Introduction
Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus (first performed around 1592) is a seminal Renaissance tragedy that explores themes of ambition, knowledge, and damnation through the protagonist, John Faustus. This essay examines whether Faustus can be considered a hero or an evil figure, with particular attention to how his torment stems from his conscience. Drawing on the play’s context in Elizabethan England, where humanism clashed with religious orthodoxy, the analysis will argue that Faustus embodies elements of both heroism and villainy, but his internal conflict—manifested as conscience-driven torment—ultimately underscores his tragic humanity. Key points include Faustus’s heroic pursuit of knowledge, his morally corrupt actions, and the psychological turmoil that reveals his conscience’s role. This perspective aligns with critical interpretations of Renaissance tragedy, supported by scholarly sources.
Faustus as a Tragic Hero
In Marlowe’s portrayal, Faustus exhibits traits of a tragic hero, reminiscent of Aristotelian models where a flawed protagonist falls due to hubris. Faustus, a learned scholar dissatisfied with traditional disciplines, boldly seeks forbidden knowledge by summoning Mephistopheles and trading his soul for 24 years of power (Marlowe, 1592). This ambition can be seen as heroic in the Renaissance context, where humanism celebrated intellectual exploration. For instance, Faustus declares, “All things that move between the quiet poles / Shall be at my command” (Marlowe, 1592, Scene 1), reflecting a Promethean defiance against divine limits. Critics like Dollimore (1984) argue that such rebellion positions Faustus as a figure of radical individualism, challenging oppressive religious structures. Indeed, his quest for “a world of profit and delight” (Marlowe, 1592, Scene 1) highlights a broader human aspiration for transcendence, making him arguably heroic despite his flaws. However, this heroism is limited; Faustus’s overreaching stems from pride, a classic hamartia, which complicates any straightforward heroic label.
Evidence of Faustus’s Evil Actions
Conversely, Faustus’s pact with Lucifer marks him as profoundly evil, driven by moral corruption rather than noble intent. By consciously rejecting God’s mercy and embracing necromancy, he commits acts of blasphemy and deceit, such as conjuring spirits and misleading others for personal gain (Marlowe, 1592). His misuse of power—wasting it on trivial pranks, like tormenting a horse-courser or summoning grapes for a duchess—reveals not intellectual heroism but selfish hedonism. Sinfield (1992) critiques this as a failure of humanist ideals, suggesting Faustus’s actions embody the evils of unchecked ambition in a Calvinist worldview, where predestined damnation amplifies his villainy. Furthermore, the play’s chorus warns of “practicing more than heavenly power permits” (Marlowe, 1592, Prologue), framing his deeds as inherently sinful. Thus, while Faustus’s initial curiosity might seem admirable, his deliberate alliance with evil forces him into a category of moral depravity, evoking audience condemnation rather than sympathy.
The Role of Conscience in His Torment
Faustus’s torment, however, arises primarily from his conscience, humanising him and blurring the hero-evil dichotomy. Throughout the play, moments of doubt plague him, such as when the Good Angel urges repentance, yet he ignores it, leading to escalating despair (Marlowe, 1592). This internal conflict peaks in his final soliloquy: “O soul, be changed to little water drops / And fall into the ocean, ne’er be found” (Marlowe, 1592, Scene 13), a poignant expression of remorse. Bevington (1962) interprets this as evidence of a tormented conscience, rooted in Elizabethan psychological realism, where guilt stems from awareness of sin without action. Arguably, this self-inflicted suffering—due to ignored moral instincts—suggests Faustus is neither purely heroic nor evil but a tragic figure whose conscience exposes the futility of his choices. Therefore, his torment serves as a cautionary element, highlighting the consequences of suppressing one’s ethical core.
Conclusion
In summary, Doctor Faustus presents its protagonist as a complex figure: heroic in his intellectual ambition yet evil in his blasphemous actions, with torment arising from a conflicted conscience that underscores his humanity. This duality reflects Marlowe’s engagement with Renaissance tensions between aspiration and damnation. The implications extend to broader literary studies, inviting readers to question the boundaries of heroism in tragedy. Ultimately, Faustus’s fate warns against hubris, reinforcing the play’s enduring relevance in exploring moral ambiguity.
References
- Bevington, D. M. (1962) From ‘Mankind’ to Marlowe: Growth of Structure in the Popular Drama of Tudor England. Harvard University Press.
- Dollimore, J. (1984) Radical Tragedy: Religion, Ideology and Power in the Drama of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries. Harvester Press.
- Marlowe, C. (1592) The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. [Original play text, as cited in editions like the A-text].
- Sinfield, A. (1992) Faultlines: Cultural Materialism and the Politics of Dissident Reading. University of California Press.
