Kiran and pleasure,/Of energy, of respect, of power”

Kiran Raj Nishad

ENGL-2322

Dr. Pagel

11/02/2017

Doctor Faustus: A Medieval Tragedy of The Renaissance
Man

In
Christian philosophy, each being has its place recommended by the Great Chain
of Being. As the Creator of the universe, God is essentially impeccable, and He
sits at the highest point of this chain of command, sovereign over every one of
his animals. These positions were believed to be changeless and settled.
Nonetheless, amid the Renaissance, there was “an expanded hesitance about
molding of human way of life as a manipulable, shrewd process” (Greenblatt
2). Scholars like Giovanni Pico della Mirandola trusted that the nobility of
man gets from his unrestrained choice, by which he could hoist himself to
higher structures. Such Promethean desires are taken to extremes in Christopher
Marlowe’s The Tragical History of Doctor
Faustus, in which Faustus, as a model of Renaissance humanism, overextends
and pays the heartbreaking cost for not perceiving his restricted put in inside
the all-inclusive request. In pronouncing an ethical lesson of human limits and
a veneration for divine equity, Marlowe’s dramatization depicts standard
medieval esteems even as the Renaissance commends man’s one of a kind position
on the planet.

Marlowe
appears to caution against the incautious aspirations of Renaissance humanism
and the hubris of man when he depicts the egomania of Faustus in the Prologue
by attracting an inference to Icarus: Faustus is “swollen with tricky, of
a self-vanity,/his waxen wings mounted over his compass,/and dissolving sky
plotted his oust” (20-22). Having officially “accomplished the
ends” of each genuine field of grant from rationality to law, from
solution to godlikeness, Faustus’ long for a “more noteworthy subject to
fit his mind” is definite of the unreasonable pride and unnecessary goal
that check him as an overreacher (1.10-11). In addition, his summon of a
specialist for each subject just to expel them as being “too servile and
illiberal” (1.36) is an emblematic dismissal of the educational certainty
and control put resources into these specialists amid medieval circumstances,
for singular request by which he can seek after “a universe of benefit and
pleasure,/Of energy, of respect, of power” (1.53-54) in full Renaissance
soul without being delineated.

 

However
there is a sharp affectability to the way that he is “still yet Faustus,
and a man” (1.23), and is subsequently unfit to achieve the boundless
power he needs. His authority of the subjects that he thinks about unworthy of
his acumen and deficient for his motivations, is in actuality the true blue
limit that God sets for even the Renaissance Man, whose information and power
must be comparable with his human condition. It is consequently just by being a
“sound mystical performer” that he can rise above – or maybe it would
be more exact to represent his routine with regards to enchantment as a
transgression – his points of confinement to end up “a powerful god”
(1.62). As indicated by Robert Ornstein, his “gallant decision isn’t
between elective ways of self-satisfaction however between the foolishness of
forceful strivings and the salvation that requests self-refusal and the
foreswearing of courageous goal” (1380). By “surfeiting upon
reviled sorcery” (Prologue.25) that is the modern illegal organic product,
Faustus submits the wrongdoing of eating from its Tree of Knowledge, and is in
this manner compared with the serpent Lucifer, whom God cast down “from
the substance of paradise” for his “trying pride and
impoliteness” (3.67-68). Both Lucifer and Faustus exceeded the limits of
their legitimate spots, and it is their insubordination of eminent laws and
their test to divine amazingness that accelerates their go wrong.

 

There
is no compelling reason to legitimize the laws of God to man since Faustus is
no skeptic; he is intensely mindful of the heavenly equity of “God’s
overwhelming anger upon his head” should he pine for “all nature’s
treasury”, and endeavor to be “on earth as Jove is in the sky,/Lord
and leader of these components” (1.72-77). This makes his renunciation of
God astounding. All things considered, to deal off one’s spirit into unceasing
perdition for twenty-four short lived a very long time of transient liberality
is, from a prudential point of view, an awful deal as well as self-obliterating.

 

To
peruse his decision of underhanded as absolutely persuaded by humanistic plans
against the breaking points forced by paradise is maybe excessively
shortsighted. The metaphorical component that the Good and Evil Angels serve in
showing Faustus’ otherworldly clashes proposes that his choice “to pick up
a divinity” (1.63) may rather be disclosed by his inability to
“perceive the legitimacy of focal Christian realities” (qtd. in
Westlund 192). It is the Evil Angel who wins every contention and denies him
the best possible comprehension of these certainties; at first enticing him
with guarantees “of respect and of riches” (5.21), at that point
preventing him from contrition by sowing despair that “God can’t feel
sorry for him” (5.189). Perusing from Jerome’s Bible, he fatalistically
infers that man “must bite the dust an everlasting passing” (1.46)
since “the reward of transgression is demise” and “belike
humans must sin” (1.40-46). However, this give up on God’s leniency is
an immediate misreading of sacred writing since Faustus precludes a fundamental
piece of the verse that would have changed his comprehension of awesome
elegance: “For the wages of transgression is passing; yet the endowment of
God is interminable life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:23). His
exchange with Lucifer is then a consider and cognizant decision of shrewdness
that is established in a flawed syllogistic comprehension of the human
condition, rather than one that has been managed by a deterministic destiny.

 

Moreover,
that Faustus trusts the exact inverse of what the Bible is imparting, is
symptomatic of his misery in regards to the salvation that God will concede him
on the off chance that he just atones. Since transgression is “a natural
marvel” introduce in every day life while elegance is
“immaterial”, it is obvious that Faustus is persuaded that the
previous is more genuine than the last mentioned (Westlund 194). Faustus has
consequently unwittingly spurned unceasing life for everlasting demise, simply
because natural joys turn out to be a great deal more alluring when man, as he
erroneously accepts, is fated to endure in life following death. Since for him
there exists no salvation of the spirit, it is no big surprise that there would
be “nothing so sweet as enchantment is to him” (Prologue.26). The
idea of Faustus as a shocking Renaissance legend confronting a medieval all
inclusive request threatening towards humanistic accomplishment is in this
manner emptied, for the incongruity is that he is only his very own casualty
untrustworthy mankind.

Regardless,
Faustus’ want to oppress “all things that move between the tranquil
shafts … to his charge” (1.56-57) is less a humanistic undertaking, than
a quest for that which is quickly powerful. One ought to perceive that while
“the innovation of Renaissance humanism lay in its expanding worry with
the absolutely normal and human, Marlowe was interested by the superhuman and
by the exceptionally powerful hypotheses” that “lay past human reason
and experience” (Ornstein 1381). Faustus can’t enjoy the
“unpleasant, brutal, awful, and abhorrent” expressions he has
beforehand exceeded expectations in on the grounds that he judges what is only
human “only outside junk” (1.35) for “unimportant minds”
(1.107-9). Since they don’t give an adequately passionate affair that would
exceed the gravity of death, these achievements are at last insignificant. His
state of mind, in opposition to what at first appears like a Renaissance quest
for human accomplishment, is really hostile to humanistic.

 

Basic
his “contempt of those delights he never shalt have” (3.86) is in
this manner an insubordination to his mortality, which he likewise accepts to
be man’s innate and unavoidable sin. Accordingly, Faustus “seethes against
the withering of his light” by getting a handle on at that which is over
his achieve; he would live for the dominance of the material world and endeavor
to resemble a divine being, yet just amazing the agnosticism he thinks about
basic to mortal finitude. While other Elizabethan grievous saints recognize
their mortality and in this way “deny passing of its unending fear”,
Faustus never figures out how amazing he can’t acknowledge that he should pass
on, and is consequently denied this triumph over death. Also, since God is by
definition idealize, it takes after aphoristically that His law is consummately
just. Since one can’t envision any legitimization for “a Promethean sort
of noncompliance” against “a supreme and cherishing Christian
God” (Ornstein 1381-2), it makes the transgression of Faustus a
fundamentally wicked demonstration of outright hubris – one without plan of
action to cases of Renaissance heartbreaking courage – on the grounds that
“the god he servest is his claim hunger” (5.11).

 

Sadly
for him, it appears that the capability of the power he would accomplish by
“buying the benefit of Mephastophilis with his spirit” (5.32)
falls far beneath his desires. From the earliest starting point, unmistakably
Faustus’ summon over Mephastophilis is deceptive. While his self image blinds
him to trust that it is because of “the power of enchantment and his
spells” that the fallen angel respects him “full of compliance and
lowliness” (3.30-1), Mephastophilis had in certainty come “in want to
get his great soul” (3.49). Besides, when the deed of blessing – a tragedy
of the New contract, by which Christ recovers for man what Faustus
inexpensively perils – is profanely “Consummatum est” (5.74), Faustus
learns of the barrenness of Mephastophilis’ forces. At the point when initially
he had planned to “influence spirits to get him what he
pleases,/resolve him of all ambiguities,/perform what edgy endeavor he
wills” (1.79-81), it appears that Mephastophilis is unequipped for
executing anything that conflicts with the power of Almighty God. The mythic
import of Renaissance challenging is decreased to unimportant cases of the
insignificant sins that grovel before the medieval comprehension of God’s
matchless quality over the greater part of His Creation.

 

Mephastophilis
can’t fulfill Faustus with “the most attractive cleaning specialist in
Germany” (5.139) however can just “bring him a spouse in the
villain’s name” (5.145), for marriage is a sacrosanct holy observance that
he has no energy to abuse. The epistemological puzzle of the creation is
moreover denied an answer since the villain is disallowed to name the awesome
Creator who is “against their kingdom … of hellfire” (5.245-6).
With respect to the inquiries that Mephastophilis answers, a frustrated Faustus
can’t resist the opportunity to scorn them as “thin plays that even
Wagner can choose” (5.224). It is consequently unexpected that Faustus had
deserted his previous examinations since they could “afford … no more
prominent marvel” (1.9) just to understand that he has paid a huge cost
for a fiend who has “no more noteworthy aptitude” than to reveal to
him unimportant “green beans’ suppositions” (5.225-30). By depicting
the energy of villains as essentially ineffectual at satisfying wants, Marlowe
recommends the religious conviction that without God, man as defective
creatures can do nothing. It is for sure evident that one can discover
wholeness just in God. Considering how God is the logos of the universe, and is
along these lines a definitive creator of Truth itself, it is God, and not
Mephastophilis, that has the appropriate response Faustus passionately looks
for. Faustus has clearly misjudged the idea of God when he imagines that he can
rise above his transgression spoiled mortality by turning towards the vanity of
sorcery, for it is amusingly by the beauty of God that Faustus can ever
“taste the everlasting delights of paradise” (3.78) – a reality
that he was excessively glutted with self-arrogance, making it impossible to
perceive.

Having
rejected God, Faustus is pushed into the unremarkableness of wrongdoing; for
even with Mephastophilis available to his no matter what, he scarcely
accomplishes anything striking amid the valuable twenty-four years. Rather than
encouraging a limitless desire, his transgressions “illustrate the
littleness of their distractions and their indecencies” (Smith 173). As
Faustus continues through his life of wickedness, his adventures get
progressively unfortunate as the request of personages in whose nearness he
plays out “the dark craftsmanship” (9.2) diminish in rank: from
playing traps on the Pope to conning a stallion courser. The uselessness of the
qualifications conceded him by the malicious agreement is no place more amusing
than when Faustus, who had fancied himself as “extraordinary ruler of the
world … now that he has got what he wants” (3.104-12), is diminished
to a sycophant before the real Emperor, “substance to do at all his
greatness should order him” (9.14-15).

 

Such
average quality is likewise reflected by the parade of the Seven Deadly Sins,
who “a long way from being amazing, are extremely minimal more than
jokesters properly outfitted with paltry responses” (Smith 172). One would
expect that Pride may – at the leader of the parade, and as the vital sin that
causes the fall of Lucifer and Faustus – be caught up in more pompous plans of
self absorbed unethical behavior than that of Ovid’s insect “creeping
into each edge of a vixen” (5.283). In that capacity, Marlowe insists that
transgression, in spite of its grave outcomes, is really trivial in nature and
is accordingly garbled with the procurement of information and power (Smith
171). Additionally, the disappointment of Faustus to accomplish his motivations
serves to show that underhanded does not pay its contribution. Unquestionably,
“thou workmanship bamboozled” (5.175) like Faustus should one trust
in diabolical forces, for they make however discharge guarantees.

 

As
it may be, Faustus may have been cheated and along these lines “denied …
of heavenly delights” (5.179), yet since God is so obviously better than
the fallen angels, and alone has the ability to recover him, at that point one
marvels why Faustus does not just atone. All things considered, the promptings
of the Good Angel to do retribution even after the settlement is made suggest
that Faustus isn’t permanently accursed. That Mephastophilis as well,
understanding that he “can’t touch his spirit” for “his
confidence is awesome”, resorts to natural and physical enticements like
Helen to “distress his body with” (12.69-70), is prove that Faustus
is still inside salvation. God will to be sure “pity him if he
repents” (5.192), yet the disaster is that Faustus is never ready to
mitigate his solid feeling of hopelessness. Persuaded that “God …
cherishes him not” (5.10) in light of the fact that “rare can he
name salvation, confidence, or paradise” before his wrongdoing comes to
thunder in his ears, Faustus trusts himself “so solidified that he can’t
atone” (5.194-6). By assuming that his wrongdoing is more prominent than
God’s effortlessness in any case, Faustus confers a definitive sin of misery
against the Holy Spirit. Thus, “where Christ’s circulation systems in the
atmosphere” (13.70), Faustus finds not the affirmation of affection from
Christ, “whose blood hath emancipated him” (13.90), yet recoils
from the “overwhelming anger of God” and his “ireful
temples” (13.75-77). In his last hour, “he sees, not the adoring
Father, but rather the furious Jehovah” (Ornstein 1383) to whom he
entreats, “My God, my God, look not all that wild on me!” (13.110).
While it is Faustus’ hubristic pride and desire that leads him into wrongdoing,
it is give up – the unbelief that “God’s leniencies are unbounded”
and the request that his “offense can ne’er be absolved” (13.13-15) –
that at last finishes his “awful fall” (Epilogue.4).

 

With
its notice against the “practice of more than glorious power
grants” (Epilog 8), Doctor Faustus is ostensively an ethical story about Renaissance
overextending. However, its emphasis on transgression and salvation
additionally strengthens customary Christian esteems acquired from medieval
circumstances. It might be that the nobility of man lies in his through and
through freedom, however even that blessing from God is liable to his heavenly
law. The deplorability of Faustus is in this way not only that he is liable of
pride and gloom, yet that he has a confused and faulty religious philosophy. He
doesn’t comprehend that “the silliness of God is more astute than human
shrewdness” (1 Corinthians 1:25) – even what the Renaissance Man is
enriched with. In judging God’s kindness and effortlessness as indicated by
defective human norms of equity, he neglects to perceive His actual nature, and
in this manner, loses his shot for salvation.

 

Works Cited

Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance
Self-Fashioning. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980. 1-2. Print.

Marlowe,
Christopher. “The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus.” The Norton Anthology
of English Literature. 9th Ed. Stephen
Greenblatt et al. Vol. B. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company,
Inc., 2012. 1127-1163. Print.

Ornstein, Robert. “Marlowe
and God: The Tragic Theology of Dr. Faustus.” PMLA, Vol. 83, No. 5 (Oct., 1968): 1378-1385.
JSTOR. PDF File.

Smith, Warren D. “The
Nature of Evil in “Doctor Faustus”.” The Modern Language Review, Vol. 60, No. 2 (Apr., 1965): 171-175. JSTOR. PDF File.

Westlund, Joseph. “The
Orthodox Christian Framework of Marlowe’s Faustus.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, Vol. 3, No. 2,
Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama (Spring, 1963): 191-205. JSTOR. PDF File.