Christopher Marlowe, The Tragical History of Dr. Faustus 
(?1593/1604 [A-text]/1616s [B-text])
Genre: 
  Tragic drama.  
Click
here for some basic advice about how to read plays.
Form:  
Blank verse (for main plot), unrhymed iambic pentameter,
set in 13 scenes with a prologue, three internal choruses, and an epilogue (the "A
text" published in 1604) or five acts, composed of 4, 3, 3, 7, and 3 scenes, and all
but the last scene begins with a "Chorus" delivering a transitional epilogue
(the significantly longer "B text" published in 1616, and probably contributed
to by later poets).  Subplot passages involving Wagner, the Clown, the Horse Courser
etc. usually are in prose and use colloquial diction to comic effect, though Faustus
becomes involved with the subplot in the end.   
 
Characters: 
Major characters include 
Faustus,
a German professor at Wittenberg who has turned magician, his servant 
Wagner, 
Mephistopholis
the tempting demon and  Lucifer, his lord, and a host of minor characters
(three scholars who hope to learn from Faustus, a troop of "clowns" or country
bumpkins whose quests for silly powers parodies Faustus' own desires, a set of high status
characters including the pope and the emperor, and a set of allegorical characters
including Faustus' good and bad angels, and the Seven Deadly Sins (a stock favorite of
medieval moralities--Everyman transformed them into social types).   
Click here for advice about 
"the mnemonic bookmark," a strategy for remembering characters' names and major 
plot and thematic issues!
Summary: 
The scholar seeks the ultimate wisdom, and with it, the
ultimate power, but becomes obsessed with power to the neglect of his spirit. A demon,
summoned, tempts him to surrender his soul for a brief period of exotic earthly powers.
His servant and a gang of comic characters, in a subplot, mirror Faustus' search for
earthly power but with markedly less success (and, hence, less risk to their souls!).
Faustus trades his spirit for illusions like his vision of Helen, a "dumbshow"
(silent play) or metadrama that occurs within his own life's play and mocks his ambitions.
Unlike Goethe's Faust, Marlowe's Faustus remains confident in his own damnation until the
end, and therefore he is correct, though also morally wrong.  
Marlowe's own view of
Faustus' career remains much more complex, however, since he shares many qualities with
the necromancer, as do we all.
Issues and Research Sources: 
  - Is this a comedy or is this a tragedy (or is it a history)? The title claims it's a
    "tragical history," but that may mean no more than "tragic story" in
    Early Modern English. However, as the genre of tragedy begins to take on more pronounced
    formal characteristics, it becomes possible to say  
  Faustus was transformed into
    something very like a tragedy (five acts, ascending and descending dramatic structure,
    high-status hero with poignant flaw which dooms him by means of his deeds, etc.). Notice
    especially the difference in structure between the 1604 and 1616 versions. More troubling,
    perhaps, is the intrusion of comedy into the doctor's downfall. The comic subplots are
    separated from the doctor's behavior until the deceived Horse Courser appears to pull off
    Faustus' leg in Scene 10.   
      - What does the separation do to our sense of the relationship between plot and subplot,
        and what does the fusion of the two do to the main plot? 
- Do you have any sense of whether Marlowe feels Faustus was 
	   morally wrong in
        seeking the knowledge and power he praises in the first scene?  
- Or is Faustus tragic, for Marlowe, because he seeks it and finds it and loses it? 
 
- English literature owes a great debt to Marlowe for identifying a certain type of
    classical tragic hero in the works of Sophocles and making him intelligible in English
    cultural terms.  
  Harry Levin called this type "the over-reacher" after
    rhetorician  
  George Puttenham's attempt to find a close English synonym for the Greek word
    "hyperbole" (in  The Arte of English Poesie, 1589). Marlowe characters
    have an exaggerated appetite for achievement, whether it's world conquest (Tamburlaine),
    knowledge as power (Faustus) or revenge and the acquisition of riches (Barabus). Marlowe's
    heroes were popular then, and remain fascinating now, as portraits of English imperial
    ambitions dressed in the appearances of an Asian warlord, a German scholar, and a wealthy
    Maltese Jew. Their exotic (to C16 English audiences) appearances and settings gave Marlowe
    an opportunity to dazzle us with some of the most elaborate and extended set speeches in
    English drama. His use of the new Elizabethan vocabulary drew upon the language of the
    exploring nations (Spain, France, Holland) as well as the Latin and Greek learning that
    had filtered down to the street-English of his time from the most exotic experiments of
    the humanists and sonneteers.  
      - Is Marlowe, perhaps, something of a "Faustus" in language?  That is, has
        he made a kind of bargain with imperialism in order to make his theater, a bargain that
        costs him something precious? 
- Is writing, itself, and literacy as a social force, something "demonic" in the
        sense that it transforms its possessors?  Look closely at Faustus' first description
        of his book of necromancy, "Lines circles, schemes, letters and characters"
        (1:51).  Isn't this just a specialized sort of writing and reading, one that gives
        its user access to power?
- In a related scene, note that writing the "deed" or instrument of his
        damnation is a crucial event in Scene 5.  What interrupts the writing
        of it, what aid is brought by Faustus' "Writing Center tutor" to break his
        "writer's block"?  Is this in any sense an analogue of Marlowe's own
        writer's psychology?
 
- What is the function of the "Chorus" in 
   Faustus? 
   
      - What kinds of information does the Chorus deliver, and what does that tell you about the
        state of Marlowe's dramatic skill and the sophistication of the theatrical audience? 
- How does a modern film producer introduce the same information, and what would be the
        effect of having a "Chorus" do it in a modern movie?
 
- Marlowe's dramas broke new ground in their ambitiously exotic settings 
  (Asia, Germany, Rome, Malta) and their extravagantly developed heroes' 
  characters, but they also preserve curious elements of Medieval English drama, 
  like the "Chorus" (above), archaic which indicate Marlowe believed his 
  audiences needed some help to experience the full illusion of his dramas.  
  Allegorical characters, like those we encountered in  
  Everyman, also 
  make appearances in  Dr. Faustus, but Marlowe appears to be of two minds 
  regarding their usefulness.  When allegory  first appears, in the 
  "Seven Deadly Sins" play (Scene 5), the "author" is Lucifer, and Faustus, as 
  the inscribed audience for their performance, openly mocks them and fails to 
  listen to the message they communicate about sin.  What might Marlowe be 
  saying in this scene about the older English theatrical tradition and, 
  perhaps, its linkage to a theology now identified with the Roman Church?  
  Also in Scene 5, Marlowe introduces "Good Angel" and "Evil Angel," two 
  allegorical characters who appear to represent aspects of Faustus' own mind or 
  soul.  They do not reappear, but in Scene 13, an enigmatic "Old Man" 
  materializes in Faustus' study to deliver a message similar to that which the 
  "Good Angel" offered.  How do you explain what Marlowe was doing with 
  those three allegorical characters, and how might that be compared with those 
  Lucifer causes to appear to Faustus?  How do they relate to Alexander and 
  His Paramour, and "Helen of Greece," herself perhaps the most well-known 
  Elizabethan character who never spoke a line, due to Faustus' famous 
  apostrophe to her (13: 81-100)?  Are those characters somewhere between 
  allegory and "round" characters?  How would you explain their function in 
  the play?
- Christopher Marlowe's rapid rise to fame as England's first "super-star" 
dramatist began while he was still a student at Cambridge.  There he wrote
Tamburlaine the Great, the story of an Asian warlord whose boundless 
appetite for conquest was expressed in 
some of the most glorious blank verse dialogue ever written.  The play 
was so popular that Marlowe wrote a sequel, Tamburlaine the Great, Part Two. 
His Faust play appears to have been written near the end of his life (ca. 
1595), but it remained popular for decades after his death.  The first 
print edition is issued nine years after he died, and the play was still being 
adapted and remounted twenty-one years later.  Why was this play so 
compelling?  Perhaps it had to do with England's emerging imperialist view 
of the world, which Faustus' dreams anticipate.  Perhaps it had to do with 
the play's radically new treatment of learning as something sought for power 
rather than to make one good (viz. "Knowledge" in Everyman).  
	Perhaps it had to do with the growing popularity of Elizabethan drama, 
	itself, which the play appears to illustrate and to criticize and to praise, 
	all at once.  One must ask, having read the play, is art real?  
	Does art have cultural/social/political power?
- Marlowe was a secret agent of Queen Elizabeth's government, and probably was killed by
    another agent, perhaps assassinated. Secrecy plays a strong role in both 
   
  Dr. Faustus
    and  The Jew of Malta, Marlowe's last plays. 
   
      - How does he treat the secret realm, whether of knowledge or of politics? 
- What things are hidden there, and what is the effect of penetrating that secrecy? 
- For instance, how do Faustus' trips to the Vatican and the Emperor's palace affect him
        and his audience? 
- Is it what you expected, based on what he said he'd do with magic in scene 1? 
- What might Marlowe be signaling here about the effects of his sojourns among the secret
        realms of Elizabethan government, and how might it relate to the views we get of Tudor
        secrecy in Wyatt ("They Flee From Me," "Lucks My Falcons," and
        "Mine Own John Poins") and Surrey ("Th' Assyrian King, in peace with foul
        desire" and "Imprisoned in Windsor")? 
- Is there, in these poets, also a satire on the state as well as upon human frailty, and
        if so, what would be the dangers that would attend writing such a satire?
 
- We will return frequently (if we can remember) 
  to the question of when tragic and comic drama take on their current 
  structural shapes (e.g., five acts?  protagonist has a flaw?).  For 
  now, compare this play's structure and characterization
  
  
  with the classical Greek 
  (C5 B.C.E.) model for how tragedy ought to operate.
- The play makes use of a metadramatic morality of the Seven Deadly Sins, 
  enacted for Faustus by demons from a script apparently created by Lucifer, 
  Hell's playwright. 
  
  
  If you are not sure what a "sin" is or whether it's a "deadly sin," 
  click here.  
  Marlowe is writing in a Protestant country, but many Catholics live in 
  England, and the poet's theology is by no means certain.  He may even 
  have been an atheist, according to charges leveled against him by a 
  contemporary.  What is this play's theological doctrine?  Don't 
  assume that, just because Faustus and Mephistophilis make fun of the Pope and 
  his retinue, the play is pro-Protestant.  It could also be telling us 
  something about the peculiar anxieties of Protestants in a post-Catholic 
  nation where Everyman's "Confession" and "Good Deeds" no longer guarantee 
  salvation.
- For some more specific ways to approach particular passages in Scenes 1 
  through 5 at a level that might support analytical papers,
  
  click here.  For a similar set of 
  analytical angles on Scenes 6 through 13,  
	click 
  here.
- 
	
	Marlowe, spies, sex, and tobacco.  
	 Clicking on this link will take 
	you to Stephen Orgel's 2000 article reviewing the available evidence about 
	Marlowe's religious beliefs, erotic orientation, and relationship with 
	Elizabeth's other secret agents.  That's right--"other"--Marlowe was a 
	spy.  Ordinarily, good literary criticism pays more attention to the 
	structure of the poem, play, novel or story than to the work's author.  
	In the early C20, a pattern of careless confusion of biographical curiosity 
	with the analysis of literature helped inspire the "New Criticism," with its 
	famous emphasis on "the text, itself," as the proper object of literary 
	study.  How might we legally, with full professional care for evidence 
	and critical methods, use the limited evidence of Marlowe's life to help us 
	discover new ways to read his plays?  Note that this is an advanced 
	level of literary analysis, related to New Historicism and other Post-Modern 
	literary theories, and you should not undertake this unless you are an 
	extremely experienced with ordinary literary analysis.  Otherwise, you 
	risk reproducing the "biographical fallacy" all over again.
- 
 
One way to track the changes a play might go through when it is performed for a 
decade or more after its author's death would be to examine the titles it was 
given in successive print editions, as in the case of the A and B texts of 
 
Marlowe's Doctor Faustus.  To work with the printed texts of the 
editions, themselves, you can see a 
parallel text edition on a web site hosted by an independent Marlowe scholar 
named Peter Farey, A-text (pub. 1604) on the left, and B-text (pub. 1611) on the 
right,
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/faustus.htm
We will be reading 
the A-text because it's what the Norton decided to print in the 7th edition 
after living with the B-Text for decades.  In the end, scholars do not 
agree about which is closer to the play as Marlowe intended it to be performed 
in his lifetime, but that will give us a chance to talk about all the ways in 
which drama as it is performed is different from a modern novel on your desk 
with a publication date, a publisher, and the author's copyright boldly claimed 
on the back of the title page. 
 
Primary Source for Research: 
 
        The Norton editors, in addition to 
modernizing spelling, have "emended" or editorially "improved" the texts of all 
the medieval and early modern works by altering their punctuation to make them 
conform to their Modern/Po-Mo expectations.  Pre-modern printers did not 
"point" or punctuate their editions as heavily as Modern printers.  They 
tended to expect longer "periods," or what we would call "sentences."  A 
typical soliloquy by Faustus, when viewed in
a 
photographic facsimile of the 1604 A-Text edition (available through the 
prior hyperlink), often would contain few "full stops" or periods.  The 
Norton editors often replace colons and semi-colons, which are fairly frequent 
in the A-Text edition, with periods.  This becomes extremely important to 
actors/performers/presenters because of its effect on enjambed and end-stopped 
lines.  Ordinarily, rational dialogue in blank verse (unrhymed iambic 
pentameter, the language of the play's tragic scenes) is end-stopped because the 
speaker develops rational thought in orderly units which conform to single lines 
ending in semi-colons, colons, periods, or at least commas.  When the 
speaker is overwhelmed by emotion, positive or negative, poets often dramatize 
that by enjambing lines, running the overflow of speech past the line ends into 
the next one (or ten?) lines, in a manner that communicates the speaker's kind 
of emotional overflow and degree of emotional disturbance to audiences 
viscerally, and to scholars who can see punctuation and count lines.  If 
the Norton punctuation differs from that in the A-Text, someone presenting on 
it, or writing a paper about the passage for a midterm paper, might want to take 
issue with the Norton punctuation if it served her/his thesis. 
Back to English 211,
Syllabus View.