In Christopher Marlowe 's play Doctor Faustus, the plot focalizes around John Faustus, a character that sells his soul to the devil in exchange for knowledge. Similarly, in William Shakespeare 's Hamlet, the ambitious King Claudius murders his own brother to achieve wealth and power as the King of Denmark. These sinful crimes compromise the integrity of both male characters and inflict devastating consequences on their well-being and ability to coexist peacefully within their respective plays. By comparing and contrasting the end of Doctor Faustus within the B-text to King Claudius 's soliloquy within Act 3 of Hamlet, this paper will examine the emotional response their sins elicit, the issues surrounding their willingness to repent, and the
…show more content…
As John Faustus 's "limbs / [are] all torn asunder by the hand of death" (Marlowe 5.3.6-7), this proves "the devils whom [he] served" (5.3. 8) are the reason for his brutal death. However, while Faustus inexplicably dies, the nature of his death is significant because it suggests that John Faustus is murdered for his repentance. Even as John Faustus repents, the warning that the "devils will tear thee to pieces" (2.3. 79) is actualized by "[his] shriek and call aloud for help" (5.3. 10). Like those who expect salvation …show more content…
While King Claudius is able to repent, he still forgoes it because he is unable to relinquish the power he has inherited from the death of his brother. Conversely, John Faustus does repent, but is still tore to pieces; this makes him a tragic character that meets an underserved end. These differences make King Claudius a more villainous character than the tragic Doctor John Faustus. However, as both John Faustus and King Claudius die in their respective plays, this has drastic implications on the justness of each death. While King Claudius 's death is justifiable because he finally pays for the crimes that he does not repent for, it makes the death of John Faustus questionable because — as one who has repented for their sins — he should be freed from the consequences of his sins. Ultimately, readers and audiences alike are left to ponder whether repentance is truly the key to salvation or, in according to what Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare seem to suggest in both their plays, if it is simply better to not engage in any activities or actions that are considered
As John Faustus 's "limbs / [are] all torn asunder by the hand of death" (Marlowe 5.3.6-7), this proves "the devils whom [he] served" (5.3. 8) are the reason for his brutal death. However, while Faustus inexplicably dies, the nature of his death is significant because it suggests that John Faustus is murdered for his repentance. Even as John Faustus repents, the warning that the "devils will tear thee to pieces" (2.3. 79) is actualized by "[his] shriek and call aloud for help" (5.3. 10). Like those who expect salvation …show more content…
While King Claudius is able to repent, he still forgoes it because he is unable to relinquish the power he has inherited from the death of his brother. Conversely, John Faustus does repent, but is still tore to pieces; this makes him a tragic character that meets an underserved end. These differences make King Claudius a more villainous character than the tragic Doctor John Faustus. However, as both John Faustus and King Claudius die in their respective plays, this has drastic implications on the justness of each death. While King Claudius 's death is justifiable because he finally pays for the crimes that he does not repent for, it makes the death of John Faustus questionable because — as one who has repented for their sins — he should be freed from the consequences of his sins. Ultimately, readers and audiences alike are left to ponder whether repentance is truly the key to salvation or, in according to what Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare seem to suggest in both their plays, if it is simply better to not engage in any activities or actions that are considered