All That Is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity

Berman explores the complexities of Faust’s inner turmoil and his quest for authentic human experience beyond the confines of his scholarly achievements. Faust, despite his intellectual accomplishments and recognition in various academic fields, is depicted as a middle-aged man trapped in a state of existential despair, feeling isolated and dissatisfied with the hollow nature of his successes. Berman illustrates how Faust’s journey is emblematic of the broader modern struggle between the inner self and the external world and between intellectual introspection and the desire for tangible, worldly engagement.

Berman argues that Faust’s invocation of the Earth Spirit and his subsequent rejection due to his disproportionate aspirations highlight a pivotal moment of self-realization. Goethe introduces the concept of the Obermensch, or “Superman,” Berman contends, not to glorify Faust’s grandiose ambitions but to underscore the misplaced nature of such striving, suggesting instead a return to authentic human values and connections.

Berman connects Faust’s individual crisis to the societal tensions preceding the French and Industrial Revolutions, portraying Faust as a figure representative of the intellectual and cultural elite who, while contributing to the dynamism of modern culture, remain detached from the broader societal and material realities. This detachment, according to Berman, signifies a broader cultural and social malaise in early modern Europe, particularly in “underdeveloped” regions like Germany, where the rapid intellectual and cultural developments contrast sharply with rigid social and economic structures.

The chapter explores the transformative potential of reconnecting with one’s childhood and the primal, emotional aspects of the self, as illustrated by Faust’s reinvigorated desire to engage with the world following his contemplation of suicide on Easter Sunday. This moment of rebirth is seen as a crucial step toward overcoming the dichotomy between intellectual isolation and the yearning for meaningful worldly action.

In Chapter 2, Berman explores the tragic love story of Gretchen and Faust, reevaluating its significance beyond a mere tale of love and innocence lost. Unlike traditional interpretations that cast Gretchen as a simple, pure-hearted maiden, Berman presents her as a complex figure whose tragic fate highlights the clash between modern sensibilities and the traditional, oppressive structures of her small-town community. This narrative arc not only explores the dynamics of Faust and Gretchen’s relationship but also critiques the rigid societal norms that ultimately lead to Gretchen’s downfall.

In Berman’s analysis, Faust’s transformation into the “lover” signifies a critical phase in his personal development, driven by his engagement with Mephistopheles. His newfound sexual and emotional awakening, catalyzed by the devil’s influence, marks a departure from his previously isolated intellectual life. This metamorphosis comes at a cost, however, primarily to Gretchen, whose entanglement with Faust propels her into a world of social ostracization, guilt, and despair.

Berman emphasizes the role of the “little world”—the conservative, religious small town—as a third protagonist in this tragedy. This setting is not merely a backdrop but an active force that, through its rigid moral and social codes, contributes to Gretchen’s destruction. Her struggle and eventual downfall serve as a critique of these insular communities, underscoring the destructive power of traditional values when confronted with the desires and forces of modernity.

Through the lens of development, both personal and societal, the chapter articulates the profound impacts of modern desires—embodied by Faust and the destabilizing presence of Mephistopheles—on a world ill-equipped to accommodate them. Gretchen’s tragic end is not just the result of her affair with Faust but also a manifestation of her own quest for self-realization within a society that stifles individual growth.

Berman’s analysis reveals the Gretchen tragedy as a complex exploration of the tensions between progress and tradition and between individual desires and communal expectations, highlighting the human cost of societal transformation. This interpretation considers the narrative not just as a story of individual failure but as a broader commentary on the painful processes of modernization and the dissolution of traditional social structures.

In Chapter 3, Berman examines the final phase of Faust’s life as depicted in the latter part of Goethe’s masterpiece, focusing on Faust’s transition from an individual seeking personal fulfillment to a figure embodying the force of modern development. This segment marks Faust’s ultimate engagement with the material world through ambitious projects that aim to harness nature for the benefit of humanity, signifying a merger of romantic aspirations for self-development with the tangible achievements of economic and societal progress.

Faust’s vision encompasses large-scale reclamation efforts to control the sea, the creation of fertile lands, and the foundation of new communities, embodying the developer’s dream of transforming the environment to meet human needs. This vision, however, is not without its costs, as Berman points out through the tragic episode involving Philemon and Baucis, an elderly couple whose existence becomes an obstacle to Faust’s grand plans. Their fate highlights the inherent tension between modernization and the remnants of a pre-modern world, illustrating the darker aspects of development such as displacement and the loss of innocence.

Berman probes the political dimensions of development, noting Faust’s alliance with the Emperor to secure the power and resources necessary for his projects. This partnership underscores the complexities of navigating the political landscape to achieve developmental goals and the compromises that often accompany such endeavors.

The narrative culminates in Faust’s realization of his achievements, juxtaposed with his tragic end. Blinded and struck by the consequences of his actions, Berman argues that Faust embodies the paradox of the modern developer: one who creates new worlds while inadvertently destroying others. His blindness serves as a metaphor for the inability to foresee the full impact of development, emphasizing the theme of loss that accompanies progress.

In the Epilogue to Part 1, Berman reflects on the legacy and implications of Goethe’s Faust for modern society. He identifies Faust as a precursor to the monumental projects and ambitions of both capitalist and socialist development, emphasizing the drive for modernization and its accompanying human costs. Berman argues that the type of development Faust undertakes—grandiose, visionary, and aimed at the long-term betterment of humanity—resonates more with utopian socialist ideals of the 19th century than with capitalist pursuits for immediate profit. Specifically, Berman draws parallels between Faust’s projects and those proposed by the Saint-Simonians, early proponents of socialism, highlighting their focus on large-scale infrastructure and communal benefits.

Berman elucidates that while Faust’s motivations and the outcomes of his actions provide a model for development, they also embody the tragic aspects of modernization—displacement, destruction, and the erasure of the pre-modern world. He critically examines the transformation of natural and urban landscapes in advanced industrial societies, where development often leaves behind a trail of devastation and renders communities and environments obsolete.

Berman further discusses the adaptation of the Faustian model in the 20th century, notably among nuclear scientists who see themselves as making a “Faustian bargain” with society. This metaphor captures the ambivalence of scientific progress, offering immense power and potential for societal benefit at the risk of catastrophic consequences. Berman critiques the tendency to vilify the “Faustian Man” as the root of modern ecological and social crises, arguing instead for a more nuanced understanding of development that acknowledges the collective responsibility that society has in shaping its own direction.