense of freedom resulting from a self-conscious attitude. Dr. Faustus embodies this Renaissance self-consciousness and the Renaissance inspirational ideology. As noted above, The Faustus myth flourished in the Renaissance when the rediscovery of Greek and Roman texts, humanism, individualism and scientific discoveries took place. Chaotic England cast in economic and political uncertainty, the existence of Puritan society which believes that the English Reformation was not successful enough in reforming the doctrines and structure of the church and the intellectual’s anxiety about the future of England created Faustus who declared himself as a second god. Man was himself a second god (as Faustus’ being the second magus who acts as an overreacher), a divine being representative of God in this world, ruler of the earth and king of all God’s creations. Renaissance man lived in a world which had been specially built for him and over which he was lord and master. Fields and mountains, animals and plants, even metals and stones were put on solely for his convenience and use (Kessler, 1988: 310). Thus, a male’s myth centred upon his sovereignty over the universe was inevitable. However, for Faustus, mere possession of the earth was

52 not enough, he also had to learn the secrecies of the other world thus, abandoning legitimate studies, he turns to supernatural forces through magic as he thinks that this will lead him to self-knowledge, the secrets of the universe and power. In the beginning of the English Faustus Book, Faustus is described as being of a disobedient and restless nature indulging in fantasies of necromancy and conjuration. His mind is set to understand the secrets of nature in the wings of an eagle flying over the whole world (Jones, op. cit., 93). The eagle connotes power and the daring of Faustus’ intellectual enquiries. The eagle image indeed assumes a significant role in Renaissance thought, becoming even more strongly associated with a new concept of man as a bold and brilliant searcher into the truths of nature and the universe (McAdam, 1999: 81). The eagle is also a part of the myth of Prometheus. It is sent by Jove to consume the liver of Prometheus as punishment for giving man fire (Simpson, 1976: 28). So, we see the conflicting images of the eagle, on the one hand, the eagle representing the free individual, on the other, symbolizing the wild nature of the eagle, both signifying freedom and punishment. Opposing forces are always dominant both in the lives of people and also in established institutions such as governments, religions. The Faustus book resorts to the eagle image. However, although Christopher Marlowe keeps the image of flying, he replaces it with the myth of Icarus in the Prologue of the play. In the introductory speech of the chorus, Faustus is identified with Icarus in past, through the waxen wings:

So much he profits in divinity, That shortly he was graced with doctor’s name, Excelling all, and sweetly can dispute In th’ heavenly matters of theology; Till swoll’n with cunning of a self-conceit, His waxen wings did mount above his reach, And, melting, heavens conspired his overthrow. For, falling to a devilish exercise, And glutted now with learning’s golden gifts, He surfeits upon cursed Necromancy; Nothing so sweet as magic is to him, Which he prefers before his chiefest bliss. And this the man that in his study sits. (Marlowe, op. cit., Prologue, lines 15-27)

53 The Icarus image symbolizes the sin against the rule and commands of divine wisdom and alludes to an already fallen and damned mythical ‘hero’, Dr. Faustus in the beginning of the play. In Greek mythology, Icarus, the son of Daedalus, was not permitted to leave the island of Crete, by the order of King Menos. His father Daedalus makes two pair of wax wings with feathers, one for himself and one for Icarus for the purpose of escape. “Having tied on Icarus’ pair for him, he said with tears in his eyes: ‘My son, be warned! Neither soar too high, let the sun melt the wax; nor swoop too low, lest the feathers be wetted by the sea.’…’Follow me closel,’ he cried, ‘do not set your own course!’(Graves, 1955: 312-313). The wings successfully helped them to escape the island. However, Icarus, neglecting the instructions of his father, flied too close to the sun just for the sake of flying high. Consequently, the wax wings melted and Icarus fell into the sea and drowned. The artist, Daedalus, being aware of his potentialities and limits, is saved since he knows his boundaries and acts accordingly. However, his son ignores the limits and flies high above his reach and as a result of this act he is punished according to the myth. The father’s neglect and failure to watch out for his son are significant in signalling to God’s eye on his own creatures in a world where the earth is no longer central in the universe. The Icarus image signifies the immature artist and also the overreacher. Moreover, the use of the Icarus image in the play is also a foreshadowing to the end of the play since the image is closely linked with the downfall. Thus, we could say that the play begins and ends with the same downfall imagery which will be quoted in the end of this chapter. The play starts with the words of the Chorus which represents a societal narrative evaluating and commenting on the position of Dr. Faustus within society. The chorus which is a voice that is existent in Greek Tragedy forms a frame narrative in Dr. Faustus. The function of the chorus in Greek Tragedy is as follows:

The chorus’ educative role may be seen to preserve, transmit and explore the values of society specifically through the telling and retelling of myth, and the chorus of tragedy often works to place the action within different mythic traditions and values. As much as the dialectic of individual actor and chorus is essential to the development of the social sense of character, so the dialectic of action and choric stasimon often develops significantly the sense of the events portrayed on the stage in relation to a more generalized collection of traditional values and stories. The chorus functions to extend the intellectual and normative context of

54 the dramatized events. …the status of the chorus within drama [is characterized] as a commentator, expander, mediator between the across and the audience. (Goldhill, 1986: 271)

The chorus which determines the boundaries of the text in Dr. Faustus controls and frames the narrative. Marlowe’s choice of using the chorus in the play is a distortion of Greek Tragedy since he only uses it in the beginning, in the middle and in the end to create a societal resolution which frames the narrative determining the limits of the text. It thus creates order within chaos. The chorus in Marlowe’s text represents an intellectual group of people that share the same anxiety about the chaotic situation of England. This chaotic condition is uttered by the chorus framing the chaotic and evil text of Dr. Faustus and it determines the limits of the content. It is significant that a chorus should choose Icarus, the disobedient son to admonish the tragic hero of the play. Faustus, representing the tragic hero in the play, is closely linked with Icarus’ as the disobedient son to his father Daedalus. Thus, Faustus could also be seen as a curious rebellious son to God. Besides Icarus’ being representative of a fallen character, he can also be seen as a positive, romantic figure that is ready to risk failure and death just for the sake of curiosity to satisfy his adventurous self. Faustus is ready to risk his scholarly life to ‘the devilish exercise’. Due to his curiosity, his hunger for reaching beyond the limits set by God, he is attracted to the devilish exercise: necromancy which can be linked with one of the curiositas that the church banned as I explained in the “The Beginning of the Faustus Myth” chapter. If we reconsider Faustus’ association with Icarus, his immaturity or his overreacher quality allows a state of mind in which all things seem possible. However, as a human being, within the traditional Orthodox Christian belief framework, he is aware of his limitations. The first act starts with a soliloquy of Faustus:

Faustus in his study

FAUSTUS Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin To sound the depth of that thou wilt profess. Having commenced, be a divine in show, Yet level at the end of every art, And live and die in Aristotle’s works. Sweet Analytics, ‘tis thou hast ravished me! [He reads] ‘Bene disserere est finis logices.’

55 (Marlowe, op. cit., lines 1.1, 1-6)

In his soliloquy he addresses himself as ‘thou’, uses the words ‘thy studies’ which indicate his split self, his alienation from the self, the inner chaos he is in, his problem in recognizing his self. Faustus’ inner turmoil is emphasised through addressing himself in the second person. Like the chorus’ framing the narrative and establishing order in disorder, the second person voice controls Faustus’ split self by distancing the Orthodox Faustus from his rebellious side. Marlowe emphasizes this split self throughout the play: “Now, Faustus, must thou needs be damned?/Canst thou not be saved?/.../’Abjure this magic, turn to God again!’ (ibid., 2.1, lines 1-2/8). While the first person rejects God’s authority, the second voice warns him to turn to God. However since Faustus is already ‘swoll’n with cunning of a self-conceit’ as the Prologue informs us, it is impossible for him to turn to God. In his soliloquy, there are also references to male authority, a canon which is a compilation of all mediating texts that prevents him from reaching the sources first hand. Faustus continually cites this male canon, Latin texts and uses quotations from the texts in their original languages. English is not adequate enough to express the ideas of these books, thus, we see the other languages’ sovereignty over English. These languages’ sovereignty over English cannot dominate Faustus because they are all the words of different mediators and they include ambiguities which confuse Faustus. For example, according to Dr. Faustus, there is ambiguity in Jerome’s Bible:

Jeromes Bible Faustus, view it well: (He reads) ‘Stipendium peccati mors est.’Ha! ‘Stipendium’, etc. The reward of the sin is death? That is hard. (He reads) ‘Si peccasse negamus, fallimur Eet nulla est in nobis veritas.’ If we say that we have no sin, We deceive ourselves, and there is no truth in us. Why then belike we must sin, And so consequently die. Ay, we must die an everlasting death. What doctrine call you this? Che sera, sera: What will be, shall be; Divinity, adieu! (He picks up a book of magic) These metaphysics of magicians, And Necromantic books are heavenly. (ibid., 1.1., lines 36-50)

56 Faustus does not say that it is God’s Bible, instead he refers to it as Jerome’s Bible. According to the Puritan view, the Bible reflects the words of God. However, since he says “Jerome’s Bible”, he feels no direct relationship with God. He reads the Bible from Jerome’s interpretation of the Bible. The same is valid for Justinian. If Justinian has written the Christian Law, where is God’s law? These men stand between man and God and they must not interfere between man and God according to the view of Puritans. These mediators overwhelmed the word of God. Thus, theirs are not reliable texts since they are interpreted by mediators. However, the ambiguity Jerome’s Bible creates in the mind of Faustus does not stimulate him to rewrite or reinterpret the Bible with his own words due to fear. Instead he leaves the Bible to Jerome saying “What will be, shall be”, being not concerned any more with the ambiguity of both this life and also the other life. Thus, we are then again faced with textual control. Neglecting the idea of Heaven and Hell, in spite of the fact that he desires to learn the secrecies of both, he only emphasizes the ambiguity of the phrase: “The reward of the sin is death?” Faustus stands for the individual will and takes responsibility for his sins by challenging and leaving the Holy Book to Jerome and taking necromantic books in his hands. The mediators’ using different languages necessitates the translation of these texts; one cannot reach them from the original. God seems to be absent and always represented. If Faustus could reach God, his place would be determined in God’s world; however, he can only approach God through mediators, as in the case of Jerome’s Bible. Faustus craves knowledge and universal earthly power which as a human being he will never achieve:

Yet art thou stil but Faustus, and a man. Couldst thou make men to live eternally, Or being dead, raise them to life again, Then this profession, were to be esteemed. (ibid., 1.1, lines 20-24)

Faustus requires spiritual powers that no mortal beings can acquire. Thus, only magic allows Faustus to achieve these delights, delights because magic enables “a world of profit and delight, / Of Power, of honour, and omnipotence/Is promised to the studious artisan!” (ibid., 1.1, lines 53-55). Faustus is placed in the societal

57 structure, as a man ambitious for power, honour, and omnipotence. On the other hand, his existence as a studious artisan in a Puritan society is not possible because the concepts of power and omnipotence do not belong to Puritan dogma. For the profit and delight of power, honour and omnipotence which magic will bring him, he degrades knowledge attained through learning and studying mediating texts. Mephistopheles does nothing to tempt Faustus; instead Faustus summons the devil despite the emphasis upon his intellectual capacity and scholarly learning. It is stressed that he knows Italian, Latin and Greek; he not only studied law, medicine, theology but also logic. Education, which awakened his scholarly consciousness to a wider sense of learning and intellectual life, putting the emphasis upon the individual mind, arouses dissatisfaction with what is learnt through scholarly books in Faustus. While he is emphasizing his dissatisfaction, and he is mocking the scholarly books, we sense the fear that he feels in his inner turmoil. Before the appearance of the scholars who are the embodiment of the kind of approach to scholarly knowledge that was very respectable in the Renaissance, Faustus’ friends Valdes and Cornelius appear. Faustus is aware of the fact that as a scholar, he is only a man who cannot make men live eternally or raise the dead to life again, so he provides reasons for his applying magic, justifying the reasons to his dearest friends Valdes and Cornelius. Valdes is reminiscent of Juan de Valdés who was a Spanish religious writer of the sixteenth century. Since Spain was a Catholic country, Marlowe stresses that this Valdes is German to emphasize that this Valdes is protestant. Marlowe’s transforming a Spanish religious writer to a Teutonic Protestant designates to the reader the interchangeability of political and religious dogmas and the chaos that lurks as a consistent possibility. On the other hand, Cornelius Agrippa was a magician and Cabbalist and lived between the years of 1486 and 1535 and his defence of witches during his lifetime posits him on the side of chaos and against conventional authorities.

Valdes, sweet Valdes, and Cornelius, Know that your words have won me at the last To practice magic and concealed arts. Philosophy is odious and obscure; Both law and physic are for petty wits; ’Tis Magic, Magic hath ravished me. Then, gentle friends, aid me in this attempt.

58 (ibid., 1.1, lines 99-105)

Since the beginning of the play, male discourses are continually referred to, magic is also so masculinised in that it ‘ravishes’ Faustus who is feminized in this quotation. The etymology of the verb ‘ravish’ is ‘rapere’ coming from Latin and it means greed in Latin. The root of the verb ‘rape’ is also the same. Encouraged by his friends, Faustus is determined to invoke the devil. In The English Faustus Book, Faustus turns to magic only because:

his mind was set to study the arts of necromancy and conjuration, the which exercise he followed day and night: and taking to him the wings of an eagle, thought to fly over the whole world and to know the secrets of heaven and earth; for his speculation was so wonderful, being expert in using his vocabula, figures, characters, conjurations and other ceremonial actions, that in all the haste he put in practice to bring the devil before him. (Jones, op. cit., 93)

Although Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus is presented as a scholar who has intellectual curiosity, he goes beyond intellectual curiosity to avoid the boundaries of the exterior world. However, it is controversial whether he really goes beyond the boundaries or not, the situation is ambiguous. This ambiguity, the struggle between opposing forces occurs throughout the play. He does not really reach power since he only orders Mephistopheles to actualize his desires though his requirements are not fully fulfilled. In the text of the play there is neither God nor Satan, there are only representatives of them as noted before. Thus, the need to translate these manly texts arouses from the emptiness created by mediators’ interference. Marlowe’s Faustus transgresses with magical words that will bring him eternal damnation. We could say that mere identification of knowledge with power is emphasized in Faustus’ words. Although this identification is reminiscent of Francis Bacon’s statement of ‘Knowledge is power’ (Bacon, op. cit., 28), Faustus does not use this so called power for the use and benefit of men. Furthermore, as we will see in the next chapter, in Goethe’s Faust, knowledge means more than power, as he realizes his potential to gain something more than knowledge and he attains the

59 spiritual and the reality of the self when he is taken beyond mere knowledge and it is then that his action is beneficial to man. Faustus rebels with immature arrogance against traditional knowledge, its borders determined by Orthodox Christian beliefs. Dissatisfied with traditional learning, Faustus offers his soul to Mephistopheles despite the warnings of [the] Good Angel: “O Faustus, lay that damned book aside/And gaze not on it, lest it tempt thy soul/And heap God’s heavy wrath upon thy head!/Read, read the Scriptures. That is blasphemy (ibid., 1.1, lines 69-72). These words make Faustus passive whereas, Mephistopheles’ words are tempting, leading him towards action which will help him to prove his existence. [The] Good Angel only leads Faustus to read what is already written thus, rebellion becomes more attractive for him. While [the] Good Angel refers to God, [the] Bad Angel uses the word ‘Jove’ (ibid., 1.1, line 76), introducing the Pagan element and denying the supremacy of the Christian deity. Like Faustus’ bartering his soul to Mephistopheles, Robin, the clown, sells his soul to Wagner, Faustus’ student, for a leg of beef. This is a parody of Faustus’ pact and the satire is further emphasized by the use of prose. The colloquialism of prose seems to indicate a contrast between the two situations but also points to the essential similarity between the lower class Wagner’s parodying of Mephistopheles and Robin (the clown) as a caricature of Faustus. Acting as a Faustus junior, Wagner emulates Mephistopheles, as Faustus emulates God; the interchangeability of the two will be even more pronounced in Goethe’s work. This caricaturization also indicates the absurdity of Faustus’ emulation of God. It is not coincidental that contrary to the traditional benevolent attitude of God, Faustus forgets all about the poverty stricken people of the society he lives in and just pursues his own desires.

Wagner: Alas, poor slave, see how poverty jests in his nakedness! I know the villain’s out of service, and so hungry that I know he would give his soul to the devil for a shoulder of mutton, though it were blood raw. Robin: Not so, neither. I had need to have it well roasted, and good sauce to it, if I pay so dear, I can tell you. (ibid., 1.4., lines 6-10) …. Wagner: …[S]irrah, if thou dost not presently bind thyself to me for seven years, I’ll turn all the lice about thee into familiars and make them tear into peaces. Robin: Nay, sir, you may save yourself a labour, for they are as familiar with me as if they paid for their meat and drink, I can tell you. (ibid., lines 18-24)

60 Wagner reduces Robin to mere meat and associates him with parasitic lice, thus depreciating the significance of Faustus’ bargain with Mephistopheles. and lice are associated with Faustus’ licentiousness and his parasitic relationship with Mephistopheles. Robin (the clown) is already bound to his master, thus there is no need for him to bind himself for an extra seven years to Wagner. Likewise, Faustus’ signing the pact with Mephistopheles does not give Faustus absolute power: he is always followed by the devil and would be helpless without his presence. If the pact had been true then he would have done everything on his own, not needing Mephistopheles. Satan’s servant pretends to serve Faustus, but he only makes him live in the world of illusions. Mephistopheles also identifies Faustus with while explaining to Faustus that the reason for Lucifer’s rebellion was due to his ‘aspiring pride and insolence’ and this is also a foreshadowing of the end. Like Lucifer’s expulsion from Heaven, Faustus is going to be expelled and he is going to be condemned to eternal damnation.

FAUSTUS I think hell’s a fable. MEPHISTOPHELES Ay, think so still, till experience change thy mind. FAUSTUS Why, dost thou think that Faustus shall be damned? MEPHISTOPHELES Ay, of necessity, for here’s the scroll In which thou hast given thy soul to Lucifer. (ibid., 2.1., lines 127-31)

Having experienced it, Mephistopheles affirms the real existence of hell.

MEPHISTOPHELES Why, this hell, nor I am out of it. Thinks’t thou that I, that saw the face of God And tasted the eternal joys of heaven, Am not tormented with ten thousand hells In being deprived of everlasting bliss? O Faustus, leave these frivolous demands, Which strikes a terror to my fainting soul! (ibid., 1.3., lines 74-80)

Faustus’ answer indicates that he does not listen to the tragedy that Mephistopheles conveys, the “manly fortitude” that he alludes to is a fiction that he creates for himself to assert a superiority that is not and cannot be his inability to digest what Mephistopheles is saying is a clue to his limitations in the foreshadowing of his inevitable end. The fact that he signs the deed with his words, “consummatum

61 est” which he translates as “this bill is ended” further emphasize the chaos in his mind: the pun involves the allusion to the roots consummo (sum up; complete, perfect) and consumo (destroy, kill). Even language is slippery as far as he is concerned and he cannot see the double entendre in the statement he is making. Owing to the question of Faustus, we deduce that Faustus makes the pact because he really does not believe in hell; a thing that he does not believe in will presumably not harm him. Moreover, Mephistopheles informs Faustus about the consequences of his choice just like God informs Adam about the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Mephistopheles’ insistence on the writing of the deed is an indication, which will be echoed in texts like Frankenstein and Dracula, of the freedom of choice that is crucial to the fall of the individual. Faustus is even asked to stab his arm himself and write the text that Mephistopheles dictates in his own blood. The fact that the blood congeals and Faustus cannot write indicates the subconscious resistance of his soul to the spiritual violation it is made subject to. Nevertheless, the central theme in the scene where Faustus makes his covenant with Lucifer is free will. Nevertheless, even after the signing of the deed we see that Faustus wavers in his decision:

Now go not backward, Faustus, be resolute. Why waver’st thou? O, something soundeth in mine ear: ‘Abjure this magic, turn to God again!’ Why, he loves thee not. (ibid., 2.1., lines, 6-9)

These words indicate the inner quandary of man, of the individual in a society and age in which, as I mentioned in my introduction, the constant benevolent gaze of God upon man has been removed by the discovery of the heliocentric universe. Faustus’ need to be loved by a patriarchal authority also points to his situation as fatherless child and his choice, made out of spite, of the wrong paternal figure. That these words are immediately followed by the entrance of [the] good and [the] bad angels is a further indication of his subconscious neediness and inner disruption.

62 [The] Good and [the] bad angels in the play represent his split self, and the binary oppositions that the individual is imprisoned in the society in which Faustus lives. The more universal conflict between God and Satan is mirrored in the duality of voices that Faustus hears from the angels attached to him. Marlowe’s text, perhaps unwittingly reveals to us the impossibility of “good” existing in a world where “evil” is absent. The Renaissance idea that ‘God created man in his own image’ is destroyed in Faustus’ portrayal since he becomes a rival to God. Faustus says:

Sweet Mephistopheles, thou pleasest me. Whilst I am here on earth, let me be cloyed With all things that delight the heart of man. My four-and-twenty years of liberty I’ll spend in pleasure and in dalliance, That Faustus’ name, whilst this bright frame doth stand, May be admired through the furthest land. (ibid., 3.1, lines 56-62)

What Faustus calls liberty is not a real liberty because he is bound to Mephistopheles. Faustus exists for twenty four years, but this so called existence requires devotion to Mephistopheles. Magic does not liberate Faustus; instead it makes him as servant to Mephistopheles although he is not aware of that. By applying to the supernatural and rejecting God and the natural limitations of man’s condition, Faustus is the embodiment of Simon Magus. According to the Biblical accounts as explained in the second chapter, Simon Magus claims that he creates human beings from air, thus he declares himself superior to God who creates Eve from Adam’s rib. Ironically, in spite of his declaration of his superiority over God, he is killed while attempting to fly. Besides Simon Magus’ involvement in magic, his failed attempts to fly are reminiscent of Faustus’ greed to fly in spite of the non-existence of his wings. Simon Magus is accompanied by a harlot known as Helen; similarly, Faustus tries to persuade Mephistopheles to provide a wife for him. However, Mephistopheles rejects his request saying that “Marriage is but a ceremoniall toy” (ibid., 2.1, line 146). Without the bond of marriage, Faustus is given the opportunity of having any woman in the world. Mephistopheles decides to let Faustus have

63 ‘heavenly Helen’ as his ‘paramour’. When she appears, Faustus, fascinated by her appearance, attempts to escape his myth by jumping into her myth. As indicated under the subject of Gnosticism, Jung combines the four female names that are used for one female companion to Simon in the biological stage, aesthetic/romantic stage, the religious and the spiritual stage. The qualities of these female figures which in fact refer to one identity fascinate Faustus.

I will be , and for love of thee Instead of Troy shall Wittenberg be sacked And I will combat with weak , And wear thy colours on my plumed crest. Yea, I will wound in the heel, And then return to Helen for a kiss. (ibid., 5.1, lines 100-105)

Faustus begins this speech to Helen with this question, “Was this the face that launched a thousand ships? / And burnt the topless towers of Ilium? / Sweet Helen, make me immortal with a kiss” (ibid., 5.1, lines 93-95). However, this immortality is only possible in the of hell. Although is described as having heavenly beauty, she is the symbol of the destructive power of beauty and sinful pleasure in Greek mythology. She is a version of the figure of the female as temptress who wreaks havoc in the male society that flourishes in a state of order. Faustus’ embracing “heavenly” Helen is the symbol of Faustus’ union with Hell. This symbolism is also evident in the speech of Faustus:

Sweet Helen, make me immortal with a kiss. [They kiss] Her lips suck forth my soul, see where it flies! Come, Helen, come, give me my soul again. [They kiss again] Here will I dwell, for heaven in these lips, And all is dross that is not Helena. (ibid., 5.1, lines 95-99)

Here he identifies Helen, who is another Satanic figure according to the traditional patriarchal discourse, with Mephistopheles because he also addresses Mephistopheles as “Sweet Mephistopheles”.

64 We do not see God in the scenes in Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus. However, in Goethe’s Faust, God is not an external power, he enters into the natural process of life, He is existent in the process of the myth although he leaves the individual alone. In Dr. Faustus, God is only felt through [the] Good Angel’s voice. The damnation of souls in Hell has no limits in Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus:

No end is limited to damned souls. Why wert thou not a creature wanting soul? Or why is this immortal that thou hast? O, Pythagoras’ metempsychosis, were that true, This soul should fly from me, and I be changed Into some brutish . All beasts are happy, for, when they die, Their souls are soon dissolved in elements; But mine must live still to be plagued in hell. Curst be the parents that engendred me! (ibid., 5.2, lines 166-175)

In contrast to the perpetual damnation of Marlowe’s Faustus, Goethe’s Faust reaches salvation through a gradual awakening as Durrani points out: “Goethe’s play is not a tale of defeat, but of man’s gradual awakening from the futile pursuit of learning to a richer, more active life far removed from the narrow world of his study” (Durrani, op.cit., 100). Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus renounces his link in the Great Chain of Being assuming God’s role in the universe. Ambiguities, illusions and sufferings could be parts of mythical heroes. However, self-destruction is not allowed to Goethe’s Faust in the age of Enlightenment as will be seen in the next chapter. In the Renaissance, Faustus’ overreaching can be considered as a lucky deed, but still he cannot reach salvation, he is damned. However, two centuries later, he will have the right to win against God with his rational mind set at work. He is more powerful than the Renaissance Faustus in asserting his identity. As I indicated before the Latinized form of the name Faustus’ means ‘the Favoured one’, Marlowe’s use of this Latinized form in fact suggests a man who is lucky to appear and challenge the authority of God in such a period of opposing conflicts. However, Faustus becomes Faust in the Enlightenment Period and we are confronted with a proud Faust who is more powerful when compared to the Renaissance Faustus. The name ‘Faust’ (it means ‘fist’ in German) suggests that he

65 can threaten both society and religion deservingly since the Enlightenment Age allowed the individual to present himself as freed from fears and restraints. For the American philosopher George Santayana ‘this excellent Faustus’ was a good Protestant, ‘damned by accident or predestination’ because he thinks that:

We see an essentially good man, because in a moment of infatuation he had signed away his soul, driven against his will to despair and damnation…. The evil angel represents the natural idea of Faustus, or of any child of the Renaissance; he appeals to the vague but healthy ambitions of a young soul, that would make trial of the world. In other word, the devil represents the true good, and it is no wonder if the honest Faustus cannot resist his suggestions. We like him for his love of life, for his trust in nature, for his enthusiasm for beauty…. Marlowe’s Faustus is a martyr to everything that the Renaissance prized, - power, curious knowledge, enterprise, wealth, and beauty. (Santayana, 1910: 147-149)

The devil represents the true good because he leads Faustus towards action which will allow him to establish his identity, while the conventional representative of the good makes him passive and inert. Although the Renaissance seemed to support the idea of human beings’ struggle for knowledge, trespassing the border was not fully tolerated. The Enlightenment will provide the individual with the freedom to establish his self-identity. At the end of Marlowe’s play, the words of the chorus are symptomatic of the restriction involved:

[EPILOGUE] Enter Chorus CHORUS Cut is the branch that might have grown full straight, And burned is Apollo’s laurel bough That sometime grew within this learned man. Faustus is gone. Regard his hellish fall, Whose fiendful fortune may exhort the wise Only to wonder at unlawful things, Whose deepness doth entice such forward wits To practice more than heavenly power permits. (Marlowe, op. cit., Epilogue, lines 1-8)

Branches that reach to Heaven are cut off and, as we hear the words “[r]egard his hellish fall,” we are reminded of the fall of Icarus, alongside the allusion to the destruction of the bough of Apollo who is the god of light and sun, music, poetry, dealing with healing and medicine. His laurel bough is burnt, and Faustus, damned while trying to achieve all the qualities that Apollo has, is also destroyed and sent to Hell, the region of fire, making the usage of the word “burnt” even more significant.

66 Moreover, Apollo’s symbol being the lyre and the snake, we see the demonization of art and art’s punishment in Dr. Faustus. In the text of Dr. Faustus, his encounter with the civil and the religious male authorities represented by the emperor and the pope represents the chaotic civil and religious authorities in England as noted in the beginning of the chapter. Faustus only desires to see, experience and wants to believe in what he sees however, what he really sees is only illusions. For example, the appearance of the Seven Deadly Sins in Act 2, Scene 3 signifies that the damnation is a real thing not an illusion as Faustus believes in. Moreover, Faustus is not aware of the fact that his life is equal to twenty four years’ time as allowed by Mephistopheles. Marlowe’s choice of the number twenty four is significant because this number refers to the hours of a day, which signifies the relativity of time and it puts more emphasis upon the illusions which Faustus experiences because his years of power are as limited as man’s lifespan is limited by God. Moreover, within the cosmic concept of time, there is very little difference between a day and the span of human life.

FAUSTUS O Faustus, Now hast thou but one bare hour to live, And then thou must be damned perpetually. Stand still, you ever-moving spheres of heaven, That time may cease and midnight never come! Fair nature’s eye, rise, rise again, and make Perpetual day; or let this hour be but A year, a month, a week, a natural day, That Faustus may repent and save his soul! (ibid., 5.2, lines 132-140)

Thus, his desire for power only remains an empty dream. Faustus’ dealing with magic and necromancy is the main concern of the play. However, he cannot achieve anything other than the pact with the devil. There also arises the question whether Faustus is damned because he is against God or because he did not understand his scholarly books. For Marlowe’s Faustus, ambitious hunger for power and salvation cannot be reconciled. While the Renaissance age allowed going beyond the boundaries, on the other hand punishment is unavoidable due to trespassing. Two centuries later, the ambitious striving for power to emulate God is tolerable and is, in

67 a way, rewarded since rational knowledge serving the deeds and the intellectual quest for the self is the central ideas of Goethe’s age. It is interesting that the Renaissance Faustus should include a trait which will run through the future renditions of the same theme. As Faustus is delivered to the Devil, nature undergoes a chaos similar to that experienced by the character:

Enter the Scholars FIRST SCHOLAR Come, gentlemen, let us go visit Faustus, For such a dreadful night was never seen Since the world’s creation did begin. Such fearful shrieks and cries were never heard. (ibid., 5.3, lines 1-4)

The hour of Faustus’ destruction is midnight, which is the witching hour, the time traditionally associated with evil and the devil. The first scholar’s evaluation, that this hour is the worst since the creation reminds the reader both of God and, in relation to God, the limited time that the earth has had, thus creating a parallelism between the world and Faustus. Whether the shrieks and cries heard in the night were Nature’s or Faustus’ is left unspecified.

68 CHAPTER 3 The Salvation of the Modern Man: Goethe’s Faust

The philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his essay “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?” (1784) describes the Enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity” (Kant, 1970: 54). While Marlowe’s Faustus performs immature acts in his pact with Mephistopheles, Goethe’s Faust achieves a mature approach to his questioning of man’s place in the universe. The Enlightenment Age, in which Goethe wrote Faust, was a period of social transformations. Beginning with the late eighteenth century, Germany faced the process of economic change and industrial transformation was a major theme in the history of nineteenth-century Germany. Germany saw the 1789 French Revolution which was not only French because it affected every country in Europe and became a European Revolution. It was even argued that the French Revolution had completed the freeing of human energies that the Reformation began (Blackbourn: 1998, 39). The Enlightenment and the French Revolution together marked the end of traditional political authority which is considered to be both liberating and destructive. On the one hand, the technological and social changes led to economic growth and the individual’s being aware of human potentiality. On the other hand, it also brought confusion, alienation of individuals due to the corruption caused by the rapid growth of social and technological changes. Thus, Faust’s identity emerges as a result of this period’s narrative of self-seeking and development, experience and recreation of the self alongside with alienation. This alienated self is expressed as the artist whose creative power rises from the innermost depth of his existentialist being. He experiences both the exhilaration and the contradictions of modernity, and thus, he attempts to give meaning to his existence through his act of creating a new self. Creative human energy, human power, particularly ‘male’ power in industry, war, in all kinds of conflicts of the era shows itself in literature with Goethe’s rewriting of the Faustus myth because ‘man’ believes that he has the right to shake the authority of God since God leaves human beings alone in a chaotic universe. Foucault argues

69 provocatively that “before the end of the eighteenth century, man did not exist” (Tobin, 2001: 17). He emphasizes the epidemic shift between the classic and the modern at the outer limits in the years of 1775 and 1825, more specifically between the years 1795 and 1800 (ibid., 18). D’alembert begins his essay on the Elements of Philosophy with a review of the last three hundred years:

If one considers without bias the present state of our knowledge, one cannot deny that philosophy among us has shown progress. Natural science from day to day accumulates new riches. Geometry, by extending its limits, has borne its torch into the regions of physical science which lay nearest at hand. The true system of the world has been recognized, developed, and perfected…. In short, from the earth to Saturn, from the history of the heavens to that of insects, natural philosophy has been revolutionized; and nearly all other fields of knowledge have assumed new forms…. The study of nature seems in itself to be cold and dull because the satisfaction derived from it consists in a uniform, continued, and uninterrupted feeling, and its pleasures, to be intense, must be intermittent and spasmodic… Nevertheless, the discovery and application of a new method of philosophizing, the kind of enthusiasm which accompanies discoveries, a certain exaltation of ideas which the spectacle of the universe produces in us- all these causes have brought about a lively fermentation of minds. Spreading through nature in all directions like a river which has burst its dams, this fermentation has swept with a sort of violence everything along with it which stood in its way…. Thus, from the principles of the secular sciences to the foundations of religious revelation, from metaphysics to matters of taste, from music to morals, from the scholastic disputes of theologians to matters of trade, from the laws of princes to those of peoples, from natural law to the arbitrary law of nations… everything has been discussed and analyzed, at least mentioned. The fruit or sequel of this general effervescence of minds has been to cast new light on some matters and new shadows on others, just as the effect of the ebb and flow of the tides is to leave some things on the shore and to wash others away. (Trans. By., Koelin in Cassirer, 1968: 3-4)

D’alembert thus, states that a great revolution has taken place in the secular sciences, theology, metaphysics, natural law, and ethics which also revolutionized the minds of man. Thus, Goethe’s Faust brings a new light to the Faustus Myth, representing Faust as the embodiment of the same human nature that all Faustus and his predecessors share. However, compared to his predecessors, Faust’s existential concern is a much more intellectual concern that brings him salvation. The traditional Faustus myth represented the orthodox attitude of the Protestant reformers. But in the 18th century, the human intellect being directly face to face with the deep problems of human life, it was intolerable that his struggles should end in eternal damnation. Enlightenment rationalism erasing magic from the minds, made people forget about

70 the Faustus myth. However, Goethe recreated the myth from a different point of view on magic. Just as Marlowe’s opening scene with the chorus also indicates the end of the play, the opening of Faust with the Prologue in Heaven is at the same time a foreshadowing of the end of the play. In Faust, the Prologue in the Heaven section which is at the beginning of the play starts with three Archangels: Raphael, Gabriel and Michael. The reason for this opening with angels could be due to the order in the Great Chain of Being. In this order, after God come the angels; they are situated between God and human beings. So they also act as messengers between God and human beings. The opening is also a foreshadowing of the end of the play, although the angels do not reappear throughout the play, they appear in the beginning and in the end of the text. The choice of these particular Archangels is significant: Gabriel is presented in the Bible as the messenger of God and is believed to be the one who will blow the trumpet at the time of the final resurrection. Raphael is known as a healer, and Michael figures as chief adversary of Satan (who himself was an Archangel before his rebellion) during the initial battle between the forces of good and evil. As such, all three have crucial roles to play on the side of God and Christian virtue. The three Archangels also remind us of the opposing forces in nature alluding to the opposing forces in human nature:

Prologue in Heaven THE LORD. THE HEAVENLY HOST. Later MEPHISTOPHELES.

[The THREE ARCHANGELS step forward.] RAPHAEL. The sun contends in age-old fashion With brother spheres in hymnic sound, And in far-thundering progression Discharges his appointed round. His aspect lends the angels power, while none may gauge his secret way; Sublime past understanding tower Those works as on the primal day. GABRIEL. The earth’s resplendence spins and ranges Past understanding swift in flight, And paradisiac licence changes With awe-inspiring depths of night; The ocean’s foaming seas run shoreward, On rocky depths rebound and rear, And rock and ocean hurtle forward, Sped by the ever-hurrying sphere. MICHAEL. And tempest roars, with tempest vying, From sea to land, from land to sea,

71 In their alternate furies tying A chain of deepest potency. A flash of fiery disaster Precedes the thunder on its way; Thy envoys, though, revere, o Master, The gentle progress of Thy day. THE THREE. [in unison] This aspect lends the angels power, As none may gauge Thy secret way, And all Thy sovereign works still tower Sublime as on the primal day. (Goethe, 1976: lines 243-269)

The first speaker, Raphael, concentrates on the more cosmic situation of the earth with respect to the sun, the traditional emblem of masculine intellectual faculties and rationality. His celebration of God’s creative power will later be contrasted with the destructive impulses of the fallen Archangel. Gabriel, the messenger, turns to the earth per se and draws attention to time as created by the revolution of the planet, and introduces the first note of discord when he mentions the wild nature of the sea and the hostile element exemplified by the rocks. It is Michael, the warrior, who emphasizes the opposition between earthly chaos and disruption and the contrasting peace and order inherent in God’s creation, These words, coupled with the final choral unison of the voices of the three angels, singing together praises for the sublime achievement of God, imply, followed immediately as they are by the appearance of Mephistopheles, that although the initial act of creation was perfection itself, some element of chaos and disintegration has been introduced into the reality of the eighteenth century world. Significantly enough when Mephistopheles takes on the power of speech, the three Archangels disappear to be replaced by the greater authority of God who seems to be the only one strong enough to argue with the ultimate forces of evil.

MEPHISTOPHELES. Since once again, o Lord, I find you deigning To walk amongst us, asking how we do, And in the past you thought me entertaining, you see me too here with your retinue. Fine speeches are, beg pardon, not my forte, Though all this round may mock me; but I know, My rhetoric, you’d laugh it out of court, Had you not cast off laughter long ago. On suns and worlds I can shed little light, I see but humans, and their piteous plight. Earth’s little god turns true to his old way And is as weird as on the primal day. He might be living somewhat better

72 Had you not given him of Heaven’s light a glitter; He calls it reason and, ordained its priest, Becomes more bestial than any beast. He seems to me, begging your Honor’s pardon, Like one of those grasshoppers in the garden That leg it skip-a-skimming all day long And in the grass chirp out the same old song. If only he’d just lie in the grass at that! But no, he sticks his nose in every pat. THE LORD. And do you have no other news? Do you come always only to accuse? Does nothing please you ever on the earth? MEPHISTOPHELES. No, Lord! I find it still of precious little worth. I feel for mankind in their wretchedness, It almost makes me want to plague them less. THE LORD. Do you know Faust? MEPHISTOPHELES. The doctor? THE LORD. Yes, my serf! MEPHISTOPHELES. Forsooth! He serves you in a curious fashion. Not of this earth the madman’s drink or ration, He’s driven far afield by some strange leaven, He’s half aware of his demented quest, He claims the most resplented stars from heaven, And from the earth each pleasure’s highest zest, Yet near or far, he finds no haven Of solace for his deeply troubled breast. THE LORD. Though now he serve me but in clouded ways, Soon I shall guide him so his spirit clears. The gardener knows by the young tree’s green haze That bloom and fruit will grace it down the years. MEPHISTOPHELES. You’ll lose him yet! I offer bet and tally, Provided that your Honor gives Me leave to lead him gently up my alley! THE LORD. As long as on the earth he lives, So long it shall not be forbidden. Man ever errs the while he strives. MEPHISTOPHELES. My thanks to you; I’ve never hidden An old distaste for dealing with the dead. Give me a full-cheeked, fresh-faced lad! A corpse with me is just no dice, In this way I am like a cat with mice. THE LORD. So be it; I shall not forbid it! Estrange this spirit from its primal source, Have licence, if you can but win it, To lead it down your path by shrewd resource; And stand ashamed when you must own perforce: A worthy soul through the dark urge within it Is well aware of the appointed course. MEPHISTOPHELES. May be-but it has never lasted yet; I am by no means worried for my bet. And if I do achieve my stated perpent, You grant me the full triumph that I covet. Dust shall he swallow, aye, and love it, Like my old cousin, the illustrious serpent. THE LORD. Then, too, enjoy free visitation; I never did abominate your kind. Of all the spirits of negation

73 The rogue has been least onerous to my mind. Man all too easily grows lax and mellow, He soon elects repose at any price; And so I like to pair him with a fellow To play the deuce, to stir, and to entice. But you, true scions of the godly race, Rejoice you in the font of living grace! By ever active, ever live creation In love’s enchanting fetters be you caught, And that which sways in wavering revelation, May you compact it with enduring thought. [Heaven closes; the ARCHANGELS disperse.] MEPHISTOPHELES. [alone] At times I don’t mind seeing the old gent, And try to keep relations smooth and level. Say what you like, it’s quite a compliment: A swell like him so man-to-man with the Devil! (ibid., lines 270-353)

The opening dialogues among the angels indicate the opposing forces in life since life is made of these clashing contrasts. In fact these opposing forces are preparing the readers for the two opposing extremes that will enter the scene: we are introduced Mephistopheles and God. The dialogue between Mephistopheles and God in the lines 300-330, originates from the Book of Job. In the biblical story of Job, Job is described as a perfect and upright man and he has fear of God. Unlike Faust who is on his own, Job was blessed with a peaceful and large family and he was wealthy. Satan challenged God in that if God touches all that Job had, he would curse Him. God allowed him to test Job, whose substance was taken away, and burnt; he lost everything. However, upon these calamities “Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground and worshipped” and said “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD. Job did not deny God as a result of his sufferings” (Job 1: 20-21). God becomes a spectator in the scene of Satan’s temptation of Faustus. If God is allowing Satan to play with one of his most beloved beings, Job, in the Bible, then Satan’s challenging God and God’s leaving Faust alone against Satan should not be considered strange or inconsistent. Although God says that “Man ever errs the while he strives” in the Prologue scene, the Angels claim the reverse at the end of the play: “Whoever strives in ceaseless toil, Him we may grant redemption” (Goethe,

74 op.cit., lines 11936-11937). Then again the words of God contrast with the end of the play. While God leaves Faust to Mephistopheles, Mephistopheles is very sure of his victory over God because the wager between God and him can be compared to a bet between two friends on an ordinary issue. Unlike Marlowe’s Faustus, Goethe’s hero Faust is an intellectual, a philosopher, who sells his soul not so that he can gain tangible rewards but because he is suffering from an existential boredom and longs for any kind of alternative experience, good or bad. He is ready to throw himself into any situation that will assist him in resolving the mystery and control life’s essential course. To see that there is nothing he can know “It fair sears [his] heart to find it so” (ibid., line 365). He falls into despair but this only breaks his heart; this is both an ironic and romantic approach to knowledge. He is tormenting himself in his study thinking of turning to magic:

I have pursued, alas, philosophy, Jurisprudence, and medicine, And help me God, theology, With fervent zeal through thick and thin. And here, poor fool, I stand once more, No wiser than I was before. They call me Magister, Doctor, no less, And for some ten years, I would guess, Through ups and downs and tos and fros I have led my pupils by the nose- And see there is nothing we can know! It fair sears my heart t find it so. True, I know more than those imposters, Those parsons and scribes, doctors and masters; No doubt can plague me or conscience cavil, I stand not in fear of hell or devil- But then, all delight for me is shattered; I do not pretend to worthwhile knowledge, Don’t flatter myself I can teach in college How men might be converted or bettered. Nor have I estate or moneyed worth, Nor honour or splendour of this earth; No dog would live out such wretched part! So I resorted to Magic’s art, To see if by spirit mouth and might Many a secret may come to light; So I need toil no longer so, Propounding what I do not know; So I perceive the inmost force That bonds the very universe, View all enactment’s seed and spring,

75 And quit my verbiage-mongering. (ibid., lines 354-385)

He inserts magic as an art into the intellectual cultural life of the Enlightenment period. We learn that he turns to magic because of his frustration with sophistic philosophy which means empty words to him and he rationalizes his reasons. According to him, magic directs the individual towards action; however, words stay where they are, making him passive. We also learn that his father practised alchemy. In his predecessors, in Marlowe and in the original Faustus book, there is not much information about Faustus’ father. But, Goethe’s Faust’s father “brooded on Nature”:

My father, man of honour through unsung, Brooded on Nature wit a crotchety passion, And- in all probity yet in his fashion- Upon her sacred circles raptly hung; By secret recipes unending, Locked up in the Black Kitchen with retorts, He brewed away with adepts, blending Contrariness of every sort. (ibid., lines 1034-1041)

He continues to say that he himself has performed similar murders that his father committed and received the same praise but he has now overgrown paternal patterns. The magic his father uses is rejected by Faust, instead he is going to use another form, in a more glorified way. Within Faust’s soliloquy resides his intellectual temptations as well as his sensual ones.

Faust. Two souls, alas, are dwelling in my breast, And either would be severed from its brother; The one holds fast with joyous earthy lust Onto the world of man with organs clinging; The other soars impassioned from the dust, To realms of lofty forebears winging. (ibid., lines 1110-1117)

Faust is trapped between the desires of worldly pleasures and spiritual pleasure. Faust’s desire to fly to the realms of his lofty forebears foreshadows his elevation at

76 the end of the work and is also reminiscent of Icarus and his ambition to fly towards the sun. Mephistopheles can be perceived as the physical form of Faust’s bad conscience that allows Faust to act upon his wings. Mephistopheles enables Faust to perform acts that Faust had only dreamed about in the past. Faust becomes enraptured by his power and forgets his responsibilities once he is no longer perceived as simply and exclusively a scholar. Faust speaks before the light of the full moon lamenting his spiritual emptiness and ennui in the tragedy’s first part:

Oh full moon radiant, would that you, who many a midnight vigil through Have found me wakeful in this chair, Might look your last on my despair! As over books I used to bend, You would appear to me, sad friend; Ah, would that on high mountain ways I wandered by your lovely rays, Might haunt with sprites a cavern rift, On meadows in your twilight drift, And rid of learning’s fetid fume, Bathe whole my spirit in your spume! (ibid., lines 386-397)

In this quotation, the dichotomy between nature versus learning and culture is given. There is a contradiction between the high mountain and low cavern, while the high mountain signifies holiness like Christ, the latter refers to the place of darkness, dark ancient knowledge already pointing to Faust’s turn to Mephistopheles. The full moon1 is identified with lunacy and the light of the full moon refers to the interchangeability of life and people. The light once appearing on Faust’s books and papers starts to fade away leaving its place to ambiguities in his mind. He wants to leave his books behind to overcome ‘learning’s fetid fume’ in other words, his imprisonment by his books. Faust relinquishes his books, the authoritative canon I mentioned above in relation to Marlowe’s version, in other words he abandons the words which enable them to speak and he starts to move. Words are necessary tools

1 The feminine nature of both the moon and the cavern point to Faust’s yearning for the mother whom he will find in the guise of Mater Gloriosa at the end of the text. This raises a question about his masculinity but this particular problematic lies outside the theme of my dissertation.

77 to accomplish meaning. However, Faust cannot give meaning to words that he has read in scholarly books; thus, he takes recourse in Magic.

I feel an urge to reach For the original, the Sacred text, appealing To simple honesty of feeling To render it in my dear German speech. (He opens a tome and sets forth.) “In the beginning was the Word” – thus runs the text. Who helps me on? Already I’m perplexed! I cannot grant the word such sovereign merit, I must translate it in a different way If I’m indeed illumined by the Spirit. “In the beginning was the Sense.” But stay! Reflect on this first sentence well and truly Lest the light pen be hurrying unduly! Is sense in fact all action’s spur and source? It should read: “In the beginning was the Force!” Yet as I write it down, some warning sense Alerts me that it, too, will give offense. The spirit speaks! And lo, the way is freed, I calmly write: In the beginning was the Deed!” (ibid., lines 1220-37)

Faust mentions the original, the sacred text as the text of God, and draws attention to the problem of language when he mentions his “dear German speech.” We are reminded of Marlowe’s Faustus and the inadequacy of the English language as seen through Renaissance eyes. The eighteenth century notion of nationhood allows Faust to regard German as the ultimate form of communication with God. Nevertheless, even in this state of certainty, the power of the word is questioned when Faust feels the need to substitute first “Force”, then “Deed” for “Word”. This substitution is symptomatic of the character’s ambiguity with regard to supremacy. Speech therefore, is seen by Faust to be inadequate when compared to action. Faust turns away from an abstract pursuit of knowledge to an active life and quest. The Deed, or to act is crucial to Faustus since he undergoes an existentialist crisis. He desires to see beyond the empty words. According to him, to act is the essence of life; acting is a tool to reach power. However, what is ironic is that while leaving learning and philosophy which he associates with empty words, he turns to magical words that lead him to a satanic alienation from God. Thus, magic is inserted and integrated with the intellectual culture of the eighteenth century. Faust’s selling his soul is the symbol of his alienation.

78

I, image of the godhead, that began To dream eternal truth was within reach, Exulting on the heavens’ brilliant beach As if I had stripped off the mortal man. (ibid., lines 614-617)

His denigration of man as inferior and mortal echoes Marlowe’s Faustus. His desire to go beyond his mortal existence is only possible by ranking himself with gods: “Shall I then rank with gods? Too well I feel/My kinship with the worm, who bores the soil’ (ibid., line 52). The allusion to the worm is meaningful since we are reminded of Satan as the snake, he diminished into an animal form associated with burial and death. These words might be a foreshadowing of the ultimate defeat of Satan. Nevertheless, Faust desires immortality and he is determined to reach it by destroying death. He eludes the Devil’s bargain in spite of tasting the forbidden fruit. In Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, Mephistopheles’ insistence on the writing of the deed is an emphasis upon Faustus’ freedom of choice which will result in his fall. However, in Goethe’s Faust, Faust reverses this situation, it is at Mephistopheles’ own free will to appear to Faust, “mind[ing] the art [that] appeals to [Faustus]” (ibid., line 1435) and leading him to the deed:

FAUST. I used no trap or stratagem, All on your own you walked into my pen. Who holds Old Nick had best hang on to him! He will not capture him so soon again. MEPHISTOPHELES. I am quite willing, if such be your pleasure, To stay in company with a man of parts; Provided I may while away your leisure In some rewarding fashion by my arts. FAUST. By all means do, you may feel free, But mind the art appeals to me. (ibid., lines 1426-1435)

It is interesting to see that after the pact of Faust with Mephistopheles, the first thing that happens is the infatuation of Faust with Margarete who comes from a humble background that does not fit Faust’s education and status in society. Margarete the root of whose name is the Latin word Margarita, meaning pearl. The pearl is associated with perfection and purity. In terms of flowers, the French word

79 “marguerite” is daisy in English, which again implies innocence and simplicity. When Margarete breaks a star flower which is one of the same species as daisies, and plucks the petals off, one by one (ibid., line 3180), in fact she destroys herself. Margarete is also symbolically lunar as she is in the text identified with lunacy and also emerges through her association with luna as the female principle. The inner turmoil she has fallen into is indicated when she says:

MARGARETE. My mother I killed, My child I drowned. Was it not given us both, and bound The two? The! No – I can’t believe it yet. Give me that hand! No, it’s no dream! My dearest hand! But it feels wet! Oh! Wipe it off! It would seem There is blood on it. Oh God! Who did it? Put off that sword, I beg of thee! (ibid., lines 4508-4516)

Class barriers are diminished when Faust offers to walk her home; however, these barriers are not totally removed since Margarete is presented under different pet names such as or Grelthen which reflect Faust’s ambiguity and his multifaceted approach to her. She is not his social equal and is replaced by Helen of Troy in the second book of Faust.

FAUST. My fair young lady, may I make free To offer you my arm and company? MARGARETE. I’m neither fair nor lady, pray, Can unescorted find my way. (ibid., lines 2605-2608)

Margarete’s belonging to a lower social status allows her the freedom and the independence to find her own way, which she ultimately does at the end of the first book of Faust when she is spiritually saved. In the first book, Faust’s encounter with jolly fellows in Auerbach’s Tavern in Leipzig, peasants, workers, and a soldier who is Margarete’s brother presents us with a slice of the society which Faust belongs to. Faust’s encounter with different people from the very beginning of the text

80 emphasizes the class distinctions within the society. However, what is significant in the speeches of these figures is that their dialogues are given in verse in spite of the fact that they belong to the lower classes. We see the only prose scene in the text of Faust in the conversation between Faust and Mephistopheles. It takes place just before they go to the dungeon to save Margarete. Their conversation reflects Faust’s mourning for Margarete and desire to save her from the misery that she has fallen into. The real agony Faust feels is echoed in prose form. At the end of the first book, Faust is addressed as Heinrich by both Margarete and also by a voice that is heard after Margarete is redeemed. This is an indication of Faust’s alienation from his real self that signs the pact with Mephistopheles. Faust’s alienation from the scholarly knowledge is portrayed in Wagner’s personality. His student Wagner, who represents scholarly knowledge, is both linked to God’s creative power and also Mephistopheles’ evil side:

WAGNER. Dear me! How long is art! And short is our life!2 I often know amid the scholar’s strife A sinking feeling in my mind and heart. How difficult the means are to be found By which the primal sources may be breached; And long before the halfway point is reached, They bury a poor devil in the ground. (ibid., lines 558-565)

MEPHISTOPHELES. I fear just one thing, for my part: Short is the time, and long is art. (ibid., lines 1786-1787)

Faust, in fact, desires to free himself from the restraints that class distinctions impose upon him. Margarete is used as an object of mere pleasure in Goethe’s Faust, thus, Faust’s relation with her is not allowed to flourish and in the second part, his relation with Helen represents a more intellectual and powerful one within which he can even give her the position of judge in which she is to punish the warden of the tower for his neglect of his duty to watch:

FAUST. For which outrage

2 An adaptation of the familiar Latin aphorism derived from the ancient Greek Doctor Hippocrates. “Ars longa, vita brevis.”

81 His life is forfeit, and his blood were split Long since by his deserts; but you alone May punish or may pardon, as you please. HELENA. Such lofty dignity as you award, Of source of justice, ruler, be it but By way of trial, as I may surmise- So I fulfil the judge’s premier charge, To grant defendants hearing. Speak you, then. (ibid., Part II, lines 9209-9217)

The relation between Wagner and Faust is different from that between Marlowe’s Faustus and Wagner. Wagner is the embodiment of the Enlightenment idea of the creating new humanity completely freed from the restraints, fears and superstitions that are determined by religion and politics. His scientific work in his laboratory creates Homonculus, a little man:

HOMUNCULUS. [in the alembic, to WAGNER] Well, there, Papa! How now? It was no jest. Clutch me affectionately to your breast, But not too roughly, or the glass might shatter. Such is, you see, a property of matter: Things natural find all the world scant space, While things synthetic want a sheltered place. [to MEPHISTOPHELES] What ho, the rogue! Sir cousin, you here, too? You are right on cue, I am obliged to you. A thoughtful fate has timed it well enough; Since I exist, I must ever be active, I feel like getting down to work right off. Where I need shortcuts, you should be effective. (ibid., Part II, lines 6878-6890)

This reminds us of Marlowe’s Wagner’s bargain with the clown. This scene is also the parody of the relation between God and the individual. Wagner cannot satisfy the man he creates, but this time Wagner is left alone, Homonculus leaving with Mephistopheles. Wagner is identified with Mephistopheles long before he creates his creature Homonculus. The setting of the second part of Faust is completely different from the first part since the second part signifies contradictory realities as opposed to the first part. While in the first part, Magic and the wager between Mephistopheles and Faust are important, in the second Money and Helen are important. Money is represented in the scenes between the Emperor and Mephistopheles. Mephistopheles becomes the

82 financial advisor to the Emperor and he provokes him to the policies that will ruin the country and result in a . It is when Faust should be satiated that dissatisfaction sets in. This man who has acquired a limitless realm and boundless fortunes thanks to the conspiracy he has formed with Mephistopheles finds himself totally frustrated when he finds he cannot incorporate into his ownership the relatively insignificant property of old Philemon and Baucis:

FAUST. [starting violently] That cursed peal! Malign and groundless, Like shot from ambush does it pierce; Before my eyes my realm is boundless, But at my back annoyance leers, Reminding me with envious stabbing: My lofty title is impure, The linden range, the weathered cabin, The frail old church are still secure. And should I seek my ease there – crawling At alien shades my flesh would rear, Thorn in my side, encumbrance galling, Oh, were I far away from here! (ibid., Part II, lines 1151-1162)

That the property consists of a small house and a linden grove, significantly a symbol of conjugal love and fidelity, does not decrease the covetousness with which Faust views this plot of land that evades his supremacy. However, as he puts it after the ensuing carnage, his aim is not piracy but what seemed to him a fair exchange:

FAUST. … But where the linden stand is wizened To piteous ruin, charred and stark, A look-out frame will soon have risen To sweep the world in boundless arc. Thence I shall view the new plantation Assigned to shelter the old pair, Who, mindful of benign salvation, Will spend life’s happy evening there. (ibid., Part II, lines 11342-11349)

This vision is totally shattered when Mephistopheles returns with tidings of destruction, significantly wreaked by hellish fire.

83 FAUST. So you have turned deaf ears to me! I meant exchange, not robbery. This thoughtless violent affair, My curse on it for you to share! (ibid., Part II, lines 11370-11373)

The strategies of Mephistopheles and Faust no longer coincide when the victims represent a simple, humble, and orderly form of life and the hospitality displayed by the old couple who offer shelter to the unnamed wayfarer indicates sincerity. The lofty ambition of Faust reveals its absurdity when he realizes that he has conspired in destroying individuals whose names are known and whose way of life he has forsaken because of his grandiose dreams. It is when he has encountered Want, Debt, Care, and Need, the four women whose discourse he fails to understand, but whose words he hears, and finally their sister Death that he is able to retrieve his humanity and utter the words,

FAUST. I have not fought my way to freedom yet. Could I but clear my path at every turning Of spells, all magic utterly unlearning; Were I but Man, with Nature for my frame, The name of human would be worth the claim. (ibid., Part II, lines 11403-11407)

From that epiphany onwards, a better Faust emerges, whose aim is now to fight the deadly wasteland represented by the marshes, a zone of infertility. The marsh also represents the possibility of sinking, a metaphysical fall and engulfment that is implicit in the destructiveness of Satanic forces. When Faust decides to fight the marshland and create a space of fertility for others, we encounter an act of altruism which will eventually be his saving grace. His protestation against Mephistopheles, when he says that his aim had not been “robbery” underlines the fact that at that point, it is no longer his free will that is being obeyed. At the moment when free will and choice are slipping from his fingers and are being snatched away from him, he realizes the egotism that has governed his deeds so far and makes his final, conscious decision:

FAUST. A chain of marshes lines the hills, Befouling all the land retrievement; To drain this stagnant pool of ills

84 Would be the crowning, last achievement. I’d open room to live for millions Not safely, but in free resilience. Lush fallow then to man and cattle yields Swift crops and comforts from the maiden fields, New homesteads near the trusty buttress-face Walled by a bold and horny-handed race. A land of Eden sheltered here within, Led tempest rage outside unto the rim, And as it laps a breach in greedy riot, Communal spirit hastens to defy it. Yet-this I hold to with devout insistence, Wisdom’s last verdict goes to say: He only earns both freedom and existence Who must reconquer them each day. And so, ringed all about by perils, here Youth, manhood, age will spend their strenuous year. Such teeming would I see upon this land, On acres free among free people stand. I might entreat the fleeting minute: Oh tarry yet, thou art so fair! My path on earth, the trace I leave within it Eons untold cannot impair. Foretasting such high happiness to come, I savor now my striving’s crown and sum. (ibid., Part II, lines 11559-11586)

This is the last time we hear him speak. The text moves on, in a grand finale where the whole universe, including the more perfected angels, supernatural forces, paternity and maternity personified, their blessed boys raise their voices to silence the complaint of Mephistopheles who is witnessing the loss of “costly, peerless profit,/The lofty soul pledged [him] by solemn forfeit,/They’ve spirited it slowly from [his] writ” (ibid., Part II, lines 11829-11831). The soul of Faust is thus elevated to Heaven, sent upward accompanied with a chorus consisting of female voices, among whom we hear the voice of the penitent Margarete. It is a male voice, that of Doctor Marianus, “prostrate in adoration,” who summarises the final ascension, but significantly enough, the final Chorus Mysticus asserts that it is “Woman Eternal” who “draw[s] us on high,” not only relating Faust’s salvation through the Great Mother, but also, through the usage of the word “us”, transforming the personal problematic of Faust to a universal one which involves the whole of mankind. The feminine necessary for salvation in a way undermines the exclusively masculine rationality of the Age of Enlightenment and paves the way towards a more Romantic idealism.

85 In Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, Faustus is offered damnation, in Goethe’s Faust, he is offered salvation. However, what is left to the postmodern perplexed, broken and aimless versions of Faustus is to prove their existence and identity by making a choice.

86 CHAPTER 4 ‘The Elect’: A Servant to Satan or to God? (The Sin of ‘the Elect’)

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

(Matthew 16:26)

And our knowledge, compared with Thy knowledge, is ignorance. St. Augustine (Pusey, 2004: 154)

What can we really know? How can we be certain that we have the truth? How can we be certain that we know anything at all? What is knowledge, and how is it different from belief? If we know something, must we know that we know it?

(Pojman, op. cit., 1)

Traditional individualistic strife which is the basis of the Renaissance idea and the emphasis on the liberated mind in the Enlightenment changes its direction towards the obscure existence of the self that floats in the universe. For what reasons the individual will search, how he will be certain that he knows what is true and certain and what is not, what he will accomplish by reaching knowledge remain unanswered and obscure in the postmodern era. Thus, the postmodern mind no longer accepts the Enlightenment belief that knowledge is objective since the universe is not mechanistic and dualistic but rather historical, relational, and personal. The world is not simply an objective given that is out there, waiting to be discovered and known; reality is relative, indeterminate, and participatory (Grenz, 1996: 7). Human beings are alienated from both their historical and personal selves since they do not know where they belong and why they exist in this world. As a result of the First and the Second World Wars, the dual and corrupted system that

87 governs the institutions within the system, man, himself, becomes the author of the destruction of humanity. Establishing the self, questioning the self has always been the concern of human beings. However, in this age it has been almost impossible to assert an autonomous self due to the corruption in the institutional, political, social, educational system. It is a result of post-war mentality that leads to feelings of alienation, freedom, despair and nothingness. In a world where dualities constructed since the age of Plato are being questioned the dichotomy between good and evil has been challenged. Marlowe’s text, on the other hand, perhaps unwittingly reveals to us the impossibility of “good” existing in a world where “evil” is absent. Baudrillard says that “in every human action, there are always two divinities doing battle; neither is defeated and the game has no end” (Baudrillard, 2001: 100). In The Magus1 (1977) by John Fowles, the battle of these two divinities, the good and the evil, is represented in a never ending game that is set by the character Conchis. The Magus, in which the game has no end, serves as an outstanding example for developing the myth of Faustus into another direction in the postmodern era. Baudrillard comments on the postmodern era as follows: “Suddenly there is a curve in the road, a turning point. Somewhere, the real scene has been lost, the scene where you had rules for the game and some solid stakes that everybody could rely on” (Baudrillard, 1993: 100). The game is performed by real players who wear masks that hide their real identities which they are never sure that they really have. This reminds us of Marlowe’s Faustus in which illusionary characters appear and are branded as “shadows, not substantial.” (Marlowe, op.cit., 4.1, line 103). The Magus consists of three main sections each one of which begins with a quotation from the first version of La Nouvelle Justine ou Les Malheurs de la Vertu, Les Infortunes de la Vertu. The usage of the Marquis de Sade as guiding voice in the novel is interesting: Sade’s novel, although interspaced with explicit scenes of an erotic nature, is fundamentally an essay on the choice of good and evil and presents the reader with an analysis of psychopathology and the essential cruelty that underlies desire. Sade’s aim is to liberate the novel and to expose within it an

1 The revised edition of The Magus, published in 1977, is going to be referred in this chapter.

88 essential knowledge about what he says is “the heart of man”. As Noelle Chatelet states,

The principle is very clear: the only knowledge possible is by evil and through evil. A new type of philosophical novel is born: this novel is definitively scandals…. Sade is endowed with the particular spirit of the philosophy of the Enlightenment. If one admits that the philosopher is really the rational man who is preoccupied by both the moral, theological and scientific becoming of humanity, and the critical and systematic analysis of the individual in his relationships with society, one is easily a philosopher in the eighteenth century.2 (Sade, 1972: 19)

The inclusion of Sade into the text indicates Fowles’ preoccupation with the interaction of aggression and physical violence with problems related with free will and the quest for power. The first section, which concentrates on the mock Joycean self-examination of Nicholas, his self imposed exile in Greece, his refusal to enter into a meaningful relationship with Alison, his betrayal and self pity which culminates in his attempted suicide constitute a process which radically denies him the label of “débauché de profession” mentioned in Sade’s introductory words. The first person narrator whose voice and “I/eye” we have to share forces the reader into an identification with Nicholas that will be sustained throughout the novel. As we read the text and become Nicholas, not only are we obliged to share his experiences and his relationship with Conchis, but we also find ourselves at the end of the novel partaking in the main character’s tragedy as both he and we as identifying readers encounter the emptiness and suspension that he has to face at the end of the novel: “Let him who has never loved, love tomorrow/And he who has loved, let him love tomorrow” (Fowles, 1997: 656). In “this frozen present tense,” in the reality of our lives now, love is out of the question. Fowles’ quotation from Sade as introductory words to the second section is:

Irritated by this first crime, the monsters did not stop at that point; they then laid her, naked, face down on a big table, they lit tapers, they placed the image of our saviour by her head, and dared to consume on the hips of the unhappy girl/woman the most redoubtable of our mysteries. (ibid., 65)

2 I am grateful to Prof. Zeynep Ergun for the translation of Sade’s quotations from French into English.

89 In the second part, although Nicholas is attracted to the game by Conchis, he is deeply involved in it by the women whom he has sexual relationships with. He is the one who is laid on a table and raped although he thinks that he rapes the island as he says at the end of the first section (ibid., 63). Fowles chooses the following quotation from Sade to begin his third section:

The triumph of philosophy would be to throw light on the obscurity of the paths that providence uses to reach the aims that she designs for man, and to trace accordingly some plan of behaviour that could teach that unhappy two-legged individual, forever in the throes of the whims of that being who is said to control him so very despotically, the way in which he must interpret the decrees of that providence. (ibid., 567)

The end of the novel contrasts with Sade’s words since in spite of the fact that Sade’s assertion of the triumph of philosophy over obscurity, the end of the novel distorts that hope. There is no hope for attaining knowledge that will flourish from darkness into the light. Sade’s presence is important in this novel since his eighteenth century discourse contrasts with the content of each section. In The Magus, a young English teacher, Nicholas Urfe, bored with his life, leaves his familiar world and journeys into the unknown, a Greek Island, Phraxos, and meets “an eccentric mysterious millionaire” (ibid., 282) who has multiple identities: a retired musician, a war criminal, an atheist according to the islanders, a psychiatrist, a sorcerer or charlatan named Conchis, who enlightens, or (it would be better to say,) misleads Nicholas about himself by drawing him into a game where all is illusion. Nicholas fails in being an individual since he is like a puppet on a string. He not only fails in being an individual but has also failed in writing poetry. “I got a third class degree and a first class illusion: that I was a poet. But nothing could have been less poetic than my seeing-through –all boredom with life in general and with making a living in particular” (ibid., 17). When his girlfriend Alison steals an expensive fountain pen for him, he does not dare to write with it (ibid., 32). The stolen fountain pen symbolizes the desired male power since it is stolen. Moreover, it also symbolizes his failure in writing since the stolen fountain pen refers to his

90 incompetent creative side. He depends on a female and someone else’s pen emphasizes his being an impotent puppet that needs to be manipulated. His failure in writing poetry and managing his own life leads him to search for a new identity for himself: “I didn’t know where I was going, but I knew what I needed. I needed a new land, a new race, a new language; and although I couldn’t have put it into words then, I needed a new mystery” (ibid., 19). This new mystery will take place in Phraxos, and he is ready to destroy the virginity of the island. This intention is confessed later by him: “I began quietly to rape the island” (ibid., 63). This quotation represents Nicholas’ unethical character; he is not an innocent victim who is attracted to the island. Although he has already completed his education in his profession, he has not fulfilled his quest for his inner self yet. As a result of the disillusioned atmosphere of the World Wars, Nicholas, dissatisfied with his self, looking for a brand new extraordinary place to rape, goes to Phraxos, i.e. to his soul. At this point ‘Gnosticism’ is significant because he will unconsciously undergo a Gnostic experience. However, in The Magus, the meaning of God is metaphoric. To understand the self, in other words, to know who you are, where you are and where you are going, means knowing God, in other words, the self, the nature of one’s true character. Nicholas, as an overreaching Faustian character, starts his journey from an island which is England to another island that he needs to discover. If we consider the island metaphor identified with the self, Nicholas’ journey into the depths of an unknown place is considered to be his desire to discover his self. On the other hand, his journey is associated with colonization and establishing his own language, the race and the system which he belongs to. Moreover, his journey to a Greek island which is the homeland of Plato and Aristotle represents his returning to the system that he thinks would not exist in the island. All these represent that there will be no exit out of the Western system. He will always return to the point where he starts as the end of the novel indicates. There is no possibility of the good and the new and all the experience that he goes through is illusionary. His departure from the island that England is, is a journey to his self where he will seek meaning in his existence. Both Nicholas and Conchis play the godgame of self-discovery trying to construct an individual myth that will classify Nicholas among the ‘Elect’ characters. Conchis

91 acts as the mentor of the novice, Nicholas. However, Nicholas’ real job is also teaching so their roles are confusing and blurred. In the novel, Nicholas seems to be determined to have a role in Conchis’ play due to his curiosity, his desire to attach himself to something or someone that will give meaning to his existence. Conchis, as the pronunciation of his name suggests, could be related to “consciousness” thereby pointing to the game of self-discovery, knowledge and it could also be associated with the Conch, a shell, which represents power, authority in Lord of the Flies. His name suggesting both knowledge and power signify Faustus’ concerns and attributes. The conch-shell (sankha in Hindi) also signifies “the primeval sound of creation and victory over the demons” (Bowker and Holm, 1994: 79) in Hinduism. Thus, from the beginning of the novel, his Godlike qualities are alluded to.

Before anything else, I knew I was expected. He saw me without surprise, wit a small smile, almost a grimace, on his face. He was nearly completely bald, brown as old leather, short and spare, a man whose age was impossible to tell: perhaps sixty, perhaps seventy; dressed in a navy-blue shirt, knee length shorts, and a pair of salt-stained gym shoes. The most striking thing about him was the intensity of his eyes; very dark brown, staring, with a simian penetration emphasized by the remarkably clear whites; eyes that seemed not quite human. (Fowles, op. cit., 79)

The ambiguity about his age creates parallels between Conchis and God, parallels that are further emphasized by the description of his eyes and his lack of surprise when he sees Nicholas. These similarities are significantly undermined by his boldness which indicates lack of vitality and the “simian penetration” of his eyes which creates a link between him and apes, thus negating his implied divinity and bringing him down to the level of the primitive Darwinian ancestors of man. When it comes to Nicholas’ name, “Old Nick” is used as one of the names of the devil. If we relate Nicholas to Faustus, he has a similar overreacher quality that seeks his self, but his name alludes to Mephistopheles. If, on the other hand, we relate Conchis with Mephistopheles who tempts him to a pact in the island, he becomes Faustus. Thus, we see the dual quality of Nicholas’ character. There is a mythical allusion in his surname, Urfe which is phonetically reminiscent of Orpheus. Nicholas Urfe, a graduate of Oxford, takes a teaching job at a Greek boys’ school

92 and soon after he comes to the island, he discovers that he is not a poet although he thinks that he can write poems (ibid., 58). Thus, Nicholas Urfe fails to fulfil the promise contained in his surname which points to the Orpheus myth. For a brief description of Orpheus is as follows:

Orpheus is a character occurring in the mythology of the Greeks. The story tells how he sang and played the lyre so well that wild animals and even stones responded. When his beloved wife EURIDICE died young, Orpheus was heart-broken. He went down into the underworld to reclaim her, and by the power and charm of his music enticed HADES to let her go. (Senior, 1990: 165)

Orpheus will be further discussed below. In spite of Urfe’s relevance to Orpheus, Orpheus’ playing the lyre can be linked to Conchis’ being a musician. Roles are confusing in the novel as it happens in the struggle of good and evil, two divinities doing battle. In this perplexing situation, Nicholas is going to discover himself under the guidance of Conchis. Nicholas will be enchanted by Conchis’ deeds and games like wild animals, trees and rocks are enchanted by Orpheus’ music. According to the myth, Orpheus was the most famous poet and musician who ever lived. Apollo presented him with a lyre, and his mother who was one of the Muses taught him how to use it. His mother, Calliope, being the muse of epic poetry, gave him the gift of music. (Hamilton, 1999: 107) He not only enchanted wild beasts, but made the trees and rocks move from their places to follow the sound of his music. Orpheus joined the Argonauts and sailed to Colchis3 with them either because it was commanded or he was asked to bring back the Golden Fleece. On the way, his music helped them to overcome many difficulties (Graves, op.cit., 112). If Urfe is identified with Orpheus, the place Orpheus sailed to i.e. Colchis, could be associated with Conchis. However, Nicholas Urfe is neither a poet nor a musician, instead Conchis fulfils these roles. So Conchis can also be identified with Orpheus since it is emphasized in the novel that her love for music came from her mother: “‘The first thing I remember clearly is my mother’s singing. She always sang, whether she was happy or sad…. ‘My mother sang - and music was the most important thing in my life, from as far back as I can remember.”

3 My emphasis.

93 (Fowles, op. cit.,112) Thus, from the beginning of the novel, the blurred identities are given with Nicholas’ and Conchis’ names’ connotations. Caliban’s speech in The Tempest is introduced into the novel shows how , identified with Faustus, destroys the harmony of the island by creating a storm and the magical text based upon chaos. Caliban’s awareness of the island’s primeval music is in direct contrast with the implied artificiality of any music that Urfe or Conchis might, but cannot, create on the island.

Be not afeard; the isle is full of noises, Sounds, and sweet airs, that give delight, and hurt not. Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments Will hum about mine ears; and sometimes voices That, if I then had wak’d after long sleep, Will make me sleep again: and then, in dreaming, The clouds methought would open, and show riches Ready to drop upon me; that, when I wak’d, I cried to dream again. (ibid., 204)

Indeed, Prospero emerges as another Faustus figure in search of knowledge and power over others. On the other hand, from a postcolonialist point of view, colonizing and exploiting both nature and the island, and utilizing others for his own purposes, Prospero appears as a Mephistopheles figure, although his magical powers are not his own but Ariel’s. However, he does exhibit Satanic powers when he frees Ariel from the tree he has been imprisoned in and forces him to act for him. In that sense, in terms of their position in Greece, both Conchis and Nicholas point towards Prospero. On the other hand, the identification of Nick’s name with the devil could be associated with Orpheus’ descend to Hades since Nicholas’ identity already represents Hell. While Orpheus joins the expedition of the Argonauts and helps them to overcome difficulties with his music, Nicholas comes for an expedition to Conchis’ place on the Bourani Coast in the Phraxos Island. On the other hand, as far as Orpheus’ descend into the underworld to bring Eurydice back to the upper world is associated with Nicholas’ expedition to Conchis’ place: “I walked for hours and I was in hell” (ibid., 58). Being in Hades, then Nicholas’ chances of success in this journey are foreshadowed because Orpheus is finally torn to pieces by the Junes.

94 Bourani alludes to the word “bourne” which means boundary, limit and also goal, destination as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. When both meanings are considered, the associated word becomes confusing like Conchis’ perplexing image in the eyes of Nicholas. As the novel proceeds Conchis will inform Nicholas about the meaning of ‘Bourani: “‘The Albanians were pirates, not poets. Their word for this cape was Bourani. Two hundred years ago it was their slang word for gourd. Also for skull.’ He moved away. ‘Death and water’” (ibid., 83). The Latin word uter which is the root of uterus means gourd. The reader cannot but notice Conchis’ blindness towards women: the word Bourani encompasses both life and death. The borders of the distinction between good and evil cannot be drawn between Nicholas and Conchis. Nicholas, feeling lost, needs something that will enchant him: “I didn’t know where I was going, but I knew what I needed, I needed a new land, a new race, a new language; and although I couldn’t have put it in words then, I needed a new mystery” (ibid.,19). The irony is that when he goes to Greece he is in actual fact making a journey that has already been accomplished: The roots of Western Culture lie in Greece. It is again ironic that he says a new language’ that he is seeking for: however, he comes to the island to teach his own language, which represents his desire to colonize the island. The “new mystery” that he needs will be presented to him in Phraxos. In Greek, the etymology of Phraxos is Fraxinus meaning ash tree. Φράξο4: (το) φυλλοβόλο δέντρο που καλλιεργείται ως καλλωπιστικό και παρέχει πολύτιμη ξυλεία, ΣΥΝ μελία. Επίσης φράξος (ο). ΕΤΥΜ. λατ. Fraxinus (Babinyiotis: 2005). If Phraxos means ash tree in the Greek language then the island could be identified with power, knowledge, and a place for experience to reach wisdom since according to Norse Mythology, the mighty ash tree Ygdrasill supports the entire universe. Under the tree lies , and when he tries to shake off its weight the earth quakes (Bulfinch: 1997, 330). Moreover, ash trees also serve as the ancestors of the human beings since after the creation of the world and the sea, man was made out of an ash tree and, woman out of an elder tree. (the man is called Aske and the woman Embla (ibid., 329–330). The tree’s roots point to the

4 Fraxo: [Ash tree] is a deciduous tree which provides timber and it is also used as ornamental, synonym, melia. I am deeply grateful to Işıl Hatipoğlu for the Greek translation of Fraxinus.

95 underworld, its branches to the sky and both are associated with human beings’ search for knowledge. In spite of the powerful connotations of Phraxos, Nicholas describes Phraxos as “uninhabited and uncultivated” (Fowles, op.cit., 52), separated from civilization and close to the instincts and the subconscious. This accords with its primal state of man as ash tree, in mythology. It has a wild and untouched nature waiting to be discovered since the island represents the subconscious or the self. Nicholas’ subconscious is hidden and waiting to be revealed on the island. Moreover, as Akşit Göktürk points out,

[s]ecluded from the outside, confined within itself, the static temporarality of the “island” makes it the opposite of the outside, “the world”. As opposed to these characteristics of the environment of the island, “the world” is identified with the principals of width, eternity, and historical time…. For the individual who is uncomfortable in the world, the island represents an environment of security, order and continuity, whereas, for the individual content in the world it represents the awakening of feelings concerning slavery, constriction and boredom. (Göktürk, 1973: 203)

The journey to the island in Greece is a journey to a largely unsocialized space which will aid his search for new knowledge. It is a journey to the depths of his subconscious, to his core in which not only his hidden desires and wild feelings exist, but also the subconscious of all Western humanity. What Nicholas only knows is “his self”; there is nothing beyond the ego; his soul is hollow and there is nothing inside it except self-centredness and selfishness. The world of consciousness that Nicholas enters when he goes to Greece also represents the impulse of colonization which he carries around within him, wittingly or unwittingly. In the uncultivated space that he imagines to be empty of old ideologies, Nicholas feels free to make new choices. As stated before, St. Augustine of Hippo, who was one of the Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church, believed that sin lies in free will, in other words, free will involves the choice of doing evil as well as the choice of doing good (Pusey: op. cit. 75). For him, if one refuses the will of God, one can only suffer the results of one’s mistaken-judgements. Human beings are free to choose whether that choice is right or not. Choosing is proving one’s existence; it is the quality that preserves one’s autonomy. However, human beings have to bear the consequences of their deeds at the end. Nicholas learns from Conchis’

96 experiences that the assertion of freedom is the highest quality, the most precious gift that an individual can possess. In the seventy eight chapters of The Magus, there is only one chapter with a title, in which Conchis narrates his experiences with the Germans during World War II. The title is the Greek word eleutheria which means freedom. The ironic allusion of the chapter’s title to World War II represents the individual’s freedom of choice and society’s requirements from the individual. In his fictive account of World War II, Conchis narrates his discovery of the precious gift when he faces with one of the guerilla fighters. He says that this guerilla:

Spoke out of a world the very opposite of mine. In mine life had no price. It was so valuable that it was literally priceless. In his, only one thing had that quality of pricelessness. It was eleutheria: freedom. He was the immalleable, the essence, the beyond reason, beyond logic, beyond civilization, beyond history. He was not God, because there is no God we can know. But he was a proof that there is a God we can never know. He was the final right to deny. To be free to choose. He, or what manifested, itself through him, even included the insane Wimmel, the despicable German and Austrian troops. He was every freedom, from the worst to the very best…. I mean he was something that passed beyond morality but sprang out of the very essence of things – that comprehended all, the freedom to do all, and stood against only one thing- the prohibition not to do all. … I saw that I was the only person left in that square who had the freedom left to chose, and that the annunciation and defense of that freedom was more important than common sense, self preservation, yes, than my own life, than the lives of eighty hostages. Again and again, since then, those eighty men have risen in the night and accused me. You must remember that I was certain I was going to die too. But all I have to set against their crucified faces are those few transcendent seconds of knowledge. But knowledge like white heat. My reason has repeatedly told me I was wrong. Yet my total being still tells me I was right. (Fowles, op. cit., 434)

The Annunciation and defence of freedom is the essence of proving existence. For Foucault, the subject of the ‘aesthetics of existence’ lies in the idea that ‘the self is not given to us’ and that ‘we have to create ourselves as a work of art’ (Foucault, 1984: 351) When one is forced to do what is being dictated then one simply becomes a mechanical victim having an automatic existence. Nicholas, considering himself as the victim of Conchis, is created as a work of art by Conchis. However, is he really created as a work of art or not is controversial although there is a slight difference between Nicholas at the end of the novel and Nicholas at the beginning of the novel. As Alison says, “‘You still haven’t learnt. You’re still playing to their script.’ She held my eyes, returning every degree of my bile. ‘I came back because I thought you’d changed.’” (Fowles, op.cit., 654) She is however, not totally aware of the

97 change because in the beginning of the novel Nicholas hides his real feelings wearing his mask:

Perhaps then, as I was looking at her, so close, I had my choice. I could have said what I was thinking: Yes, you are a tramp, and even worse, you exploit your tramp-hood, and I wish I’d taken your sister-in-law-to-be’s advice. Perhaps if I had been farther away from her, on the other side of the room, in any situation where I could have avoided her eyes, I could have been decisively brutal. But those grey, searching, always candid eyes, by their begging me not to lie, made me lie. (ibid., 30)

This mask is necessary for him because he is aware of the fact that he lives in a society that he needs its approval. Thus, Nicholas uses free will for his own good to lie and not to destroy social order. However in the end, free will disappears and what is left is only emptiness to him:

I do not know why I did what happened next. It was neither intended nor instinctive, it was neither in cold blood nor in hot; but yet it seemed, once committed, a necessary act; no breaking of the commandment. My arm flicked out and slapped her left cheek as hard as it could. The blow caught her completely by surprise, nearly knocked her off balance, and her eyes blinked with the shock; then very slowly she put her left hand to the cheek. We stared wildly at each other for a long moment, in a kind of terror: the world had disappeared and we were falling through space. The abyss might be narrow, but it was bottomless. (ibid., 654)

There is neither free will nor guiding, watching one or ones, only emptiness remains behind. In the postmodern age, we consider that God is substituted by society however, “[t]here were no watching eyes. The windows were as blank as they looked.” (ibid.). There is no one out there to watch or guide. What is left unspecified in the novel is whether it is Alison or Conchis does the real teaching for Nicholas. All the experiences Nicholas goes through with Conchis remains illusionary, only it was Alison who remind him that he lives in this world, and really exists. However in the novel, Nicholas is always reminded that he is watched by Conchis who identifies himself with Zeus. Conchis’ power is emphasized throughout the novel even by himself: “If you question Hermes, Zeus will know” (ibid., 80). This is also illusionary and in the end it is all proved that all the experiences he goes through is illusion when he sees the grave of Maurice Conchis and finds out that he is four years dead. (ibid., 559)

98 For Nicholas, Conchis not only represents power and authority but he is also as a surrogate father figure to him. It is significant that Nicholas should have lost both his parents as they were travelling to another colony of Britain, India and their death should be the result of the funereal pyre caused by the crash of technology symbolized by the phallic plane. Nicholas, who is twenty-one at the time, is a little old to figure in the novel as a Dickensian orphan, but his words “so I now have no family to trammel what I regarded as my real self” (ibid., 16), constitute an ironic parody of Pip’s situation at the beginning of Great Expectations.5 The first paragraph of The Magus, with its insistent repetition of the first person pronoun and the potted autobiography it gives of Nicholas’, not only reveals the self-centredness of the protagonist, but also trivializes the first two decades that he experiences in Britain. His rejection of both mother and father, his inclusion into the text of his possible French antecedents, his haughty preference for D. H. Lawrence, further emphasize his own satanic pride and rebellion against what is he sees to be the status quo. His need for a surrogate father is thus self-explanatory. “He searched my eyes, then did something strange: reached out, as he had in the boat, and touched my shoulder paternally6. I had indeed, it seemed, passed some test” (ibid., 154). The father-son relationship that he hardly ever had with his father is emphasized in this quotation. Conchis acts as Nicholas’ surrogate father. Another father figure who is related to the title of the novel is Simon Magus, who can be associated with Conchis both as a surrogate father to Nicholas and as a metaphorical magus. The soul is given by God to the body; and the soul inhabits the body by the consent of God according to the Augustan view. In the novel, Nicholas’ soul is inhabited by Conchis, metaphorically his God. Conchis, in the novel, reminds us of Simon Magus. As stated in the Gnosticism section, Simon Magus made people believe that he was the great power of God. Similarly, Conchis fascinates and manipulates Nicholas and makes him believe that he is God or Satan who is going to make his wishes come true.

5 Great Expectations is the story of Pip’s formation as a Victorian gentleman through the quasi- Faustian quest for knowledge under the tutelage of the Mephistopheles-like Magwitch. 6 My emphasis.

99 As already noted, Foucault asserted that the subject of ‘aesthetics of existence’ lies in the idea that ‘the self is not given to us’ and that ‘we have to create ourselves as a work of art’ (Foucault, loc. cit.). Although Nicholas is totally ignorant of the delusive game that Conchis leads him into, he is made to believe he is the ‘Elect’ who will create himself as a work of art that he fails to achieve, in the world of Conchis:

Then once more out of the blue he said quietly, ‘Are you elect?’ ‘Elect?’ ‘Do you feel chosen by anything?’ ‘Chosen?’ ‘John Leverrier felt chosen by God.’ ‘I don’t believe in God. And I don’t feel chosen.’ ‘I think you may be.’ I smiled dubiously. ‘Thank you.’ ‘It is not a compliment. Hazard makes you elect. You cannot elect yourself.’ ‘And what chooses me?’ ‘Chance wears many faces.’ (Fowles, op. cit., 87)

Nicholas thinks about the meaning of being elect. “..What did my being ‘elect’ mean – our having ‘many things to discover’? In itself it could mean nothing; in regard to him (Conchis) it could mean only that he was mad” (ibid., 90). As stated above, if he is really chosen then this should not be something bad, he will only discover and learn. The word “chosen” has implications related with puritan fate but is also connected with sainthood and Jewishness. It is traditionally God who does the choosing. Connecting the concept of divine choice with hazard and chance, and adding that “[c]hance wears many faces,” a characteristic of Satan, Conchis is here exhibiting the slipperiness that traditional dogmas have acquired in the postmodern period. The word hazard will be repeated by the first person narrator at the end of the novel where he experiences a negative epiphany. However, Nicholas, before he is drawn into a ‘Godgame’ (as the alternative title of the book suggests) (ibid., 10) by Conchis, thinks about Conchis’ question: whether he feels elected or not. The point is who Nicholas is elected or chosen by. Conchis, considering himself to be God, points to himself to indicate that he himself has given the degree of being ‘Elect’ to Nicholas. Thus, naturally, Conchis assumes the role of God and declares Nicholas to be his chosen one. Conchis is the God on

100 his territory and Nicholas becomes his toy or property. Nicholas’ quest for his identity is also associated with literature; while he is seeking for himself, the literary books guide him. Fiction and real life are intermingled and life for Nicholas becomes arbitrary. He refers to the texts by Eliot, Auden and Pound as will be quoted in this chapter. Whether Conchis has Godlike or Satanic qualities is controversial since the two are related in the novel. Conchis’ Godgame reminds us of the Prologue in the Heaven Scene of Goethe’s Faust since God bargains with Mephistopheles about Faust just as Conchis attracts Nicholas into a wager. However, here both God and Mephistopheles are presented in Conchis’ identity. Nicholas seems to be elected to have a role in Conchis’ play. Nevertheless when human beings have free choice to do what they like, whether good or bad, then this means that they are individuals as long as they keep their integrity. Since he has already been elected by Conchis, he does not have the choice of doing what he wants. Nevertheless, he is attracted to the mystery that Conchis presents him. Therefore in this postmodern novel, free choice is both present and absent. The Magus, the setting of which is a Greek island, uses mythological Gods in intricate plays that are performed by real players. Apollo, the Pagan god, urged his followers to “Know Thyself”. So, the emphasis on Apollo in the novel is not a coincidence. It is not only Apollo, the god of sunlight, prophecy, music, and poetry, who is used, but also Poseidon, the god of the sea, earthquakes and horses, and the satyr, half man, half goat, is used as an instrument in this creative, imaginative illusionary play:

With a new shock I realized that it was that of an absolutely naked man. He was just near enough for me to make out the black pubic hair, the pale scape of penis; tall, well-built, well cast to be Apollo. His eyes seemed exaggeratedly large, as if they had been made up. On his head there was a glint of gold, a crown of leaves; laurel-leaves. He was facing us, immobile, with his yard-long horn, a narrow crescent with a flared end, held slightly out from his waist in his right hand. It struck me after a few seconds that his skin was an unnatural white, almost phosphorescent in the weak beam, as if his body as well as his face had been painted. (ibid., 181)

Apollo, the god of order, is depicted as a very masculine well-built young man in this quotation. His skin’s unnatural whiteness is a result of the fact that the player

101 in the role of Apollo is a black man. In the Greek religion, the Greek Gods have a higher human beauty. However, although we expect the perfect whiteness of his skin, this Apollo’s skin has an unnatural whiteness due to the player’s skin’s actual blackness. With an introduction of a black character the concept of colonization and exploitation is further emphasized. Although Apollo represents order in mythology, like the endless battle between good and evil, there is something chaotic in this scene. Fiction and reality is blurred since we are confronted with a black Apollo instead of a white Apollo. The presentation of a black Apollo into the scene puts an emphasis upon the distortion of the myth. Myth which represents order within a system is distorted in Fowles’ postmodern text unlike in Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus and in Goethe’s Faust. Although Marlowe’s version of the Faustus myth and Goethe’s are dissimilar in terms of plot, they both have a recognizable resolution. Established religions are God centred but Gnosticism is centred on individuals. As far as Gnosticism’s being centred on each person, i.e. individual, is concerned, and bearing in mind that every individual is like God, Nicholas also struggles to go through a quest for self-discovery that will help him realize the full potential of his powers. He is aware of his modernist individual strife in this world and says:

“I thought back over the last few years of my life, the striving for individuality that had obsessed all my generation after the limiting and conforming years of the war, our retreat from society, nation, into self. I knew I couldn’t really answer his charge, the question his story posed; and that I could not get off by claiming that I was a historical victim, powerless to be anything else but selfish – or I should not be able to get off from now on. (ibid., 441)

As mentioned above, in spite of the fact that Nicholas is not presented as an innocent victim, he victimizes himself as a result of the wars. The individuality that Nicholas mentions is a modernist individuality, not a Renaissance individuality. The Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of “individualism” fits the characteristics of Faust’s deeds as well as Nicholas’ and Conchis’: “self-centred feeling or conduct as a principle… free and independent individual action or thought; egoism”. Likewise, Conchis says: “The human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed” (ibid., 132). Self-realization and the self are important both for Conchis and Gnosticism. Conchis also tells Nicholas that we should not leave everything to

102 hazard. We should choose when the true time comes. Conchis claims that every man is an island representing the human self (ibid., 160), an island that needs to be discovered, a wild island that should be tamed and manipulated or something to be discovered or learnt. But this quotation reminds us of John Donne’s work, “Meditation XVII” as opposed to postmodern self-centredness:

No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as any manner of thy friends or of thine own were; any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind. And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. (Donne: “Meditation XVII”)

Although this quotation connotes death, with the recurring imagery of the island and the mainland in The Magus, there is no escape from the despair caused by the wars and atrocities that have been experienced. The solidarity and religious communality implied in Donne’s text no longer applies to the postmodern individual. Conchis supports the idea that a human being can exist on his own and can understand the self by exploring it. “the human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed” (Fowles, op. cit., 132), in other words your self is your own God and you must be honest to Him. However in the original Faustus Book, Faustus is led to study divinity by his uncle so that he might arrive at the knowledge of God and His laws (Jones: op. cit., 92). Instead of turning to the study of divinity and scholarly books, Faustus consults magic and studies necromancy not for understanding God but for the sake of power, for the sake of becoming God. Faustus’ quest for knowledge and power leads him to taste the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge just like Adam and Eve do. Nicholas’ quest for his self rather than knowledge is explained by Conchis: “Self-realization occurs when you realize that you have no choice but to choose. You have to choose and use your free will and make a decision; this is when self acceptance comes” (Fowles, op. cit., 167). He learns to accept his self and life as it is and stops questioning. If one does not stop questioning then curiosity is aroused and it may lead to trespassing the boundaries. Nicholas is given the chance of trespassing the boundaries but he is led to another illusion each time. Faustus is also given a devilish opportunity of going beyond the boundaries.

103 However, Nicholas is trapped in this never ending game of illusions while both Faustus in Marlowe and Faust in Goethe escape from this trap either through damnation or salvation. Gnostics value creative imagination seeking new interpretations and avoiding tradition. This notion could be the basis of Conchis’ usage of applying Meta-Theatre which employs play-within-a-play technique. Life is a performance in itself. This view is also announced in As You Like It by Shakespeare: “All the world’s a stage,/And all the men and women merely players:/They have their exists and their entrances” (II.vii.139). Meta-theatre is a kind of mirror in which we view the actions and sufferings of characters like ourselves, suspending our disbelief in their reality. We suspect what is real and what is illusion. It is not only the scripted line that is blurred in The Magus but also the boundary between actors, actresses, the director and the audience is blurred. In established religions people agree to the assertions of an authority but Gnostics do not accept an authority. They believe in the creativity that stems from freedom of thought and behaviour. They reject control whether it be exerted by human laws, by demons or by gods. In The Magus, “The word being [is] no longer passive and descriptive, but active... almost imperative” (Fowles, op. cit., 130), due to the imaginative, stunning plays that are created by Conchis. Though Gnostics do not approve of control by any power, Conchis is the controlling authority being the director here. The reason for Nicholas’s being elected by Conchis and his transformation into an active being is his ignorance as stated by Conchis:

‘So. I shall see you next Saturday?’ I smiled. ‘You know you will. I shall never forget these last two days. Even though I don’t know why I’m elect. Or elected. ‘Perhaps your ignorance is why.’ ‘As long as you know the election feels a great privilege.’ (ibid., 154)

Conchis assumes the role of God just as Simon Magus presents himself as the great power of God as narrated in the Bible. In Gnostic stories, Simon Magus is always accompanied by Helen of Troy as he calls her. Likewise, Doctor Faust made

104 the ‘spirit’ of fair Helen of Greece his own paramour and bedfellow in his 23rd year (Jones, op. cit., 172). Bishop Irenaeus verifies that Helen was worshipped as the Great Mother, and Simon as Zeus. Similarly, Conchis acts like Zeus in the whole illusion. In Gnostic mythology, the figure of Helen is linked to the concept of light – in the form of a blazing torch or a pillar of fire – with fertility and also with Wisdom. Her Greek name means “brightness”. As the meaning of her name suggests she appears at different times as Wisdom, the Holy Spirit or the Great Mother in Gnostic stories. Simon and Helen appeared in many different forms in these stories and were called by a variety of names just as Conchis and the twin sisters, Lily/Julie, Rose/June who are used by Conchis to seduce Nicholas, appear under different names and identities. It is almost impossible to identify Helen as a companion to the Magus, in other words, Conchis. Conchis plays the role of Simon Magus in the novel, and female characters in the novel function as Helens for Conchis: Alison, Lily/Julie, Rose/June. Conchis uses them for helping Nicholas in his self discovery in the cycle of game.7 At the beginning of the novel, Nicholas talks about his unsuccessful liaisons:

I suppose I’d had, by the standards of of that pre-permissive time, a good deal of sex for my age. … I didn’t collect conquests, but by the time I left Oxford I was a dozen girls away from virginity.

(Fowles, op. cit., 21)

After this introduction of his solitary heart, he meets Alison who is an Australian airline stewardess. Her being an Australian airline stewardness refers to her rootlessness. England’s colonization of Australia is particularly tragic, not only in terms of the treatment of the native people of that island but also because Australia has been transformed into an open air prison. Thus Alison’s antecedents, we may surmise, would be related with ancestors who were radically marginalized and segregated from the island to which Nicholas belongs. Her profession further

7 As stated above this dissertation does not cover the issue of woman within the Faustus myth from a feminist point of view, thus, I will not delve in great detail about the problematics involved in the interchangeability of character and gender questions that arise in an analysis of these female characters.

105 emphasizes her attribute of “traveller”, reminding us of the wayfarer in Goethe’s Faust. Nicholas considers Alison as “a girl with as much morality as a worn-out whore from the Place Pigalle” (ibid., 613). However, in need of an emotional attachment, she is tired of being “a stupid Australian slut”, “a piece” as she describes herself. She is aware of the fact that she lacks the mystery that Nicholas looks for. When Alison comes to visit Nicholas in Greece, they climb Mount Parnassus and at the summit of Mount Parnassus, Nicholas finds carved the letters ΦΩΣ which means ‘light’ (ibid., 258). Nicholas is identified with Apollo being on the summit of Parnassus in front of the letters of ‘light’:

The peak reached up into a world both literally and metaphorically of light. It didn’t touch the emotions; it was too vast, too inhuman, too serene; and it came to me like a shock, a delicious intellectual joy marrying and completing the physical one, that the reality of the place was as beautiful, as calm as ideal, as so many poets had always dreamed it to be. (ibid.)

However, Nicholas fails to fulfil the characteristics of this mythical hero. On the other hand, Alison can be identified with light since her name means noble and light. Alison, as Fowles points out, indicates a flower with “thin green leaves, small white flowers, Alysson maritime… parfum de miel… from the Greek a (without), lyssa (madness). Called this in Italian, this in German. In English: Sweet Alison” (ibid., 566). Her name’s relationship with a flower reminds us of Goethe’s Margarete’s name meaning daisy. She can also be connected with a grown up, disillusioned Alice in Wonderland who has no way of escaping the hell that the wonderland has become. At the end of the novel, reduced to silence and rigidity, she will become an anagram, a mere jumble of letters made flesh. Nicholas does not dare to bring light either to his life or to the lives of other people around him. He does not dare because he is only an ordinary man accepting Conchis in the arrogant role of God or Simon Magus who claims that he can also perform the miracles of Jesus. In Gnostic stories, Simon often appears to be flying, reflecting the idea of escape from the body. Similarly, Faustus, in the Original Book, was also taught by Mephistopheles to fly. In The Magus, Conchis does not fly but he is interested in

106 ornithology which studies every aspect of bird life. He identifies himself with birds literally. The constant mentioning about birds could be associated with Chaucer’s “The Parliament of Foules” which is inverted in the novel and includes the author’s name in its title. The presence of nature in the novel is reduced, as nature becomes an object of desire for Conchis in his ambition to rule over the island by assuming the role of God. In “The Parliament of Foules” male birds present their love in the form of texts. In Chaucer’s work, the prerogative of judgement is given to nature who sits as a Goddess upon flowers. The eagles vying with one another for the “formel egle” (female eagle) who is presented and introduced in detail by nature woo her through the usage of speech and decorum is never infringed. In contrast, Nicholas presents his love to women when the females are unnamed and unknown. However, when their identity is revealed and he becomes familiar with them, females become ordinary sluts for him. In The Magus, Conchis tells Nicholas to ask him no questions and he expects him to accept his authority without question. He becomes God who is the director of life and the Godgame begins. Nicholas starts to lose control over his life because control is taken over by Conchis. At this point we should think about Conchis’ satanic deeds as well as his being God to Nicholas. Conchis is the God who directs this game and manipulates Nicholas who becomes a fool, a toy in his hands. Although the roles of God and Satan are distinct in the Bible, in Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus and Goethe’s Faust, and in The Magus, God and Satan are one. Nicholas is very much confused with what he knows or what is real or dream as the novel proceeds. “I began to get some sort of harmony between body and mind; or so it seemed. It was an illusion” (ibid., 53). The illusion in Nicholas’ mind starts when he feels harmony between body and mind. However, Faustus’ journey starts when he forgets both body and soul. “He believed not that there was a God, hell or evil: he thought that body and soul died together and had quite forgotten divinity or the immortality of his soul but stood in his damnable heresy day and night” (Jones, op.cit., 100). On the other hand for the real historical person Faustus, no matter whether it was an illusion or not, the harmony between body and soul assisted him in serving the Devil. When he was teaching at the University of Erfurt, and a famous

107 Franciscan monk told him that his soul was eternally damned unless he returned to God, Faustus is said to have replied:

I have pledged myself to the devil with my own blood, To be his in eternity, body and soul…. My agreement ties me down irrevocably…. Nor would be honest or honorable if it had to be said about me that I had gone against my letter and seal, which after all I signed with my own blood. The devil has kept faithfully what he has promised me; so I, too, want to keep faithfully what I have promised and pledged to him. (Rosenberg, 1997: 255-256)

Dr. Faustus made a pact with Mephistopheles in order to experience the world for infinite knowledge and power. However, Nicholas has not made a pact with Conchis: Conchis, alone made the pact. He just included the ignorant Nicholas without his permission and he used these experiences for the gratification of his own ego. While knowledge applies to facts or ideas acquired by study, investigation, observation, or experience, Conchis’ imaginary world is connected with sensuality by experience through illusions. Mephistopheles offers knowledge to some extent; however what Conchis offers Nicholas neither gives Nicholas power nor helps him to understands his self better. If we consider the definition of evil by Pocock already provided in my introduction, where the phrase “overstepping proper limits” was used, then it is not going to be inappropriate that we regard the deeds of Faustus as devilish. The definition in Pocock which points to the concept of suffering is also relevant in The Magus, since suffering is used to mean learning by Conchis: “Suffering is learning” (Fowles, op. cit., 101). “Greece is like a mirror. It makes you suffer. Then you learn” (ibid., 99). If suffering is learning, does Faustus suffer while learning or experiencing, or learn while suffering? The Magus depicts this desperate struggle of man. Conchis is amused by this desperate struggle in Nicholas. However, when he thinks that he experiences “a new moment of moral resolve”, “a new self-acceptance”, he is not aware of the fact that he lives in an illusionary world which Conchis creates for him. Nicholas is confused as it is understood by his words:

I was experiencing what he meant; a new self-acceptance, a sense that I had to be this mind and this body, its vices and its virtues, and that I had no other chance or choice. It was an

108 awareness of a new kind of potentiality, one very different from my old sense of the word, which had been based on the illusions of ambition. The mess of my life, the selfishnesses and false turnings and the treacheries, all these things could fall into place, they could become a source of construction rather than a source of chaos, and precisely because I had no other choice. It was certainly not a moment of new moral resolve, or anything like it. No doubt our accepting what we are must always inhibit our being what we ought to be; for all that, it felt like a step forward – and upward. (ibid., 164)

The question of freedom of choice has a central position in existentialism. Freedom is defined as equal to the ‘free choice’ of the individual. When Conchis captivates him, Nicholas cannot decide for himself but just obeys the rules set by him. It is all decided for him and what choice will be made has already been determined. This captivation pleases Nicholas: “thank you once again for possessing me”, he says (ibid., 312). However he realizes that he is only a toy or in another words one of the “real human beings that was turned into his puppets…” (ibid., 322). The reason for his being turned into a puppet is:

Because he [Conchis] had simply guessed that for me freedom meant the freedom to satisfy personal desire, private ambition. Against that he set a freedom that must be responsible for its actions; something much older than the existentialist freedom, I suspected – a moral imperative, an almost Christian concept, certainly not a political or democratic one. (ibid., 440-441)

Though the aim is to make him understand what he lives his life for, he is ruined in a way, or he feels that he is cheated. A man exists when he stands for himself. In the novel, Nicholas has to take the responsibilities for his deeds since he does not believe in a God. There has been no God, no paternal figure in his life. His captivation by Conchis has been easier since he did not previously experience an authoritative figure in his life. When Nicholas first sees the barbed wire on the island, he also finds “one of the commonest paperback anthologies of modern English verse” (ibid., 69) and reads the lines:

We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And to know the place for the first time.

109 (From “Little Gidding”)

In fact these lines refer to the end of the novel, in the end Nicholas comes back to where he started only with a slight change. Grant points out that “for the man convinced of spiritual values, life is a coherent pattern in which the ending has its due place and because it is part of a pattern, itself leads into the beginning: the present is able to take up, and even give added meaning to, the values of the past.” (Grant, 1997: 529) Even the exploring ends where it starts, one must not cease to sail after knowledge as Pound says in his poem:

Knowledge the shade of a shade, Yet must thou sail after knowledge Knowing less than drugged beasts. (Fowles, op. cit., 70)

This quotation is a reference to Odysseus’ striving to return home and it indicates that man’s quest and striving has been continuous since ancient Greeks. When Nicholas passes the barbed wire to Bourani through the gap, in fact he trespasses into the territory of God. As Nicholas points out, “I cannot say why I suddenly became so curious about him. Partly it was for lack of anything else to be curious about” (ibid., 76). Conchis uses fictional and poetic texts by different writers to attract Nicholas into the game. By being included in a “paperback anthology of modern English verse” (ibid., 69), the poems of the individual modernist writers are vulgarized and inserted into the canon. Thus, Conchis’ discourse of seduction consists of plagiarism and is not his own. However, he becomes so successful in impressing Nicholas, the strategy that Conchis uses has the result of dehumanizing Nicholas to the extent that he fictionalizes himself: “I felt like Robinson Crusoe” (ibid., 70). This creates in Nicholas a false conception of himself as a hero. John Locke accepted the limitations of human knowledge and he also believed that human knowledge is satisfactory for the conduct of human life. Human beings are given all the knowledge they need to secure their ‘great concernments’: convenience in this life and the means for attaining a better life hereafter. (Locke, op. cit., 11). Locke defines knowledge as the perception of the agreement or disagreement between ‘ideas’. These ideas are basically derived from experience.

110 (ibid., II I 2). However, this does not mean that knowledge gained by experience can be applied to general truths; the degree of certainty cannot be attained. Nicholas suspects the reality of Conchis’ world and the reality of Nicholas is different from Conchis’. He is confused when he views reality. For Baudrillard, the world does not exist in order for us to know it or, more exactly, knowledge itself is part of the illusion of the world (Baudrillard: op. cit., 42). Nicholas can never be sure of the life Conchis leads him into because it is certain that his self is limited and conditioned as all human beings’ selves are. If we cannot be sure about what we know then how can we be sure about God? Conchis comments on this as follows:

‘If a person is intelligent, then of course he is either an agnostic or an atheist. Just as he is a physical coward. They are automatic definitions of high intelligence. But I am not talking about God. I am talking about science.’ (Fowles, op. cit., 110)

An Agnostic does not accept any authority in the sense in which religious people do. He holds that a man should think out questions of conduct for himself. Of course, he will seek to gain profit by the wisdom of others, but he will have to choose the people he is to consider wise for himself. Faustus acquires knowledge through his pact with the devil and Nicholas in The Magus obtains it through Conchis. However, Nicholas’ experience with Conchis is controversial since it is illusions that are created instead of one single truth. Nicholas’ desire to learn more, in fact, is there long before he meets Conchis, because Greece, especially Phraxos Island, reveals Nicholas’ hidden desires, and it is a perfect place for exploring hidden beauties, desires, knowledge. London, the previous place where he lived, represents the superego controlling the subconscious or the self. London is Nicholas’s cold and controlling superego; whereas Greece is his alter ego where intense and wild feelings reside. Nicholas looks at his “pale London hands” (ibid., 51) which change when he arrives in Greece. Greece is the wild and beautiful country which inspires contradictory feelings in Nicholas. They are intense, beautiful but at the same time dangerous. He feels disoriented, just like Alice in Wonderland; he is in an unknown country and about to encounter his subconscious which is a total to him. In fact he is disoriented due to

111 Conchis. He wonders “How his [Conchis’] only real passion was to know, to extend human knowledge” (ibid., 337). In The Magus, Nicholas cannot decide what to believe. He cannot trust the knowledge that he gains through experience as stated by Locke. John Locke systematically attacks the notions of innate ideas and a priori knowledge, arguing that if our claims to knowledge are to make sense they must be derived from the world of sense experience. In Nicholas’ case dream, illusion and real life are intermingled and he cannot decide which is which. However, Nicholas first should be aware of his being, his self in order to recognize life. Nicholas’ illusion, becoming one with nature, the image of light and revelation comes and he realizes his existence, pure awareness, “the act of description taints the description” (ibid., 212). He realizes that reality means just “interaction”, nothing else, the flow of life and change, everything emerged into oneness, naming things means nothing, concepts, words, classification, knowledge, these are superficial. Thus, to go beyond what is given by God means rebelling against God and the result will be absolute punishment. However, human beings are naturally selfish and have the desire to possess everything but one should be aware of one’s limitations and act accordingly. Conchis tries to play the role of God; he is using and manipulating Nicholas. He, in turn, is attracted to Conchis due to his curiosity and desire for learning more: “the unknown being the great motivating factor in all human existence. He meant not knowing why we are here. Why we exist. Death. The after-life. All that” (ibid., 286). Adam and Eve also fell because of their thirst for the unknown. Nicholas realizes that he has no special role in this game; he is an ordinary individual and actor (ibid., 392). Towards the end of the novel, Nicholas realizes that he is being given a lesson on man’s existence and that he has limitations which are set by his egocentricity. He feels a kind of disintegration of his self which is a natural outcome of living in a postmodern society:

Modern, overloaded individuals, desperately trying to maintain rootedness and integrity...ultimately are pushed to the point where there is little reason not to believe that all value-orientations are equally well-founded. Therefore, increasingly, choice becomes meaningless. According to Baudrillard (1984, 38-9), we must now come to terms with the second revolution, “that of the Twentieth Century, of postmodernity, which is the immense

112 process of the destruction of meaning equal to the earlier destruction of appearances. Whoever lives by meaning dies by meaning.”

(Ashley: 1990, 128.)

Nicholas’ rootlessness is not only felt by himself but also by others: “this rootlessness, homelandlessness, which she [Alison] knew was also a truth about me” (Fowles, op. cit., 267). In fact, his rootlessness and homelandlessness enable Nicholas to adapt himself easily to this attractive fantastic world that is offered to him since he has nothing to lose. Conchis says “We are all actors here, my friend. None of us is what we really are. We all lie some of the time, and some of us all the time...You have much to learn. You are as far from your true self as that Egyptian mask our American friend wore is his from true face” (ibid., 410-11). Although Conchis is not wearing a concrete mask, he is hiding his true self. His mask is invisible but felt throughout the novel. He cannot see it, so he cannot take it off. In order to get rid of it he must realize that he is wearing a mask too. To understand the meaning of freedom is important because the freedom to choose is important. Sartre believes that by choosing action, people choose themselves and not existence. Thus, they choose their essence, a future way of existing. However, freedom may also be dangerous as indicated in the Faustus myth. You cannot escape from the consequences of your deeds, the past possesses you. “All that is past possesses our present. Whatever happens here now, whatever governs what happens, is partly, no, is essentially what happened thirty years again that Norwegian forest.” says Conchis (ibid., 317). The past influences our behaviour, thoughts, ideas and relationships; we are shaped by our past. In regard to the memory, the brain masks useless parts of our past in order to allow only the useful ones to appear. Bergson comments that

What are we, in fact, what is our character, if not the condensation of the history that we have lived from the birth – nay, even before our birth, since we bring with us prenatal dispositions? Doubtless we think with only a small part of our past, but it is with our entire past, including the original bent of our soul, that we desire, we’ll act. Our past, then as a whole, is made manifest to us in its impulse; it is felt in the form of tendency, although a small part of it only is known in the form of idea.

(Bergson: 1998, 5)

All Nicholas’ past and present life turns into a fiction which traps him. He is imprisoned in his fiction; however, he has locked himself up in it. An artist’s being

113 locked up in a fiction is almost impossible since artists have the freedom of creative imagination. If this artist is a failed one then this means that he does not have the potential to be free. Faustus in the original text frees himself from all kind of restraints by signing a pact with the devil. However, he is in fact responsible for the results of his actions and consequently, he has been the slave of his desires. He has to pay for what he wishes as Nicholas pays for the experience that is offered by his Mephistopheles, Conchis.

All my life I had tried to turn life into fiction, to hold reality away; always I had acted as if a third person was watching and listening and giving me marks for good or bad behaviour-a god like a novelist, to whom I turned like a character with the power to please, the sensitivity to feel slighted, the ability to adapt himself to whatever he believed the novelist-god wanted. (Fowles, op. cit., 48)

Postmodern man empties the meaning of freedom. The notion of freedom actually meant death, thus it led to a land of fear. Beyond the cage there is another human being who is waiting to offer you freedom, which is unconsciously associated with death, destruction and the loss of self. You have to destroy the cage of yourself in order to become free. Thus, in fact Nicholas has a fear of freedom; he is the typical postmodern man imprisoned in the cage built by his ego. However Faustus as a Renaissance man has never experienced this fear of freedom, he celebrated the freedom of choice and had to bear the consequences of his deeds. Completely different from Faustus, The Magus ends with an uncertainty like the one the postmodern world offers to people. This is the postmodern consequence of the vague and unpromising God image. The end of the novel is reminiscent of Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus’ end: “And somewhere the stinging smell of burning leaves” (ibid., 656) reminds us of “And burned is Apollo’s laurel bough” (Marlowe, op. cit., Epilogue, line 2) Ambitions create illusions which prevent you from seeing the reality. The more Nicholas tries to know, the more he suffers. Yet, in the end Nicholas’ change is controversial. One almost cannot help feeling that he has returned to the point he has started; the end is almost the beginning, which is indicative of his failure in creating his own myth. Rebellion of the self is almost impossible due to the non-assertion of the self. Nicholas does not have any system of values on his own since he goes after

114 Conchis without questioning anything, any behaviour or any word of him. Action he pursues can be identified with Goethe’s Faust’s pursuing the action instead of mere words. However, Nicholas’ chance of salvation is almost reduced to zero due to the postmodern age disparity of human beings. Acheson argues that “to view the world as Conchis does would mean living by another man’s view of it, instead of formulating his own. The existentially authentic individual must construct the world for himself in his own way” (Acheson: 1998, 25). However, to formulate his own mythology is not possible any more in the postmodern age. Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus is condemned to damnation while Goethe’s Faust attains salvation through the intervention of divine forces. Nicholas Urfe, on the other hand, is consigned in the “SALLE D’ATTENTE” (Fowles, op. cit., 71), a perpetual purgatory.

115 CONCLUSION

In this dissertation, the Faustus myth starting from its origins back in mythology until the postmodern reinterpretation in the English novel is analysed. It has been concluded that in spite of the different ages, cultures, histories, philosophies, what is common in all is that Faustian man and the basis of the Faustus myth has never changed and the underlying qualities remain the same throughout history. In the Renaissance all magical controversies and concerns are attributed to the character of Faustus and are negated by the damnation of the main character. In the Enlightenment, he is reinterpreted by Goethe, reflecting the philosophical and religious view upon him, putting magic into the text to emphasize the rationality of the age. While in the first book of Goethe’s Faust, the main concern is magic and power achieved through magic, in the second book, materialism and realism is inserted by the presence of the financial issues of the Emperor. When we come to the postmodern age, we have blurred roles and identities. In fact identity representations are controversial since binary oppositions between good and evil are not clear cut. When it is so, then the question arises, do good and evil really exist and how they are defined and differentiated in postmodern terms? As we have discussed in previous chapters, Faustus appeared in the Renaissance period but the existentialist concern of individual beings has always been in the minds of people since the beginning of mankind. In the Renaissance under the identity of Faustus, the individual is given a chance to exist but he cannot escape being damned. However, in the nineteenth century, he is reinterpreted and represented as a saved soul in Goethe’s work. He reaches salvation because the age is freed from all kind of restraints and fears that were imposed onto the human mind. In the Renaissance, Dr. Faustus summons the Devil himself and he bears the results of his deeds. In Goethe’s Faust, Faust does not invoke the Devil himself. Instead God sends the Devil. In spite of God’s losing his bet against the Devil, God gives a chance to Faust for salvation. And in the twentieth century, we do not see any sign of God’s presence in the text, not even as representation.

116 “The Faustian myth is all about us in the psychology of the late twentieth century”. It is present “in our demand for power (which is defined in terms of money), in our craze for fulfilment of all sensual desires, in our greed, our compulsive activity, our frantic pursuit of progress” (May, 1991: 269). In fact, this is not restricted to the psychology of the twentieth century but is relevant for all times. However, the main concern remains the same: going beyond the boundaries whatever these boundaries may be. The Faustus myth starting with a historical person mirrors the Renaissance ambition of transcending the restrictions and limits drawn by God, and then it progresses towards the Enlightenment Period in which magic is overshadowed by money and materialism. Then gradual change gives birth to ambiguous, blurred, confusing values in the twentieth century. We cannot say that the twentieth century is governed by a specific idea. Human beings, while trying to question their identities and the meaning of their lives, try to assert their autonomous individualism. However, existence has always been a major concern among human beings so we cannot say that it originated in the twentieth century. While Goethe’s Faust gives supremacy to the deed that will serve for the creation of the self, Marlowe’s Faustus transgresses with magical words. His search for knowledge begins with words but turns to destructive ambition for power. In the original Faustus myth and Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, the identification of knowledge with power is emphasised. In Goethe’s Faust, knowledge means more than power, he realizes his potential to gain something more than knowledge and he only demands more to reach the self in a more metaphysical sense and hence, the process involves more spiritual suffering and is a more intellectual concern when compared to Marlowe’s Faustus. In conclusion, whether in mythology or in the postmodern novel, the myth does not change, the theme is universal and applicable to all ages either in terms of the real historical story or other representative stories. It is also significant that genres do not affect the plot. When it comes to the postmodern era, the myth completely breaks away from the norms; the borders between fiction and reality, history/philosophy/literature collapse and the roles of good and evil are blurred Goethe’s Faust’s goals are different from Marlowe’s Faustus’, and Fowles’ Nicholas’ are completely different but in spite of the fact that they are all looking for

117 different things, the aim of their quest is the same: to find their own God-Godness and determine their fate according to their own will. The poem below shows the development of the Faustus theme throughout the ages:

The Progress of Faust

He was born in Deutschland, as you would suspect, And graduated in magic from Cracow In Fifteen Five. His portraits show a brow Heightened by science. The eye is indirect, As of bent light upon a crooked soul, And that he bargained with the Prince of Shame For pleasures intellectually foul Is known by every court that lists his name.

His frequent disappearances are put down To visits in the regions of the damned And to the periodic deaths he shammed, But, unregenerate and in Doctor’s gown, He would turn up to lecture at the fair And do a minor miracle for a fee. Many a life he whispered up the stair To teach the black art of anatomy.

He was as deaf to angels as an oak When in the fall of Fifteen-Ninenty-four, He went to London and crashed through the floor In mock damnation of the playgoing folk. Weekending with a scientific crowd, He met Sir Francis Bacon and helped draft “Colours of Good and Evil” and read aloud An obscene sermon at which no one laughed.

He toured the Continent for a hundred years And subsidized among the peasantry The puppet play, his tragic history; With a white glove he boxed the devil’s ears And with a black his own. Tired of this, He published penny poems about his sins, In which he placed the heavy emphasis On the white glove which, for a penny, wins.

Some time before the hemorrhage of the Kings Of France, he turned respectable and taught; Quite suddenly everything that he had thought Seemed to grow scholars’ beards and angels’ wings. It was the Overthrow. On Reason’s throne He sat with the fair Phrygian on his knees And called all universities his own, As plausible a figure as you please.

Then back to Germany as the sage’s sage To preach comparative science to the young

118 Who came from every land in a great throng And knew they heard the master of the age. When for a secret formula he paid The Devil another fragment of his soul, His scholars wept, and several even prayed That Satan would restore him to them whole.

Backwardly tolerant, Faustus was expelled From the Third Reich in Nineteen Thirty-nine. His exit caused the breaching of the Rhine, Except for which the frontier might have held. Five years unknown to enemy and friend He did, appearing on the sixth to pose In an American desert at war’s end Where, at his back, a dome of atoms rose. (Saphiro, 1968: 121-122)

This poem is retelling the story of both Faustus as a symbol of human beings and also the history in which Faustus flourishes. However, it is ironic to mention the progress of Faustus. The story of Faustus is rooted in a climate of transition from naive faith in redemption to an increasing focus on sinfulness. To the age of Marlowe, going beyond boundaries was attemptable but restricted. However, to the age of Goethe it was natural. Faust appealed to Goethe as a symbol of man’s emancipation from scholastic authority. In Marlowe, Faustus tries to prove his existence through intuition, Goethe’s Faust achieves transcendence through reason, Fowles’ Nicholas tries to achieve self-knowledge through experience although it is controversial whether he really succeeds or not. We cannot fully assert Nicholas’ proving his existence. He tries but the postmodern age does not allow this. Marlowe’s Faustus reveals the conflicting issues of the emergence of individualism. As natural to the Renaissance, Faustus, with the emergent tendency of aspiring to individualism, is given an opportunity to assert his identity as an individual, estranging himself from the other scholars who are satisfied with scholarly learning. However, he is not yet allowed to reach salvation; he pays for what he chooses to do. In Mon Faust, Valéry’s Faust sarcastically expresses that: “They have written so much about me that I no longer know who I am.” (Valéry, 1946: 21) Each era creates its own Faustus in a context of societal, political and historical in spite of the fact that the main concerns almost remain same.

119 BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY TEXTS:

Fowles, John.: The Magus, Great Britain, Vintage, 1997.

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang Von.: Faust: A Tragedy. Trans. by Walter Arndt, New York, W.W. Norton&Company, 1976.

Jones, John Henry: The English Faust Book, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Marlowe, Christopher: Doctor Faustus and Other Plays, Oxford University Press, 1995.

OTHER SOURCES:

Acheson, J.: John Fowles, Basingstoke, Macmilan, 1998.

Agrippa, H. C.: De Occulta Philosophia, Paris, 1531.

Alighieri, Dante: The Divine Comedy, Trans. by H. R. Huse, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962.

Ascoli, Albert Russell: Ariosto’s Bitter Harmony: Crisis and Evasion in the Italian Renaissance, Princeton, 1987.

120 Ashley, David: Habermas and the Project of Modernit: In Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity, Ed. by Bryan Turner, London, Sage, 1990.

Atkins, Stuart: “Motif in Literature: The Faust Theme,” Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas. Ed. by Cyrus Hamlin, New York, Norton, 2001, pp. 573-585.

Augustine Saint: Confessions, Trans. by Edward Bouverie Pusey, Kessinger Publishing, 2004.

Babinyiotis, Y.: The Dictionary of Modern Greek, B Edition, 2005, (ΜΠΑΜΠΙΝΙΩΤΗ, Γ. ΛΕΞΙΚΟ ΤΗΣ ΝΕΑΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΑΣ. Β’ ΑΝΑΤΥΠΩΣΗ, 2005).

Bacon, Francis: The Works Vol. IV, Ed. by J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, and D.D. Heath, London, 1901.

______: “Religious Meditations: On Heresies”, Ed. by A. Smith, Oxford Book of Quotations, Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 1966, pp. 24- 28.

Barnes, Hazel Estella: Humanistic Existentialism: A Study in Humanistic Existentialism, University of Nebraska Press, 1962.

Barthes, Roland: Mythologies, Trans. by Annette Lavers, London, Granada, 1973.

121 Baudrillard, Jean: The Intelligence of Evil or the Lucidity Pact, Trans. by Chris Turner, Oxford, New York, Berg, 2005.

______: The Ecstasy of Communication, Trans. by Bernard and Caroline Schutze and Ed. By Sylvere Lotringer, Semiotext(e), 1988.

______: Impossible Exchange, Trans. by Chris Turner, London, Verso, 2001.

______: “Forget Baudrillard: Interview with Sylvere Lotringer”, Baudrillard Live: Selected Interviews, Ed. by Mike Gane, Routledge, 1993.

Bergson, Henri: Creative Evolution, Trans. by Arthur Mitchell, Courier Dover Publications, 1998.

Bishop, Paul: The Dionysian Self: C.G. Jung's Reception of Friedrich Nietzsche, New York, Walter de Gruyter, 1995.

Blackbourn, David: History of Germany 1780-1918: The Long Nineteenth Century, Blackwell Publishing, 1998.

Bloom, Sandra: “Trauma and the Nature of Evil”, Trauma and Controversy, 12th Annual Meeting, ISTSS, November 1996.

Boerner, Peter and Sidney Johnson: Faust Through Four Centuries: Retrospect

122 and Analysis, Tübingen, Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1989.

Bowker, John W. and Jean Holm: Picturing God, Continuum International Publishing Group, 1994.

Bregman, Jay and R. T. Wallis: Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, State University of New York Press, 1992.

Brinton, Crane: The Shaping of Modern Thought, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963.

Bulfinch, Thomas: Bulfinch's Mythology, New York, Portland House, 1997.

Burckhardt, Jacob: “Part Two: The Development of The Individual”, Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, Penguin Classics, 1990.

Burns, Edward McNall: Western Civilizations: Their History and Their Culture, Seventh Edition, Volume I, New York, W.W. Norton&Company Inc., 1969.

Butler, E. M.: The Myth of the Magus, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1948.

Campbell, Joseph, Bill Moyers: The Power of Myth, Ed. by Sue Flowers, New York, Doubleday, 1988.

______: Transformations of Myth through Time: Thirteen Brilliant Final Lectures from the Renowned Master of Mythology, USA,

123 Harper&Row, Publishers, Inc., 1990.

______: Myths, Dreams, and Religion, New York, E. P. Dutton & Company, 1970.

Carlyle, Thomas: “Faust on the Stage,” Essays on Goethe, Leipzig, Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1916.

Cassier, Ernst: The Logic of the Humanities, New Haven, 1961.

______: The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, Ed. by, James P. Pettegrove, Trans. by, Fritz C. A. Koelin, Princeton University Press, 1968.

Chadwick, Ruth, F.: Immanuel Kant, Routledge, 1992.

Chisholm, R.: Theory of Knowledge, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1977.

Clark, Kenneth: Civilization: A Personal View, London, BBC Books, 1969.

Coffin, Judith G., et al.,: Western Civilizations, Fourteenth Edition, New York, London, W. W. Norton Company, 2002.

Conradi, P.: John Fowles, London, New York, Methuen, 1982.

Couling, Della: Ferruccio Busoni: “A Musical Ishmael”, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2005.

124 Descartes, René: Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Discourse on the Method of Rightly Truth in the Sciences, (e-book), http://library.bilgi.edu.tr/record=b1039365, 1996.

Druxes, Helga: The Feminization of Dr. Faustus: Female Identity Quests From Stendhal to Morgner, Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania State University Press,1993.

Durrani, Osman: Faust, UK, RRP, November, 2004.

Eliade, Mircea: Rites and Symbols of Initiation, Harper and Row, 1965.

Ellman, R., C. Feidelson, Jr.: The Modern Tradition: Backgrounds of Modern Literature, New York, Oxford University Press, 1965.

Eriksen, Roy. T.: The Forme of Faustus Fortunes a Study of the Tragedie of Doctor Faustus 1616, Norway, Solum Forlag A. S, 1987.

Esler, Philip F. (ed.): Early Christian World, Taylor&Francis, Inc., 2004.

Falck, Colin: Myth, Truth and Literature: Towards a True Postmodernism, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1989.

125 Fawkner, H.W. : The Timescapes of John Fowles, Foreword by John Fowles, Rutherford, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1984.

Fetzer, John F.: Changing Perceptions of Thomas Mann’s Doctor Faustus: Criticism 1947-1992. Boydell&Brewer Limited, 1996.

Foster, Benjamin R.(trans. and ed.): The Epic of Gilgamesh, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001.

Foucault, Michael: The Order of Things: An Archaeology of Human Sciences, London, Vintage Books, 1973.

______: “On the Genealogy of ethics: An overview of Work in Progress”, The Foucault Reader, Ed. by Paul Rabinow, New York, Pantheon, 1984.

Fox, Alistair: The : Identity and Representation in Elizabethan England, USA, Blackwell Publishing, 1997.

Freud, Sigmund: New Introductory Lectures in Psychoanalysis, New York, W.W. Norton, 1965.

Frye, Northrope: “Myth, Fiction, and Displacement”, Ed. by Robert A. Segal, Theories of Myth From Ancient Israel and Greece to Freud, Jung, Campbell, and Lévi Strauss, New York,

126 London, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996, pp. 119-137.

______: “The Archetypes of Literature”, Ed. by Robert A. Segal, Theories of Myth From Ancient Israel and Greece to Freud, Jung, Campbell, and Lévi Strauss, New York, London, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996, pp. 100-118.

Gatti, Hilary: The Renaissance Drama of Knowledge: in England, Routledge, 1989.

Gaukroger, Stephen: Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early-Modern Philosophy, Cambridge, U.K., New York, Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Goldhill, Simon: Reading Greek Tragedy, Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Goldman, Caren and B. Naparstek: Healing Words for the Body, Mind and Spirit: 101 Words to Inspire and Affirm, Marlowe&Company, 2001.

Gorak, Jan: The Making of the Modern Canon: Genesis and Crisis of a Literary Idea, Athlone Press, 1991.

Gove, Philip B., et al.: Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, USA, Merriam-Webster Inc., 1981.

127 Göktürk, Akşit: Edebiyatta Ada: İngiliz Edebiyatında Ada Kavramı Üzerine bir İnceleme, İstanbul, Sinan Yayınları, 1973.

Grant, R. M.: Gnosticism and Early Christianity, New York, Columbia University Press, 1959.

Grant, Michael: T. S. Eliot, Routledge, 1997.

Graves, Robert: The Greek Myths, Moyer Bell Ltd., 1955.

Grenz, Stanley J.: A Primer on Postmodernism, Eerdmans, William B. Publishing Company, 1996.

Hadfield, Andrew: English Renaissance, 1500-1620, Wiley, John&Sons, Incorporated, 2000.

Hamilton, Edith: Mythology: Timeless Tales of Gods and Heroes, New York and Boston, Warner Books, 1999.

Harris, John Glyndwr: Gnosticism: Beliefs and Practices, Sussex Academic Press, 1999.

Heller, Erich: “On Goethe’s Faust,” Ed. by Victor Lang, Goethe: A Collection of Critical Essays, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 1968.

Higget, Gilbert: “The Reinterpretations of the Myths,” Ed. by Robert A. Segal, Theories of Myth From Ancient Israel and Greece to Freud, Jung, Campbell, and Lévi Strauss, New York,

128 London, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996, pp. 183-199.

Hunt, Joselyn: The Renaissance, Routledge, 1999.

Jonas, Hans: The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of Christianity, Boston, Beacon Press, 1958.

Jones, Louise Conley: A Textual Analysis of Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus With Director’s Book: Stage Action As a Metaphor, New York, The Edwin Mellen Press, 1996.

Jung, C. G.: “The Psychology of Child Archetype”, Essays on a Science of Mythology, Trans. by, R. F. C. Hull, Bollingen Series xxii, New York, Pantheon, 1949.

Kant, Immanuel: Kant’s Political Writings. Ed. By Hans Reiss, Trans. by H. B. Nisbet, 2nd ed., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991.

______: “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?”, Kant’s Political Writings, Ed. By Hans Reiss, Trans. by H. B. Nisbet, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1970.

Kearney, Richard: The Wake of Imagination: Toward a Postmodern Culture, Routledge, 1989.

Kessler, E., et al.: The Cambridge History of Renaissance

129 Philosopy, Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Kramer, H., J. Sprenger: The Malleus Maleficarum, http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/downloads/ index.html, 1928.

Lehrer, K.: Knowledge, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1974.

Levin, Harry: Christopher Marlowe: The Overreacher, London, Faber&Faber Limited, 1973.

Lim, Walter S.H.: Arts of Empire: the Poetics of Colonialism From Raleigh to Milton, University of Delaware Press, 1998.

Locke, John: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1964.

Lyotard, Jean François: The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Trans. by Geoff Bennington and Brian Massum, Foreword by Fredric Jameson, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, c1984.

MacFarlane, Alan: “The Root of All Evil,” Ed. by David Parkin, The Anthropology of Evil, New York, Basil, Blackwell, 1985, pp.57-76.

Malinowski, Bronislaw: The Father in Primitive Psychology/Myth in Primitive Psychology, Volume Five, Taylor&Francis, Inc., Routledge, 2001.

130 ______: Myth in Primitive Psychology, London, 1926.

May, Rollo: The Cry for Myth, New York, W.W. Norton, 1991.

McAdam, Ian: The Irony of Identity: Self and Imagination in the Drama of Christopher Marlowe, Newark, London, University of Delaware Press, Associated University Press, 1999.

Mill, J.S.: On Liberty, , Volume 25, P.F. Collier & Son, 1909.

Milton, John: Paradise Lost, England, Penguin Popular Classics, 1996.

Müller, Gustav Emil: Philosophy of Literature, New York, Ayer Publishing, 1976.

Nietzsche, Friedrich: The Birth of Tragedy, New York, Dover Publications, Inc., 1995.

______: The Will to Power, Trans. by Walter Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale, New York, Random House, 1967.

______: Beyond Good and Evil, http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/4363, 2003.

Paglia, Camille: Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, Penguin Books, 1991.

131 Palmer, P. M., R. P. More: The Sources of the Faust Tradition from Simon Magus to Lessing, New York, Oxford University Press, 1936.

Palmer, William J.: The Fiction of John Fowles: Tradition, Art, and the Loneliness of Selfhood, Columbia, University of Missouri Press, 1974.

Patai, Raphael: Myth and Modern Man, New Jersey, Prentice- Hall Inc., 1972.

Pocock, D.: “Unruly Evil,” Ed. by D. Parkin, The Anthropology of Evil, New York, Basil, Blackwell, 1985, pp.42-56.

Pojman, Louis P.: The Theory of Knowledge: Classical and Contemporary Readings, Third Edition, Canada, Wadsworth, 2003.

Pollack, J.: Contemporary Theories of Knowledge, Totowa, Rowman and Littlefield, 1986.

Pope, Alexander: “Essay on Man”, The Works of Alexander Pope, Esq., Volume 3, w. place, 2001.

Putnam, Hilary: “Meaning, Other People, and the World,” Representation and Reality, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1991, pp. 19-41.

Riggs, David: The World of Christopher Marlowe, London, Faber and Faber, 2004.

132 Rommerskirchen, B.: Constructing Reality: John Fowles’ The Magus. Berlin, New York, Peter Lang, 1999.

Rosenberg, Donna: , Myths, and Legends: A World Perspective, USA, NTC Publishing Group, 1997.

Russell, Bertrand: Human Knowledge: its Scope and Limits, with a new introduction by John G. Slater, London, Routledge, c1992.

Sade Marquis de: System de L’Agression, Ed. by, Noelle Chatelet, Paris, Aubier, Montaigne, 1972.

Santayana, George: Three Philosophical Poets: Lucretius, Dante and Goethe, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1910.

Saphiro, Karl: “The Progress of Faust”, Selected Poems, Random House, 1968.

Schorer, Mark: “The Necessity of Myth,” Ed. By Henry A. Murray, Myth and Mythmaking, Boston, 1960.

Segal, Robert A.: The Poimandres As Myth: Scholarly Theory and Gnostic Meaning, Walter De Gruyter, 1986.

______, Ed.: Theories of Myth: From Ancient Israel and Greece to Freud, Jung, Campbell and Lévi-

133 Strauss, NewYork&London, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996.

Senior, Michael: Who’s Who in Mythology: Over 1200 Figures From World Cultures, Consultant Ed. by Geoffrey Parrinder, Macdonald&Co (Pulishers) Ltd., 1990.

Shakespeare, William: The Tempest, Ed. by Frank Kermode, London, Methuen, 1977.

______: As You Like It, Ed. by Michael Hattaway, Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Simpson, Michael, Trans. and Ed., Gods and Heroes of the Greeks: The Library of Apollodorus, University of Massachusetts Press, 1976.

Smart, B.: ‘The Politics of Truth and the Problem of Hegemony,’ Ed. by D.H. Hoy, Foucault: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986.

Smeed, J.W.: Faust in Literature, Wesport, Conn, Greenwood Press, 1987.

Spengler, Oswald: The Decline of the West, English abridged edition prepared by Arthur Helps from the translation by Charles Francis Atkinson, New York, Oxford University Press, 1932.

Spinoza, Benedictus de: The Improvement of the Understanding,

134 Trans. by R. H. M. Elwes, http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/1016, 1997.

Spivack, Charlotte, Ed.: Merlin versus Faust : Contending Archetypes in Western Culture, Lewiston, Edwin Mellen Press, c1992.

Stemmer, N: The Roots of Knowledge, Blackwell, Oxford, New York, St. Martin's Press, 1983.

Strauss Claudé Levi: “The Structural Study of Myth”, Structuralism in Myth: Lévi-Strauss, Barthes, Dumezil, and Propp, Routledge, 1996.

The Holy Bible King James Version: American Bible Society, New York.

Thomas, Keith: Religion and the Decline of Magic, New York: Scribner’s, 1971.

Thorndike, Lynn: The Place of Magic in the Intellectual History of Europe, Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, 24, 1, New York, Columbia University Press, 1905.

Tobin, Robert D.: Doctor’s Orders: Goethe and Enlightenment Thought, Bucknell University Press, 2001.

Tydeman, William: Text and Performance: Doctor Faustus, London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd., 1984.

Valéry, Paul: Mon Faust (ébauches), Paris, Gallimard, 1946.

135 Vickery, John B.: “Literature and Myth”, Ed. by Robert A. Segal, Theories of Myth From Ancient Israel and Greece to Freud, Jung, Campbell, and Lévi Strauss, New York, London, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996, pp. 283-305.

Walker, Steven, F.: Jung and the Jungians on Myth: An Introduction, Routledge, 1995.

Watt, Ian: Myths of Modern Individualism: Faust, Don Quixote, Don Juan, Robinson Crusoe, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Wiemken, Helmut: Doctor Fausti Weheklang. Die Volksbücher von D. Johann Faust und Christoph Wagner, Trans. by Ingrid H. Shafer, Bremen, Carl Schünemann, 1961.

Wilde, Oscar: The Picture of Dorian Gray, with an introduction and notes by John M. L. Drew, Wordsworth Editions Limited, 2001.

Wolfe, Peter: John Fowles, Magus and Moralist, Lewisburg, Bucknell University Press, 1976.

136 Şeyda İnceoğlu Tel: 02163450241 05323767263 Adres: Mühürdar Karakolu Sokak, No:43/10, Refah Apt. Kadıköy/İstanbul, 34710

Kişisel Bilgiler: Doğum Tarihi: 19 Ekim 1974 Doğum Yeri : Denizli Uyruğu : T.C.

Eğitim Durumu: 2002-2008 : İstanbul Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı Doktora Programı 1999-2002 : Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı Yüksek Lisans Programı 1991-1996 : Ege Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı Lisans Programı

İş Deneyimi: 2002-… : İstanbul Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı’nda Araştırma Görevlisi 1999-2002 : Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı’nda Araştırma Görevlisi

Yayınlar:

Konferanslarda Sunduğum Bildiriler:

137 “Edebiyat ve İletişimde Kadın” Konulu Panelde “Kadın Söylemi” üzerine konuşma, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Denizli, Mart 2001. “Cinsiyet ve Söylem: Samuel Richardson’ın Pamela Adlı Romanında Erkek Yazarın Kadın Söylemi”, I. Dil, Yazın, Deyişbilim Sempozyumu, 5-7 Nisan 2001, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Denizli.

“Sezgin Kaymaz’ın Kaptanın Teknesi Adlı Eserinde Kadın Karakterin Dil Özellikleri”, II. Dil, Yazın, Deyişbilim Sempozyumu, 9-10 Mayıs 2002, Çukurova Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Adana.

Etkinlikler: 2005 Şubat ayında kurulan IDEA Derneği (İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Dalındaki öğretim görevlilerinin bir araya gelip kurdukları bir dernek) üyesiyim.

138