Theatrical Authorship and Providential Bodies: The Case of Doctor Faustus

Abstract

Marlowe’s plays are often taken to be distinctively modern in some way, as in a recent consideration of Doctor Faustus as a “degree zero for modern drama, the definitive break with the sacral theater of medieval drama.”1 One set of evidence in this case for Marlowe’s transitional status has been his participation in a general shift away from allegorical dramatic modes over the course of the sixteenth century.2 As Katharine Eisaman Maus notes, “Marlowe makes the individualist and naturalistic conventions of tragedy collide abruptly with the collectivist, allegorical procedures of the morality play, deliberately emphasizing the irreconcilability of the two genres.”3 And even as many of Marlowe’s plays employ features of the moralities— hypersymmetry, vice characters, or pageantry of the seven deadly sins—the Marlovian corpus famously confounds attempts to pin down what the moral of the story might be.4 Critics persuasively argue for diametrically opposed readings of plays such as Tamburlaine and Doctor Faustus, which is not usually the case for earlier moralities: Is Doctor Faustus an indictment of Faustus himself or of the cruelty of the Calvinist God?5 Is Faustus free to repent until the last moment, or has God himself hardened the doctor’s heart?6 KeywordsHoly WaterLive TheaterStage DirectionDivine GraceDaily IndicationThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.