Although heavily influenced by the Enlightenment, the play Faust seems to be making more a critique of the new culture. Unlike Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus, Goethe’s version involved the character “pursuing not knowledge but experience” (“Goethe” 315). Faust claims, “I’ve studied, alas, philosophy, Law and medicine, recto and verso, and how I regret it… With what result? Poor fooling old man, I’m no whit wiser than when I began!” (320) Faust is voicing his frustrating that science, philosophy and education, three key components of the Enlightenment, which are not fulfilling him. He is left unsatisfied to the point in which he is willing to sell his soul to the Devil. Not differing from Marlowe’s version, both Faust characters stake their lives and salvation on their “capacity ever to yearn for something beyond” (“Goethe” 315). Yet, this Enlightenment character is not searching for more knowledge, but is searching for something even better- experience.
Faust's character is so developed in the sciences, yet he feels a sense of lacking in his understanding of the world. He states, "Oh, if I only had a magic mantle to bear me off to unknown lands, I'd never trade it for the costliest gowns" (337). This search for a different knowledge, for a spiritual encounter, is one different than of what the Enlightenment considers worthy. Faust, throughout the entire play, is dealing with the Devil, and magic, and trickery. These concepts are not what are important in the Enlightenment.
While Faust’s character is one exploring new areas other than those of the Enlightenment, his general core engulfs the very individualistic attitude of the time. In the beginning of the play, Faust is too egotistical and self centered to share his knowledge with the world, in order to better serve humanity. He is very centralized in his own understanding of the world, and his own personal gain from the experiences he so desires. The Enlightenment was very much so about individual knowledge and growth, yet taken to the extreme, could be detrimental to society. Goethe was making a social critique of the era by using Faust as a prime example to raise questions such as, “Where does societal good come into play concerning this Enlightenment period?”
Goethe used Faust to explore the benefits and the negatives of the Enlightenment. While knowledge is something definitely worshipped in this era, Goethe critiques science as not being the end-all- be- all answer to everything. Without a magical sense and higher-power interaction, art cannot be fully understood. Art is not something as simple as 2+2, and Goethe sought to explore this critique through his character Faust during a time where realism was all.
From what my World Literature class has covered so far, the evolution of theater and definition of art from Moliere’s Tartuffe to Pirandello’s Six Characters in Search of an Author is astounding. Theater’s shift from traditional defined characters and a structured plot of the 17th century to the confusing and distorted, fourth-wall broken art of the 20th century is drastic.
Tartuffe serves as a basic format for traditional drama. “Moliere employs classic comic devices of plot and character,” (“Moliere” 98) to tell the tale of a hypocritical Christian being caught in his demise. The story involves traditional Greek ideals of how theater should be produced. Like conventional theater, Tartuffe is told in verse, and follows a consistent time sequence, place, and rising action. The play does not leap to flashbacks, switch locations, or introduce concepts out of order. The purpose of Tartuffe was to expose the vices of hypocrisy within the church of Moliere’s day. Moliere defends his piece in his Preface, “If the function of comedy is to correct men’s vices, I do not see why any should be exempt” (101). In following traditional Greek theater format, and being written for a purpose, Tartuffe represents “good theater” of its day.
Then along came Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler in the 19th century, which shook the core of the definition of beauty. Very different than its predecessors, Ibsen sought to bring to the forefront social issues which needed to be talked about. He incorporated nasty subjects, such as women’s roles in society, social classes entwining, and even venereal diseases into his plays. And although these topics aren’t beautiful, he sought to write about them in still an artistic manner. He brought complicated characters, such as Hedda, full of malice and manipulation, and made them sympathetic to the audience. “The play is not, however, simply a character study… It is also an extremely effective, swiftly moving play of action, deftly plotted in its clashes and climaxes” (“Henrik Ibsen” 652). Because Ibsen so effectively portrayed these characters, emotions, and societal injustices, his work, although different than traditional theater, is very easily classified as art.
By the 20th century, Pirandello’s Six Characters further experiments with the definition of art. The shift of society because of the Industrial Revolution changed the culture of world, thus changing the way of life for people. Pirandello sought to break the fourth wall in this play, thus changing the actors into characters themselves. The argument of whether art is more real than reality is the entire theme of his play. These challenging new ways of stage convention are difficult, thus changing art and becoming art of its time. This play challenges its readers/viewers to understand different concepts which had not been explored before.
Both Ibsen’s and Pirandello’s plays are experimental pieces of art in their time. Both authors sought to explore past the boundaries of traditional theater drama and encompass new ideas. Ibsen sought to make his audience question the social problems of his time, while Pirandello sought to make his audience question their own realities. Both are equally as daring as each other, because they both created a new style of writing theater while achieving two different goals. The intent of producing good art was affective by Moliere, Ibsen and Pirandello through the shift of what “good theater” was considered through the 17th- 20th centuries.
Work Cited
Simon, Peter, ed. Norton Anthology of World Literature. Shorter Second ed. Vol. 2. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. Print.
“Henrik Ibsen.” Simon. 649-709. Print.
“Jean- Baptiste Poquelin (“Moliere”).” Simon. 98-155. Print.
“Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.” Simon. 314-420. Print.
“Luigi Pirandello.” Simon. 860-903. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment