59. This provision is largely self-explanatory. It is also a question of addressing the circumstances that may arise during the period between the execution of the contract and its execution. Regarding the form of the agreement, legend suggests that an execution contract (unlike a spot contract) is more appropriate in the circumstances. Goethe and Marlowe`s texts look at a transaction structure made of Faust`s promise to transfer his soul to Mephistopheles, if and when Mephistophele`s beautiful Faust moment. The promise is forward-looking and conditional; it sees no immediate performance envisaged. At the same time, it should be noted that we are not dealing with a conditional sales contract. Mephistopheles does not take the soul of Faust (at least not literally) to get the property at a later date (for example. B at the time of delivery of the purchase price – the “beautiful moment”). Although the obligation to deliver the purchase price is a precondition for closing the transaction (for example.
B the transfer of Faust`s soul). 82. In legal practice, individuals are sometimes required to put their legal seal on a document. The intention is to prove the review. The closing act usually includes the installation of a small red glue (e.g. the size of a pea) next to the signature. Compare this with Mephistophelis` Push Faustus for: “… Write a gift with your own blood, for this security yearns for Lucifer” (II.i.36-37). Google Scholar similar, in Goethe, , Mephistopheles says Faust, “And for your signature, a drop of blood” (1737). Google scholar Faust is bored and depressed with his scholarly life. After trying to commit suicide, he calls on the devil to have more magical knowledge and powers to indulge in all the fun and knowledge of the world.
In response, the devil`s representative, Mephistopheles, appears. He makes a windfall with the fist: Mephistopheles will serve Faust with his magical powers for a specified number of years, but at the end of the term, the devil will claim the soul of Faust, and Faust will be eternally enslaved. The fallen angel and the leader of hell who takes the mission of Faustus` soul. He is master of all demons. 9. In Marlowe, Mephistophelis (next to Lucifer and Belzebub) is broadcast like a demon. In addition, he describes himself as an unhappy mind, “… who fell with Lucifer” (I.III, 73). In Goethe, Mephistopheles called himself “the devil” (353, 1408), but, pushed by Faust to give his name, he only admits that he “is part of that power that would constantly do evil and constantly does good” (1336). Here Faust appears as Christ, and Mephistopheles is the devil incarnate, which implies an unusual reading of Goethe`s play.
There are, of course, many ways to approach this task. For example, we could take a purely historical approach and try to isolate and study as far as possible the exact legal meaning of an “action gift” or “bill” in Marlowe`s time (or “bet” in Goethe`s time) and try to deduce from this point of view an understanding of the nature and nature of the legal document that each of these authors examines. We could then study the legend of the Fist in light of the legal issues raised by this type of document. However, I do not wish to pursue this specific approach in this document. My interest in the legend of the fist is not strictly historical; Nor is it a question of “reconstituting” precisely Marlowe`s interpretation of the legend on the basis of a historical analysis of the law. On the contrary, as I indicated in the introduction, I would like to examine how contract law and the dynamics of legislation can help to highlight important philosophical issues at the heart of the Faustian legend.
