Here are the questions for weeks 1 - 3. Please use the comments section to post your answers. Do not make a new blog:
1. What genres do the following texts belong to?
Voluspa, Volsunga Saga, Beowulf, The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
Give some examples from these texts that support your identification (for example: "Voluspa is an example of the _____ genre, as the following references to gods from the poem illustrate: "Hear my words / you holy gods' (l.1) "By Odin's Will I'll speak the ancient lore" (l.3), etc).
2. What are some possible features of residual (or "secondary") orality preserved in Voluspa, according to the criteria Ong (1982) advances?
3. Identify a central incident that happens in at least four of the above texts, and discuss how it is both similar and different in each example (remember to cite from the original texts).
4. How did Tolkien draw on the Old Norse and Old English texts in his Hobbit and Lord of the Rings fantasy novels? Provide some concrete examples.
5. Discuss how Tolkien's use of "tradition" (e.g. older literary sources) differs from the techniques and agendas of modernism (see Week 7 in your Reader).
6. What place do the old myths have in the modern world?
7. How does the film Beowulf and Grendel "problematise" the hero-myth of Beowulf ?
8. Discuss what you think any of these texts desire (in the sense of their intention, how they wish to be received, what pleasures they offer).
Voluspa, Volsunga Saga, Beowulf, The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
Give some examples from these texts that support your identification (for example: "Voluspa is an example of the _____ genre, as the following references to gods from the poem illustrate: "Hear my words / you holy gods' (l.1) "By Odin's Will I'll speak the ancient lore" (l.3), etc).
2. What are some possible features of residual (or "secondary") orality preserved in Voluspa, according to the criteria Ong (1982) advances?
3. Identify a central incident that happens in at least four of the above texts, and discuss how it is both similar and different in each example (remember to cite from the original texts).
4. How did Tolkien draw on the Old Norse and Old English texts in his Hobbit and Lord of the Rings fantasy novels? Provide some concrete examples.
5. Discuss how Tolkien's use of "tradition" (e.g. older literary sources) differs from the techniques and agendas of modernism (see Week 7 in your Reader).
6. What place do the old myths have in the modern world?
7. How does the film Beowulf and Grendel "problematise" the hero-myth of Beowulf ?
8. Discuss what you think any of these texts desire (in the sense of their intention, how they wish to be received, what pleasures they offer).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQ7. How does the film Beowulf and Grendel “problematize” the hero-myth of Beowulf?
ReplyDeleteThe hero-myth of Beowulf presents the tale of a man who saves a kingdom from a monster named Grendel. In the poem, it is clear who the protagonist and antagonists are. However, the way the film Beowulf and Grendel complicates this is by blurring the lines between the two. Like any good movie, the villain is given a backstory and his actions are in turn supported by a traumatising event that he has experienced in the past. Giving a villain a motive and backstory is a form of modernising, compared to the old black and white, good and evil. Grendel is turned into what Bureman (n.d.) describes as a “Pity Anti-Villain”, which is “a character who makes you feel sorry for them”. This is apparent from the moment Grendel is introduced into the movie. The writers not only present the character as human, but also as a child to generate empathy from the audience and inspire a connection between the child and the viewer. Everyone has been a child in their lives, and has lost someone or something important to them in one way or another, whether this be a close relative or even a pet. The act of introducing Grendel as a child and then immediately witnessing him lose one of the only significant people in his life, his father, instantly makes Grendel relatable.
“Memorable villains are usually wounded individuals” (Drago, n.d.). An aspect of the movie that supports this idea is the addition of the character Selma. Selma gives Beowulf and most importantly, the audience, insight to how Grendel thinks, what he says and what has happened in his past. This not only evokes sympathy from the audience, but also from the character of Beowulf. This further complicates the typical hero-villain structure because it lessens the idea that Grendel is the villain of the story. Beowulf is then presented with the issue of morality when Grendel refuses to fight him and in the end, does not battle with Grendel or defeat him in any sort of way. Grendel is defeated by his own mistakes guided by the lust of revenge. Near the end of the movie, Beowulf says that Grendel is “no more human than you and I" (Gunnarsson, 2005) proving that Grendel is no longer a villain in Beowulf’s eyes, but rather an equal.
References
Beowulf and Grendel. (2005). [film] Iceland: Sturla Gunnarsson.
Bureman, L. (n.d.). Four Types of Anti-Villains. [Blog] The Write Practice. Available at: http://thewritepractice.com/types-anti-villains/ [Accessed 14 Mar. 2017].
Drago, A. (n.d.). 5 Characteristics of an Epic Villain. [Blog] Mythic Scribes. Available at: https://mythicscribes.com/character-development/5-characteristics-epic-villain/ [Accessed 14 Mar. 2017].
Good point, as in the most of the movie, many villains tend to be "good". They did something made them look like villains, but they are more likely did something "wrong". Your answer is great to the question, but it will be better if you can relate some points of the epic poem.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi Yves,
DeleteThe task was to discuss how the film problematises the hero-myth of Beowulf, which I've done. I'm unsure what you mean about relating some points of the epic poem. I have mentioned the poem in the beginning of my answer, I feel that the way the film problematises the hero-myth is by not having a single villain or hero, therefore my answer focuses on how the film blurs the lines between good and evil.
Good answer, Emily. The film hits a modern anti-colonial theme. Beowulf is the invader/coloniser, while Grendel represents the defeated indigenous population, decimated by the invader. This gives the movie a political dimension.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the invader/coloniser in the film was more so the king rather than Beowulf. I feel Beowulf was more of a visitor and the purpose of his character was to discover the secrets of the plot. I view the king as more of a villain and Beowulf and Grendel are equals as protagonists. This is shown through Beowulf's line I mentioned earlier and also from the title of the film. You mentioned that Grendel represents the defeated indigenous population that is decimated by the invader, however Beowulf is not the character who does this. In fact, it is the king who kills Grendel's father and Beowulf does not actually battle Grendel. From what I observed, Beowulf does not actually want to battle Grendel, but instead pities him.
DeleteFair enough comment, Emily. However, whether it is Beowulf himself or his king, it was their people who displaced and murdered the original inhabitants of that place. So the political dimension still holds. These complexities upset the simple morality of the original story, turn the story on its head, and so create a more subversive film.
DeleteYes I agree. The Norse themselves were conquerors who glorified war so it isn't surprising that they would portray themselves as the "good guys" and the original inhabitants as "monsters" as they did in the poem. The movie does give insight into a different side of the story, being the story of the original inhabitants and I agree that this aspect of the film further disrupts the views the poem aims to convey.
DeleteQuestion 7
ReplyDeleteHow does the film Beowulf and Grendel "problematize" the hero-myth of Beowulf?
In the 2005 film Beowulf and Grendel is set in the time of the Anglo-Saxons in 500 A.D. The first epic poem was composed around 800 A.D. where Christianity was a prominent figure in governing and law making (Addison, 2009, p. 38). Therefore, finger prints of Christianity were present in both the poem and the film. Christianity is briefly explored in the film as a priest survives the encounter with Grendel seemingly through prayer alone, later baptising the town for their protection. Woman’s rights were also explored in the film showing Selma as being resilient and empathetic, overcoming challenges in her life during the dark ages. She is faced with the death of her parents leaving her vulnerable, sexually abused, casting woman as a tool for pleasure rather than equals. Then there is Beowulf, a hero who has come to save Denmark from an evil troll known as Grendel. Grendel has been marked as an evil troll for his killing and mutilating of twenty soldiers. The film problematises the legend of Beowulf by creating a different context within the legend. Bringing understanding to Grendel’s actions and creating sympathy for this character rather than setting him up to be an antagonist. There is no simple good versus evil.
The film starts with Grendel’s father being murdered by Danes while Grendel watches. This is a heart-breaking moment, especially when Grendel goes on to find his father’s dead body. He tries to wake him, as Grendel’s too small to move the body he hacks off his head and cherishes it. This is a turning point for Grendel. The hate for the Danes, having to grow up without the guidance of a father figure. Grieving for a lost parent and the haunting dreams of the death witnessed. By setting up the scene viewers can relate to how Grendel is feeling and why. The viewers understand the revenge he exacts on the soldiers, having seen the traumatic events that unfolded. Knowing that anyone who had experienced this would be emotionally scared. It is understood by the audience that Grendel was a product of his environment, not the monster that is portrayed in the epic poem, undermining the original purpose of the text.
This is shown in the film (2005) when Beowulf has an encounter with Grendel in the hills, Selma as a translator. Beowulf asks Selma why Grendel won’t fight him, she replies,
“Why should he? You’ve done nothing to him.”
Beowulf in the epic poem Beowulf (Alexander, 2010) is the perfect archetypal of a hero, big, strong, handsome, brave. Many parts of the poem write of his strengths and bravery but in this passage a watchman describes his figure.
ReplyDelete“I have not in my life set eyes on a man with more might in his frame than this helmed lord. He’s no hall-fellow dressed in fine armour, or his face belies him; he has the head of a hero.” (p. 10)
The legend Beowulf (Heaney, 1999) writes of how he saves towns and cities from Grendel and Grendel’s mother.
“triumphed in Heorot in the fight with Grendel. He out grappled the monster and his evil kin.” (p.74)
Through the battle with Grendel there is not a moment of sympathy for the monster. Casting Grendel in a dark light, as read in this passage,
“One began to encompass evil, an enemy from hell. Grendel they called this cruel spirit”. (Alexander, 2010, p.4)
Beowulf overcomes all quest that no other man could do alone, following the typical good versus evil. In the poem, there is no explanation of Grendel’s father and no Selma to assist Beowulf in trying to understand the monster. In the poem, they tell of Grendel being, “kindred of Cain” (Alexander, 2010, p.5), this view never changing. At the end of the film (2005) however, a story teller refers to Grendel being like Cain, a killer, and another man turns and says,
“We all are. The tale is shit”.
The film questions the integrity of Beowulf. Instead of being a hero when Grendel is killed, the viewer could see him as a brute that follows orders and kills for glory. Killing Grendel for the people even though he knows it is not the right thing to do.
We are left then to decide who we believe to be the true antagonist. A troll who was wronged and reacted in a way any normal man at that time would or Beowulf, the perfect archetypal of a hero but killed a creature for glory rather than right or wrong.
REFERENCING
Addison, J. T. (2009). The Medieval Missionary: A study of the conversion of Northern Europe A.D. 500-1300. Oregon, United States: Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Alexander, M. (Trans). (2010). Beowulf. Victoria, Australia: Penguin Group.
Gunnarsson, S. (Director&Producer) & Cowan, M., Jordan E., Karlsottir, A. M., Piette, J., Stephens, P. (Producers) & Berzins, A. R. (Writer). (2005). Beowulf & Grendel [Motion picture]. Iceland: Union Station Media & Equinoxe Films
Heaney, S. (Trans). (1999). Beowulf: a new translation. London: Penguin.
EDITED ANALYSIS. Bianca Janse van vuuren
DeleteHi Mike, I didn't know if I was to delete the other submitted copy but here is my final, edited answer.
Q7.
In the 2005 film Beowulf and Grendel is set in the time of the Anglo-Saxons in 500 A.D. The first epic poem was composed around 800 A.D. where Christianity was a prominent figure in governing and law making (Addison, 2009, p. 38). Therefore, finger prints of Christianity were present in both the poem and the film. Christianity is briefly explored in the film as a priest survives the encounter with Grendel seemingly through prayer alone, later baptising the town for their protection.
Along with religion, woman’s rights are also explored in the film through Selma. Showing Selma as being resilient and empathetic, overcoming challenges in her life during the middle ages. She is faced with the death of her parents leaving her vulnerable, sexually abused, casting woman as a tool for pleasure rather than equals. Alixe Bovey (n.d.) writes of women in the middle ages being under men’s authority. Being a religious period, women were held accountable for the ‘original sin’ of Eve.
Then there is Beowulf, a hero who has come to save Denmark from an evil troll known as Grendel. Grendel has been marked as an evil troll for his killing and mutilating of twenty soldiers. The film problematises the legend of Beowulf by creating a different context within the legend. Bringing understanding to Grendel’s actions and creating sympathy for this character rather than setting him up to be an antagonist. There is no simple good versus evil.
The film starts with Grendel’s father being murdered by Danes while Grendel watches. This is a heart-breaking moment, especially when Grendel goes on to find his father’s dead body. He tries to wake him, as Grendel’s too small to move the body he hacks off his head and cherishes it. This is a turning point for Grendel. The hate for the Danes, having to grow up without the guidance of a father figure. Grieving for a lost parent and the haunting dreams of the death witnessed.
By setting up the scene viewers can relate to how Grendel is feeling and why. The viewers understand the revenge he exacts on the soldiers, having seen the traumatic events that unfolded. Knowing that anyone who had experienced this would be emotionally scared. It is understood by the audience that Grendel was a product of his environment, not the monster that is portrayed in the epic poem, undermining the original purpose of the text.
This is shown in the film (2005) when Beowulf has an encounter with Grendel in the hills, Selma as a translator. Beowulf asks Selma why Grendel won’t fight him, she replies,
“Why should he? You’ve done nothing to him.”
Beowulf in the epic poem Beowulf (Alexander, 2010) is the perfect archetypal of a hero, big, strong, handsome, brave. Many parts of the poem write of his strengths and bravery but in this passage a watchman describes his figure.
Delete“I have not in my life set eyes on a man with more might in his frame than this helmed lord. He’s no hall-fellow dressed in fine armour, or his face belies him; he has the head of a hero.” (p. 10)
The legend Beowulf (Heaney, 1999) writes of how he saves towns and cities from Grendel and Grendel’s mother.
“triumphed in Heorot in the fight with Grendel. He out grappled the monster and his evil kin.” (p.74)
Through the battle with Grendel there is not a moment of sympathy for the monster. Casting Grendel in a dark light, as read in this passage,
“One began to encompass evil, an enemy from hell. Grendel they called this cruel spirit”. (Alexander, 2010, p.4)
Beowulf overcomes all quest that no other man could do alone, following the typical good versus evil. In the poem, there is no explanation of Grendel’s father and no Selma to assist Beowulf in trying to understand the monster. In the poem, they tell of Grendel being, “kindred of Cain” (Alexander, 2010, p.5), this view never changing. At the end of the film (2005) however, a story teller refers to Grendel being like Cain, a killer, and another man turns and says,
“We all are. The tale is shit”.
The film questions the integrity of Beowulf. Instead of being a hero when Grendel is killed, the viewer could see him as a brute that follows orders and kills for glory. Killing Grendel for the people even though he knows it is not the right thing to do.
We are left then to decide who we believe to be the true antagonist. A troll who was wronged and reacted in a way any normal man at that time would or Beowulf, the perfect archetypal of a hero but killed a creature for glory rather than right or wrong.
REFERENCING:
Addison, J. T. (2009). The Medieval Missionary: A study of the conversion of Northern Europe A.D. 500-1300. Oregon, United States: Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Alexander, M. (Trans). (2010). Beowulf. Victoria, Australia: Penguin Group.
Bovey, A. (n.d.). Women in medieval Society. Retrieved March 15, 2017 from https://www.bl.uk/the-middle-ages/articles/women-in-medieval-society.
Gunnarsson, S. (Director&Producer) & Cowan, M., Jordan E., Karlsottir, A. M., Piette, J., Stephens, P. (Producers) & Berzins, A. R. (Writer). (2005). Beowulf & Grendel [Motion picture]. Iceland: Union Station Media & Equinoxe Films.
Heaney, S. (Trans). (1999). Beowulf: a new translation. London: Penguin.
It was incredible that you can think about women's rights. Not only Selma, every woman in the movie were not equal to men and mostly are widows. What made Selma really pathetic is that everyone excluded her and said she is just a witch. Also, in the movie, Selma was being sexually abused by Grendel and even had a child. When Grendel came to her cabin. Selma was scared in the begging, she did not even tried to refuse and fight with Grendel. She just wanted to be safe rather than virginal.
DeleteHi Bianca,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your response, however I disagree with the view that Beowulf is seen as a brute. In the movie, Grendel is not actually killed by anyone but himself. Beowulf doesn't know what the "right" thing to do is and in my opinion, neither should the audience. Should Beowulf let Grendel keep terrorising the town because he feels sorry for him? Or should he keep his promise to save the town from a man who has killed 20 of it's people? Either way, the writers chose for him and Grendel kills himself by cutting off his arm. The way the movie problematises the hero-myth of Beowulf is that there is no true protagonist or antagonist. Depending on who's story you follow, there is always a different villain and a different hero. For the king, Grendel is the villian and Beowulf is the hero. For Selma, the king is the villain and Grendel is the hero. Even if we do understand why someone kills, this doesn't make it acceptable. At the end of the day killing for revenge and killing for loyalty are both still villainous acts.
Hi Emily,
DeleteThank you for reading and reviewing my post. I appreciate your opinion and can see where you are coming from. However, the question was how does the film "problematise" the legend of Beowulf. After reading the epic poem of Beowulf we cant help but admire the character, Beowulf, his bravery, loyalty and physique. Never do we second guess his character, his motives or his decisions. In the film however, we immediately get a different view. As you said in your post, we all have lost something or someone in our lives, so the film intentionally pulls at that string creating a bond with the character Grendel, who is supposably the "bad guy". Beowulf on the other hand, although some may admire his loyalty, the choices he makes, wanting to fight Grendel on the hill. Each opportunity wanting to kill him does somewhat depict him as a brute. Only fighting to get the "hero" title, for loyalty but not for what he thought was right. The film involves the audience by creating this good vs evil dilemma, and by doing this we all engage and have our own opinion on what is right and wrong. In my opinion after watching the film, Beowulf knows its not right to kill Grendel. Grendel does kill himself trying to get away from Beowulf, who was trying to kill him and would have succeeded most likely if he hadn't of cut his arm off. Grendel only killed those who wronged him. He would have hurt no one else if they left him alone. The king and Beowulf wanted to kill Grendel because he had wronged them and they wouldn't stop until he was dead. Both sides are wrong and as you say it is unacceptable to kill, making all their characters questionable. This leaving each individual audience member to have their own opinion on who is wrong and right, "problematising" the legend. Mine being that Beowulf isn't just a "normal" human. He grew up with other humans and had someone to look up to, he should know better. Grendel had no father figure, no one to steer him on the right path, revenge is all he knew. He was karma in a sense, if he was left alone, if they left selma alone he would have not hurt anyone else. But as I say thats my opinion we all may differ. The poem however is straight cut, Beowulf is a hero.
Hi Bianca,
DeleteI don't disagree that the poem and the film give us very different views of the character of Beowulf. I do, however, disagree that he is seen as a brute that only fights for the title of 'hero'. Beowulf is not a savage person who kills for fun. In his mind, his purpose at that moment is to save the town from a terrorising troll. He is still introduced as a man who is brave and loyal, however, I do not believe that at the end of the movie that he still wants to kill Grendel just because he wants to be called a hero. Grendel has killed 20 or more men including one of Beowulf's friends. Beowulf has a duty to the king because of his promise to save the kingdom. Although he may feel sympathy for Grendel, that does not excuse the crimes he has committed. As I said before, killing for revenge and killing for loyalty are still both villainous acts, no matter what a person's background is. I did say that the film problematises the hero-myth of Beowulf because it does not give us a clear view on who is good and who is evil and yes, this does leave it to the audience to decide who the protagonist and antagonists are. In my opinion, both characters have equal protagonist and antagonist qualities. From what I have read, I assume that you believe that Grendel is more of a protagonist than Beowulf.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJust an addition to my previous comment, you say that the king and Beowulf wanted to kill Grendel because he had wronged them and wouldn't stop until he was dead. This can apply to Grendel as well. Grendel wanted to kill the Danes because they had wronged him and wouldn't stop until they were all dead. You also say that Grendel only killed those who wronged him, this is somewhat true in my opinion. He killed Beowulf's friend because he had destroyed his father's scull and he had killed the Danes because they had killed his father, however Grendel's father was killed under the king's command, so why not just kill the king. Is it acceptable to blame all Danish soldiers for the death of your father?
DeleteHi Emily, thanks for giving me a side to think about.
DeleteIn your argument the king is portrayed as being "bad guy". You have pointed out that Beowulf is loyal to the king. Beowulf is the kings sward, by association this already implements Beowulf. He is doing the kings bidding and therefore is being the arm of the villain. Yes the 'Troll' has killed his friend but these people have killed others (who have had families and friends), they also raped a women who couldn’t defend herself. These men are there to protect people, however a women who needed protection from them they took advantage of. Its almost like saying the people who followed Hitler arn't bad people, they were just loyal to the bad person (extreme context). Beowulf could have made his own decision on the matter, he is given all the information from Selma and the king on why Grendel isn't a bad person.
This argument can be reversed and that they are killing Grendel's family and raping his friend. That Grendel has a duty to protect the mother of his child and his family who they continue to threaten, since he was a child when his father was killed over a fish. He relates any human as a threat, killing over something so small. Would you let a lion walk up to you and do what it wants or will you immediately defend yourself? The lion could mean no harm however, we relate with what we know of lions, that they want to kill us if we are close. Same with Grendel, from young these people have shown him they are entrust worthy and kill for nothing. His first reaction will be to defend himself.
These are people who came to this land and took what they wanted with no thought of consequences. Invaders. Grendel was trying to protect himself, his family and his land. Beowulf understands this at the end, when he pauses before attacking him. In that moment he decided he wanted to be the hero, no matter if it was wrong or right. Grendel never wanted to kill Beowulf, he had not wronged him. Grendel killed those who killed his father and harmed Selma. If these 'invaders' stopped with the unnecessary killings for their gain and stopped harming Selma, Grendel would have stopped. Each Danish had a choice, they chose to listen to the king. They cant not be held accountable for their actions just because someone else gave the order. Responsibility and punishment is given where its is due. As I said before these people know the difference between wrong and right, they have had a family to bring them up. Grendel however, had this taken away from him, killing may not be the answer to the problems but he learnt from those around him. He learnt from the Danish people that killing is what is done to solve a problem. If the Dane's reacted different or treated people better he may have learnt this but this is not the case.
Hi Bianca,
DeleteYou make some very good points, however I still have to disagree with you. For example, your reference to Hitler and his army. I think the situations between Beowulf and the King and Hitler and his army are completely different. The King did not ask for Beowulf's help, Beowulf offered it. Beowulf is not doing the Kings bidding, rather helping the King do what he can't do himself. I do see the King as a bad person in where he kills Grendel's father just for stealing, that was a villainous act. However, I don't see him as a villain. He is not a "malicious person who is devoted to wickedness or crime" (villain, n.d.).
Regarding the point you made about how Grendel killed Beowulf's friend but they have killed others who have had families and friends, Grendel has also killed other Danish men who have also had families and friends. You say that they have raped a woman who couldn't defend herself, Grendel has also raped that same woman. Like I said before, just because Beowulf does not think Grendel is a bad person shouldn't stop him from terrorising a town he swore to protect. Grendel chooses to protect Selma sure, but no one knows about his child, no one is trying to kill his child or Selma. Also, he goes further by attacking and killing Danish soldiers every night for his revenge.
You say Grendel relates any human as a threat and you refer to humans as lions. If that were true, he would have killed Selma and Beowulf on the spot as soon as he met them, because they are humans too. Lions kill to protect their young and to provide food for their pride, they don’t just kill anything they see and we know this from observation and research, not experience. I for one have never experienced a lion trying to kill me. If I did see a lion, the first thing I would do is run and hide, I would not be capable of defending myself against a lion, but I am not an enormous troll who can rip people limb from limb. Also, Grendel is not the prey of the Danish like how you described the relationship between a human and a lion. The king and his men only start to hunt Grendel as soon as he massacres a mead hall full of Danish soldiers. It is only speculation whether Grendel would have stopped and from what I have seen, it seems Grendel would have not stopped until every Danish soldier and the King was dead. Now imagine that Grendel is the lion. If a lion attacks a village because they killed it’s father (even though lions don’t seek revenge), would the villagers leave the lion alone in hopes that he leaves them alone or would they seek to eliminate the threat to protect their people?
The soldiers have a duty to the King, so if the King commands a man to be dead, they do it, it is not a choice. Just how if a policeman orders you to put your hands behind your head, you do it because they have authority over you. Blaming all of a mans actions on childhood trauma and that he had no one to tell him between right and wrong does not excuse his villainous actions of killing and terrorising. This was a war between Grendel and the Danish and Beowulf as an ally to the King. It is a matter of perspective when deciding who the villain and the hero of the story is. From my point of view, as a person of the audience, there is no hero and there is no villain, which is why this film problematises the hero-myth of Beowulf. The King is not a villain, Beowulf is not a villain and Grendel is not a villain, and neither one is more villainous than the other, they are just on different sides of the fight.
villain. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved March 27, 2017 from Dictionary.com website http://www.dictionary.com/browse/villain
Hi Emily and Bianca. what a great discussion. This is academic writing at its best, fully a discussion. Arguably, there are no villains in the film, nor are there any heroes in the straightforward sense. Can anyone see the spectre of genocide here? The killing of Grendel's father was part of a land grab. Grendel hasn't just lost his father. He's lost his tribe, his people, his land, everything. The invaders turn him into a monster because he is the last of his kind.
DeleteHi Emily and Mike,
DeleteGreat responses, as I have written in my post I believe it’s up to the viewer to decide on who is the villain or if there is one at all. I don’t believe Beowulf or Grendel are villains, however I do believe Beowulf had more opportunities in life and in the situation to possibly change the outcome of the tragedy. Possibly even form some sort of peace between the two. Therefore, he is in my eyes not the strong-willed hero he is depicted as in the poem, rather a puppet of the king, “problematizing” Beowulf.
As I have said in my previous comments I believe that the Danes invaded Grendel’s land and therefore could be seen as the enemy. I didn’t go as far to say genocide as the movie and the poem didn’t go as far back to say whether Grendel’s ‘tribe’ was wiped out by the Danes. However, I do agree with this as a possibility, as with the invasion of the land they could have possibly killed them all, or thought they did. Over all I believe we can all agree there is no hero and no antagonist.
In regards to Beowulf, Emily, I think we can agree to disagree on his character displayed in the movie as we both have great points but do believe in our views and what we took from the movie. These comments have been great and made us able to grow our understanding of poem and film, taking in what others grasped from both. However, this has also made us stronger in our main viewpoints.
Question 7: How does the film 'Beowulf and Grendel' "problematize" the hero-myth of Beowulf?
ReplyDeleteThe story and epic poem of Beowulf does not have a precise date to when it was written, but it is known that the only manuscript of the hero-myth circulates around 700AD to 1000AD. The hero myth unwaveringly presents Beowulf as the brave hero who battles monsters, with a fierce tenacity. He is written as a loyal and honourable man, but appropriately modest. “Yet there was no way the weakened nation could get Beowulf to give in and agree to be elevated over Heardred as his lord or to undertake the office of kingship. But he did provide support for the prince, honoured and minded him until he matured as the ruler of Geatland.” (Heaney, 1999). His loyalty inspired his men and gave indication to his good natured persona. Beowulf’s loyalty is further portrayed in the 2005 film Beowulf and Grendel. In short, Beowulf travels to Denmark to kill the monster Grendel on behalf of the old King Hrothgar, a man Beowulf holds loyalty towards. Grendel is described by SparkNote Editors as grotesque and monstrous looking (2003), a creature with animalistic features who has been killing King Hrothgar’s men for twelve years. This gives readers a villainous visual of the character, but the written depiction of Grendel is portrayed in a different light in the 2005 film, which in turn problematizes Beowulf’s heroism.
The opening scene of the film begins with King Hrothgar and his men killing Grendel's father. At the time, Grendel was only a child and to his merit, spared by the King for his youth and innocence. By starting the film as such, Grendel has immediately inherited a victimized character, taking away from the "fashion evils, monster grim" (Grummere, 1993) he is described as in the epic poem. The film gave the supposed antagonist [Grendel] a point of view where we understood and developed a sympathetic outlook towards his character. His need for vengeance against the Danish men stemmed from a traumatic childhood event, one that makes Grendel the victim. King Hrothgar emulates the position of an antagonist when he admits he killed the child's father because he was in the way and stole a fish.
Beowulf's intentions of slaying Grendel are stilted, as both the audience and character himself begin to understand that Grendel's vengeance stems from an unnecessary act of violence against his father. This complicates the hero-myth of Beowulf, as his loyalty is firmly with the King, yet the Hrothgar in the film is portrayed as the antagonist by killing Grendel's father for unmerited reasons. Instead of Beowulf being portrayed as the brave hero he is depicted as in the epic poem, he is seen as an invader. This is further shown within the film when Grendel says to Beowulf “you are not Dane, that is why you still breathe.” Grendel’s wrath is aimed purely towards the Dane’s, not Beowulf. This takes away from the heroic stature Beowulf is widely known for in the hero-myth, as the film complicates the view of the hero and the villain.
References:
Beowulf and Grendel. (2005). [film] Iceland: Sturla Gunnarsson
Heaney, S. (Trans). (1999). Beowulf: a new translation. London: Penguin.
Grummere, F. (Trans). (1993). Beowulf (Modern English Translation). United States of America: Poetry Foundation.
SparkNotes Editors. (2003). SparkNote on Beowulf. Retrieved March 15, 2017, from http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/beowulf/
It is true that Beowulf is seen as an invader in the movie. Grendel should be the one who kills people with no reasons. This is how the movie humanize Grendel. Like in the movie, Beowulf consider Grendel as a person rather than just a bloody monster who eats people. The loyalty of Beowulf is remarkable, because when he asked the reason why Grendel needs to be slayed. The king did not answer, even at that time Beowulf did not really want to kill Grendel, but he still did because of the loyalty. Beowulf was not sentimental in the poem, but he was kind of sentimental in the movie. I think you can further talk about how Beowulf's emotions changed when he was slaying Grendel.
DeleteGood point raised in your last paragraph, Marcella. And Yves, it seems that even Beowulf's loyalty is problematized in the film, because it lead him to do a killing he does completely believe in.
DeleteHi Yves.
DeleteIn my opinion, I feel Beowulf is an invader in the story as he, by choice and loyalty, involved himself in a situation that had nothing to do with him. Though his loyalty to defend the King is honorable, he inserted himself into a situation he came to understand was more than what it seemed. It problematized his heroic image because Grendel wasn't portrayed in the movie as a monster, but a victimized character. Grendel wasn't killing people for no reason as you said, he was killing the Dane men, and ONLY Dane men in revenge for what they took from him. Does that make him killing them right? No of course not, but the movie portrayed Grendel in a more sympathized light that we can't entirely view him as the villain.
I do agree with you saying how I could further include how Beowulf's emotions changed.
Thank you!
Hi Marcella,
ReplyDeleteGreat points, I agree with most of them. I do feel there is a lot of information about Grendel and more so the king rather than Beowulf being the invader. There is not as much information to explain why he is an invader, and what he does to not be seen as a hero apart form his loyalty to the king (who is the antagonist from your p.o.v). This could be how you feel the hero myth/epic poem is problematised, that instead of Beowulf being problematised, the king is. Therefore, as a result Beowulf is just on the wrong team in a sense.
Great work explaining your angles. I would also check with Mike on using sparknotes as a reference but thats just to be safe.
Hi Bianca.
DeleteYes I've re-read over my work and find I do talk more on the King and Grendel, rather than Beowulf.
The aspect of villain and hero is so complicated in the film that I can't help but involve the King as I find him to be portrayed more so as the antagonist. I feel Beowulf's character is more of an annoyance than help in the film too as he inserts himself in a situation he doesn't entirely understand. As Beowulf comes to understand more about Grendel, his loyalty to the King is still enrooted in his actions.
I'll post my final review of this and hopefully involve more on Beowulf as the question indicates.
Thank you!
Q: How did Tolkien draw on the old Norse and old English texts in his The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings fantasy novels? Provide some concrete examples.
ReplyDeleteA: Tolkien drew heavily on Norse Mythology while creating his works The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Texts such as the poem Voluspa and the Volsunga saga influenced Tolkien in creating the world of Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits and Men and during his time studying at King Edward’s School in Birmingham, he spent his time translating and reading Old Norse texts (Brown, 2012).
One of the more obvious inspirations Tolkien took from Norse Mythology is the Dwarves, who feature mostly in The Hobbit. “The Dwarves in Tolkiens work are clearly adopted from Norse Myth. The Norse Dwarves live in saves and mines in the mountains where they dig for gold and gems.” (Wettstein, 2002), this is very similar to the Dwarves in The Hobbit who live in the mountain Erebor where they mine for gems and forge weapons.
Further into the creation of the Dwarves in The Hobbit, Tolkien took direct inspiration from the Norse Creation Myth, the poem Voluspa when naming the Dwarves in the company lead by Thorin. The poems has a few stanzas on the dwarves of Norse Myth, it features lines such as "There was Motsognir the mightiest made of all the dwarfs, and Durin next; Many a likeness of men they made, The dwarfs in the earth, as Durin said.” (Poetic Edda, n.d.), which tie in to the line of Durin who features in The Hobbit as Thror, Thrain and Thorin, who are later mentioned in the lines "Vigg and Gandalf, Vindalf, Thrain, Thekk and Thorin, Thror, Vit and Lit” (Poetic Edda, n.d.). Many of the other dwarves including Fili, Kili and Gloin are also mentioned in the listing of names.
Two particular figures that were inspired by Norse Mythological figures are Gandalf and his horse Shadowfax. According to Wettstein (2002), he suggests that Gandalf is inspired by Odin. He states that “Odin, the chief of the Aesir often wandered on earth among me. When he did so he appeared as an old wandering wizard”. So it is likely that Tolkien based his appearance and character on Odin. The horse Shadowfax, shows a number of similarities to Odins horse Sleipinr. When Shadowfax is given to Gandalf by Theoden, he is said to be the fastest horse that ever lived, similar to Sleipinr who is also said to be the fasted horse alive. The only distinct difference between the two horses is that Sleipinr has eight legs instead of four.
Dragons were another inspiration that Tolkien took from Norse Myth (though this could have been from Celtic Myth, as dragons were also present there). Dragons are very common in Norse Myth, so it is clear to see why Tolkien would have chose to create Smaug as one of his villains. In Norse Myth, "dragons lived in caves and protected their area” and “their only weak spot was their belly” (Wettstein, 2002), which are both parts of Smaugs character.
Finally, the creations of the swords in his works were also inspired by Norse Myth. In Norse myth all the famous swords have names. The naming of the swords brought them to life in the story. Wettstein (2002) states that "they are uplifted above the level of mere object and become actors”. This is a property that Tolkien applied to his swords. The swords held names like Sting, Orcrist and Glamdring, that made them memorable and almost like their own characters.
References:
Brown, N. M. (2012). Song of the vikings. New York, NY: St. Martins Press.
Poetic Edda. (n.d.). Volsupo. Retrieved from http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/poe/poe03.htm
Wettstein, M. (2002). Norse elements in the work of J.R.R. Tolkien. Retrieved from Academia website: https://www.academia.edu/228734/Norse_Elements_in_the_work_of_J.R.R._Tolkien
Hi Stephanie,
DeleteGreat work. I read that Tolkien was inspired by Norse texts and he has done an excellent job at intergrating these myths into his stories. Just a couple suggestions. 1st paragraph, second sentence is very long. You can place a full stop after men, starting the new sentence with during.
Second paragraph, 3rd line. You have written saves instead of caves.
Hope this helps. Great work
Great answer Stephanie, particularly the point about the swords and their names. Naming objects made them more personal, like a friend.
DeleteHi Stephanie,
DeleteFirstly, great work on finding the similarities between the old texts and Tolkien's books. The similarities are vast in Tolkien's work with the old Norse tales. I agree with your view on Gandalf being a character inspired and based on the Norse God Odin and furthermore on the horses. The white horse (sometimes grey) in mythology is ridden by warrior heroes or an 'end-of-time' saviour. Both of which Odin and Gandalf's characters are portrayed as. It can also be noted that Gandalf's horse [Shadowfax] is white.
As mentioned before there are so many similarities between Tolkien's work and old Norse/English texts.
Great work!
Question 7
ReplyDeleteThe old English epic poem Beowulf tells the story of a young Geatish warrior - Beowulf comes to the rescue of Hrothgar, the king of Danes, his land was being attacked by a monster – Grendel. In the ceremony, when they were toasting, Beowulf said he will kill the Grendel or being killed. (Sparknotes, 2003)This utterance apparently touched everyone and showed his heroism. But in the movie, Beowulf was overconfident in the speech. Beowulf promised that he will definitely hold the head of a dead troll body. He said, “We’ll hoist the shield now, Drive that hunger back down it’s down, Await, can chew on its tongue. It can chew on its own sticking stone of a heart, but no more Danes” (Gunnarsson, 2005). This sounds stirring, but it was a sarcasm when Beowulf started feeling sorry for Grendel. Ironically, the movie humanized Grendel, Grendel hurts people with reasons, because he wanted to revenge. When Beowulf came to Grendel and wanted to fight with Grendel. Grendel simply said you were not my enemy, those Danes were. Grendel sounded much like a human than the king of Danes. It’s been told in the movie, the king of Danes killed Grendel’s father because Grendel’s father stole a fish. Grendel killed the Danes because he wanted to revenge. Beowulf killed Grendel and its mother because they hurt the innocent Danes, and also he was loyal to the king. Danes did not do anything wrong but follow the king’s demands. The movie gave much details about how this fights begins, humanized a monster as a person and made the king into a bad person. It is really strange that Grendel and Beowulf slept with the same woman. Grendel even have a son with the witch. Is it another way to prove that Grendel was a human than just a monster? In the end of the movie, when Beowulf found the witch, Beowulf warmed the witch, “You know they’ll kill your son if they find him.” The witch said, “You couldn’t.” Beowulf said, “I’m not them.” The witch answered, “No, you just killed his father” (Gunnarsson, 2005). This is just repeated the mistake that the king made. And it just made the hero-myth of Beowulf complicated. I think Beowulf killed Grendel is not just being loyal to follow the King’s demands, he also wanted to stop this war. No one was really wrong in the movie, except the king of Danes.
References
Beowulf and Grendel. (2005). [film] Iceland: Sturla Gunnarsson.
Sparknotes (2003). Sparknote on Beowulf, Lines 301-709 Retrieved March 19, 2017, from http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/beowulf/section2.rhtml
A thoughtful answer. A division into two or three paragraphs might have helped the flow of your argument. I'm not sure of your conclusion, though. And why should the film be thought of as 'subversive'?
DeleteThe conclusion wasn't really relevant to my previous points, it was just a personal opinion and it can be extremely wrong. I just consider the action of "slaying someone for just because he stole a fish" was kind of stingy. It was not like you can't live without this one fish. So I don't know the purpose of it, maybe the king think Grendel's father will constantly steal the food they have? However, comparing to lose many lives of people, it was not worth to make that move. Of course, the king left Grendel alive was kind-hearted and he did not know Grendel will revenge. I personally think the king was the main reason to start this war, if he did not make kill Grendel's father for a reason that he was embarrassed about, none of this will be started. So that is why I put Beowulf and Grendel wasn't wrong but the king was.
DeleteHi Yves, you bring up some good points such as Grendel ans Beowulf both sleeping with Selma and if the movie was trying to portray a message, like youve said is it to humanise Grendel? I do disagree with your point that no one was wrong except for the King. In my opinion Grendel, the king, the kings me and Grendel were all at fault, some more than others. They all had the chance to change (change their mind or their actions), to be the "bigger person".
ReplyDeleteJust a couple suggestions:
I would recommend adding a quote from the epic poem to help explain how the movie "problematises" the legend of Beowulf.
Also to do a bit of a grammar check.
Hope this helps. Some good points Yves, nice work.
Thanks for the advice, I do accept the way you think. They all made mistakes, but what I mean was if the king did not kill Grendel's father, none of this will happen. Personally, everyone has the chance to change, like if the king told Beowulf what really happened about the stolen fish before the fight, I think Beowulf may not help the king to kill Grendel. The king knew what he has done was wrong, but he kept it as secret. Instead of saving his people, he chose let them to fight. He lost many people but he did not seem very regretful for it.
Delete