Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparing grendel to frankenstein
Comparison between Grendel and Frankenstein
Comparing grendel to frankenstein
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Comparing grendel to frankenstein
One In The Same
Grendel and the fiend in Frankenstein are characters from two different stories. Even though they entered the world in different ways, they can be seen as being the same character because of the amount of qualities they share like: showing interest in art, living their life as outsiders, and growing up innocent then turning into the true monsters they are.
Grendel is an intelligent monster who is capable of being just as human as anyone else in John Gardner’s novel. Aside from Grendel’s hideous appearance and his emotional outbursts, there was very little that separated him from the rest of the world. Just like the Danes, Grendel was moved by the words that were being spoken out of the Shaper’s mouth. He was moved by the
…show more content…
songs more than he liked to admit it. “A little poetic, I would readily admit. His manner of speaking was infecting me, making me pompous” (Gardner 49). Even though he truly knew that every word that was said by the Shaper was a lie, Grendel found a way to believe him. He was addicted to listening to the deceitful messages that had been told by the Shaper and his harp. Like Grendel, the monster in Frankenstein was attracted to learning the English language. He was interested in how humans used their voice to communicate with each other. He admired this method of communication and he eventually learned it himself by listening to his neighboring cottagers speak. The monster conveys that he appreciates this language when he says: By degrees I made a discovery of still greater moment. I found that these people possessed a method of communicating their experience and feelings to one another by articulate sounds. . . This was indeed a godlike science, and I ardently desired to become acquainted with it (Shelley 130). The monster, as well as Grendel, became fixated on literature. They both eventually learned new phrases from humans. Since Grendel was a monster and appeared to be something that could kill anything or anyone in a heartbeat, he was seen as a threat by everything. Therefore, he lived his life being an outsider. He was misunderstood and alone causing him not to have anybody to speak to. “’Why can’t I have someone to talk to? . . . The Shaper has people to talk to. . . Hrothgar has people to talk to’” (Gardner 53). He started to realize that even though he is surrounded by many people, he was indeed alone. The monster experiences the same pain as Grendel. The monster was denied many times by humans, because of his appearance. Again, like Grendel, he was misunderstood by the rest of the world. “I am alone and miserable: man will not associate with me; but one as deformed and horrible as myself would not defy herself to me.” (Shelley 129). The monster and Grendel are isolated from society, because they were perceived as being things that have evil intentions from the start, but what the humans did not comprehend was that they were not evil-doing monsters in the beginning. When Grendel entered the world, he did not automatically have in mind to become an enemy to the world, he was innocent and obtained pure thoughts like any other child. He explored his confined world ingeniously. In the beginning of Chapter 2, Gardner includes what Grendel did as a young one: Explored our far-flung underground world in an endless wargame of leaps onto nothing, ingenious twists into freedom or new perplexity, quick whispered plotting with invisible friends, wild cackles when vengeance was mine. I nosed out, in my childish games, every last shark-toothed chamber and hall, every black tentacle of my mother’s cave, and so came at last, adventure by adventure (Gardner 15-16). Grendel was naïve and guiltless.
The monster was not always evil. He was innocent in the beginning. He was kind and sensitive to other people’s feelings. “The gentle manners and beauty of the cottagers greatly endeared them to me; when they were unhappy, I felt depressed; when they rejoiced, I sympathized in their joys” (Shelley 131). People did not understand that the monster possibly could have been the gentlest soul that they would have ever met, but they did not give him the chance. They relied too much on his external appearance to assume that he was wicked. Grendel and the monster wanted to experience having someone to talk to, but since they did not receive this friendship, they became the actual monsters people thought they were in the first place.
In John Gardner’s novel, Grendel, and the monster in Frankenstein, have multiple characteristics that are similar. They are characters from different books, so how is it possible that they can be alike? Even though they come from different stories, they are identical because of the different qualities they possess like being extremely powerful and living as the “brute existence by which humankind learns to define itself” (Gardner 73). These two characters ultimately are one in the
same.
Grendel, as a character, has a much more complex identity than just a monster and a human. Some, such as Ruud, classify him as a mixture of three different characteristics, but alone, they tend to conflict with each other. By making the connection that Grendel represents immorality, the previous idea makes more sense, while simultaneously incorporating more aspects of the character into the analysis. In either case, Grendel represents much more than meets the eye, and provides a fascinating insight into
Grendel varies from the simple, childish tone of "'Why can't I have someone to talk to? The Shaper has people to talk to'" (53) to the dense philosophical metaphors and complex diction of Grendel's conversation with the dragon. Gardener gives Grendel a purposefully guileless voice to illustrate both the monster's feelings of lost youth as well as his progression into a more sentient being.
Our first character, Grendel, is an exceptionally diverse character. It is implied that in both book and poem, Grendel is a blood-thirsty monster. All Grendel does is go through meadhalls and kill the drunk, often asleep people. But when narrated through the eyes of Grendel, the true nature of this beast is discovered. The author of Grendel entails that Grendel is a depressed and misunderstood monster, restrained to the confinements of his own underwater cave. He is a lot like the monster in the book Frankenstein. Both Grendel and Frankenstein are born with no real purpose to life, going off of what they hear other people say and taking it as the truth. Both monsters, knowing that everyone detests them for being unattractive and different, retaliate by way of murder and mayhem. From the perspective of the people in the stories itself, Grendel is exactly how the narrator in the poem Beowulf makes him out to be. The people, or the thanes, of Hrothgar’s kingdom see Grendel as a demon from hell, representing all that’s evil in the world. He’s a supernatural creature and in this time period anything supernatural that wasn’t human was considered a spirit, a god, evil or, in Grendel...
In Grendel, nearly all of the characters are driven to shape the world to their ideas. Hrothgar spends his life crafting a government. Grendel's mother is described as loving her son "not for myself, my holy specialness, but for my son-ness, my displacement of air as visible proof of her power (138)." Both Grendel and the Shaper constantly seek the ability to reshape reality with words. While they have differing motives, all of these acts of creation give power and significance to the creator. As Baby Grendel desperately convinces himself, it is the act of observing and commenting on what is outside that makes one real: "I understood that, finally ...
Both these characters exude such power and strength through their personalities. The way they handle situations and the way they don’t give up on themselves is something that is truly honorable. Grendel and Frankenstein, both very different from each other, are both very similar in regards to their heroism. These two characters are essentially alone in their societies and have nobody to turn to for help. They base everything around their beliefs and what they feel is the good and bad thing to do, whether society rejects their beliefs or not. Their loyalty to themselves illustrates their heroism of honesty, loyalty, courage and bravery and their never ending power to continue to fight alone for themselves against a world who wishes to overlook their existence and contributions to diversify the society.
“I wanted it, yes! Even if I must be the outcast,” (55). This is after Grendel has listened to the Shaper’s story about Cain and Abel. Grendel learns that he is the cursed descendant of Cain and is forever destined to be a monster. At first, he didn’t want to believe that is was true but after a while, he gladly accepted the role thus creating his own meaning. “I was Grendel, Ruiner of Meadhalls, Wrecker of Kings!” (80). This is when Grendel is experiencing his newfound invincibility to the humans and their weapons and he is tormenting them. After he visits the dragon in Chapter 5, Grendel has a renewed sense of confidence of who he is - which is a monster. In Chapter 6, he continues to terrorize the Danes and pursuing his monstrous desires. Grendel is acting upon his role as the monster because after speaking to the dragon, he realizes that nothing can stop
One thing that influences perception of reality that is initially explored in Grendel are words. This is demonstrated when Grendel secretly listens to the poem sung by the shaper, who is a blind court bard who sings poems with the harp, and sees how the people are
In Chapter 8, Grendel exclaims, “I’m a machine. Like all of you. Blood-lust and rage are my character,” (Gardner 123). This profound statement establishes a connection between Grendel and the ambiguous “you,” the reader. The monster, though he confesses to his wrongdoing, asserts that readers are no better than he. Countless bible verses reiterate this concept: “For all have sinned,” (Romans 3:23) “[Humans] are all. .impure with sin,” (Isaiah 64:6). Gardner’s reminder to readers of mankind’s predisposition to sin earns pity for the monster. He expands on these sympathies by describing the nature of Grendel’s lonely existence. “But there was one thing worse,” Grendel states after discovering the dragon’s charm, “no weapon could cut me,” (Gardner 75). In this moment, nihilism overcomes Grendel; if fighting poses no danger, it has no purpose, and neither does he. Any reader who has had an experience which challenged his or her values cannot help but feel empathetic towards the purposeless creature. Perhaps more piteous, however, is the suggestion that Grendel has no choice in being “the dark side. . the terrible race God cursed,” (Gardner 51). The dragon condemns Grendel as “the brute existent by which [humans] learn to define themselves,” telling him that it is worthless to better his character (Gardner 72). It is not until after
John Gardner’s Grendel portrays a monster searching for his purpose in life. The characters know the meaning of their lives, but Grendel tries to discover his role and what life has to offer him. Grendel discovers his identity through other characters’ actions and beliefs. In Grendel, John Gardner illustrates the contrasting views of each character to show their view of society and the influence they have on Grendel.
As time goes on, many things tend to change, and then they begin to inherit completely different images. Over the years, the character, created by Dr. Victor Frankenstein in Mary Shelley’s famous novel, has changed dramatically. The monster, regularly called “Frankenstein,” has been featured in numerous films, such as Frankenweenie and Edward Scissorhands. Although, the characters in today’s pop culture and the monster in the well-known 1800’s novel have similarities, they are actually very different. The many similarities and differences range from the character’s physical traits and psychological traits, the character’s persona, and the character’s place in the Gothic style.
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein and the monster that he creates are very similar. For example, Victor creates the monster to be like himself. Another similarity is that the anger of both Victor and the monster is brought about by society. One more parallel between Victor and the monster is that they both became recluses. These traits that Victor and the monster possess show that they are very similar.
Characters from different novels have similar personalities. As creators of another creature, God and Victor Frankenstein are very similar, in that they both lose part of their "family," and they let the war between them and their creations go on too long. Victor says, "I collected bones from charnel houses; and disturbed, with profane fingers, the tremendous secrets of the human frame." This shows that he creates the monster out of corpses, just as God creates Satan. Furthermore, Victor is disgusted with his own creation, "the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart."
Frankenstein, and Othello are the same because Othello was mistreated because he was black. He was hated due to his appearance. He was a minority, and faced racism on a daily basis. The monster in Frankenstein was mistreated because he was ugly. He was bullied so bad because of his appearance. This caused the monster to be evil and do devilish acts. Both the monster in Frankenstein and Othello had good intentions. They were not treated properly which made them become bad people. Iago treated Othello horribly by using racial slurs toward him. Jekyll and Hyde were similar to Frankenstein because Jekyll and Hyde had two personalities just like the monster did. One side of Jekyll and Hyde was evil, and the other was good. The monster in Frankenstein was the same because he started out as a good monster, and had good intentions. He was treated so horribly by people because of the way he looked, that he turned
In Grendel by John Gardner, Grendel is widely known as a monster. However, once this novel is portrayed first-person through Grendel’s eyes, it becomes evident that he is not the true beast. The true evil in the novel originates from the humans. The reader interprets Grendel’s thoughts in a new perspective forcing them to realize all of Grendel's actions result from the cruelty of humans acted upon him. He has a fear of being overrun by the evil humans which causes him to act as he does. Grendel is not evil because he simply mocks the interactions he sees from the humans during their wars and towards him during their first encounters all the way to when Grendel is brutally killed by the human Beowulf.
In Grendel’s case, he does not know that his actions of eating people are wrong due to his childlike mentality. So can he really be considered evil? If Grendel is really a “monster” does it really matter whether he is evil or not, considering the fact that monsters are usually always considered evil since they are not like humans? For example, when he is approached by the men on the horses while he is stuck in the tree, they think he is an evil spirit because of what he looks and sounds like. They ask, “Could it be some type of oak tree spirit. Better not to mess with it… That’s it! King’s right! It’s a spirit!” (Gardner 25). As a result of this, the readers are forced to assume that Grendel is evil just because he looks and acts like he