38. It is likely that no jurisdiction subject to lethal law has imposed a taxable tax on the transfer of a human soul. Nevertheless, the parties will want to consider all contingencies and ensure responsibility for paying the tax. Our agreement was developed to address this concern. In addition, both parties should speak to a qualified tax advisor. 83. Those considering a similar agreement would do well to remember Marlowe`s last lines, (V.iii, 23-27),Google Scholar 6. The exact legal nature of the agreement between Faust and Mephistopheles is controversial. In Marlowe, it is expressly called “gifts” (II.i, 60 and II.i, 90) or, alternatively, “bill” (II.i, 64, II.i, 74 and V.ii, 65). But the agreement between them clearly provides for more than a free transfer. For example, says Faustus, (II.i, 89-92), 77. The use of the term “exclusively” in these circumstances is intended to make the parties understand that no other authority has the power to rule on an issue within the framework of the agreement. Divine authority is naturally one of them.
Even if this cannot be to Faust`s advantage, Mephistopheles would probably insist on this exclusivity, for any other court would probably not find in his favour, especially the one that was summoned under divine authority. Faust will simply have to live with this clause or risk being accused of finding an “out”. 74. The purpose of the provision is to ensure that the rights and obligations of the parties remain effective in the event of death, transfer or any other case resulting in the replacement of a party under the agreement. For example, if Faust died during the delivery of the purchase price, Mephistopheles would retain the executors of his estate bound by the terms of the contract on the basis of that provision. In order to be able, for example, to require the delivery of Faust`s books and recordings (see section 4.1 (d)). Unlike Faustus`, Goethe`s call to God is ignored (v.ii., 173-175). Google Scholar Indeed, it is ignored, precisely because the parties have chosen to regulate the agreement by the laws of hell, because Mephistophelis informs Faustus- if Faustus tries to break his agreement- “Christ cannot save your soul, because it is righteous;/there is none, but I have an interest in it.” (II.ii., 87-88). Google Scholar The last line of the drama emphasizes this point by suggesting that the tragedy of Faustus was in its exercise, “more than the celestial power allowed” (v.iii., 27). Google Scholar A pact with the devil (a deal with the devil or a good Faustian deal) is an agreement with evil, in the form of the devil, often (as in the story of Faust) with the paradoxical intention of achieving a much higher otherwise hindered.