1442 / Ru m eliDE Jou rnal of Lan guag e an d Lit er at ur e Studies 2 0 2 4 .

3 8 ( F e b r u a r y )
Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein / Afacan,
M.

88. Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s

Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein1

Merve AFACAN2

APA: Afacan, M. (2024). Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s

Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi,
(38), 1442-1451. DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.1404445.

Abstract

Only a few themes in English literature may have the same profound symbolic significance such as
the pursuit of human potential and the quest to surpass the human capability as employed
Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus.
Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus presents the perilous exploration of knowledge and power within the
context of Renaissance, the era that is brave and fertile in terms of intellectual rebirth while
challenging of the long-held truth about individualism. Similarly, Shelley’s Frankenstein reflects the
Romantic period’s preoccupation with individualism and the breaking of societal and natural norms
centered around an academic’s hubristic struggle to conquer the mysteries of life and death. Both
narratives not only stand out more than horror stories, but also turn out to be an exploration of self-
identity, morality, societal norms and the inextricable link between science and the notion of the self.
Thus, both protagonists, Faustus and Victor Frankenstein, embody their eras’s ethos, with the former
reveling in the Renaissance’s celebration of human potential and the latter mirroring the Romantic
fascination with the sublime and the transgressive. Taking these perspectives into account, this article
delves into how Doctor Faustus and Frankenstein critically engage with their characters’s attempts
to transcend social, cultural and scientific barriers through their process of self-fashioning. Both
works not only encapsulate the social atmosphere of their respective times but also serve as
cautionary tales about the ramifications of overreaching ambition.

Keywords: Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus, Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, Self-Fashioning

Theory

1 Statement (Tez/ Bildiri): It is declared that scientific and ethical principles were followed during the preparation
process of this study and all the studies utilised are indicated in the bibliography.
Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest is declared.
Funding: No external funding was used to support this research.
Copyright & Licence: The authors own the copyright of their work published in the journal and their work is published
under the CC BY-NC 4.0 licence.
Source: It is declared that scientific and ethical principles were followed during the preparation of this study and all the
studies used are stated in the bibliography.
Similarity Report: Received - Turnitin, Rate: 4
Ethics Complaint: editor@rumelide.com
Article Type: Research article, Article Registration Date: 07.11.2023-Acceptance Date: 20.02.2024-Publication
Date: 21.02.2024;
DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.1404445
Peer Review: Two External Referees / Double Blind
2 Arş. Gör., Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Bölümü, İngiliz
Dili Ve Edebiyatı ABD / Research Assist., Hacettepe University, Faculty of Letters, Institute of Social Sciences, Department
of English Language and Literature, Department of English Language and Literature (Ankara, Türkiye),
mafacann@gmail.com, ORCID ID: 0000-0002-4960-6746, ROR ID: https://ror.org/04kwvgz42, ISNI: 0000 0001
2342 7339, Crossreff Funder ID: 501100005378

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
 RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 2024.38 (Şubat)/ 1443
Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı /
Afacan, M.

Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor

Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı3

Öz

İngiliz edebiyatındaki yalnızca birkaç temanın Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus ve Mary
Shelley’nin Frankenstein veya Modern Prometheus eserlerinde kullanılan insan potansiyelini arayış
ve insan kabiliyetlerini aşma çabası gibi derin sembolik anlam taşıdığı söylenebilir. Marlowe’un
Doctor Faustus’u, entelektüel yeniden doğuşun cesur ve verimli olduğu Rönesans dönemi
bağlamında, uzun süre kabul görmüş gerçeklerin sorgulanmasıyla birlikte bilgi ve güç arayışının
tehlikelerini sunar. Benzer şekilde, Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı da Romantik dönemin bireysellik ile
toplumsal ve doğal normları yıkmaya olan takıntısını, hayat ve ölüm sırlarını fethetmeye çalışan bir
akademisyenin kibirli mücadelesi yoluyla yansıtır. Her iki anlatı da sadece korku hikâyelerinden
fazlasını sunar; aynı zamanda öz kimlik, ahlak, toplumsal normlar ve bilim ile benliğin kavramı
arasındaki ayrılmaz bağın bir araştırmasını gözler önüne serer. Böylece, her iki başkahraman,
Faustus ve Victor Frankenstein, dönemlerinin dünya görüşünü temsil eder; ilki Rönesans’ın insan
potansiyelinin kutlarken, diğeri Romantik dönemin yüce ve aşırıya kaçan takıntısını yansıtır. Bu
bakış açılarını göz önünde bulundurarak, bu makale Doctor Faustus ve Frankenstein eserlerinin
karakterlerinin öz biçimlendirme süreçleri aracılığıyla sosyal, kültürel ve bilimsel sınırları aşma
çabaları ile nasıl eleştirel bir şekilde ilgilendiklerini incelemektedir. Her iki eser de sadece kendi
dönemlerinin toplumsal atmosferini özetlemekle kalmaz, aynı zamanda aşırıya kaçan hırsın
sonuçları konusunda uyarıcı öyküler ortaya koyarlar.

Keywords: Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus, Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, Öz- Biçimlendirme
Teorisi

The Renaissance which means “rebirth” in French was a cultural, artistic, political and intellectual
movement that lasted from the late thirteenth century until the early seventeenth century. This
transitional period from the Middle Ages to the Modern Age was distinguished by a growing interest in
the art, literature and philosophies of ancient Rome and Greece. People were encouraged to embrace
the ideals of ancient Rome and Greece as humanism flourished and classic art and literature made a
triumphant return. There was a noticeable desire for self-discovery, a willingness confront society’s
established conventions and a desire to explore new intellectual realms. All of these factors worked
together to foster critical thinking and pave the way for a vibrant human spirit. During the Renaissance,
“intellectuals emerged from the church into an independent lay status, they had to reconceive their
relation to power and particularly to the increasing power of the royal courts” that marked this era as
unparalleled in its transformation of societal roles (Greenblatt, 1980, p. 36). In the light of the newly
introduced power relations, many people during the Renaissance were on a quest to stand out with the

3 Beyan (Tez/ Bildiri): Bu çalışmanın hazırlanma sürecinde bilimsel ve etik ilkelere uyulduğu ve yararlanılan tüm
çalışmaların kaynakçada belirtildiği beyan olunur.
Çıkar Çatışması: Çıkar çatışması beyan edilmemiştir.
Finansman: Bu araştırmayı desteklemek için dış fon kullanılmamıştır.
Telif Hakkı & Lisans: Yazarlar dergide yayınlanan çalışmalarının telif hakkına sahiptirler ve çalışmaları CC BY-NC 4.0
lisansı altında yayımlanmaktadır.
Kaynak: Bu çalışmanın hazırlanma sürecinde bilimsel ve etik ilkelere uyulduğu ve yararlanılan tüm çalışmaların
kaynakçada belirtildiği beyan olunur.
Benzerlik Raporu: Alındı – Turnitin, Oran: %4
Etik Şikayeti: editor@rumelide.com
Makale Türü: Araştırma makalesi, Makale Kayıt Tarihi: 07.11.2023-Kabul Tarihi: 20.02.2024-Yayın Tarihi:
21.02.2024; DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.1404445
Hakem Değerlendirmesi: İki Dış Hakem / Çift Taraflı Körleme

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
1444 / Rum el iDE J ournal of Languag e and Lit er atur e Studies 2 0 2 4 . 3 8 ( F e b r u a r y )
Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein / Afacan,
M.

motivation of a fresh feeling of self-actualisation. Stephen Greenblatt’s self-fashioning theory emerges

as an effective instrument for generating new insights into the Renaissance on the grounds that it
provides a framework for understanding how individuals in this period construct their identities through
various social and cultural practices. In his book, Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to
Shakespeare, Greenblatt (1980) defines the term as “the achievement of a less tangible shape: a
distinctive personality, a characteristic address to the world, a consistent mode of perceiving and
behaving” that define an individual’s presence and influence within their society (p. 2). Through his
theory, Greenblatt suggests that individuals have the ability to shape and decide their fate by way of their
decisions and behaviors. Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus (1616) and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
or the Modern Prometheus (1818) offer two iconic characters, Faustus and Victor Frankenstein,
respectively, who serve as emblematic self-fashioned overreachers driven by ambition and thirst for
knowledge and aim to transgress boundaries to defy societal norms. Although the challenges of their
times are revolutionary and distinct in their own senses, both narratives delve into the similarly
profound human inclination to transcend human boundaries that eventually result in dramatic
consequences. The parallels between Faustus and Frankenstein on the basis of their shared motivations,
the consequences of their actions along with their potential pitfalls construct the main concern of this
study. Besides, although both of these works exemplify the popular genres of their times, they
thematically and contextually inhabit the mutual concern that develops the focus of this study.

Stephen Greenblatt in his Renaissance Self-Fashioning refers to two principal subjects: power and
selfhood in the process of identity formation. By connecting the social and cultural dynamics of the
Renaissance to the process of forming a personal identity, Greenblatt offers a fresh perspective on the
subject. His theory of self-fashioning displays self not as a self-enclosed performance but as an outward
oriented response to power that “is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it
comes from everywhere” (Foucault, The History 93). In other words, the sense of self is shaped and
dominated by a multitude of experiences, interactions and sources that make it pervasive rather than
absorbing or consuming every aspect of the society. Greenblatt discusses the mutual influence between
culture and literature. To explain further, Greenblatt believes culture shapes literature as a means of
reflecting its values, beliefs and norms. Conversely, literature can influence and reshape culture by
introducing new ideas, challenging established norms or highlighting particular aspects of society.
Culture and literature are interwoven areas that affect and are affected by the other. Self-fashioning
refers to a person’s desires and objectives in the process of developing a self, the concept that “has
provided an opportunity for re-examining the relation between the individual and society, an
opportunity to detail the myriad ways in which individuals are constituted as identities or subjects who
interact in a socially structured world of people, relationships and institutions” (Elliott, 2020, p. 13). By
way of executing this discipline, these institutions consider it critical to have control over the individual
identity that directly determines the greater social fabric. In this respect, individual identity “is not an
interior possession, but communal, a question of property rights, a place-holder in a web of legal and
social determinations” and should not be assessed apart from social, political and religious institutions
(Kerrigan, 1989, p. 116). In his book, Greenblatt inquires if an individual has the autonomy to craft
his/her own persona or if external norms predominantly dictate one’s identity.

Stephen Greenblatt refers to the Renaissance era in his study as the period in mention is an outstanding
period of cultural, artistic and intellectual rebirth that “there may well have been less autonomy in self-
fashioning in the sixteenth century than before, the family, state, and religious institutions impose a
more rigid and far-reaching discipline upon their middle-class and aristocratic subjects” (Greenblatt,
1980, p. 1). This era presents a significant shift towards a new kind of individualism by means of which

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
 RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 2024.38 (Şubat)/ 1445
Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı /
Afacan, M.

people begin to see themselves as the shapers of their own destinies rather than merely as actors in a
predetermined divine script. Furthermore, a heritage of historical and literary materials from the
Renaissance, ranging from Shakespearean plays to courtly conduct, offer a plenty of materials to be
studied to comprehend the complex processes of self-fashioning in addition to “the sixteenth-century
figures on whom [Greenblatt’s] study focuses a common factor that may help to explain their sensibility
as writers to the construction of identity: they all embody, in one form or another, a profound mobility”
(Greenblatt, 1980, p. 7). Among these, Christopher Marlowe (1564- 1593), one of the prominent literary
figures in English Renaissance, was a boy on scholarship throughout his education who experienced the
self-actualisation process himself. Christopher Marlowe’s protagonists, much like Marlowe himself,
represent individuals determined to push beyond societal and ethical limits to fulfill their desires. They
are “the impenitent sinner[s], the structural pattern exists for a protagonist who is tragic and yet
comically degenerate, and who is both an individual and a universal example of spiritual failure”
(Bevington, 1962, p. 165). For example, Marlowe presents the shepherd Tamburlaine in Tamburlaine
the Great (1590) as the perfect example of an overreacher who becomes a conqueror. Although in the
context of wealth and social status, wealthy Jewish merchant Barabas represents Marlowe’s overreacher
in his next work, The Jew of Malta (1592) who aims to regain his lost wealth and to position himself in
a place of power and security even if it means causing harm to others. These characters are perceived as
representations of the two-fold essence of Renaissance values, reflecting both their pursuit of
individuality and self-direction and the tragic outcomes that arise from exceeding their boundaries.
Among his literary productions, Doctor Faustus stands out to be “the tragedy of a man who in striving
boundlessly misdirects great gifts of mind and spirit and hence progressively loses his soul by
disintegration as well as by capture” (Farnham, 1969, p. 10). Christopher Marlowe’s landmark “and
perhaps the last” work (Bevington, 1962, p. 245) comes in two distinct editions: the A-text and the B-
text. Published in 1616, the B-text is notably extended with added comic sequences and further details
that offer a “tragedy of a scientific libertine who gained control over nature while losing control of
himself” (Levin, 2013, p. 134). The story is based on the German Faust legend in which a medical student
trades his soul to the devil in exchange for knowledge and power. Faustus, a notable scholar from
Wittenberg, grows weary of the confines of conventional academics and turns to the dark arts of
necromancy. Tempted by the fascination of infinite knowledge, he strikes a deal with the devil that he
seals with his own blood. According to the pact, Mephistopheles, an agent of the devil, is dispatched to
attend to Faustus and fulfill his desires for the following twenty-four years. Yet, even as Mephistopheles
offers him various worldly indulgences and adventures, Faustus finds himself unfulfilled. He eventually
realises that his pursuit of greatness has only produced ephemeral displays that have little lasting power.

Stephen Greenblatt describes the era during which Doctor Faustus was crafted as a time as “the period
in which European man embarked on his extraordinary career of consumption, his eager pursuit of
knowledge, with one intellectual model after another seized, squeezed dry, and discarded, and his
frenzied exhaustion of the world’s resources” (Greenblatt, 1980, p. 199). Marlowe’s play delves deeply
into the inner conflicts and persistent self-shaping endeavors of its main character. Faustus emerges as
an ambitious academic who has already exhausted traditional avenues of study and now yearns for
knowledge beyond human comprehension. The play prominently underscores the dangers of unchecked
ambition, as Faustus’s thirst for knowledge leads him towards his own destruction. While Faustus
embodies many characteristics of a Renaissance man “with his eager, courageous, outward-looking,
chance-taking view of the world”, his actions provide a commentary on the dangers of unchecked
ambition and desire (Male, 1985, p. 35). The tragic conclusion of his story highlights the perils of
ambition and the ethical and spiritual repercussions of surpassing human limits. While Faustus
exemplifies certain aspects of the Renaissance man, his character also serves as a critique concerning

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
1446 / Rum el iDE J ourn al of Lan guag e an d Lit er at ur e Studies 2 0 2 4 . 3 8 ( F e b r u a r y )
Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein / Afacan,
M.

the portrayal of the dilemma of the Renaissance man “within the limits of this dualism that the tragical
history of the life and death of Doctor Faustus exists” (Mizener, 1969, p. 115).

In similar vein, the nineteenth century England is marked by numerous transformations as well; some
of which are embraced by society while others elicit resistance among individuals. Similar to the rise of
the middle class and urban centers during the Renaissance, the nineteenth century England has gone
through the Industrial Revolution that has transformed the economic landscape. This shift has paved
the way to the emergence of industrial bourgeoisie and working class. Additionally, the advancements
and innovations in science at the time evoke a combination of fascination and apprehension among the
Victorians. Scientific discoveries and the inventions especially in the fields of chemistry, biology,
electricity, medicine and human anatomy were the effective developments which caused science to
displace the current norms and offer new perspectives. After a gradual development, the evolution
theory found its way into public Victorian thought, especially after the publication of Charles Darwin’s
The Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859. Following the release of Darwin’s seminal
work, the notion of an ongoing evolutionary process became more plausible which prompts the
consideration of contemporary humanity as a preliminary stage for additional transformations.
Consequently, beliefs and values that were held in reverence in preceding centuries became subject to
scrutiny and reinterpretation through a modern lens during this age. On an individual level, the
departure from a dogmatic worldview and the emphasis on individualism and human potential take
steps further and individual exploration gains emphasis both in political discourse and societal
expectations. Along with the lines of Renaissance works, the literary texts of the age, especially novel as
the dominant genre, aim to offer an insightful exploration of individual consciousness, social norms and
the tension between them. The importance of social status and individuality were the romantic
characteristics that were made use in the Gothic novels of the time. The influential gothic horror novel
that fused both romantic and gothic traits was Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus
of which narrative delves into the paranoia surrounding the dangers of unbridled scientific ambition,
confronts the taboo of challenging natural boundaries by creating life and exposes the barbaric
consequences of societal alienation and abandonment; thereby, establishing itself as a quintessential
work in the Gothic literary tradition. Frankenstein is a ground-breaking work that takes a critical look
at the expanding domains of scientific advancements through the protagonist that attempts to surpass
the boundaries he faces. Through its portrayal of an ambitious man of knowledge, Mary Shelley’s work
explores a variety of themes, including self-identity, morality and societal conventions and their
influence on his personal aspirations. This literary persona offers an intriguing case to study self-
fashioning by means of questioning standard notions of identity and cultural conventions. Above all, the
story emphasises the importance of scientific development in our knowledge of mankind and what it
means to be human.

Although the protagonists belong to different centuries, they are both bound by similar social structures.
Their aim to transcend these structures render the protagonists in mention relevant to examine through
Greenblatt’s concept of self-fashioning. They both attempt to redefine their identities and transcend
human boundaries under the influence of their distinctive overreaching ambitions. In both cases, their
mutual enthusiasm cause their tragic downfall. Both narratives share thematic resonances that are
emblematic of their respective eras. Situated at the height of the Renaissance, Marlowe’s Faustus reveals
the spirit of overreaching as he challenges the accepted norms of the age. His inclination towards
necromancy is reinforced by his desire for unparalleled power and fame. In the prologue, his interest is
put forward to be “cursed necromancy; / Nothing so sweet as magic is to him, / Which he prefers before
his chiefest bliss: / And this the man that in his study sits” (Marlowe, 2005, pp. 49-50). Furthermore,

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
 RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 2024.38 (Şubat)/ 1447
Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı /
Afacan, M.

Faustus reveals his aspiration for knowledge and reflects his self-fashioning’s course to become a learned
and knowledgeable man at the very beginning of the play: “Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin / To
sound the depth of that thou wilt profess; / Having commenc’d, be a divine in show, / Yet level at the
end of every art, / And live and die in Aristotle’s works” (Marlowe, 2005, p. 51). In these lines, Faustus
expresses his desire to be acknowledged as a godly figure while also mastering all forms of arts and
subjects especially the ones celebrated in Aristotle’s writings. His thirst for knowledge and prestige
mirrors his journey of shaping himself into a powerful and knowledgeable individual.

Therewithal, Faustus embodies the transition from Medieval to Renaissance thinking. As a scholar, he
initially studies traditional disciplines like divinity, law, medicine and logic. However, finding them
inadequate for his aspirations, he delves into necromancy that stands as the reassessment of
contemporary knowledge, an act of rebellion against the intellectual constraints. In his pursuit of
fashioned self, necromancy works as a quest of manipulation of moral and supernatural forces to explore
his potential and limits. Lastly, in the atmosphere of the awakening, Faustus embodies the spirit of
inquiry although it leads him to his awaiting downfall. Throughout the play, these Renaissance ideals
are often portrayed as temptations from the devil. Faustus’s deal with Mephistopheles reveals his
inconsiderate behaviour to trade his soul in exchange for services from the devil’s assistant. Above all,
his pact marks a drastic shift in his identity from a revered academic to someone drawing power from
dark forces. When empowered, Faustus, particularly in the scene with the angels, reveals how his
newfound capabilities, especially the notion that spirits can fulfill any of his desires, serve but consume
him. He feels enthusiastic about the supremacy he now possesses in the lines: “How am I glutted with
conceit of this! / Shall I make spirits fetch me what I please, / Resolve me of all ambiguities, / Perform
what desperate enterprise I will? / I’ll have them fly to India for gold, / Ransack the ocean for orient
pearl, / And search all corners of the new-found world / For pleasant fruits and princely delicates”
(Marlowe, 2005, p. 53). These words refer to the impending catastrophe that frequently results from
unbridled ambition. Using his newly acquired powers to subvert social structures, Faustus displays his
self-made character throughout the play. His interactions with the nobility – including the Emperor, the
Duke and the Duchess – further highlight his desire to be acknowledged and honored as a man of
unparalleled skill. Another particularly noteworthy instance is when he makes fun of the Pope using
magic. Faustus playfully boxes the Pope’s ears and his bold gesture can be read as a symbolic challenge
to the authority of the Catholic Church. More than just a playful moment, it showcases Faustus’s desire
to stand above traditional powers and reveals his lack of awareness about the dire consequences of his
actions. Faustus’s use of magic highlights his yearning to stand out from the crowd and exert control
over the ordinary individual. Faustus’s attempt to transform himself into a strong and intelligent
persona reveals the complex aspects of his self-made character by exposing his desire for earthly
pleasures. His declaration, “A sound magician is a demi-god; / Here tire, my brains, to get a deity!”
(Marlowe, 2005, p. 52) demonstrates his desire to transcend his human limitations and assume a
position of near-divinity. His passion sets the stage for the choices he makes later in the play reinforcing
the central idea about the dangers of unbridled ambition and the moral implications of his choices.
While initially courageous and willing to gamble his eternal spirit for transitory worldly pleasures,
Faustus slowly begins to sense the hollowness and impermanence of his desires. This understanding
doesn’t strike him suddenly but is a gradual realisation that intensifies as his doom nears. Marlowe
unfolds Faustus’s despair and regret in a deeply moving soliloquy:

FAU. O God,
If thou wilt not have mercy on my soul,
Yet for Christ’s sake, whose blood hath ransom’d me,

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
1448 / Rum el iDE J ou rna l of Lan guag e an d Lit er at ur e Studies 2 0 2 4 . 3 8 ( F e b r u a r y )
Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein / Afacan,
M.

Impose some end to my incessant pain;

Let Faustus live in hell a thousand years,
A hundred thousand, and at last be sav’d. (Marlowe, 2005, p. 111)

In this deeply introspective moment, Faustus tragically recognises how he has wasted his great mind
and the terrible results of his wrong decisions. This monologue and his belated self-awareness
underscore the devastating consequences of his misguided attempts to define himself.

Centuries later, it is still possible to observe the impact of social developments and transformations
within literary works. While its evident that the scientific debates and discoveries of its time have direct
influence on Mary Shelley’s work, it is still a matter of scholarly debate whether the main plot of
Frankenstein has gained its inspiration from Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus. Nevertheless, considering the
vibrant literary environment in which Shelley composed her work, it’s probable that the expansive
Faustian legacy may have subtly shaped her perspective owing to its numerous interpretations and
adaptations. Frankenstein discourses upon a biological experiment of a passionate medical student who
“does not lack for knowledge, the monster is proof of that; but he is clearly unable to see how the
application of that knowledge can be used in a way that is proper and judicious as well as humane and
rational” (Rauch, 1995, p. 243). As Faustus aims to become proficient at the mysteries of life via
challenging his own, Shelley’s eponymous hero Doctor Victor Frankenstein carries the Faustus myth a
step further by generating life in its own right so as to comprehend its secrets through science. In the
course of his experiment, Victor lacks the foresight concerning the consequences. Just like Faustus,
Victor’s impetuous attempt initiates the reason of his tragic downfall in itself. Even though he achieves
to fulfill his dream of discovering “the principle of life” via the inanimate, he has epistemological
difficulties in conveying the method and the result to his peers and the public (Rauch, 1995, p. 241). His
loss of the loved ones and increasing isolation exacerbate his challenges. Victor’s inability to address or
find a solution to the problem he has initiated gives rise to his tragic end. This fact proves his professional
inadequacy as a scientist, as he is destitute of recognition that “all knowledge has a monstrous quality
and the only way to introduce knowledge is to de-monstrate it, that is, to display it and in doing so, to
demystify it” (Rauch, 1995, p. 237).

The science is portrayed as “the source of evil – the masking of one’s intentions with what is desirable,
precluding its covert potential for self-serving mayhem which begins with a desire to feed the ego and a
human being’s deluded notion of self-importance” (Sataravala, 2019, p. 218). These instances serve to
highlight the inherent ethical and moral considerations involved in the pursuit of self-fashioning as well
as revealing the potential risks associated with venturing into unexplored domains of scientific inquiry.
In Sherwin’s (1981) words, what actually Victor creates “is distance between his daemoni[s]ed self and
a newly alienated reality” that become inseparable (p. 893). In his attempt to gain God-like power and
control over his peers, Victor unawarely designs his downfall. Similarly, Victor ventures beyond the
known boundaries of science as a consequence of the same quest that of Faustus’s. The established social
order is subverted and conventional ideas of identity and Victor’s wish to master “the world [that is] to
[him] a secret which [he] desire[s] to divine” (Shelley, 2012, p. 36) are challenged through the creation
of a human-like being through the manipulation of biological components by an ambitious God-like
scientist. As Victor describes himself as an enthusiast “longing to penetrate the secrets of nature”
(Shelley, 2012, p. 64) who aims to “pioneer a new way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world
the deepest mysteries of creation” (Shelley, 2012, p. 75) and eventually achieves “discovering the cause
of generation and life; nay, more, [he] became [himself] capable of giving life upon lifeless matter”
(Shelley, 2012, p. 80). Victor Frankenstein’s pursuit of knowledge and scientific advancement leads him

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
 RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 2024.38 (Şubat)/ 1449
Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı /
Afacan, M.

to create the creature using a combination of chemistry, alchemy, and galvanism through a process that
melds organic and inorganic materials “for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body”
(Shelley, 2012, p. 86). Although he is inherently suspicious of what his studies would possibly cause,
Victor justifies both his aspiration “to become greater than his nature” (Shelley, 2012, p. 81) and his
experiment in setting the required ground for the future studies. If there are any constraints on
Frankenstein’s knowledge, Shelley wants the reader to realise that they are social rather than
supernatural as the result of the experiment is a being in flesh and blood that demands recognition by
the society. The creature is inevitably seen as strange and unacceptable by society since Frankenstein
created it more for his personal benefit—that is, to fashion himself as exceptionally the most
exceptionally capable one among his peers—than for the benefit of the community.

In the course of the work, giving life brings forth intricate ethical and moral dilemmas surrounding the
alteration of human nature, particularly in terms of unintended consequences. Victor Frankenstein’s
initial enthusiasm as a self-fashioned scientist for advancing human understanding through the creation
of life quickly turns into horror and regret when he acknowledges the potential dangers posed by his
experiment. He explicitly delivers his overreaching ambition and to be acknowledged as “the creator” in
his words: “A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures
would owe their being to me” (Shelley, 2012, p. 36). Further, he disguises his ambition in the form of
science as

[t]he Enlightenment attempts to replace God with man which is what Frankenstein attempts to play
at. Man becomes the agent, the creator, that gives commands and the subject that decides what will
happen and what counts. This increase in power is purchased at a price which is estrangement. Thus,
even though man has more power, he is estranged from the very things he is trying to understand.
This is central to the relationship between Frankenstein and his fiend—they are unable to understand
each other. (Sataravala, 2019, p. 220)

This realisation highlights the moral dilemma of pushing scientific boundaries without fully
comprehending the consequences. For example, Victor is forced to accept responsibility of creating the
“monster” and the following misery it causes as a result of the creature’s acts of vengeance and
aggression, the feelings motivated by social rejection and thus loneliness (Shelley, 2012, p. 225). So as
to fashion himself, Victor “makes himself a monster. Or, to put it in other words; Frankenstein’s monster
images the monstrous nature of representation” (Cottom, 1980, p. 60). In a way he is successful in his
wish to become the first of the mortals by creating life that uncovers “the social hubris he commits by
pursuing knowledge for the sake of no one but himself” (Rauch, 1995, p. 251). The fact conforms his
solitude and Victor recognises “his own separate consciousness of himself as the most wretched of
mortals. But even if his egotism is such that he glories in this doom as the token of a special destiny, he
has become just another Gothic hero-villain, a tiresome neurotic whose presence impoverishes the
larger portion of the novel that bears his name” (Sherwin, 1981, p. 898).

From another perspective, the novel proposes a provocative example of how a biological and scientific
experiment can have an impact on several sociological sectors. Frankenstein ultimately invites readers
to consider the delicate balance between scientific advancement, social dynamics and the quest for
selfhood in an ever-evolving world. The creature’s transhumanistic characteristics serve as a
springboard for investigating the relationships between science, society and the formation of the self.
Considered from a different angle, self-fashioning journey of the creature, in the context of Greenblatt’s
theory, foregrounds the difficult process of identity development and the difficulties faced by the
members who exist outside of social norms. When the creature intends to be accepted as a member of
the community, it “has left the state of nature and learned the language and laws of society, [it] has

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
1450 / Rum el iDE J ourn al of Lan guag e and Lit er atur e Studies 2 0 2 4 . 3 8 ( F e b r u a r y )
Two Doctors as Self-Fashioned Overreachers: Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein / Afacan,
M.

gained a self-consciousness that [it] can never lose, the consciousness of his own isolation” (Mellor,
1989, p. 50). In Mary Shelley’s novel, the creature’s quest for identity and acceptance epitomises the
existential crisis inherent to Victor and the creature that finds itself “similar, yet at the same time
strangely unlike to the beings concerning whom [it] read[s], and to whose conversation [he] was a
listener” (Shelley, 2012, p. 178). As the creature navigates the intricacies of its identity, purpose and
position within society, it struggles with the precarious balance between its human and non-human
aspects and aspires to have a higher status rather than being an outcast. However, the knowledge that
gives Victor power to create also “brings about awareness of inequality in the monster and no matter
how hard [it] tries, he is never treated as equal with humans. He learns from humans love and desire
but he also learns from them rejection and denial, rage and revenge” (Sataravala, 2019, p. 216). Further
to that, the tension and opposition that exists between the creator and the creature stands for a symbolic
struggle that “can be interpreted as a semiotic battle between Victor, representative of human
community in general, and the Creature, in search of identity and social niche” (Bernatchez, 2009, p.
207). Two specific examples from the novel emphasise the creature’s pursuit of self-fashioning for
acceptance. First, the creature, upon realising its own uniqueness and isolation, pleads with Victor
Frankenstein to create a companion in its resemblance that Victor rejects for the reason “that future
ages might curse [him] as their pest, whose selfishness had not hesitated to buy its own peace at the
price, perhaps, of the existence of the whole human race” (Shelley, 2012, p. 225). This request
underscores the creature’s desire for connection and acknowledgment from a being similar to itself.
Second, when the De Lacey family, whom the creature has been observing and learning from, violently
rejects it upon discovering its appearance, the creature experiences profound despair and isolation. This
rejection highlights the probable challenges faced by marginalised beings in their quest for acceptance
and belonging within a society that often fears and ostracise them from society. Through these instances,
Shelley delves into the complexities of identity, acceptance and the human condition as experienced by
the creature in her novel that has been a scholarly debate of a separate work.

Building upon the exploration of Faustus and Frankenstein’s engagement with social, cultural and
scientific boundaries, it becomes evident that the consequences of their ambitions extend beyond
individual tragedy. Marlowe’s Faustus and Shelley’s Frankenstein, despite existing in distinct temporal
and literary contexts, intersect in underscoring a universal human struggle. Through their characters,
these works present the timeless cautionary tale of the dangers associated with unbridled ambition.
Faustus and Frankenstein, as emblematic figures of overreachers, force readers to confront the
perennial question of the ethical limits of knowledge and power. The narratives of Doctor Faustus and
Frankenstein transcend their temporal origins and offer profound insights into the perennial challenges
of human ambition and the enduring need for ethical self-reflection.

In conclusion, Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern
Prometheus present well-recognised protagonists in literary spheres as exemplary figures of well-
educated men of their own eras. The doctors are both driven by the ambitious desires to transgress the
social, moral, scientific and intellectual confines of their times. Their insatiable thirst for knowledge set
these figures aside taking their ambitious desires into consideration. They emerge as emblematic figures
of overreachers who attempt to fashion themselves and shape their destinies beyond societal and moral
boundaries. Their pursuit of knowledge and power result in tragic consequences along with highlighting
the dangers of uncontrolled ambition. Although both of these works belong to separate periods and
contexts, they epitomise a universal human struggle.

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124
 RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 2024.38 (Şubat)/ 1451
Kendi Kaderini Aşanlar Olarak İki Doktor: Christopher Marlowe’un Doctor Faustus’u ve Mary Shelley’nin Frankenstein’ı /
Afacan, M.

Works Cited
Bernatchez, J. (2009). Monstrosity, Suffering, Subjectivity, and Sympathetic Community in
Frankenstein and “The Structure of Torture.” Science Fiction Studies, 36(2), 205–216.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40649956
Bevington, D. M. (1962). From Mankind to Marlowe: Growth of structure in the popular drama of
Tudor England. Harvard University Press.
Cottom, D. (1980). Frankenstein and the Monster of Representation. SubStance, 9(3), 60–71.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3683905
Elliott, A. (2020). Concepts of the Self. Polity Press.
Farnham, W. (1969). Introduction. In W. Farnham (Ed.), Twentieth Century Interpretations of Doctor
Faustus (pp. 1–12). Prentice-Hall International Inc.
Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An introduction. Pantheon Books.
Greenblatt, S. (1980). Renaissance self-fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. University of Chicago
Press.
Kerrigan, W. (1989). Individualism, Historicism, and New Styles of Overreaching. Philosophy and
Literature, 13(1), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1353/phl.1989.0078
Levin, H. (2013). Overreacher: A Study of Christopher Marlowe. Harvard University Press.
Male, D. A. (1985). Doctor Faustus by Christopher Marlowe. Macmillan Education
UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-07608-6
Marlowe, C. (2005). Doctor Faustus (J. D. Jump, Ed.).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203977965
Mellor, A. K. (1989). Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. Routledge.
Mizener, A. (1969). The Dualism in Dr Faustus. In J. O'Neill (Ed.), Critics on Marlowe (pp. 115–118).
George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
Rauch, A. (1995). The Monstrous Body of Knowledge in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein.” Studies in
Romanticism, 34(2), 227–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/25601114
Sataravala, S. (2019). Shelley, Mary W., & Butler, M. (1994). Frankenstein: The 1818 text. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 26(1-2), 215–
223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971521518813278
Shelley, M. (2012). Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Engin Publishing.
Sherwin, P. (1981). Frankenstein: Creation as Catastrophe. PMLA, 96(5), 883–903.
https://doi.org/10.2307/462130

Adres Address
RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies
e-posta: editor@rumelide.com e-mail: editor@rumelide.com,
tel: +90 505 7958124 phone: +90 505 7958124