ity of its Ruler, is then presented to us in an allegorical picture, whereto the concluding symbol of a State overthrown by the selfishness and weakness of a self-indulgent Ruler forms an explanatory contrast.”
Schnetger divides the scene into five parts: I. “A picture of the cheerful, rich garden of Life.” II. A sketch of the disorganizing influences in human society, which require to be governed; of the beneficent powers which have lost their sway in our modern world, and of the darker elements which have taken their place. III. A representation of a well-governed State. IV. The worship of Mammon in human society, and the vulgar hunger of the multitude for gold. V. The collision of the cupidity of the People with that of the Prince, followed by a general conflagration.
Hartung considers that the forms and forces of social life are directly presented, and finds a class of persons, not of ideas, behind each mask. He seems to include the elephant and its attendants (generally accepted as the symbol of the State) among the social allegories, but sees, in the conclusion, the overthrow of civil order.
Deycks and Köstlin reject the idea of a complete and consistent allegory of Society and Government. The latter, moreover, gives a different explanation of the final catastrophe, which is quoted in its appropriate place.
Kreyssig says of the scene: “Here the poet introduces that singular masquerade in which the action of the next following scenes is announced and allegorically hinted, and which, to the dispassionate mind, if not exactly the most difficult to be comprehended, is yet one of the most entangled and unrefreshing portions of the whole poem. Here the diction first displays all those ostentatious singularities, which have brought the Second Part of Faust into such bad repute with a part of the reading world. Here the poet first manifests, in easy latitude, his known tendency to mysterious, symbolic pranks, and loads the poem with a multitude of adjuncts which seem to us unnecessary for the comprehension and proper effect of the whole—but rich material for the interpreters who are skilled in æsthetic filigree-work.”
