First of all, let me preface this by noting that according to my inside information, this show experienced some significant challenges, mostly related to the summer Covid surge that took out a bunch of people during crucial phases of preparation; and as a result, there were substitutions, insufficient rehearsals, and changes and adaptations from the original intention.
So, for anyone involved in this, I understand that you had to overcome a clusterfuck, so don’t think of any criticism as throwing shade. I know you all did what you could under difficult circumstances, and I’m glad this didn’t end up canceled.
I read Doctor Faustus in high school, and became fascinated with the whole Faust legend and the different ways that playwrights and authors handled the story over the years. Marlowe is so very different from Goethe, to put it mildly, and shorter remixes by authors such as Washington Irving, each have their own flavors and points to make.
And yes, I have read both parts of Goethe’s Faust, but have not yet read Thomas Mann’s novel. But I own it and do intend to read it.
There is no real mystery why we humans are captivated by the idea of selling our souls. After all, we can see this phenomenon all around us. We see it in the Bible:
Then the devil led Him up to a high place and showed Him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. “I will give You authority over all these kingdoms and all their glory,” he said. “For it has been relinquished to me, and I can give it to anyone I wish. So if You worship me, it will all be Yours.” But Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve Him only.”
One might say this is the rare version of the story where someone doesn’t agree to sell their soul.
The earliest versions of the legend arose in Germany, and generally had the moral of “Learning too much is bad, so best stick to the doctrine the Church teaches.” Faust studied too much, learned too much, and ultimately sold his soul for knowledge. A twist on the story of the Fall of Man, in other words. Stay away from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
By the time we get to Marlowe, though, things are already looking a bit different. Faust is bored with his learning - he rejects medicine and science and rhetoric. What fascinates him in his boredom is necromancy - he wants to speak with someone from the other side, someone who can grant him knowledge. And even more than knowledge, what he wants is POWER.
He summons Mephistopheles, and promptly asks that he have a lackey, someone to do shit for him - his magic genie so to speak. Sure, he asks some scientific questions. And gets some, um, really dated wrong answers. But power is his thing. Not that he wants to rule, but he gets off pranking those in power and messing with politics behind the scenes.
Actually, that does look kind of fun, unless you are the butt of the joke. Marlowe takes time to poke fun at a recent issue with rival Popes - which was probably as particularly funny to Elizabethan audiences as all Shakespeare’s jokes at the expense of the French.
Marlowe also appealed to the groundlings with the humorous side plots involving Faust’s assistant and his pranks on the gullible commoners. Perhaps not quite up there with Shakespeare’s best, but still funny.
I looked the play up to see if my memory was correct, and it was: there are two versions of the play. Kind of like the folios and quartos for Shakespeare. The earliest version is shorter, with fewer of the humorous scenes, and a few line changes. We got the longer one, I believe.
The one change that is the most fascinating is one involving the central theological question: Is Faust irrevocably damned?
At the time the play was written, Calvinism was increasing in popularity in England. It was already the dominant belief in Scotland, as Sir Walter Scott would note in his historical novels, and it would come to dominate English politics a generation later during the English Civil War and the Puritan commonwealth.
For those not raised in Fundamentalist religion, a central tenet of Calvinism is “predestination.” God, in his supposedly infinite power and wisdom, decides before the dawn of time which humans will be elected to go to heaven, and which to hell. None of us really have a choice - we either are part of The Elect, or we are damned.
Other versions of Christian doctrine either believe in free will, or in some form of universalism. (The latter was actually the dominant view before Constantine needed to put the fear of Hell into his subjects…)
One of the recurring scenes in this play occurs when Faust is hearing his good angel and his bad angel in his head. (I am curious if this is the first version of this in print? I cannot find confirmation.) Faust’s good angel, up until the end, urges him to repent, and states that Faust can be saved if he will repent.
Okay, “if he will repent” is in the later version. In the earlier version, it is “if he can repent.” Big difference theologically.
It is easy to assume that the question is about that contract signed in blood. But it really isn’t. To a true Calvinist, Faust is damned before he is born. That he signs the contract is as inevitable as his damnation, and both were decreed by God himself. Mephistopheles and Lucifer are merely pawns in God’s game.
If one believes that repentance is purely a matter of free will, on the other hand, the contract is irrelevant. Signing it was a sin, but it was no different from other sins, and, as the good angel insists, Faust can repent of it and throw himself on the mercy of the Divine.
That Faust never in fact repents is either proof that he was predestined to damnation, or that he chooses it until the very end.
One of the questions that has never been answered is whether Marlowe intended the play as an argument in favor of Calvinism, or a refutation of it. Since he died soon after the first performance, it appears nobody had the chance to ask him - and he may well have refused to comment.
Two hundred years later, of course, Goethe would conclude that Faust could be saved - as indeed he is in that version. You can read my analysis from a decade ago of that play if you like.
There is another passage that I really loved in this play. Soon after the fateful contract is signed, Faust and Mephistopheles begin their conversation - Faust has many questions about the nature of the world.
Mephistopheles: Now, Faustus, ask what thou wilt.
Faust: First will I question with thee about hell.
Tell me, where is that place that men call hell?
Mephistopheles: Under the heavens
Faust: Ay, but whereabout?
Mephistopheles: Within the bowels of these elements
Where we are tortured and remain forever.
Hell hath no limits, nor is circumscribed
In one self place, for where we are is hell,
And where hell is there must we ever be;
And, to conclude, when all the world dissolves,
And every creature shall be purified,
All places shall be hell that is not heaven.
This is bold stuff, and shockingly modern in a way. Hell is not a place, but hell is here - and now. I think about this a lot these days, seeing so many that believe they are in hell right now - and because of that belief, so they are.
The most obvious is the MAGA crowd, believing in Trump’s vision of America (particularly the cities) as a hellscape. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: when you see the existence of immigrants, refugees, people of color, impoverished people, unhoused people, and LGBTQ+ people as a dire threat, then walking through the world is indeed hell. Hell is what we create.
Marlowe had a reputation as an atheist - and a homosexual - but it is unclear how true either was. To be sure, his writing often had homoerotic themes, and he was a humanist by the standards of his day.
But this is also disputed, because it is definitely true that he served as a spy for Queen Elizabeth, and his reputation as a bit of a dangerous man probably helped his career. He died at age 29 in what may well have been a murder - although a barroom brawl over a woman…or a man…is also plausible. There are a lot of questions about the death, and not a lot of clear answers. If you want to read up on the theories, Wikipedia has a good summary.
Regarding the accusation of atheism, there is no doubt that his writings contain plenty of evidence that, at minimum, he distrusted institutional religion and orthodox doctrine. This play certainly pushes back at religion, particularly the Catholic church, even as it takes the form of a morality play.
While evidence of homosexuality is tainted by the unreliability of the witnesses, Marlowe certainly seemed drawn to homoerotic themes in his writing. Even in this play, Faust’s request for a wife is dismissed as trivial.
Mephistopheles: Tut, Faustus,
Marriage is but a ceremonial toy.
If thou lovest me, think no more of it.
Courtesans are fine, and he can have them, but the primary relationship is with Mephistopheles. What starts out as a master/servant relationship pretty quickly starts to resemble a close friendship, or perhaps something more.
Having explored the play itself a bit, I wanted to talk about the production.
This was a seriously stripped-down version. By that, I do not mean that lines were cut - as far as I can tell, it was presented in full (in the B folio version.) Rather, costumes and sets were nearly absent, props were minimalist, and lighting was austere - although quite effective.
For the most part, the actors wore black. There were some changing accessories to differentiate characters, since most of the supporting actors played multiple roles. The main exception was that the Pope got a good hat and vest - presumably from a prior production. The set was four wooden boxes that got moved around throughout. Props included a staff for the good angel, books, and little else. Bare bones, simple, and enough.
The lighting involved some effective changes in color and emphasis, but again was very simple. Overall, the focus was on the acting and the language, which is not a bad way to go with this play.
All this was good, and impressive considering the clusterfuck preceding it.
The weaker part of the play was the diction. Some of this was the fact that some parts had to be read rather than memorized - and I totally get the problems of swapping actors at the last minute and other challenges. It is what it is.
What the production could have used (in a more perfect world) was more vocal coaching for the actors. Marlowe isn’t quite as flowery as Shakespeare, but it is of the same era, and unless your actors are veterans to Elizabethan plays, it can be difficult to get the cadence and flow right without assistance. There were some cases where the line breaks were emphasized too much, a few mispronounced words, and more where the language felt awkward.
As I noted above, I do not mean this as shade to any actors, given the circumstances.
What I do want to say is that the leads - Salvador Vidaurri as Faust and Kelsey Morrow as Mephistopheles - had great chemistry, and were solid overall. Our longtime friend Selah Gradowitz as the good angel and other parts, and Scott Deaton as the Pope, Lucifer, and others clearly had the most experience with Shakespeare and Elizabethan language, and they were particularly outstanding.
Definite props to the rest of the cast and crew as well, for making this play happen under difficult circumstances.
I note that next season will include Ibsen and Lillian Hellman, continuing Stars Playhouse’s project of bringing less performed classics back to the local stage. I am looking forward to seeing both of them.
This play runs this weekend as well. Tickets at the door, or online at bmtstars.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment