|
Abstract
This paper examines the ethical view of suicides, physician-aided suicides and euthanasia. Some of the pertinent
arguments and counter-arguments of philosophers and modern thinkers for all forms of suicides have been subjected to scrutiny.
The physician-aided suicide and euthanasia have been explored from the point of view act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism.
The ethical issues have been raised about the defensibility of intentional termination of one’s life from the individual,
social and national viewpoints. Finally, a conclusion has been reached that euthanasia should not be allowed to be practiced
except on the unanimous opinion of a medical board.
What’s Wrong with Euthanasia?
This paper attempts to explore the moral and ethical implications
of suicide, physician-assisted suicide, and active euthanasia. The common factor in them is the deliberate termination of
life before its natural expiry. Some most pertinent questions have been raised
as to the defensibility of all forms of suicides. In probing the issue we examine the opinions of various authorities on this
subject. Suicide cannot be supported except in extremely extenuating circumstances. More often than not, the oppressed and
the misfits in society commit suicide to escape the tyrannies of life. In most cases they can find no silver lining behind
the dark clouds. A suicide always leaves a stigma on the family and the community to which the person belonged. People wonder
and comment that they were not aware that the suicide’s suffering reached such boiling point to make all options closed.
The physician-aided suicide and euthanasia have been explored from the point of view act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism.
All types of self-annihilations may be judged from the
point of view of utilitarianism. According to utilitarianism an action is right if it can promote happiness for the subject.
So pleasure is good and it should be our goal and pain is bad and therefore it
should be avoided. In Jeremy Bentham’s opinion, good is what brings greatest happiness to the greatest number. But due
to inherent contradiction he changed his definition to greatest happiness principle. He follows Epicurus who held happiness
as the goal of human life which came to be known as Classical or Hedonist utilitarianism.
In the opinion of John Stuart Mill, cultural, intellectual and spiritual pleasures are more valuable than the pleasures
of the senses; yet his utilitarianism is regarded hedonistic as it insists on pleasure as goal. The form of utilitarianism
which looks beyond pleasure to virtue, knowledge, love and beauty, is also known as Ideal Utilitarianism. However, in practice
people pursue their self-interest rather than the happiness of the greatest number. But for an act to be right, it has to
be useful, efficient and good. If we apply act-utilitarianism theory to the acts of suicides and euthanasia, we are likely
to be caught up in controversies. The consequences of suicide may not be always harmful. If there is a neurotic patient in
the house for a long period of time, it is likely to have adverse effect on the normal members of the family, particularly
the children who may come to regard the abnormal behavior as normal and may have difficulty growing up as sane and mature
individuals.
Suicide, according to David Hume, is defensible
when age, sickness, or misfortune renders life a burden to oneself and other, and make it worse even than annihilation. He
also believes that no one throws away life that is worth keeping. He argues that any one attempting suicide must have be cursed
with such an incurable depravity or gloominess of temper as must poison all enjoyment and render him miserable with most grievous
misfortunes. Immanuel Kant, however, criticized suicide because will power is used for its own destruction and he also condemned
it on religious ground. But he does admit that it is no suicide to risk one’s life to attack the enemies and thus discharge
one’s duties. Kant preaches the doctrine of self-love and argues if circumstances of life threaten more evil, one is
justified in cutting short his life. If a scientist, for example, is captured by terrorist group and is forced to make nuclear
weapons against his will, he may terminate his life with good reason. But there are others like Aristotle and St
Thomas who believe suicide is an act against one’s
state and community. In cases like Sylvia Plath and Virginia Woolf, their suicide take a high toll on society whereas in other
instances society remain unharmed, though it is a loss to a particular family. Society would be a better place if people are
taught the moral obligation not to end their life on flimsy grounds.
However,
there are extenuating circumstances where suicide is unavoidable. A soldier with knowledge of defense secret of his country
may prefer to kill himself rather divulge the secret to the enemies. When a poor man’s livelihood is taken away, he
is left with no alternative. In the third world we have instances of farmers who grow crop with borrowed money against mortgage.
When the crop fails due to inclement weather, their land, cottage and even household items are seized by the money-lenders.
It is this fear that drives them to suicide, sometimes with the dependant members of their family. When a factory is under
lock-out, the workers cannot find alternative employment. After the borrowing and begging come to a dead end, and starting
a new business becomes impossible for lack of capital, many commit suicide. In these two cases suicide cannot be blamed. The
consequences of their action are always bad. Their surviving wives and children work as laborer or maid-servant for a pittance;
and the children go without education, but the militant trade unions which are responsible for strikes and lock-outs cannot
provide any succor.
The puritans may criticize suicide on principle and as
an act of escape from duties. Can suicidal tendencies then be traced to one’s temperament? In other words, are some
people more prone to suicide? Is it in our genes? Though sentimental and hypersensitive people are more likely to be upset
by the insensitive remarks of family members and close acquaintances, suicidal tendency cannot be called a genetic inheritance.
Too much self-absorption is bad for any individual. Narcissism should not be encouraged as it leads to high expectations and
extreme frustration in the event of failure.
Too much
job stress or pressure of academic studies leads to suicide. In a target-oriented society from the cradle to the grave, stress
cannot be altogether avoided. Individuals must learn how to cope with stress. In good schools and offices there are arrangements
for psychiatric counseling. The problem is compounded by break down in communication. If individuals suffering from depression
cannot give vent to their problems to either their friends or to the counselors, then they are to blame. People who are taciturn
or reserved by temperament often fall prey to suicidal tendencies. Religious upbringing sometimes helps. Children, who are
taught to regard suicide as sinful or as a sign of weak character, may avoid such uncontrolled emotional behavior. Suicide
may be objectively seen as inadequate response to emotional disturbances in one’s personal life. In the technological
age of hectic activities and meeting targets, human relationship becomes the first victim.
Unfulfilled
ambition in the stubborn young men and women may tempt them to take their own lives. In such cases it is either the parents
are too old-fashioned to allow their children choose their career or the children choose a career with little opportunities
to succeed in life. In either case the home and school have a responsible role to play. Another reason for suicide is the
alienation between the children and their parents, particularly when both the parents have no time for the children. When
children feel unloved and insecure, they often behave sentimentally; and small events compel them to consider their life as
failure. The aged parents and grandparents also feel distanced from the mainstream of life and often suffer from acute depression.
In such a case the family is not properly integrated. Women who are introvert by nature suffer the most. Men often offset
their emptiness by all sorts of games and partying.
A very important factor in suicide is the society’s attitude to this problem. It cannot be treated merely as
a problem of an individual. It is the duty of our social and educational institutions to impart some mental training in dealing
with the emotional issues of life – particularly for the emotionally volatile adolescents.
We may examine some typical suicide cases and judge the impact from the
ethical point of view.
Case:1 A frustrated single woman jumps off a high rise building when
her lover is killed in an accident. This is indeed a tragic case, but no one else suffers any loss except the woman. If such
a distressed woman has very warm-hearted relatives and friends, she can absorb the shock and survive to make a fresh start
in life. Society cannot blame lovers who believe in the myth that they are made for each other.
Case:2 An old man who has outlived his friends and relatives finds life dull and not worth living. He cannot share
his thoughts and feelings with men and women of his generation. The values of the current generations seem hollow to him.
In despair he commits suicide. In this case there are few losers; his successors may stand to gain by inheriting his properties,
if any. Since old men are close to death, people may pity such incidents, but are not much moved by it.
Case:3 A spy or agent who works for the intelligence department (e.g., James Bond) and knows the top secret of is country is captured by his enemies. It is matter of concern and even public outrage
if he chooses to kill himself rather
than jeopardize his country’s security. But such suicide may be seen as a martyr or hero. His death is an honorable
death. Such tragedy is a part of the job profile and those who join this service accept it as a challenge. However, same may
not be said for the agent who works for a terrorist group and agrees to use himself as a human bomb in a suicidal attack.
Only religious fanatics defend such barbaric acts.
Case: 4. A responsible bus-driver who loses control of his vehicle and rams it into a concrete structure to avoid
hitting a stranded school bus with children. A worthy case for posthumous award, though technically a suicide. From the point
of view of his bereaved family, his life was equally important to them. If he could jump off before crashing, it is acceptable
to all.
Case: 5. Captain Oates decides to sacrifice his life when caught up in a snow blizzard rather than be a burden
to his fellow-explorers. This is also a case of sacrifice for other people which is morally inspiring. But the fact of forceful
termination stares us in the face.
Case: 6. A religious man with full faith in God’s grace refuses blood transfusion because it would betray
his lack of faith in His power. Many orthodox devotees will admire such steadfast faith, but a more sensible man regards it
as stretching faith too far. God never tells us to neglect medical care. These
cases show the moral and ethical implications of suicide in crucial situations.
Case: 7 Students often commit suicide driven hard by their ambitious parents to become topper. When they fail to
reach this almost impossible goal, they take their life for the fear of not being live up to their expectations. Here the
parents are more to blame as they teach their children wrong values and a stressful life style. There can be happiness in
life without being always the numero uno.
St.Augustine, St.Thomas Acquinas and Immanuel Kant condemn suicide on religious ground. However, R.B.Brandt
and David Hume do not consider suicide to be immoral. Liberal men do not criticize it as long as other people are not much
harmed. A fully insured father unable to cope with stress can commit suicide and may be condoned, but not a father who is
the only bread-winner. Many psychiatrists and philosophers don’t subscribe to the view that suicide is a symptom of
mental illness or incompetence. In the broad sense euthanasia means killing (active euthanasia) and allowing hopeless patients
to die (passive euthanasia). In real life the demarcation line between active and passive euthanasia is very thin. Whether
an orphan child with considerable wealth is allowed to die in a fire which is noticed by his uncle or the uncle himself sets
the fire makes little difference, except from legal point of view. Daniel Callahan however distinguishes between killing and
allowing someone to die by emphasizing the distinction between physical causality and moral culpability. In the narrow sense
it is equated with mercy killing which involves giving a lethal dose of drug to an incurable and hopeless patient. Voluntary
euthanasia may sometimes be defended on the request of the sane and mature patient to liberate him from a life of suffering.
The cost of keeping a terminally ill patient alive may be so high that those who have to foot the bill
may become financially bankrupt. So all the factors should be taken into consideration in before trying euthanasia. But non-voluntary
euthanasia may be fraught with danger. The doctor or the patient’s relatives may misuse it for their financial gain
such as inheritance. Exceptions, however, may be made in cases of Alzheimer patients and or new-born deformed babies on the
advice of a board of medical experts. But orthodox believers don’t accept any such exceptions as birth and death are
believed to be in the jurisdiction of God.
If we follow the rule-utilitarian approach, we have to
oppose suicide and euthanasia as a rule. As this is always neither feasible nor desirable, we have to make allowances for
exceptional cases. In a case where the sole earning member of a family who has a insurance policy, and commits suicide after incurring a huge debt, the sadness of
his death will be neutralized by the relief from the burden of debt in the family. Daniel Callahan opposes euthanasia on the
ground that the job of a physician is to heal a patient, not to kill him. James Rachel and Dan W.Brock approve the legitimacy
of active euthanasia. The arguments in favor of voluntary active euthanasia are that it is inhuman cruelty to ignore the wishes
of a terminally sick patient and also that the autonomy of a mentally sane adult should be respected as far as it does not
interfere with other people’s life and happiness. The arguments against active euthanasia are that killing a patient
itself is inhuman and it is beyond the duty of physicians to kill patients and finally, such killing will end up lessening
respect for human life and may have bad social repercussions.
Physician-aided suicide
is more or less similar in nature. It implies two kinds of help from the physicians. First, the doctor supplies the information
about the ways of terminating one’s life and secondly, he also provides the means -- such as supplying the lethal drug
and aiding and supervising the actual suicide. In two cases in 1997, U.S. Supreme Court rejected the claim of physician-aided
suicide as a fundamental right. A patient undergoing terminal sedation dies either of the disease from which he is suffering
or he dies of dehydration and starvation. However, terminal sedation may be defended because the doctor is trying to relieve
the patient’s suffering, not to kill him. But Orentlicher supports only sedation, not withholding of nutrition and hydration.
Suicide is unlikely to
find social acceptance as it violates the basic human instinct of surviving. It has been noticed that many suicides after
unsuccessful attempts often give up such attempt in future and reform themselves. Attachment to one’s family and the
urge to bring up the next generations are great motivational factors which help people to fight depression. Even concern for
the suffering and disgrace to one’s spouse and children often deter people from making desperate attempt on their lives.
Social censure is another preventive factor. Generally, a member of a family where suicide has taken place is not considered
for certain jobs and also in matters of matrimonial ties. Suicide is associated with violence and violence is not respectable
in a civilized society. Those who support the right to commit suicide, do so on the ground of human freedom. But it is debatable
question whether freedom includes the right to take one’s life. Freedom does not mean license to do what one pleases.
Freedom is subject to the condition that no man can use it to bring destruction to himself. Nor should he allow external forces
to limit it. By jumping on the railway tracks one can end one’s crisis, but the disruption of train service also means
delay and harassment of thousands of working people, students and patients. Suicide at bottom is a narrow-minded goal of an
individual who has for some reasons been isolated from the mainstream of life. He deserves our sympathy and attention, but
never our support. Some right-minded people are deluded into thinking that suicide
is an act of cowardice. Such a sweeping generalization is not correct. The suicides of Cato and Atticus are not cowardly;
on the contrary, in the history of Rome and Greece suicide was honorable.
Ethical questions have been raised about the justification
of active euthanasia, even for the terminally sick patients or patients in coma. A notorious doctor who openly advocated and
practiced euthanasia was found guilty of using unfair means to inherit the wealth of very rich patients. Doctors who practice
physician-aided suicide are unlikely to be popular among the patients in general. Patients may be apprehensive to visit such
doctors for treatment and be suspicious incase their health deteriorates after undergoing his treatment. To common man the
very concept of a doctor playing the role of a killer is horrifying. To the religious-minded taking off life supporting system from such helpless patients would be a sin. But
there are genuine cases of extreme suffering like the incurable cancer patients and the babies with congenitally weak health,
which a team of qualified doctors can perform euthanasia at the request of the patient and his family. As suicides are more
a matter of wrong attitude to life, counseling with sympathy should be tried to change the mindset of those who are keen on
departing prematurely from this planet.
© Dr.Swapan K.Banerjee. 5.5.2007
----------------------------------
References
Mappes, Thomas A. and Degrazia, David (Eds.). (2006) Biomedical
Ethics. McGraw-Hill.
Raphael, D.D. (1981). Moral Philosophy. New York: Oxford U.P.
Singer, Peter. (Ed.) (1986) Applied Ethics. New York: Oxford U.P.
Midsummer
Night’s Dream: Shakespeare’s Absurd Drama
Judged from modern perspective
Shakespeare’s Midsummer Night’s Dream is an absurd play. Its grotesque,
supernatural and ludicrous elements may remind us of the post-war experimental drama of Eugene
Ionesco, Jean Genet, Samuel Beckett and Harold Pinter which came to be known as the Theater of the Absurd. But Shakespeare’s
comedy does not share their incoherent plot and final impression of futility of human existence. Shakespeare has focused not on the absurdity of human life, but on the absurdity of human behavior when they
fall in time – a universal and timeless truth. The keynote of the play
can be found in Theseus’ most well-known speech: “The lunatic, the lover, and the poet,/ are of imagination all
compact:” (5.1.7-8)
The absurdities lie
in the characters and situations of the play. The setting of the nocturnal wood with its magic and mischief make the most
fantastic events seem real to the mesmerized audience. The ludicrous behavior of the pairs of
lovers – Hermia-Lysander, and Demetrius-Helena – proves to be a kind of wild goose chase to fulfill their
passion. The highly intriguing love between Hermia and Lysander takes a serious turn when Hermia is threatened with dire consequences
for deserting Demetrius. The earthly lovers, Theseus and his queen Hippolyta are related to the passionate young lovers –
Lysander, Demetrius, Hermia and Helena. The supernatural couple, Oberon and Titania, is linked to the lovers and Bottom. Even
fairy queen Titania dotes on Bottom with ass head. Under the influence of Puck’s magic potion the confused lovers say
silly things and behave in irresponsible ways only to realize their stupidity in the end. The play within the play “Pyramus
and Thisby” also underscores the irresistible force of youthful love. In spite of the absurdities, Shakespeare’s
comedy does not end with life as a meaningless existence; the final impression is that life is enjoyable despite absurdities.
Work Cited
Craig, W.J.(ed.) Shakespeare: Complete Works. London. O.U.P. 1974
Written, 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representation of Love in
The Book of the Duchess and Troilus and Cressida
Love has many facets
like a diamond. Two major poets, William Shakespeare and Geoffrey Chaucer chose
to treat the themes of love, separation, and betrayal in Troilus and Cressida(1602)
and mourning of beloved’s death in The Book of the Duchess (1369). Under French influence Chaucer wrote the poem to commemorate the death of Blanche,
the duchess of Lancaster and the wife of John Gaunt. He has
used the love-vision effectively as an eulogy on the duchess and as an elegy to express the husband’s grief. Shakespeare’s
tragedy is based on Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde which in turn is borrowed
from Boccaccio’s Filostrato.
Chaucer expresses real feeling of disappointment in love with vivid imagination. Plagued by insomnia, the poet reads the romance
of a king who died leaving behind his unhappy queen. His vision of “A wonder wel-farynge knight--/of the age of foure
and twenty yer”(ll.52-53) and the poet’s final awakening: “As
hyt hadde smyten houre twelve.-/Therwyth I awook myselve/ And fond me lyinge in my bed;/ And the book that I hadde red,/ of
Alcione and Seys the king” (ll.1323-1327) As we compare and contrast these
two tragic love stories we discover more dissimilarity in the poets’ treatment of love. In Shakespeare’s play
the motif of love is eclipsed by the business of war between the Trojans and the Greeks.
Both
the lovers, Troilus and the knight, deeply mourn the separation and ultimate loss of their love. To them love is inseparable
from faith. Troilus has a rendezvous with Cressida arranged by her uncle to unite the lovers. But he is too overwhelmed to
speak whereas Cressida is canny enough to
know love’s folly. Though she vows to be faithful to Troilus for ever, it goes against her grain. Troilus’ love begins with a passionate declaration to Pandarus: “ I tell thee I am mad /In Cressid’s
love.” (Troilus.1.1.53-54) But Cressida is shrewdly aware of not only “Words,
vows, gifts, tears, and love’s full sacrifice”(1.2.306), she is also armed with
knowledge of human nature: “Women are angels, wooing/ Things won are done; joy’s soul lies in the doing:…Men
prize the ungain’d more than it is:” (1.2.310-13) The vow of their constancy in love is sealed by Pandarus: “If
ever you prove false one to another, since I have taken such pains to bring you together, lt all pitiful goers-between be
called to the world’s end after my name: call them Pandars; let all constant men be Troiluses, all false women Cressids,
and all brokers-between Pandars!”(3.2.206-211) Though the lovers talk about faith and steadfastness in glowing terms,
Cressida at least admits, “..to be wise and love /Exceeds man’s might; that dwells with gods above.”(3.2.163-64)
At
the end Troilus is upset by the treachery of Cressida giving away his gift to her new lover Diomedes and exclaims: “O
beauty! Where is thy faith?”(5.2.65) But we must not lose sight of the fact that Cressida is no Juliet; she can mock at the contradiction between a lover’s promise and performance even as
she takes such a vow: “They say all lovers swear more performance than they are able, and reserve an ability that they
never perform;” (3.2.89-91) As object of love and adoration the “false
wench” can hardly hold candle to the unforgettable duchess. Cressida’s love is very complex: she is always aware
of her flighty nature ( “O pretty, pretty, pledge!”) and confesses it from time to time. She hands over Troilus’
gift to her new lover: “’T was one’s that loved me better than you will/But now you have it, take it.”(5.2.86-87)
Later she rationalizes her philandering as an incorrigible weakness of female sexuality. But Troilus refutes her fallacy:
“Let it not be believed for womanhood! Think we had mothers;” (5.3.126) His soul is caught up in a strange inner
turmoil which he is unable to resolve. By contrast the knight’s tale of mourning looks too simplistic. It is a presentation of Chaucer’s dream versus Shakespeare’s reality.
Both the love stories are sad and a melancholy
broods over them. The hopes of both the knight and Troilus remain unfulfilled
in the end. Chaucer’s hero is a tall handsome knight of twenty-four. When begged by the poet to share his sorrow, he
communicates that nothing can alleviate sorrow as perfidious Fortune has taken his Queen at chess and he is lost forever:
“I am sorwe and sorwe is I”(Duchesse.l.597) He fell in love with an
attractive dancer with face of captivating charm, and her voice soft and sweet;
her neck “smothe, streght, and flat”. She is virtuous and versatile. All his sufferings vanish in her presence.
When he musters enough courage to declare his love, the lady turns it down. After a year of disappointment, the chivalrous
knight proposes again and the lady reacts positively: “So whan my lady knew al this,/ My lady yaf me al hooly/ The noble
yift of her mercy.”(ll. 1768-1770)
His marital life is full of bliss till she dies. The poet is dismayed to hear of this tragic loss.
Shakespeare’s love story is told in the
backdrop of seven years’ war whereas the Chaucer seems to have met the knight in mourning in a forest setting. A parallel
may be found in Keats’ La Belle Dame Sans Merci. John Dryden comments on
Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida: “If Shakespeare were stripped of
all the bombasts in his passion, and dressed in the most vulgar words, we should find the beauties of his thoughts remaining;”(Andrews.19)
The beauty of a noble sentiment is also present in Chaucer’s tale. In style Troilus’ story has the necessary dramatic
tension as Cressida’s father has defected to the enemy camp. The Book of the
Duchess is, however, a plain narrative of desertion, desolation of a disconsolate knight. There is no obstacle or conflict
in the latter. In Chaucer’s story the hero’s lament is full of pathos as he is discovered in black leaning against
an oak : “.And far-wel, swete, my worless blisse!/ I praye god your sorwe lisse;/To litel whyl our blisse lasteth!”
(ll.209-211), but Shakespeare lover is betrayed by his lady who once vowed unflinching
love and steadfastness in the presence of her uncle.
Chaucer’s hero blames Fortune for playing a cruel trick on him – a belief we find in Thomas
Hardy’s novels. As the knight laments: “My boldness ys turned to shame/ For fals Fortune hath played a
game” (ll.617-18) While Troilus is as love-sick as the knight, his tragedy
mainly springs from his obsessive love for a woman whose coquettish nature would not let her be a faithful wife. There are
many ups and downs in the amorous relationship between Troilus and Cressida because of the arrival of a rival named Diomedes.
This stands in sharp contrast to the knight’s declaration: “Now that I see my lady bright,/ Which I have loved
with al my might.”(ll.477-78) There is also humor in Chaucer’s tale,
such as the poet’s mistaking the lady for “queen”, a piece in the game of chess. But Shakespeare’s
tragedy is a grim story of inconstancy in love and unfaithfulness.
While steadfastness in love is the cause of the
knight’s suffering in Troilus and Cressida,
lack of heroine’s steadiness brings about the hero’s depression. In Romeo
and Juliet Shakespeare shows us the intensity of love, in Troilus and Cressida
he demonstrates the futility of vows and pledges in the face of fleeting passion. Cressida represents the false woman who
easily switches her affection to a new person when she meets with obstacles.
Troilus
and Cressida stands for the universal tragedy of betrayal in love. Chaucer, a budding poet, tells the story of eternal
love as a vision in a flat way – except the surprise at the end about the death of the knight’s beloved wife,
“She ys ded!” “Nay!” “Yis, bi my trouthe!”(Duchess.l.1309) The common theme of despair in love is contrasted by the uncommon ways of
requital by the respective heroines.
Work Cited
Andrews, W.T. (ed.). Critics on Shakespeare. London. George Allen&
Unwin.1973
Craig, W.J.(ed.) Shakespeare: Complete Works. London.
O.U.P. 1974
Morrison, Theodre.(ed)
The Portable Chaucer. Canada.
The Viking Press.1949
Robinson, F.N.(ed.). The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer.London.O.U.P.1974
Written, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milton’s
Paradise Lost: The Story of Satan’s Power Politics
In Paradise Lost,
Book I & II the power struggle between Satan, his followers on the one hand
and God and his angels on the other provides a good story with dramatic conflict.
In Book I Satan “who durst defy the Omnipotent to arms” emerges as leader of a rebel group who are overwhelmed
by their first defeat but not totally overcome. As a punishment of his ambition and audacity, Satan and his comrades were
“hurled headlong from the ethereal sky …to bottomless perdition.” (Bk.I.l.45)
Like a statesman with strategic insight he converts this defeat as a springboard for the next
battle and accordingly inspires his followers with a thunderous call: “What though the field be lost?/All is not lost:
the unconquerable will,/ And study of revenge, immortal hate,”(ll.105-07)
He instills a confidence in his comrades that victory and defeat are in the hands of the fighters. So his clarion call to
his army is addressed to boost their morale and shake off their depression: “Awake, arise, or be for ever fallen!”.
(l.330) There is also the hint that the first battle was lost due to lack of experience
and a inadequate strategy. Moreover, the strength of the enemy (the Almighty) was also not known. Now with hindsight they
can formulate a better strategy for an embarking on a war that can end only in triumph. Besides, he has a worthy lieutenant
in Beelzebub who has great admiration for the general and mobilize the army. The story of struggle between the ambitious and
scheming Satan and the Almighty has all the ingredients of a good plot-- a bold and strong anti-hero as the protagonist, the
vivid descriptive and narrative power, the sublime epic style, the dramatic dialogues and the technique of beginning the story
in the middle of action. Nine days after their expulsion from the bliss of Heaven, Satan and his followers lie stupefied in
the burning lake of Hell.
Then he rises and awakens his worthy Second-in-Command to lead his army to the scorching dry land and hold a meeting to devise
the winning strategy. Presently, a vast council chamber is built to hold a conference
of the great Angels. Readers’ attention is arrested by the suspense about the nature of
crime for which such harsh punishment has been meted out to them. Members of Satan’s inner circle – Moloch,
Belial and Mammon -- offer their opinions, but it is Beelzebub’s suggestion about secretly ruining God’s new creation
that is accepted as a fitting revenge against the Almighty. As none offers to undertake this perilous task, Satan volunteers to take the voyage to the earth after passing through the Hell
gate and Chaos. Milton has used flash back technique to present earlier events with the help of dreams, reminiscences
and conversations (in Books V-VIII) It seems in Satan Milton has subconsciously created a character for whom he feels sympathy
and admiration. But C.S. Lewis refutes this view in A Preface to Paradise Lost:
“It may mean that Milton’s presentation of him
is a magnificent poetical achievement which engages the attention and excites the admiration of the reader.” (Lewis.94)
The
setting of Hell is an integral part of Milton’s epic
style. It is appropriate as place for punishment of the expelled angels. But
Satan with his ingenuity turns it into an advantage by erecting a vast palace called Pandemonium. There he hatches the conspiracy
to destroy God’s creation. Hell also highlights the change of scenario for the angels who have fallen from grace. Milton gives us a vivid account of the flaming hell without light and
the miserable plight of the fallen angels writhing in pain. The vanquished followers of Satan “who lay entranced/ thick
as autumnal leaves that strow the brooks.”(ll.301-02). Milton further portrays them “with looks/ downcast and
damp … have found their chief/ not in despair, to have found themselves not lost/ in loss itself;” (ll.522-26)
To the dejected followers comes the uplifting call “Cherub and Seraph rolling
in the flood/ with scattered arms and ensign,” The congregation of the fallen angels at Pademonium is described with
due pomp: “Of trumpets loud and clarions be upreared/ his mighty standard
(ll.532-33) The fighting spirit of the downcast and damp followers are raised with
the help of sonorous metal blowing martial sounds and ten thousand colorful banners
fluttering in the wind and serried shields in thick array convey the impression of the preparation of a counter attack. “The
imperial ensign…with gems and golden luster rich emblazed,/ Seraphic arms and trophies:(ll.538-39). We get a grand impression of Satan “in shape and gesture proudly eminent/ stood like a tower”
(ll.590-91) “his face/ deep
scars of thunder had intrenched … under brows of dauntless courage, and considerable pride” (ll.600-603) The wealth of details truly conforms to the epic tradition and adds to its grandeur. Millions of rebellious
spirits thus stand suffering silently with loyalty and devotion to their commander even after being flung from their eternal
splendor, “driven out of bliss, condemned/ in his abhorred deep to utter woe;/ where pain of unextinguishable fire”
(Bk.II.ll.86-88). Satan’s makes a dramatic escape from Hell with a view to
covertly strike God by sabotaging his beautiful creation. However, according to F.R. Leavis, “After the first two books,
magnificent in their simple force (party politics in the Grand Style Milton can compass), Paradise
Lost, though there are intervals of relief, becomes dull and empty: ‘all,’ as Raleigh says, ‘is power, vagueness, and grandeur.’ Milton’s inadequacy to myth, in fact, is so inescapable…”(Leavis 61)
If the setting of Paradise Lost is changed, we have a new story. In modern era a person of
Satan’s caliber would be hailed as an irrepressible leader of the opposition party in a country with democratic
set up. His goal would be to dislodge the ruling party in power in the election. He would aim to convince people by highlighting
the government’s failures and underestimating its achievement. Naturally, there would neither be God nor Satan, neither
Heaven nor Hell, neither angels nor devils in the new scenario. The ambition to rule would not be regarded a punishable offence.
Examples and parallels abound. Many countries in Asia now have militant groups of separatists who declare themselves as “Liberation
Force” that wage armed battles against their own government for freedom and autonomy (naming them would be unwise).
Satan’s role has affinity with a militant trade union leader who sometimes, like Lech Walesa in Poland, can win election and become
the President. In stead of brute force the opposition leader uses his political strategies and communication skill to convince
majority of the voters that the ruling party is at fault and their country will be safer in the hands of his political party.
In
U.K. the Labor party won the election
overthrowing their rival Tories in 1994 under the leadership of Tony Blair. It is the business of the opposition to pick holes
in the performance of the ruling party. He would criticize their policies, attack their inefficiency, expose their corruption
and project them as responsible for country’s backwardness. He would offer better plans and strategies to get the country
out of the mess. He does not have to fight physically to defeat his rival like Satan, but the methods of attack have much resemblance. As Satan says: “our better part remains/ to work in close design, by
fraud or guile,” (Bk.I.ll.645-46) and his continual emphasis on victory:
“For who can think submission? War then, war/ open or understood must be resolved.” (ll.661-62) The opposition leader often resorts to disparaging remarks and undermining the image of his rival as
Satan debunks God, “Who now triumphs, and in excess of joy/ sole reigning holds the tyranny of heaven.” (ll.123-24)
The political rival is presented as oppressor. The main difference is that in Milton’s
world there no neutral voters who decide the fate of the leaders. It is God and his angels are in power, and Satan and his
ambitious followers endeavor to dethrone Him. Like real life politics there are fence-sitters and defectors in Paradise Lost. The rebel leaders’ meeting in Book II to discuss and debate their strategies has a parallel
in modern politics. It may be argued that Milton’s religious
epic still have relevance in a secular world. Satan’s story is everyman’s search for power and his struggle to
gain it.
The underlying theme of Satan’s
struggle against God and his angels is that of search for power and motivate
a demoralized group of fallen angels and a determination to sacrifice everything
to conquer Heaven and rule it. As Satan proclaims: “to be weak is miserable,/ Doing or suffering:” (ll.157-58) “To wage by force or guile eternal war,/ Irreconcileable to our grand foe,” (ll.121-22)
The
main characters, the epic style, the inspiring speech, and the preparation for a “perpetual war” all help to develop
the theme of pursuit of power and the use all means to get it. Satan shows the right mindset of a winner who would not accept
anything short of victory as he speaks candidly about it: “To reign is
worth ambition, though in Hell:/ Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.”(Bk.I.ll.262-63)
Satan represents the freedom-loving individualist who also demonstrates great pragmatic sense by adapting himself to the harsh
realities of Hell and consoles himself with his psychological insight: “The
mind is its own place, and in itself/ Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.” (Bk.I.ll.254-255)
Work Cited
Lewis, C.S. A Preface
to Paradise Lost. London.
O.U.P. 1984
Leavis, F.R. Revaluation.
Harmondsworth. Penguin.1972
Abrams, M.H. & Greenblatt, Stephen. The Norton Anthology of English Literature.(7th ed) New York.
W.W.Norton & Co. 2001. pp.722-764
Written, 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde: A Freudian Analysis
Abstract
Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde
can be subjected to Freudian psychoanalytic theory to explore the ‘thorough and primitive duality of man’ and
bring out its psychological significance. The story stimulates horror or primordial
fear repressed in society as well as a respectable individual’s problem of coming to terms with the Id. Stevenson wrote
this ‘fine bogey tale’ based on a strange nightmare, but its classic stature owes to his wife, Fanny who helped
him transform it into a philosophical probe into the dark recesses of human soul. The bright and the dark side of the same
personality – Dr.Jekyll and Edward Hyde – are the Super-ego and the
Id, according to Freudian theory of the superstructure. Though the forbidden pleasures are enjoyed by the Ego, Dr.Jekyll cannot
participate in it. So, he invokes the Id in him – Edward Hyde -- who enjoys his suppressed instincts and aggression
to the hilt. But the wanton activities of the Id are put under a scanner by Utterson, Dr.Lanyon
and Enfield, the puritan conscience of civilized society –
the Super-ego. The ego of Dr.Jekyll more and more enjoys the uninhibited escapades of
his Id – Hyde’s trampling of the little girl, murder of the father figure, Sir Danvers Carew, but he is
embarrassed to acknowledge Hyde’s existence owing to social respectability – ‘the imperious desire to carry
my held high, and wear more than commonly grave countenance before the public’. In the tug-of–war between the
Id and the Super-ego, it’s the Id that gets the better of the ego – a façade that tries to grapple the conflict
between the instincts and civilization, and put an end to the ‘profound duplicity of life’. Jekyll’s conscience,
the weakened Super-ego grows too ineffective to control the Id’s domination and the penchant for ‘dual life’.
According to Stephen heath, male sexuality is emphasized, women marginalized and consciousness overvalued. Elaine Showalter
cites many case histories of multiple personality disorder. The fate of Dr.Jekyll’s experimentation with the Id has
the same result as Frankenstein’s: the creation (devil) kills his creator.
----------------------------------------
Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde: A Freudian Analysis
Robert
Louis Stevenson’s Strange Case of
Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde can be subjected to Freudian psychoanalytic theory to
explore the ‘thorough and primitive duality of man’ and bring out its psychological significance. The story stimulates
the horror or primordial fear repressed in society as well as a respectable individual’s problem of coming to terms
with the Id. Stevenson
wrote this ‘fine bogey tale’ based on strange nightmare, but its classic stature owes to his wife, Fanny who helped
him transform it into a philosophical probe into the dark recesses of human soul. But he suffers from a Freudian slip when
we find that in his nouvella women play no significant role. They are marginalized either as little girl trampled, or a maid-servant,
witness to Hyde’s crime. Only the male sexuality has been emphasized. Dr.Jekyll and Edward Hyde are the projection of Stevenson’s desire for a dual life – one by the day and another by the night.
According to Elaine Showalter, fin-de-siecle was the golden age of literary and
sexual double life, and ‘Stevenson was
the fin-de-siecle laureate of the double life.’(p.106) She cites
many case histories of multiple
personality disorder. A French young man named Louis V. who abruptly turned violent, greedy and quarrelsome apparently without
reason from a normal boy of mild temperament. But under hypnosis it was revealed that he was frightened by a viper and was
finally cured. While neurotics negatively repress their instincts, according to Freud, leading to nervous illness and hysteria,
perverts more energetically put their desires into practice.(p.120) She also makes a comparative study of many commercial
film versions which inducted sensual women characters to satisfy Hyde’s
libido. But in Stevenson’s story, Hyde is not guilty of sexual offences,
but of cruelty, hypocrisy and ‘a certain impatient gaiety of disposition.’
(Stevenson.60) Hyde represents the Id and struggles for freedom from the conditioning of society and religion – an expression
of Stevenson’s revolt against his own strict upbringing. He is nothing but the embodiment of Jekyll’s subconscious repressed desires – a fact revealed by his sanction of Hyde’s forgery
and ruthless acts of trampling, murder and his final will. According to Stephen Heath, male sexuality is emphasized, women
marginalized and consciousness overvalued.
The Id is the great unconscious consisting of the deep-seated instinctive
drive, the great reservoir of libido . It serves as the hinterland of passions and instincts. It is governed by pleasure and
therefore is unmoral, illogical and full of repressed desires. Dr.Jekyll as Ego or façade, shuttles between his baser parts,
the Id, and his conscience, the Super Ego. And in this tussle between the good and the evil, the Id destroys the good. As
his will power grows weaker, the Ego fails to return to his good self; slipping into the evil no longer requires his volition
– it’s forced act. As the Ego, Jekyll is a respectable doctor, therefore cannot fulfill his secret, repressed
desires. The Ego is the part of personality which deals with the external world. Its lower portion merges into the Id. While a part of it is conscious, its other part is unconscious.
From it proceed the repressions, the holding in check of the superior strength of the Id.
Just as instincts play a great role in the Id, so perception plays an important role in the case of the Ego. It is plagued
by three dangers: the external world, the libido of the Id and the severity of the Super-ego. An important function of the
Ego is to induce the Id to modify or renounce some of its urges. Dr.Jekyll gradually loses control over the Id and we find
Hyde go berserk every time he goes out in the world. When the Ego-Id conflict is not resolved, neurosis is the result. However,
without the warfare of the Ego and the Id, life would be pretty dull and monotonous. So Jekyll
invokes the Id in him – Edward Hyde who indulges in his suppressed instincts and aggression to the hilt. In the
introduction to Everyman’s Library edition Nicholas Rance connects Freud to Stevenson’s book: ‘Obviously,
though, if Freud’s theories were correct, the phenomenon of the “return of the repressed” existed prior
to being labeled, and Freud recurrently complimented poets, novelists and philosophers whose intuitions anticipated his theories.
Freud does not seem to have read Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, but doubtless would have been interested.’(Stevenson.p.xi)
The image of the door recurs, sometimes withholding the secret of
Hyde; and its breaking down signifies divulging it. According to Stephen Heath, Jekyll is Je
(I) kill; Hyde, the hidden beast with his ape-like tricks. Jekyll lets out the beast because, according to Freud, those who
comply with the demands of civilization beyond a point and struggle to be noble-minded, fall victims to neurosis. Jekyll’s
drug unleashes the ‘suppression of perverse instincts’ and destroys the Super-ego. As neurosis is the negative
of perversions, men remain sexually healthy but immoral; but women trying to be high-minded turn neurotic. The metaphors associated with Hyde are those of abnormality, criminality, disease, contagion and death.’(Showalter.112)
To learn about Jekyll-Hyde’s secret leads to death, as it destroys Dr.Layon,
for example. Often multiple personality disorder patients are sexually abused
children who shut a part of themselves in the unconscious.
Another Freudian truth
emerges with Jekyll turning hostile to the father figures. As the Ego surrenders more and more to Id, Hyde attacks the portraits
and the library of Dr.Jekyll, his creator, seeking total independence from him. In chapter four another elderly father figure,
Sir Danvers Carew, the kind M.P’s horrible murder by Hyde is described : ‘And next moment, with ape-like fury,
he was trampling his victim under foot, and hailing down a storm of blows, under which the bones were audibly shattered and
the body jumped upon the roadway. (Stevenson.23) The
father figure stands for the authority against which the Id revolts and tries to remove it as a hindrance. Hysterical men
are effeminate. Homosexuality represented a doubled life. Stevenson himself dreamed of a doubled life – one of the day
and one of the night. Many critics have remarked on the maleness or even monasticism of the story. Jekyll protects Hyde as
a minion. The drawing up of Jekyll’s will to bequeath his properties is highly significant as it shows his real intention:
he apprehends that returning from the Id to the Ego is becoming increasingly difficult and soon it may be impossible which
is narrated: “in case of the decease of Henry Jekyll, M.D., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., & c., all his possessions were
to pass into the hands of his ‘friend and benefactor Edward Hyde’; but that in case of Dr Jekyll's ‘disappearance
or unexplained absence for any period exceeding three calendar months’.(Stevenson.10) The merger of identities is further
suggested by Jekyll’s instruction that Hyde should step into his shoes without further delay. His willingness to remain
in the form of Hyde is an affirmation of Id’s
dominance over the ego and the Super-ego. Hyde guards himself against the suspicion
and inquisitiveness of Utterson who is shocked to discover that Hyde has complete access to Jekyll’s house. The
Id has eclipsed the Ego. Faced with scrutiny, Hyde goes underground to escape the public eyes. Yet the Super-ego in Jekyll is not totally annihilated. As he confesses in the final chapter: ‘Many a man would have even blazoned such
irregularities as I was guilty of; but from the high views that I had set before me, I regarded and hid them with an almost
morbid sense of shame.’(Stevenson.60) The Super-ego is and outgrowth of the Ego and its modification. It is always in
close touch with the Id and acts as its representative in relation to the Ego. Its main function as conscience is to instill
in the Ego a sense of guilt. The mature Ego remains subject to Super-ego domination. In this story there are moments when
he decides to lead a normal life of the doctor and eschews ‘the thorough
and primitive duality of man.’
But the wanton activities of the Id are put under a scanner by Utterson,
Dr.Lanyon and Enfield, the puritan representatives
of civilized society – the Super-ego. The ego of Dr.Jekyll more and more enjoys the uninhibited escapades of his Id – Hyde’s trampling of the little girl, murder of the father figure, Sir Danvers Carew,
but he is embarrassed to acknowledge Hyde’s existence owing to social respectability – ‘the imperious desire
to carry my held high, and wear more than commonly grave countenance before the public’. Anybody who acquires knowledge
about Hyde soon meets death. Dr.Layon, Dr.Jekyll’s estranged friend, dies in mysterious circumstances: ‘He had
his death-warrant written legibly upon his face. The rosy man had grown pale; his flesh had fallen away; he was visibly balder
and older; and yet it was not so much these tokens of a swift physical decay that arrested the lawyer's notice, as a look
in the eye and quality of manner that seemed to testify to some deep-seated terror of the mind.’ (Stevenson.33)
.
In the tug-of–war between
the Id and the Super-ego, it’s the Id that gets the better of the ego – a façade that tries to resolve the conflict
between the instincts and civilization -- and put an end to the ‘profound duplicity of life’. Jekyll’s conscience,
the weakened Super-ego grows too ineffective to control the Id’s domination and return to ‘dual life’. Even
his butler, Pool suspects: ‘I think there's been foul play’(Stevenson.39).
Readers can identify the
protagonist’s eternal conflict between impulses and reason by sympathy or empathy. In the nineteenth century the belief
in the ‘higher self’ and ‘lower self’ was not unknown, but Stevenson gave it a new dimension by imparting
psychological insight that ‘man is not truly one, but truly two’. The Id and the Super-ego play a hide-and-seek
game with Dr.Jekyll, ‘so profound a double-dealer’, killing him in
the end and this tragedy is best interpreted in the light of Freud’s psychoanalytic
theory.
---------------------------------------------
Work Cited
Heath Stephen. “Psychopathia Sexualis: Stevenson’s Strange Case”, Critical Quarterly.Vol.28.Nos.1&2
Jastrow, Joseph. Freud: His Dream and Sex Theories, Canada: Greenberg, 1946
Showalter, Elaine. The Sexual Anarchy. Harmondsworth: Penguin,
1991
Stevenson, R.L. Dr.Jekyll
and Mr.Hyde and Other Stories. London:
Everyman’s Library, 1992
Written, 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Travelogue as Social Commentary
A travelogue like Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) explores the culture, customs and
the rituals of the imaginary lands which caricature contemporary English society, it serves as documents of social commentary
in the same way as Chaucer’s The
Canterbury Tales (1386-1400) have some observations on the social conditions of people of his time. These two texts have
been compared and contrasted for their comparative analysis and criticism of contemporary societies. If Swift’s intention
of writing Gulliver’s Travels was to vex the world rather than divert it, then he has successfully created
a satirical masterpiece which is both universal and topical in scope. But Chaucer’s The
Canterbury Tales is more universal and less topical in nature.
Parallels may found between the historical and political events of the eighteenth century and the incidents in Gulliver's
Travels. The first attack on the quality of
the contemporary politics is to be found in the publisher Sympson’s (a fictitious character) preface to the reader in
which he recommends the book as “a better entertainment to our young noblemen
than the common scribbles of politics and party.” (Norton.973)The veracity of
Gulliver’s observations and description is also confirmed in the publisher’s note: “the only fault
I find is, that the author, after the manner of the travellers, is a little circumstantial.” (Norton.973) The controversy
arises about this political fantasy as to whether Swift reflected his own views on politics and religion or whether these
are only the views of his fictional character Gulliver. This dystopia is regarded as a satire on politics, intelligentsia, manners
and morality of England and Ireland
in his day . Political offices were offered by English King on the basis of lobby. The Treasurer
of the Lilliputians, Flimnap, reminds us of Sir Robert Walpole, the Prime Minister
of England. Dancing on tight ropes represents Walpole's political
and diplomatic skill in parliamentary affairs. The three fine silk threads awarded stand for the various prizes awarded by
English King to his favorites. The contemporary conflict between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants is reflected in the
fight between the Big Endians and the Little Endians. Queen Anne’s displeasure at Swift’s A Tale of the Tub has been satirized in the Little empress’s
indignation at Gulliver extinguishing the fire at her palace. King Brobdingnag’s disparaging comments on English history
is nothing but a series of conspiracies, rebellions, murders, revolutions and banishments. If we compare Swift with Chaucer,
we find his The Canterbury Tales surprisingly
lacking in faithful rendering of social realities. There is no mention of any war with France and their breaking away from the English yoke in 1378. Hardly any allusion
is made to either the uprising of the oppressed peasantry or the religious schism that divided England. In spite of Chaucer’s
participation in the military and diplomatic events, we find no mention of Richard
II’s deposition by his cousin Henry of Lancaster. Only in the description of the young squire in the Prologue (ll.85-88) we find reference to the great national war. Because of
scant interest in war he sends away his soldier, the Knight, to fight
in foreign lands. Chaucer does not show much interest in either the troubles or turmoil of his country, or in its triumphs.
All we get to know about the terrible plague of his time is from the physician who made money in the Pardoner’s Tale and that thousands died of the epidemic. Chaucer emerges more universal than topical in
The Canterbury Tales. But Chaucer has drawn the pilgrims from various stations of life and their speeches and behavior are very appropriate to their vocations.
In Part III the voyage to Leputa the flying island echoes the English exploitation of the Irish and a satire
on Newtonian mathematics: “The place is stored with great variety of sextants, quadrants, telescopes, astrolabes, and
other astronomical instruments.” (Swift.191) The Grand Academy of Lagado is undisguised parody on extravagance of the
Royal Society, “Every room hath in it one or more projectors, and I believe I could not be in fewer than five hundred
rooms,” and the absurdity of research is mocked. “to reduce human excrement to original food.” (Swift.209)
New criticism, literary and historical, is satirized in Gulliver’s voyage to Glubbdubdrib. Voyage to Luggnagg only deepens
profound disillusion about the future of mankind. We are greatly amused by the useless experiments and researches, which are
going on at the academy of Projectors
in Lugado. In contrast the priest and other religious figures found in The Canterbury Tales are depicted as individuals, yet they
show some traits of their profession. Corruption in the church is exposed. The Church is guilty of ostentation of wealth while all the time glorifying poverty
and suffering for the sake of God. The churchmen are known to accept bribes, and bribe others for gain. They indulge in the
pleasures of the senses just like laymen. The monk is seen to be biased against the Pardoner. In Part II dwarfish Gulliver’s
microscopic vision discovers the “most pernicious race of little vermin” and then referring to Berkley’s
Theory of Vision (1709) adds philosophically, “Undoubtedly, philosophers
are in the right when they tell us, nothing is great or little otherwise than by comparison.” (Norton. 1015)
Chaucer’s tales are like
modern best-sellers aimed to entertain the pilgrims on their way and to relieve them of the boredom of their journey. Therefore,
they are full of murder violence, cheating, adulteries, and other immoral actions. But they give us a broad canvass of life
with broadminded morality seasoned with good humor. The lying, cheating and hypocrisies are a part of human nature (as Swift
demonstrates) which is more universal than a reliable picture of contemporary life.
Work Cited
Abrams, M.H. and Greenblatt, Stephen (eds.) The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 7th Ed. New York.
W.W.Norton & Co. 2001. pp.173-276; 966-1118
Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver’s
Travels and Other Writings. N.York.Bantam.2005
May 27, 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment of Knowledge in Doctor Faustus and Everyman
Knowledge plays a key role in Medieval anonymous play Everyman
as well as Marlow’s Doctor Faustus.
Dr.Faustus, the tragic hero, uses knowledge as a means to obtaining worldly power
and wealth. Having been dissatisfied with knowledge of theology and other academic subjects that enrich the mind, he aspires
for knowledge of black magic and
witchcraft, that would give him enormous ability. So, with the help of Valdes and Cornelius, two dabblers in witchcraft, he reaches out to ‘cursed necromancy’ as an alternative short cut to power.
As in Macbeth the external temptations have control over Dr.Faustus because they tend to fulfill his secret ambition. To reach his goal Faustus, ‘swollen with cunning of a self-conceit’
does not hesitate to sell his soul to Mephistophilis for twenty-four years of supernatural powers. After rejecting all subjects
as unworthy of achieving immortal fame, he becomes romantically obsessed with ‘metaphysics of the magicians’ and
hastily concludes: ‘A sound magician is a demi-god.’ (I.1.63). The futility of his
misdirected ambition is described in the Prologue: ‘His waxen wings
did mount above his reach, / And melting, heavens conspired his overthrow;’ (Pro.20-21) William Hazlitt comments on Dr.Faustus, ‘This character may be considered as a personification of
the pride of will and eagerness of curiosity, sublimed beyond the reach of fear and remorse.’ (Maclure.78). The
wisdom of the Old Testament is meant for such persons whose excessive curiosity leads them astray: ‘For with much wisdom
comes much sorrow; / the more knowledge, the more grief.’ (Ecclesiastes:1.18) Edward Dowden comments on his all-consuming
passion: ‘All the secrets of Nature and of Fate he desires to penetrate, but not in order that he may contemplate their
mysteries in philosophic calmness, not that he may possess his soul in the serene light of ascertained primal truths; rather
it is for the lordship over men and things which knowledge places in his hands that he chiefly desires it.’(Maclure.107) In sharp contrast to Doctor Faustus, Knowledge in Everyman is the sister of Good Deeds and it means the consciousness
of one’s sins. In this allegory of personified virtues and vices, Knowledge is a steadfast guide to accompany Everyman
through suffering till his death. Therefore, Knowledge in his case becomes a
liberator and helps him fight the Devil and his temptations.
As a seeker of knowledge Dr.Faustus is bold and unconventional. He takes the risk of an experimenter to expand the horizon of his knowledge. Commonplace
knowledge is tedious to him; he seems to be one of those for whom the sky is the limit. He seeks the excitement of innovations
and discovery of new things. Though tormented by the conflict in his soul, he makes his own decisions and suffers the consequences.
Above all, he uses knowledge to transcend the limitations of this earthly existence. But Knowledge leads Everyman to Confession
and seek God’s grace and ‘kneel down and ask mercy, / For he is in good conceit with God almighty.’
In terms of knowledge,
the goals and aspirations of Dr.Faustus are contrary to Everyman in every respect.
Everyman is humble and content with the conventional knowledge and shares the common virtues and vices of ordinary man. Valdes
and Cornelius lure Dr.Faustus about the power of magic and its glory: ‘The miracles that magic will perform/ Will make
thee vow to study nothing else.’ (I.137-38). Dr.Faustus jumps into the fray for earthly power and glory and is further tempted about ‘all the wealth that our forefathers hid/ within the massy entrails of the
earth.’ (I.1.147-48) He is a typical Renaissance scholar gone astray. His craze for fame and material wealth goads him to dream of impossible tasks: ‘Ransack the
oceans for orient pearl/ …And chase the Prince of Parma from our land/ And reign sole king of all the provinces,’
(I.1.84-95). As a man of immense knowledge he is aware of the consequences of
his action: ‘This night I’ll conjure, though I die therefore.’ (I.1.167). He systematically
denigrates all knowledge of physics, law and Divinity as worthless, except ‘necromantic skill’. Other fellow-scholars
are horrified by his willful submission to evil and exclaim: ‘That thou art fall’n into that damned art’
(I.2.26) His greatest pleasure now lies in having Mephistophilis, a devil,
at his beck and call: ‘Now Faustus, thou art conjuror laureate,/ That canst command great Mephistophilis.’ (I.2.32-33)
His patriotic talk about extending his kingdom is nothing but disguised ambition. When summoned by God to render an account
of his life, Everyman is deserted by his false friends; but Knowledge comes to his rescue and acts as a mediator between Everyman
and Confession, the Church – the house of Salvation. Knowledge helps Everyman by escorting him to Confession, assist him in preparing the Book of Accounts, but cannot
accompany him to the grave; Everyman can take only Good Deeds. So penance is recommended —
Knowledge: Everyman, look your penance that ye fulfill,
What pain that
ever it to you be,
And Knowledge
shall give you counsel at will,
How your accounts
you shall make clearly, (p.10)
Confession
requests Knowledge to guide Everyman in his painful and perilous journey. Knowledge also counsels him to undergo Penance which
he willingly accepts. They work in tandem for the salvation of Everyman’s soul. It is worth noting that while Everyman’s
humility and good intention ensure helps from all quarters, Dr.Faustus’ hubris drives away the Good Angel and attracts sinister forces in nature. Knowledge offers Everyman the garment of sorrow
called Repentance. As he struggles to free himself from the clutches of the Devil, Knowledge urges him to go to Priesthood
and have recourse to holy sacrament and ointment. Knowledge counsels: ‘It is a garment of sorrow:/ From pain it will
you borrow;/ Contrition it is,/ That getteth forgiveness;/ It pleaseth God passing well.’ (p.11)In this case it is the
Angels who triumph and welcome him to heaven. With a clean account he is ready to appear before
the Day of Last Judgment.
Everyman is an allegory of personified
virtues and vices which provide dramatic conflict. Dr.Faustus is more like ambition
and greed personified. Here the anti-hero is a knowledgeable man who spurns scholarship and opts for black magic. He agrees to surrender to Lucifer or Beelzebub and ‘abjure the Trinity’ in
order to have Mephistophilis at his command. Armed with knowledge and strong
will power, he makes a conditional offer to Mephistophilis –
Learn
thou of Faustus manly fortitude,
And
scorn those joys thou never shalt possess.
Go
bear these tidings to great Lucifer:
Seeing
Faustus hath incurred eternal death
By
desperate thoughts against Jove’s deity,
Say he surrenders up to him his soul,
So
he will spare him four and twenty years,
Letting
him live in all voluptuousness,
Having thee ever to attend to me,
To
give me whatsoever I demand,
To
slay mine enemies, and aid my friends,
And
always be obedient to my will. (I.3.85-97)
His lust for absolute
power degenerates almost into servility as he declares: ‘Had I as many souls as there be stars, / I’d give them
all for Mephistophilis.’ (I.3.102-03). Faustus does not attempt to hide the fact that he is an imperialist.
Dr.Faustus
abuses knowledge in two ways: he uses knowledge to entertain the Emperor, Charles V, the Duke and the Duchess. He also uses
knowledge to exhibit his power: for no good reason, he humiliates a knight named Benvolio and makes horns grow on his head.
Pride and arrogance make him blind to the divine warning that appears on his arm ‘Homo fuge’ or ‘Fly, man!’
His mind is distracted easily by Mephistophilis with the promise of courtesans, dance and books on occult.
While in his confusion Everyman retains steady faith
in Knowledge and Confession, Dr.Faustus
is full of skepticism and self-pity at he nears his end: ‘Wretch, what hast thou done?/ Damned art thou, Faustus,
damned; despair and die!’ (V.1.55-56). Next moment he changes his mind to entreat the Devil’s disciple: ‘Sweet Mephistophilis,
entreat thy lord/ to pardon my unjust presumption,’ (V.1.79-80). Knowledge sometimes comes to him in a flash and
makes him realize his blunder: ‘But Faustus’ offence can ne’er be pardoned. The serpent that tempted Eve
may be saved, but not Faustus.’(V.2.41-42). He even identifies Mephistophilis as chief source of misery and mischief in his life and
flares up: ‘O thou bewitching fiend, ‘twas thy temptation/ Hath robbed me of eternal happiness.’ (V.2.87-88)
Clifford Leech points out that Dr.Faustus’s pursuit of the limitless knowledge
is a lonely and self-centered activity: ‘Faustus goes to conjure alone, and alone he concludes his pact with the devil.
What use will he make of his hazardously won powers?’ (Leech.95)
Knowledge
under the veil of ignorance breeds conflict in Faustus’s soul in the form
of alternating bouts of remorse and elation. His Christian conscience has not
yet deserted him. Even after striking the bargain and signing the contract, Faustus is tormented by conflicting thoughts which
finds expression in his monologue: ‘Abjure this magic; turn to God again.’ and ‘Despair in God, and trust
in Beelzebub.’ The Good Angel and the Bad Angel may be seen as his Id and Super-ego -- one urging him to ‘think
of heaven and heavenly things.’, and the other to ‘think of honor and wealth.’
(I.2.21-22). Dr.Faustus keeps oscillating between these opposing impulses. Charles Lamb comments on Marlow’s atheistic
positions: ‘To such a genius the history of Faustus must have been delectable food: to wander in fields where curiosity
is forbidden to go, to approach the dark gulf near enough to look in, to be busied in speculations which are the rottenest
part of the core of the fruit that full from the tree of knowledge.’ (Maclure.69)
Knowledge-hunting
in Doctor Faustus ends with a tragic sense of waste: too much knowledge brings
sorrow and death. As morality plays, Everyman
and Marlow’s Doctor Faustus effectively show the disastrous effect that forbidden knowledge
and excessive curiosity have on our lives. His speech at the eleventh hour of
his life is full of repentance: ‘Rend not my heart for naming of my Christ!/
Yet will I call on him. O, spare me, Lucifer!’ (V.2.145-46) The pitiable death of the intrusive Doctor ultimately brings
out the hollowness of temporal power
and glory, as is evident from the comment of the Chorus in the epilogue: ‘Faustus is gone. Regard his hellish fall,/
whose fiendful fortune may exhort the wise.’(Ep.4-5). Knowledge, properly utilized by Everyman leads him to heaven. But
knowledge perverted by greed and power results
in intense suffering and death of Dr.Faustus.
-----------------------------------
Works Cited
Leech, Clifford (Ed.)
Marlow: A Collection of Critical Essays. N.J: Prentice-Hall International,1964
Maclure, Millar (Ed.).
Marlow: The Critical Heritage. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979
Ribner, Irving (Ed.).
C.Marlow’s Doctor Faustus. Newburyport:
Focus Publishing, 2004
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/everyman.html (for E-Text of Everyman)
October,
2008
swkb@indiatimes.com
|
