(Written June 2019)
The magnum opus of Johann Goethe, Faust is a tragedy written in the late 18th century and early 19th century. It is considered to be one of the greatest works of German literature ever written, and after a read through it is no mystery as to why. Goethe pulls from many different philosophical traditions and weaves them together in a two-part story about a man on his quest for meaning. The tragedy is based heavily on Christian and Catholic doctrines, but Platonic, Roman, Paganism, and Eastern Spirituality all play a part in forming the core of the story.
Even though the work is almost 250 years old, there is much to learn from Faust, as Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, knew. Freud quoted from the tragedy, for it was one of his favorite works alongside Paradise Lost. Ironically, Freud often quoted the lines of Mephisto, the devil, which is unsurprising since Freud had an obsession with the dark side of humanity and the devil specifically – a funny thing for an atheist. It would also not surprise me if this obsession influenced Freud when he conceived the famous concepts of the Id, Ego, and Superego – which place emphasis on the repressed side of human nature and morality. Moreover, the entire work reads like something out of a Jungian reality due to the many archetypes, dreams, and symbols. Yet despite all of the deeper meaning embedded in the tragedy, it is a fairly interesting read and also gives much wisdom that applies to the everyday world.
Meaning of Life
The tragedy starts off in Heaven with a conversation between Mephisto (the Devil) and God. In an eerie parallel to the Biblical book of Job, God allows Mephisto to tempt Faust. Though the outset of the tragedy sounds a lot like the book of Job, the differences are almost superficial. Without going into too much detail, the devil acts very differently in the two accounts and the salvation of both men (Job and Faust) could not be more different. Nonetheless, the tragedy proceeds to take us to the office of Dr. Henry Faust, who searches day and night in vain pursuit for meaning and the nature of true reality. Mephisto appears, and he and Faust make a bet – if Faust ever says that he enjoys the earthly pleasures begotten to him by the dark power of Mephisto, then his soul will be eternally enslaved to the devil. The two depart on a long journey of debauchery and a frivolous pursuit of meaning.
In my reading, I saw some parallels between the Biblical book of Ecclesiastes and Faust’s journey to find meaning. At first, we find out that Faust is very famous in his town and that everyone loves him. In spite of this, he still finds his life lacking something. The same can be said about his studies – they never satisfy him. This is almost perfectly analogous to the first few chapters of Ecclesiastes, especially chapter one verses twelve through eighteen. Yet, in the end, the author of Ecclesiastes can find meaning through service to Yahweh, while Goethe paints a more pagan view and derives ultimate meaning through the archetype of the Eternal Feminine.
Though the view of meaning and salvation Goethe paints is different from a traditional Christian one, we can still see that a key moral the story pushes is that meaning cannot be derived solely through material possessions. Faust is given everything under the sun from money, power, fame, and even Helen of Troy – the archetype of beauty herself. Yet nothing earthly satisfies him. This is a common theme in many religions, especially Christianity and Eastern Spirituality.
We also see a striking parallel between Socrates and Faust in regards to their view of death. Before embarking on his journey through life with Mephisto, Faust nearly drinks poison to attempt to explore the other side of reality – death. Socrates in his Phaedo, explains that true philosophers should not fear death since it allows the soul to be free from the hindrances of the body, and gives the soul pure freedom in the pursuit of knowledge. Goethe was read in Plato, and thus it is not surprising that elements of the Greek Philosopher are a common occurrence.
What exactly is the end result of Faust’s quest for meaning? It seems as though Goethe leaves us with a very unsatisfying answer. Per the discussion above, Faust was not able to find meaning through earthly materials, but through what is known as the Eternal Feminine. This concept has roots in Taoism, but the crux of this point is that Faust had to look outside this human domain to quench his thirst for meaning. I find this meta concept very similar to a famous quote from C.S. Lewis in which he says, “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.”
Eternal Feminine
In the 19th century, a very ancient philosophical concent reemerged as a common theme throughout literature. The Eternal Feminine is an archetype that defines the core essence of the female through ideal forms of grace, beauty, love, and pureness. Plato is thought to be one of the first thinkers who developed this idea, and thinkers like Jakob Bohme can also be seen embracing it as well.
The Taijitu, or the Yin Yang symbol, is an ancient symbolic representation of the eternal feminine and masculine. However, upon further reflection, I think that the Bagua is a better symbol of understanding what occurs in Faust. The Bagua is the symbol for The Tao, better known as “The Way.” It includes a Yin Yang symbol in the middle of it representing the duality of reality – masculine and feminine, better translated as order and chaos. The entire discussion of this concept is outside the scope of this thesis, and for those purposes, I will leave it at that and simply refer to the Bagua in an attempt to better understand what Goethe was trying to convey in his work.
A vital component of the Bagua is the twin serpent Yin Yang symbol. This gives credence to the thought that it is actually through the dual aspects of reality that one can find “The Way” and thus meaning. We certainly see Goethe adhere to this view throughout his piece.
Gretchen, the mother of Faust’s bastard son, serves as the representation of the Eternal Feminine. Her beauty, grace, and pureness are affirmed after her execution when she is saved and brought into Heaven. She is the one who, through intercession to the Virgin Mary, saves Faust’s soul from damnation, and is also the reason why Faust loses his bet with Mephisto. Both of these points require further exploration.
Gretchen is known to have interceded for Faust’s sins through prayer to the Virgin Mary (once again similar to Job praying for his sons), and as a result, Faust’s salvation comes not through The Son (Jesus Christ), but through the Eternal Feminine. This concept is entirely pagan and, withholding the one instance with Job – which is also not analogous – has no basis in Christian thought. It appears that Goethe is suggesting that ultimate meaning and salvation come through the Feminine aspect of The Tao.
This is further evidenced by the fact that Faust admits to Mephisto that he wishes he could live in the moment in time he spent with Gretchen, thus saying that he had found meaning through one of Mephisto’s “gifts” and allowing Mephisto to win the bet for Faust’s soul. In more general terms, Faust admitted that the Eternal Feminine was able to satisfy his search for meaning. What is missing is the masculine part of The Tao. Yet it can be argued that God the Father represents this and plays a role at the beginning of the tragedy when He assures Mephisto that Faust’s soul will be saved. The unity of the eternal feminine and masculine forming The Way [to meaning] seem to provide us with a more compelling answer.
There is no doubt that this is a very strange view to hold, one that I cannot do anything but speculate as to why Goethe would even postulate it. Nevertheless, it is fascinating to think about, but at the same time, I also feel as if I’m missing something and will probably come back to this in the future.
Goethe’s Assault on Rationalism
A direct attack on the rationalist school of thought also takes place in Faust. As a member of the Sturm und Drang movement, Goethe believed that emotion was much more important than the rationalist thought processes by which the enlightenment so supported. I see Goethe’s views as similar to those embodied by the Existentialists (Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and so forth). This is due to the huge emphasis put on emotion as being the underlying motivator in human behavior throughout the entire play.
As Faust dances with a witch in the first part of the tragedy, he, when referring to the town critic, says, “…when others dance he’s got to criticize, and if he fails to criticize a step, that step may as well not have been taken.” (Faust 375). Goethe uses the critic as a symbol of the rationalist school of thought and through Faust attempts to show how contradictory to actual reality rationalism is.
The assault on rationalism is evident in two other major speeches in part two. The Chancellor and Neerus both mention the fact that reason alone is not enough to persuade men to act a certain way. It is emotion that drives human behavior. Look at the examples referenced by Neerus – Paris and Odysseus, two of the players in the Greek Epics. Both of these men are given rational advice, yet they fail to follow it and instead pursue their emotions when the consequences are obvious. Granted, the Greek Epics are mythological, but I think that what they do helps us to understand our reality. By reading them, we are peering into the condition of human nature. No longer are we in the sheltered world of our own subjectivity, we see what truly motivates people and how they operate. We know that people follow their emotions much more than any rational thought process. This has been the subject of philosophical debate for thousands of years. A modern example of the debate can be found in Thomas Nagel’s Right and Wrong. Nagel argues specifically against the Kantian view that reason alone is not enough to give men sufficient reason to act, and that our own desires and motivations must be taken into account.
Goethe was trying to tell us something when we included these examples in his play. He knew that it was not through careful, and well-thought-out decisions but through wild fluctuating emotional states that people are driven to commit the actions that they do. The tragedy of Faust could not be a more perfect example of that fact.
Archetypes
The Jungian element of Faust is obvious from the get-go. There are four main archetypal characters in the story: Mephisto, Gretchen, The Virgin Mary, and Helen. Each one of them plays a vital role in the plotline and also in the development of the character of Faust. As stated previously, Gretchen is the archetype of the Eternal, and much more need not be discussed regarding her. The Virgin Mary is the archetype of the suffering mother and plays a more vital role in the Catholic tradition than in this story. A notable expression of the Virgin Mother’s divine role can be seen at the end of part one when Gretchen cries out in suffering to her. We see a suffering mother (Gretchen) cry out to The Suffering Mother.
I would argue that Helen of Troy plays a two-part role. Her role as the archetype of beauty is obvious, but on a deeper level, she is also the archetype of lust. In every situation where she appears, men flock to do whatever she pleases. Faust is no exception. He pursues Helen at every single turn and does not rest until he finds her. In the pursuit, Faust is blinded by lust and is even willing to kill a man to impress Helen. After Faust has obtained her as an object of his sexual desire, his life remains unfulfilled and eventually worsens, and he remains incomplete. A key lesson can be learned from this part of the story – one that should be heeded as well. Lust makes people even more incomplete, though at the moment it promises to fulfill all our desires. It also blinds us to reality. When enticed by lust, everything else of significance melts away and only the pathological relationship between the tempter and the tempted exist. The tempted loses all form of reason and only focuses on fulfilling the instant gratification of themselves. It is for this reason that lust seems to have close parallels to something pathological.
The Devil himself is undoubtedly the archetype of evil, but Mephisto has a more subtle role that can be overlooked. Throughout the tragedy, he acts no different than a [generally] normal human being. This point cannot be emphasized enough. Before opening the book, I went in with expectations that Mephisto would be the literal personification of evil himself, and that meant that he would be committing all sorts of unspeakable horrors. To my surprise, he went about life in a rather boring manner – mostly just pursuing earthly lusts, tempting people into doing stupid things, but rarely doing anything worthy of what the biblical records portray (unleashing war, sickness, famine on the human race) Satan as doing. It seems as if Mephisto is almost boring. Because Mephisto acts in such a way throughout the tragedy, it leads me to believe that Goethe’s portrayal of him seems to be closer to the Jungian archetype of the shadow than anything.
The shadow is essentially the dark side of each person, it’s the suppressed part of our inner selves that few of us want to confront. And for good reason – to see your shadow is to awaken to the real capacities of human nature. This means coming to realize that you aren’t a perfect avatar of goodness and purity, nor are you nearly as good of a person as you think. This can at times seem bleak, but coming to accept your shadow has great benefits.
The magnum opus of Johann Goethe, Faust is a tragedy written in the late 18th century and early 19th century. It is considered to be one of the greatest works of German literature ever written, and after a read through it is no mystery as to why. Goethe pulls from many different philosophical traditions and weaves them together in a two-part story about a man on his quest for meaning. The tragedy is based heavily on Christian and Catholic doctrines, but Platonic, Roman, Paganism, and Eastern Spirituality all play a part in forming the core of the story.
Even though the work is almost 250 years old, there is much to learn from Faust, as Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, knew. Freud quoted from the tragedy, for it was one of his favorite works alongside Paradise Lost. Ironically, Freud often quoted the lines of Mephisto, the devil, which is unsurprising since Freud had an obsession with the dark side of humanity and the devil specifically – a funny thing for an atheist. It would also not surprise me if this obsession influenced Freud when he conceived the famous concepts of the Id, Ego, and Superego – which place an emphasis on the repressed side of human nature and morality. Moreover, the entire work reads like something out of a Jungian reality due to the many archetypes, dreams, and symbols. Yet despite all of the deeper meaning embedded in the tragedy, it is a fairly interesting read and also gives much wisdom that is applicable to the everyday world.
Meaning of Life
The tragedy starts off in heaven with a conversation between Mephisto (the Devil) and God. In an eerie parallel to the Biblical book of Job, God allows Mephisto to tempt Faust. Though the outset of the tragedy sounds a lot like the book of Job, the differences are almost superficial. Without going into too much detail, the devil acts very differently in the two accounts and the salvation of both men (Job and Faust) could not be more different. Nonetheless, the tragedy proceeds to take us to the office of Dr. Henry Faust who searches day and night in vain pursuit for meaning and the nature of true reality. Mephisto appears and he and Faust make a bet – if Faust ever says that he enjoys the earthly pleasures begotten to him by the dark power of Mephisto, then his soul will be eternally enslaved to the devil. The two depart on a long journey of debauchery and a frivolous pursuit of meaning.
In my reading, I saw some parallels between the Biblical book of Ecclesiastes and Faust’s journey to find meaning. At first, we find out that Faust is very famous in his town and that everyone loves him. In spite of this, he still finds his life lacking something. The same can be said about his studies – they never satisfy him. This is almost perfectly analogous to the first few chapters of Ecclesiastes, especially chapter one verses twelve through eighteen. Yet, in the end, the author of Ecclesiastes is able to find meaning through service to Yahweh, while Goethe paints a more pagan view and derives ultimate meaning through the archetype of the Eternal Feminine.
Though the view of meaning and salvation Goethe paints is different from a traditional Christian one, we can still see that a key moral the story pushes is that meaning cannot be derived solely through material possessions. Faust is given everything under the sun from money, power, fame, and even Helen of Troy – the archetype of beauty herself. Yet nothing earthly satisfies him. This is a common theme in many religions, especially Christianity and Eastern Spirituality.
We also see a striking parallel between Socrates and Faust in regards to their view of death. Before embarking on his journey through life with Mephisto, Faust nearly drinks poison in order to attempt to explore the other side of reality – death. Socrates in his Phaedo, explains that true philosophers should not fear death since it allows the soul to be free from the hindrances of the body, and gives the soul pure freedom in the pursuit of knowledge. Goethe was read in Plato and thus it is not surprising that elements of the Greek Philosopher are a common occurrence.
What exactly is the end result of Faust’s quest for meaning? It seems as though Goethe leaves us with a very unsatisfying answer. Per the discussion above Faust was not able to find meaning through earthly materials, but through what is known as the Eternal Feminine. This concept has roots in Taoism, but the crux of this point is that Faust had to look outside this human domain in order to quench his thirst for meaning. I find this meta concept very similar to a famous quote from C.S. Lewis in which he says, “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.”
Eternal Feminine
In the 19th century, a very ancient philosophical concent reemerged as a common theme throughout literature. The Eternal Feminine is an archetype that defines the core essence of the female through ideal forms of grace, beauty, love, and pureness. Plato is thought to be one of the first thinkers who developed this idea, and thinkers like Jakob Bohme can also be seen embracing it as well.
The Taijitu, or the Yin Yang symbol, is an ancient symbolic representation of the eternal feminine and masculine. However, upon further reflection, I think that the Bagua is a better symbol to understand what occurs in Faust. The Bagua is the symbol for The Tao, better known as “The Way”. It includes a Yin Yang symbol in the middle of it representing the duality of reality – masculine and feminine, better translated as order and chaos. The entire discussion of this concept is outside the scope of this thesis, and for those purposes, I will leave it at that and simply refer to the Bagua in an attempt to better understand what Goethe was trying to convey in his work.
A vital component of the Bagua is the twin serpent Yin Yang symbol. This gives credence to the thought that it is actually through the dual aspects of reality that one can find “The Way” and thus meaning. We certainly see Goethe adhere to this view throughout his piece.
Gretchen, the mother of Faust’s bastard son serves as the representation of the Eternal Feminine. Her beauty, grace, and pureness are affirmed after her execution when she is saved and brought into Heaven. She is the one who, through intercession to the Virgin Mary, saves Faust’s soul from damnation, and is also the reason why Faust loses his bet with Mephisto. Both of these points require further exploration.
Gretchen is known to have interceded for Faust’s sins through prayer to the Virgin Mary (once again similar to Job praying for his sons), and as a result, Faust’s salvation comes not through The Son (Jesus Christ), but through the Eternal Feminine. This concept is entirely pagan and, withholding the one instance with Job – which is also not analogous – has no basis in Christian thought. It appears that Goethe is suggesting that ultimate meaning and salvation come through the Feminine aspect of The Tao.
This is further evidenced by the fact that Faust admits to Mephisto that he wishes he could live in the moment in time he spent with Gretchen, thus saying that he had found meaning through one of Mephisto’s “gifts” and allowing Mephisto to win the bet for Faust’s soul. In more general terms, Faust admitted that the Eternal Feminine was able to satisfy his search for meaning. What is missing is the masculine part of The Tao. Yet it can be argued that God the Father represents this and plays a role at the beginning of the tragedy when He assures Mephisto that Faust’s soul will be saved. The unity of the eternal feminine and masculine forming The Way [to meaning] seem to provide us with a more compelling answer.
There is no doubt that this is a very strange view to hold, one that I cannot do anything but speculate as to why Goethe would even postulate it. Nevertheless, it is fascinating to think about, but at the same time, I also feel as if I’m missing something and will probably come back to this in the future.
Goethe’s Assault on Rationalism
A direct attack on the rationalist school of thought also takes place in Faust. As a member of the Sturm und Drang movement, Goethe believed that emotion was much more important than the rationalist thought processes by which the enlightenment so supported. I see Goethe’s views as similar to those embodied by the Existentialists (Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and so forth). This is due to the huge emphasis put on emotion as being the underlying motivator in human behavior throughout the entire play.
As Faust dances with a witch in the first part of the tragedy, he, when referring to the town critic, says, “…when others dance he’s got to criticize, and if he fails to criticize a step, that step may as well not have been taken.” (Faust 375). Goethe uses the critic as a symbol of the rationalist school of thought and through Faust attempts to show how contradictory to actual reality rationalism is.
The assault on rationalism is evident in two other major speeches in part two. The Chancellor and Neerus both mention the fact that reason alone is not enough to persuade men to act a certain way. It is emotion that drives human behavior. Look at the examples referenced by Neerus – Paris and Odysseus, two of the players in the Greek Epics. Both of these men are given rational advice, yet they fail to follow it and instead pursue their emotions when the consequences are obvious. Granted, the Greek Epics are mythological, but I think that what they do helps us to understand our reality. By reading them we are peering into the condition of human nature. No longer are we in the sheltered world of our own subjectivity, we see what truly motivates people and how they operate. We know that people follow their emotions much more than any rational thought process. This has been the subject of philosophical debate for thousands of years. A modern example of the debate can be found in Thomas Nagel’s Right and Wrong. Nagel argues specifically against the Kantian view that reason alone is not enough to give men sufficient reason to act, and that our own desires and motivations must be taken into account.
Goethe was trying to tell us something when we included these examples in his play. He knew that it was not through careful, and well-thought-out decisions but through wild fluctuating emotional states that people are driven to commit the actions that they do. The tragedy of Faust could not be a more perfect example of that fact.
Archetypes
The Jungian element of Faust is obvious from the get-go. There are four main archetypal characters in the story: Mephisto, Gretchen, The Virgin Mary, and Helen. Each one of them play a vital role in the plotline and also in the development of the character of Faust. As stated previously, Gretchen is the archetype of the Eternal Femine and much more need not be discussed regarding her. The Virgin Mary is the archetype of the suffering mother and plays a more vital role in the Catholic tradition than in this story. A notable expression of the Virgin Mother’s divine role can be seen at the end of part one when Gretchen cries out in suffering to her. We see a suffering mother (Gretchen) cry out to The Suffering Mother.
I would argue that Helen of Troy plays a two part role. Her role as the archetype of beauty is obvious, but on a deeper level she is also the archetype of lust. In every situation where she appears, men flock to do whatever she pleases. Faust is no exception. He pursues Helen at every single turn and does not rest until he finds her. In the pursuit, Faust is blinded by lust and is even willing to kill a man to impress Helen. After Faust has obtained her as an object of his sexual desire, his life remains unfulfilled and eventually worsens and he remains incomplete. A key lesson can be learned from this part of the story – one that should be heeded as well. Lust makes people even more incomplete, though at the moment it promises to fulfill all our desires. It also blinds us to reality. When enticed by lust everything else of significance melts away and only the pathological relationship between the tempter and the tempted exist. The tempted loses all form of reason and only focuses on fulfilling the instant gratification of themself. It is for this reason that lust seems to have close parallels to something pathological.
The Devil himself is undoubtedly the archetype of evil, but Mephisto has a more subtle role that can be overlooked. Throughout the tragedy he acts no different than a [generally] normal human being. This point cannot be emphasized enough. Before opening the book I went in with expectations that Mephisto would be the literal personification of evil himself, and that meant that he would be comitting all sorts of unspeakable horrors. To my suprise, he went about life in a rather boring manner – mostly just pursuing earthly lusts, tempting people into doing stupid things, but rarely doing anything worthy of what the biblical records portray (unleashing war, sickness, famine on the human race) Satan as doing. It seems as if Mephisto is almost boring. Because Mephisto acts in such a way throughout the tragedy, it leads me to believe that Goethe’s portrayal of him seems to be closer to the Jungian archetype of the shadow than anything.
The shadow is essentially the dark side of each person, it’s the suppressed part of our inner selves that few of us want to confront. And for good reason – to see your shadow is to awaken to the real capacities of human nature. This means coming to realize that you aren’t a perfect avatar of goodness and purity, nor are you nearly as good of a person as you think. This can at times seem bleak, but coming to accept your shadow has great benefits.
As will be discussed in a future paper, the acknowledgment of the shadow presupposes the existence of evil in the human heart. It was this Jungian concept that allowed me to fully grasp what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn meant when he said that the line between good and evil cuts through the heart of every man. In us dwells both the potential to do unbelievable good, but also unbelievable horror. When we come to accept the full range of capabilities of ourselves we can stop ourselves from committing evil by recognizing it and then proceed to stand for the good in the face of evil.
The Reluctant Philosopher 
Leave a comment