![]() |
Original cover to Goethe's Play |
If Gothic Literature has become timeless in one aspect, the
Faustian Pact has subsisted throughout history. Since the last temptation of
Christ, as long as the Devil has been believed in, there will always be stories
of him or his representatives tempting fallible mortals into selling their
souls. Humanity and selling one’s soul is usually considered when a Faustian pact
is made. Using examples from Gothic Literature, there are noteworthy elements
of the character, after selling their soul, loses what is means to be human.
They may kill close friends, ruin the lives of the innocent and eventually be
stripped down to a shell of the character they were at the start of the
story.
Selling one’s soul was first
popularised by the German legend featuring the scholar, Faust, which gave the
deal its infamous name. Since then many authors have given their own
interpretations to the legend. One of the earlier adaptations was by that of
Christopher Marlowe in the play Doctor
Faustus. It is either due to the mannerisms of Marlowe, or the legend
itself, which has proceeding interpretations with the mortal’s story ending
with eternal damnation. Rare is the ending in which the deal is escaped. The
only two notable exceptions for the common Faustian pact would be Johann
Wolfgang Von Goethe’s play in 1790 which has Faust redeem himself; the second
is the 1937 reworking of The Devil and Daniel
Webster. With the redemption of the Faustian character being so few and far
between, it is interesting to see the fragility of human nature explored in
these narratives. After all, seeing someone become increasingly flawed, rather
than increasingly virtuous, will always be more popular.
Vanity and lust are human vices
often exploited in drama and reality. Naturally these imperfections would be
exploited by the Devil when he buys his soul from a mortal. Oscar Wilde and
Matthew Lewis explore vanity and lust respectively in The Picture of Doran Gray and The
Monk. Both novels revolve around the aforementioned condemnation of the
titular characters, otherwise known as a fall from grace.
![]() |
The Picture of Dorian Gray |
Wilde’s version is unique in that
there is no direct appearance of the Devil. After Dorian, upon seeing his newly
finished portrait, says in passing:
‘How sad it is! I shall grow old,
and horrible, and dreadful. But this picture will remain always young. It will
never be older than this particular day of June…If it were only the other way!
If it were I who was to be always young, and the picture that was to grow old!
For that—for that—I would give everything! Yes there is nothing in the whole
world I would give my soul for that!’ (The Picture of Dorian Gray, p.25)
It would have been easy to have a scene in which the Devil
grants just that. Instead, the reader and Dorian is left not discovering that
the deal has been made until he has snubbed Sybil. The more Dorian wrongs
people or is swayed into immorality by those around him, the more the portrait
changes. At first Dorian sees this as an advantage until curiosity keeps
bringing him back to look at the painting and every time it is different.
Nothing that Dorian does from then on is done selflessly. Without his soul,
Dorian acts with vanity, even when trying to be true to his newest conquest,
Hetty. Hoping that the painting will revert back to normal if he becomes a good
person is itself an act of vanity which only leads to his death when he attacks
the painting, thus killing himself.
He could see no change, save that
in the eyes there was a look of cunning, and in the mouth the curved wrinkle of
the hypocrite. The thing was still loathsome—more loathsome, if possible, than
before—and the scarlet dew that spotted the hand seemed brighter, and more like
blood newly split. Then he trembled. Had it been merely vanity that had made
him do his one good deed? Or the desire for a new sensation, as Lord Henry had
hinted, with his mocking laugh? Or that passion to act a part that sometimes
makes us do things finer than we are ourselves? Or, perhaps, all these? (The Picture of Dorian Gray p.186)
Ultimately, Dorian brings his own downfall, breaking the
deal only by ending his life with the same blade he used to kill Basil. The
interesting fact is that Dorian may have sold his soul to remain forever young,
but he had always the option to do good but always acted immorally, suggesting
that the decisions which brings someone to their ultimate fate is of their own
choosing.
Lewis, on the other hand, focuses
more on the fallibility of human nature. Ambrosio is arguably the kind of
person that the Devil preys upon the most because, as the most moral abbot in
Madrid, he has the furthest to fall. Lust is often a vice for antagonists,
protagonists and deuteragonists, not only used in Gothic Literature. When said
lust is conflicted with religious duty, especially Catholic celibacy, it is
always an interesting imbalance in a character arc. Like Dorian, Ambrosio also
has a fall from grace, even before he sells his soul when he sleeps with
Matilda, who encourages him to continue pursuing Antonia. His inability to
fight temptation doesn’t necessarily come from lack of a soul, more Lucifer
draws upon his infallibility which no mortal is above. Furthermore, it is
debateable that Ambrosio’s actions didn’t need the deal with Lucifer to condemn
him. He still would have forced himself on Antonia and killed her to silence
her anyway. Lucifer’s offerings were merely to quicken his downfall, which he
later mocks Ambrosio for.
Fool that you were to confide
yourself in a Devil! Why did you not stipulate for life, and power, and
pleasure? Then all would have been granted: Now your reflections come too late.
Miscreant, prepare for death; You have not many hours to live!’ (The Monk, p.441)
It seems only fitting that Ambrosio dies in a barren place
in utter agony, mirroring the misery and suffering he has caused, especially
where Antonia and Agnes is concerned. Like most Faustian pacts, it insists upon
the need never to give in to temptation.
![]() |
Sebastian Michaelis in the anime adaptation of Black Butler |
Following the misdeeds of Dorian
and Ambrosio, post-nineteenth century authors have developed their own versions
of the Faustian pact, exploring all vices and infallibilities of human nature. It
is interesting how this concept has become culturally universal. Usually some
legends are alien to other cultures, for example, Grimm’s fairy tales are not
as well known in Asia as they are in Europe. Meanwhile the Faustian Pact has
reached as far as Japan, as portrayed in the Japanese Manga, Black Butler. This explores another
reason why a mortal would sell their soul: vengeance. In the manga, Ciel
Phantomhive strikes a bargain with a demon, known only as Sebastian Michaelis,
in order to avenge the murder of his parents and get retribution for those who
have wronged him. Sebastian has not yet taken his soul, the deal will only be
settled when Ciel is properly avenge; however Ciel’s vain, demanding, and
cynical nature demonstrates why Sebastian made the offer in the first place.
If there’s one thing that authors
will not stop exploring, it’s human nature. Faustian Pacts, where a mortal
gives away what it means to be human for a fleeting gain will always be a
strong way of exploring that. Through Faust’s pride, Dorian’s vanity, Ambrosio’s
lust and Ciel’s cynicism, narratives will always exist to either explore
humanity or make a critique on human nature itself. This is a narrative concept
that is overall timeless and can be applied to any culture or any time.
Anderson, Matthew Gregory Lewis Howard, The Monk: A Romance (London: Oxford University Press, 1980)
Dawson, Terence, The Effective Protagonist in the Nineteenth-Century British Novel (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004)
Julian, Philippe, Oscar Wilde (London: Paladin, 1986)
Kingsolver, Barbara, The Poisonwood Bible (New York: Harper, 1998)
Lewis, Matthew, The Monk (Oxford: Oxford World Classics, 1796)
Praz, Mario, 'The Metamorphoses of Satan' in The Gothick Novel, ed. by Victor Sage (Hampshire: Macmillan Press, 1990)
Smeed, J.W., Faust in Literature (London: Oxford University Press, 1975)
Toboso, Yana, Black Butler (Kuroshitsuji) (Tokyo: Spuare Enix, 2006)
Von Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, Faust (London: Penguin Books, 2001)
Wilde, Oscar, The Picture of Dorian Gray (Oxford: Oxford World Classics, 1890)
Dawson, Terence, The Effective Protagonist in the Nineteenth-Century British Novel (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004)
Julian, Philippe, Oscar Wilde (London: Paladin, 1986)
Kingsolver, Barbara, The Poisonwood Bible (New York: Harper, 1998)
Lewis, Matthew, The Monk (Oxford: Oxford World Classics, 1796)
Praz, Mario, 'The Metamorphoses of Satan' in The Gothick Novel, ed. by Victor Sage (Hampshire: Macmillan Press, 1990)
Smeed, J.W., Faust in Literature (London: Oxford University Press, 1975)
Toboso, Yana, Black Butler (Kuroshitsuji) (Tokyo: Spuare Enix, 2006)
Von Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, Faust (London: Penguin Books, 2001)
Wilde, Oscar, The Picture of Dorian Gray (Oxford: Oxford World Classics, 1890)
Faustian Pacts are quite an interesting subject, especially when one thinks about what is actually gained through the deal for both parties. One of the examples I thought of whilst reading through your blog was the old tale ‘Bearskin’, in which a man lives for years in a disgusting state (unrecognisable from a monster) with the promise of happiness at the end of the ordeal. Obviously, the devil in question doesn’t believe the protagonist will stick to his promises, which would lead to the devil taking his soul from him, but when he is successful, he causes the suicides of two girls (from jealousy), thus giving the devil two souls instead of his own. In instances like this, it is hard to say if there is truly a winning party. The devil gains two souls, but has to grant a man a lifetime of happiness, which is obviously out of character, while our protagonist gains happiness, but has caused evil through the suicide of the girls.
ReplyDeleteOther interesting examples to think about (the former of which I’m surprised you didn’t address) include Death Note and Little Shop of Horrors. The first in interesting to think about because of the harm (or arguable good) that the protagonist inflicts upon humanity, while in the second, the protagonist survives but after having caused great harm (although again, he does good in the process by eliminating evil).