Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Grendel evilness
Out of the nearly seven billion people living in the world, not one can truly be classified as purely good or evil. Rather, people are a combination of both good and evil. The understanding of what it means to be good or evil is often flawed in today’s society. Good can best be defined as the ability to put others before one’s self. On the contrary, evil is a trait that is defined as having no mercy and lacking the ability to see another person's perspective. In Grendel, written by John Gardner, the main character named Grendel has been in battle for twelve years with King Hrothgar and his mead hall. Grendel can best be described in the novel as a sort of monster who has a tendency to become quite violent toward humans. Despite Grendel’s violence, …show more content…
he should be considered neither purely evil nor purely good. Grendel should not be considered purely evil since he gains the perspective of others, spares Unferth his life, and his intentions are misinterpreted by the humans. As the reader will see, Grendel is nowhere near being purely evil. Throughout Grendel, Grendel is portrayed as an evil being due to the violent acts he commits. However, Grendel’s violent perception is caused in the beginning of the novel due to a misunderstanding. Grendel is lured towards the mead hall after hearing the shaper’s song. On his way towards the mead hall, he stumbles across a man who has been gruesomely killed. Grendel described the moment saying “I stared up at the hall, baffled, beginning to shake” (Gardner 50). This quote shows that Grendel is not purely evil because the death of a man frightens him because death would not frighten a purely evil being. Grendel makes the mistake of picking up the man’s body. As Grendel puts the man on his shoulder, several men see Grendel and make the assumption that Grendel has murdered this man in cold blood. However, Grendel has not murdered this man and has just discovered him. Grendel’s inability to communicate this to the men leads to them attacking Grendel viscously. This is one of Grendel’s first violent encounters with humans. Furthermore, Grendel’s encounter with the humans would set the precedent for Grendel’s “violence”. Ultimately, this encounter helps to shape the violent relationship between Grendel and the humans. A simple misunderstanding caused this relationship making it impossible for Grendel to be completely evil since the humans created the misunderstanding. Furthermore, Grendel is also not purely evil since he is able to see perspective. In order for Grendel to be considered purely evil, he must lack the ability to see another person’s perspective.
However, this is not the case. Early in Grendel, a bull attempts to attack Grendel. While the bull does not cause much physical damage to Grendel, it does prompt him to ponder the purpose of the world. Grendel says, “All at once, as if by sudden vision, I understood the emptiness in the eyes of those humpbacked shapes back in the cave. I understood the world was nothing: a mechanical chaos of brute enmity of which we stupidly impose our hopes and fears” (21-22). Indeed, Grendel has demonstrated the capability to put himself in the bull’s perspective and even understand the “emptiness” they experience. In addition, Grendel also manages to conclude that the world is full of “mechanical chaos.” Grendel’s attempt to put himself in the bull’s perspective provides evidence that he is not purely evil. Grendel also refutes the claim that he is purely evil by pardoning one of Hrothgar’s men named …show more content…
Unferth. One night, Grendel launches his first large-scale raid in the mead hall.
Unferth, one of Hrothgar’s men, tells the other warriors to step aside as he will solely defeat Grendel. Indeed, Unferth attempts to appear very confident saying, “Tell them in Hell that Unferth, son of Ecglaf sent you, known far and wide in these Scanian lands as a hero among the Scyldings” (82) As Unferth begins to circle Grendel, an evil idea overcomes Grendel. Grendel begins to throw apples at Unferth as this prevents him from attacking Grendel and humiliates Unferth. Grendel claims after the battle that “I got more pleasure from that apple fight than from any other battle in my life” (86). Wow! Grendel, a supposedly evil monster, claims that he experiences the greatest satisfaction from a battle that lacks bloodshed. Grendel refusing to kill Unferth and instead pelting him with apples proves that Grendel is not purely evil because a purely evil being would have killed Unferth. However, Grendel’s conflict with Unferth will
continue. After the apple fight, Grendel is asleep in his cave when he is woken by Unferth. Unferth is motivated to come to Grendel’s lair because he desires to die an honorable death saying “It will be sung year on year and age on age that Unferth went down through the burning lake and gave his life in battle with the world-rim monster” (87). While Unferth desires to be killed by Grendel, Grendel has other plans. Grendel decides to not kill Unferth and instead carries him back to Hrothgar's mead hall. Grendel’s ability to restrain himself from killing Unferth proves that he is not purely evil because he is showing mercy. Throughout Grendel, Grendel often plays the role of the evildoer. A being who is purely evil is one who does not possess mercy and lacks understanding of others. However, Grendel proves that he does have mercy and is capable of putting himself in the perspective of others. Grendel exhibits these qualities through Unferth’s life and realizing the perspective of the bull. Lastly, Grendel is portrayed as an evil being due to the misunderstanding that he slaughtered a man. Ultimately, Grendel is a being who does not possess the qualities necessary to be deemed purely evil.
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
the men as the "beasts" and Grendel as the victim. & nbsp; Another aspect of the humans in the story that Grendel defines is their concept of a hero. Not only does he allow for heroes to exist he gives them their purpose in life. Grendel is the monster in the darkness. that every loyal thane would defend his king against. Without Grendel this unique situation would not exist. On the other hand, Grendel has the ability to humiliate and cause a man to be named a coward. He does. this to none other than Unferth. Unferth is treated like a hero because he would defeat the "monster" Grendel, or die trying. When Grendel does not. allow him to complete this task he is shamed by his fellow thanes. Grendel realizes that by killing the man he will be defining him as a hero in the eyes of the humans. Considering the way Grendel was treated by Unferth. and others like him, it becomes easy to sympathize with him extracting this.
What's the difference between good and evil? In John Gardner’s classic tale Grendel the line between good and evil is exceedingly blurred. Gardner does a phenomenal job of forcing the reader to question who the real hero of the story is. So is Grendel evil or simply misunderstood? To answer this question one must look at his basic character traits. Grendel is an unloving creature, he enjoys killing and torturing humans, and when he shows any sort of mercy, he later regrets it. Due to these facts it is impossible to label him as “good”.
He doesn’t believe that he has done anything wrong, therefore he doesn’t believe that he is a bad person. In the novel Grendel, Grendel states that, “I saw, is merely what pushes me, or what I push against, blindly—as blindly as all that is not myself pushes back. I create the whole universe blink by blink… (Gardner, 22)”. This internal thought from Grendel at the beginning of his story shows his belief that he holds the power to choose his future and that he creates his own reality. He truly does believe that despite his killing nature and that he is not technically human, he can still live among them and rise above his original reputation. In his encounter with the dragon in chapter 5, Grendel is told that, "My knowledge of the future does not cause the future. It merely sees it” (Gardner 63). What the dragon says in this instance sticks with Grendel in the sense that even though he is drawing away from his existentialist views, he still knows that he controls himself. Him accepting this strikes as somewhat half existentialism and half nihilism due to the character arc taking place. In addition to the evidence of existentialism in the novel itself, there is also many instances within literary criticism that suggest Grendel’s
Many of the characters in Grendel have direction and purpose in their lives. Wealtheow is self- sacrificing, and Hrothgar is out for personal glory. Unferth and Beowulf spend their lives trying to become great heroes so that their names may outlast their flesh. The dragon believed in nihilism, and the Shaper used his imagination to create something to believe in. Some of the characters’ philosophies may not have been commendable, but Grendel could not find any direction or purpose for his life whatsoever. Grendel looked for the intervention of a power higher than himself to lay the truths of the world upon him, an experience that the Romantics would characterize as an experience of the sublime. John Gardner portrays Grendel as someone who wants to find a philosophy, whether his own or someone else’s, that fits him and gives him an identity or a reason to live. By looking at the text from this perspective we can see how Gardner believes people should pursue, or rather, embrace a power greater than themselves.
A being cursed for evil goes through life looking for meaning. How can a monster of biblically banished descent be challenged with ideas of morality. In John Gardner’s postmodern novel Grendel, Grendel, explores and speculates on the meaning of life, humanity, and existence while being cursed to life as a monster. Due to his own bleak existence and the observations he has made of mean, Grendel views life as meaningless. Even though he is a descendent of Cain, the distinction between good and evil is blurred in Grendel’s perspective. How can a monster view morality when he is the wicked one yet he watches humans kill each other for bloodshed? Grendel is trying to make sense of an absurd world while the different theories shape his own identity.
In short, the dragon is saying, "You are evil and they are good, but the only thing that makes them good is you." In this statement, it is apparent that good and evil have inseparable, yet undefinable boundaries, and are actually two in the same. Grendel's evilness motivates the fearful people to work, to strive, to think, and to overcome their problems. In this, however indirect or abstract it may seem, Grendel is actually producing good. Amazingly, he manages to be both evil and good at the same time.
As a result of not receiving help when the bull was attacking him, Grendel develops a new theory: “I alone exist. All the rest, I saw, is merely what pushes me, or what I push against, blindly—as blindly as all that is not myself pushes back. I create the universe, blink by blink” (Gardner 21-22). Grendel’s questioning of his way of living marks a transformation of Grendel into a mature character who gains knowledge from his experience with the bull, concluding that the world revolves only around him. The utilization of ‘I’ portrays that his growing isolation from the absence of his mother during the bull attack is what permits him to believe that he is superior to everyone else and the only worthy creature to exist. This foreshadows his ultimate purpose in life which is to kill mankind. Grendel, as the creator of the world, holds the ultimate power to decide who will live, lacking the perspective that there is a higher force other than himself. In other words, the experience Grendel acquires from the bull attack enables him to mature and obtain insight on the truth of his
In contrast to the drunken lurching of the others, Unferth comes toward Grendel with speeches and bravery. He is a puffed up as a peacock, proud and ready to die for his king, his people, his ideal. Grendel simply states, “He was one of those.” Grendel sees Unferth with a clear and unbiased mind. He is ridiculous. His exaggerated heroism, his words, even his first move, to scuttle sideways like a crab from thirty feet away, is laughable. Grendle does with him what he does with no other Dane in the story, he talks.
... by murdering Grendel, this action is expressed as moral. This idea is reconfirmed when the Dragon explains to Grendel how he is “the brute existent by which they learn to define themselves” in reference to men (Gardner 73). This further suggests that society requires evil to present them an explanation for their life and actions.
Evil. It’s a concept that has baffled philosophers, religious figures, and the common man alike for thousands of years. In this millennium, people may exemplify evil as terrorism, genocide, or, perhaps, placing an empty milk carton back in the refrigerator. However, many remain conflicted about the exact definition of evil, as the dispute over the character Grendel, from the John Gardner novel, makes evident. To conclude that Grendel is not evil, readers must first operate under the assumption that the beast is unequivocally and thoroughly evil. Having done so, readers will notice the fallacies within this thought process. By asserting that Grendel is evil, readers blatantly disregard the ambiguity with which humanity defines its actions, as
Grendel is born a neutral being, perhaps even good, but nevertheless, without hate. The transition which he undergoes to become evil is due to misunderstandings between himself and humans and also meeting with a dragon who is questionably evil. As a young “monster”, Grendel knew nothing other than the cave he lived in and his mother who could not speak any distinguishable language. He was a playful creature who seemed to be like a “bla...
Grendel is the embodiment of all that is evil and dark. He is a descendant of Cain and like Cain is an outcast of society. He is doomed to roam in the shadows. He is always outside looking inside. He is an outside threat to the order of society and all that is good. His whole existence is grounded solely in the moral perversion to hate good simply because it is good.
87-91). Hearing all the jubilation that he cannot share in makes Grendel bitter. Because nothing that can be done to make Grendel’s resentfulness subside, he “[wages] his lonely war, inflicting constant cruelties on the people, atrocious hurt” (ln. 164-166) to make himself feel better. Every day he finds satisfaction in killing and eating the men who fall asleep in the hall after they have drunk and partied the evening away. Causing harm to human society is Grendel’s means of compensating for his loneliness.
...zes humanity in this scene by portraying them as the evil beings instead of Grendel who is the helpless victim of their savage assault. The men attack Grendel solely because they could not understand him and because of his appearance. Grendel makes no attempt to harm the men but to communicate with them while they are the ones that savagely tried to kill him. John Gardner portrays the men as the real monsters who mercilessly tried to kill Grendel while he was defenseless. Grendel has another revelation due to this attack in where he states. “The world resists me and I resist the world… “That’s all there is.”(Gardner, 28) Grendel makes this assertion as a means to organized the ways he perceives the world. While he once saw the world as a confusing array of frightening images, now he can separate the world into categories: those who do not resemble him and himself.