Not Another Faustian Age!

"Wake Me Up," Avicci

"I Want It All," Queen

Ah, Goethe's Faust. This is, no doubt, one of the greatest literary pieces ever written. Goethe took sixty years to write Faust, starting in 1770, and he died one year after it was published in 1831. It has been the centrepiece of many philosophical studies, movies, musical scores, and novels. The work is fantastic, as it not only shows the development of a man but also the development of a society. It parallels Goethe's reaction to the changes in society that were going on around him as he slowly developed Faust's character. Ultimately, Goethe's Faust is a study of man from youth to death. There have been many different analytical interpretations, which have merit. But the beauty of the book is that it is a living masterpiece, that is open to interpretations that change as society changes.

The novel is set from the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century. It deals with the powerful upheaval of the world during the time of the Industrial Revolution. Boring! "What's this got to do with eighteen-year-old males today?" I hear you ask. Well, the parallels between the Industrial Revolution and today's Technological Revolution are uncanny. They are full of sex and power, a real lust for life, a no-holds-barred "YOLO" ("you only live once," for those not up on all acronyms) mentality. Today I can see a generation of Faustian young men, and who would blame them? Certainly not I.

Marshall Berman examines Goethe's Faust in his book All That Is Solid Melts into Air. He explains that the novel is separated into three stages in the development of man: the dreamer, the lover, and the developer.

The Dreamer. Picture this: you are in your bedroom, dreaming about the future, including what you want to be. (Yes, I said what rather than who for a reason, but I'll get to that much later.) Your dreams are big—really big. When I ask teenage boys what they want to be when they are older, after their initial response of "a porn star," they inevitably say they want to be rich and famous and make so much money they can get everything they want. Even though Faust is middle-aged and extremely learned—a doctor, a philosopher, etc.—he is a very successful man; somehow, all this study has made him feel isolated from the outside world. He feels ... well, he doesn't feel. That's the problem. He wants to experience everything that "common" people feel and go through. I like to compare it to boys doing their final exams. They struggle to stay on task during their study, they're over school and the study routine, and they want to get out there and feel. They want to experience life.

Berman goes on to say that Faust's dreams are big. He wants to experience everything: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. "I feel the courage to plunge into the world, to bear all earthly grief, all earthly joy" (Berman 1982).

Faust feels he has so much not only to experience but also (thanks to years and years of self-sacrifice and study) to give to the world to make it a better place. His dreams are colossal—more than most men dare to dream. But how can they be achieved? He needs help in order to achieve his desires.

So he evokes the powers of the underworld. He calls out to Mephistopheles, and Mephistopheles answers. Thus begins Faust's relationship with the Devil. It is the beginning of negotiations for his soul. Not that Faust realizes this, although I think, being such a learned man, he must have known, but maybe he thought he was too intelligent to get trapped. Goethe shows us later in the story that he was in denial, as his narcissistic greed had taken over. This begs the question: Just how desperately bored or lonely was he that he was willing to tread such treacherous waters?

Berman writes, "In a typically Goethean irony, he [Mephistopheles] materializes just when Faust feels closest to God" (Berman 1982, 46).

Faust is reading Genesis and pondering the creation stories when the Devil testifies that he has all the power. He claims that as God created the world to be destroyed, in an ironic twist, the destructive force of evil (sin) is the creative. Therefore, the Devil lies to him and persuades him to believe that he is

"the spirit that negates all!
For all that comes to be
deserves to perish wretchedly" (Berman 1982, 47)

Goethe nails the characteristics of Mephistopheles with pure brilliance. You see throughout the book that Mephistopheles repeatedly asks Faust, "Are you sure you want to do this? Okay, I can help, but are you really sure you want to do this? Yes, but are you really, really sure?" After all, the only person who can send oneself to hell is that person. It is a personal choice that no one can make for another; only the person himself or herself can do it.

Faust feels in control. Every step of the way, everything is done by his own choice; he is still in control. He believes he hasn't sold out his soul yet. What he doesn't realize is the Devil is making things happen behind the scenes to sweeten the deal.

Faust's desire for erotic pleasure, for all experiences of the flesh from pure to depraved, is insatiable. I think one of the best ways to demonstrate this to young men is through movies. This is clearly seen in Oscar Wilde's literary piece adapted for the screen The Picture of Dorian Gray. This is another interpretation of Goethe's Faust, where Dorian sells his soul to the Devil to be the most handsome, charismatic, and intelligent man so he can live a hedonistic life indulging in beauty and the senses.

Dorian's request is answered, but in the attic of his house is a self-portrait of Dorian. This portrait ages while Dorian stays young and beautiful. Not only does the portrait age, but the further into depravity Dorian goes, the uglier the portrait gets.

In the end, Dorian dies and his face and body end up as hideously repulsive as the painting, and his soul is lost forever.

Faust is portrayed as a vain, selfish man who, although he learned to love and became a great lover—which is all too familiar to many women—is ultimately interested in his own satisfaction. We see a man who lives for fulfilling his desires. I will expand on this later.

There are so very many examples over the last century of Faustian development where the obsession to create one's own kingdom are all too devastatingly real. Faust's dreams for a utopian modern world are taking shape. He has created a beautiful city with modern developments as far as the eye can see. He has power and control. But he is in denial. As Berman puts it, "Faust has been pretending not only to others but to himself that he could create a new world with clean hands; he is still not ready to accept responsibility for the human suffering and death that clear the way" (Berman 1982, 68).

As I said earlier, throughout the novel, Mephistopheles is clearing a path for Faust. He is opening doors, creating opportunities, and assisting with (and getting rid of) troublesome people who interfere with Faust's plans. This climaxes when Faust chooses to murder an elderly couple whose traditional home, with its pretty patch of green grass, is juxtaposed with his multilayered, modern development.

"Faust becomes obsessed with this old couple and their little piece of land ... At this point, Faust commits his first self-consciously evil act. He summons Mephisto and his `mighty men' and orders them to get the old people out of the way. He does not want to see it, or to know the details of how it is done" (Berman 1982, 67). Here, finally, the deal is sealed; his soul is sold.

In order for Faust to justify his actions, as well as avoid any responsibility for them, he destroys anything in the world related to the past; any reminder of how he used to be is destroyed. But in doing so, he has developed a new society in which he is obsolete. The creation was always a lie. The creation, his creation, has become his destruction (Berman 1982, 68–70).

In the end the only thing that can save Faust is God's unconditional love and forgiveness.

I have just lightly touched on Wilde's and Berman's interpretations. Goethe's is a fascinating and ageless story. Berman's analysis is brilliant. There have also been a few movies made based on Dorian Gray. My favourite is the 1945 version. There is something compelling, mesmerizing, or—should I say?—pure evil about the performance of Hurd Hatfield that is hypnotic.

Take time to look at these and decide for yourself.

Corporations: Good or Evil?

"Big Time," Peter Gabriel

Abhorred monster! Fiend that thou art! The tortures of hell are too mild a vengeance for thy crimes. Wretched devil! You reproach me with your creation; come on, then, that I may extinguish the spark which I so negligently bestowed. —Mary Shelley, Frankenstein

The Industrial Revolution, the Faustian age, the birth of capitalism. Where do we go from here? Or more importantly, where does our youth go from here? What sort of legacy are we leaving? I know there are many clichés about this, but we have to ask this question. There is a fine line between visionary and megalomaniac. There is also a fine line between self-preservation and apathy.

Being an artist, I am obsessed with creativity, and I understand the urge man has to create and to change. This is an absolute necessity for the development of the human being. However, we need to ask ourselves what and for whom we are creating.

The rapid change in the last few centuries from Industrial Revolution to Technological Revolution is mind-blowing. We have created a world where we are so busy we don't have time to think. We have created a world where we crave constant stimulation. We can blame trans-national corporations and "Big Brother" and say we are the victims of a helpless, hopeless situation. Or we can say we have the power to create change. Are we victims, or are we perpetrators? Are we not like Faust looking for something else to stimulate our desires?

Desires: our motivation, our driving force.

I was in high school in the nineteen eighties when women were forging new frontiers in the corporate world. As a child I remember watching TV shows like Mary Tyler Moore starring Mary Tyler Moore, then Moonlighting starring Cybill Shepherd, Murphy Brown starring Candice Bergen and Seinfield with Elaine Benes (Julia Louis-Dreyfus). The air was thick with women joining men in the climb up the corporate ladder. My father told me to be my own boss and not to rely on a man. He said I could do anything. I am grateful to my father for that. He did not put me in a pigeon hole because of my gender.

In the 1980's and '90's we, men and women, went to work and worked hard. We worked long hours and weekends with unpaid overtime because the world was moving so fast. As Ferris Beuller said "life moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it." (Broderick, 1986). We all had a dream to get to the top. It became a world of dog eat dog and everyone was `networking' to secure a deal before the competition got wind of it.

Ethics began to slide down the ladder as the snakes slithered to the top. I have been to so many meetings and experienced so many new bosses, most of which I have been fortunate to work with, but I think I have got the corporate jargon nailed. Each new boss is so much better than the one before. Every new programme is implemented to benefit the workers and the workers well-being is the corporation's major concern. Each boss guarantees that his strategies will see us working `smarter' not `harder'. When we work overtime to reach deadlines it is because we must keep the `stakeholders' happy and in time we will be rewarded for our hard work. But if we are truthful to ourselves we know no matter how hard we work, there is always Jack around the corner who is a friend of the boss, or something like that, and ultimately we will be pressured into `moving on' because staff cuts are necessary, and youthfulness is next to godliness.

It is a long time since the late 1980's and I don't see anyone with higher job security, more free time, less work pressure and the money in their pocket stretching farther.

So what have we gained, genetically modified food? Plastics that choke the ocean, carbon choking our air, diabetes, heart attacks, cancer, stroke etc. In Australia thirty years ago the average house price was the equivalent of one to three years income. Now it is six, or more like, nine times the average income. Meanwhile I have been listening lately to discussions about lowering the average wage to make Australia more competitive on the global market. So what have we lost?

The ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) has an interesting television show called Big Ideas. It hosts national and international speakers who are experts in their particular fields. Each speaker exposed clarity and/or challenges for the audience to ponder. One such charismatic speaker is Mike Daisey (Daisey 2011). Mike came to Australia for the "Festival of Dangerous Ideas". I was captivated by his talk. Please take the time to watch it.

He has a fascination with Egyptology and made extraordinary parallels between Western civilization today and that of the Ancient Egyptians. He said the consensus today is that the pyramids were built by skilled labour, and just as the glamorous skyscrapers today are designed by experts in architecture and engineering and constructed by skilled tradesmen, so too were the pyramids.

So how does this compare to today's society?

We have made corporations the new religion and corporate towers the new pyramids and we, the workers, are the builders of these corporate pyramids. These corporations, such as Apple, are the new gods of our time. We "worship" them (Daisey 2011). You only have to go outside on a Sunday to know that the mall is the new church as you see a pilgrimage of motor vehicles all packed with families in their Sunday best making their way to buy the products of the gods. All the while participants at the local churches are getting fewer and fewer and older and older. We, as Daisey points out, have "educated our children to worship corporations," and like the Egyptians, we have dedicated our lives to these corporations.

We spend our lives working in them, consuming their genetically modified produce which is a concern (Berry, 2012), wearing their clothes, using their products, and building them into gigantic nations of ultimate power over us. We have convinced ourselves that we can't live without them and they make us better people. Why? Because they feed our desires. It is such a Faustian lecture that Daisey gives, with a twist. As far as Faustian ideologies go toward the concord of the developer then and now, he also asks where the consumer fits into the equation. I wonder who exactly Faust is in today's scenario. The developer creates a society that kills him, and the consumer creates a society that kills him. Which one is more at fault? Which one is more Faustian? Which one is to blame?

Today, there are many people who are concerned with where society is headed. Over the last few years there has been an upsurge in the argument that neoliberalism (the "bible" for governments and corporations) has had its day. To use a crude explanation of this ideology that governments have embraced (as I do not want to confuse the kiddies) is that neoliberalism operates under the assumption that every person has something to contribute to the "market," and the better the "market," the better the society. The problem with this is that human beings are broken down to material objects, tools, machines. We all need to work, but what are we working for? What is the market, and just who benefits? There are many, many papers that discuss this topic (e.g., see William Davies and David Harvey in the bibliography section). If you don't have time to read, please take a few minutes to watch Catherine Samaray's "What Comes after Neoliberalism?" on YouTube (http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-MNENaI0bY).

Many more people are asking this question since the global financial crisis (GFC). Is there another way to govern? These "ginormous" profits and bonuses to top corporations and their executives are unsustainable. The number of people working in these corporations is dwindling. The jobless rate is rising.

Marx explained this "political economy" when he was talking about "estranged labour," a farce to get the masses to work toward making someone rich.