Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between good and evil
The relationship between good and evil
The idea of good and evil
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Good vs. Evil is a common theme throughout all of literature. However, John Gardner’s novel, Grendel, presents an uncommon twist on this theme. Grendel is in constant emotional turmoil with the concepts of good and evil. He is heavily influenced throughout the novel by each side, but he is reluctant to fully embrace either good or evil. Characters such as Wealtheow and the dragon provide insight to good and evil, which helps shape Grendel into the monster he is.
Wealtheow represents good and innocence, which confuses Grendel because of his existential views of life to where he is reluctant to accept this good. Grendel views the universe as meaningless, so when Wealtheow appears in his life as a symbol of purity and beauty he does not know
…show more content…
whether he should kill her or worship her. She contradicts his philosophy of nothingness. When Grendel first sees Wealtheow he is immediately fascinated with her. Grendel can see himself “leaping from [his] high tree and running on all fours through the crowd to her…throwing himself down, drooling and groveling at her small, fur booted feet” (101). His heart overpowers his mind, the exact opposite of what his existentialist views identify with. This makes Grendel feel vulnerable and he feels as if he needs to cure himself from idealizing her. Therefore he decides to kill her, except when he tries to something stops him. He believes it is meaningless to kill her because the concept of joy itself is meaningless. It is possible that Grendel could not kill her because he knew that it was the wrong thing to do, therefore he is lying to himself by coming up with the idea that joy is meaningless and that is why he did not kill Wealtheow. Grendel is a “creature of two minds: and one of them said¬—that she was beautiful” (110). When the goodness in Grendel shines through he immediately crushes it with his existentialist views. Therefore, these views represent evil. He does not allow himself to succumb to anything good, or anything that enhances the concept of good. The dragon represents evil, nothingness, greed and unhappiness; but Grendel still does not fully embrace the concept of evil because of the goodness inside of him.
Throughout the entire novel the dragon’s evil presence is evident, slowly pulling Grendel toward the dark side. Eventually Grendel “sank away like a stone through earth and sea, toward the dragon” (56). The dragon had been expecting Grendel when he arrives and tells him to embrace his darker side because it makes the world a better place. However, we then see that in fact embracing the dark side does not make one happier because of how unhappy the dragon is. The dragon “sees from the mountaintop: all time, all space” (63). Knowledge is not always a blessing, the dragon may know all, but he is the unhappiest character in the book. Grendel is violent, but he is not as violent as the dragon makes him seem. He does not agree with everything the dragon is spitting out but the dragon’s conniving nature convinces Grendel to accept some of his advice. After his encounter with the dragon, “something much deeper stayed with [Grendel], became [his] aura” (75). Even though the dragon did not fully transform Grendel’s views, he did alter them some. Grendel is reluctant to fully accept the dragon’s advice, however he does not offer much evidence as to why. Possibly, Grendel believes this evil lifestyle is not appropriate because is goes against the small amount of good consequence he has inside of him. He does not want to be fully evil, but also denies the fact that he is good
either. Wealtheow and the dragon alter Grendel’s views; however do not fully change them. Grendel is both good and evil, as most humans are, however he does not give into the pressure of others to change his views. Even though he is in consistent mental struggle throughout the book, he does not stray from what he believes in. This is a common concept today. The pressures of our society are constantly shaping us to be the person we are today. However, being ourselves and fitting into society is the greatest task one can be presented with.
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
Good vs. Evil in John Gardner's Grendel? & nbsp; John Gardner's novel Grendel gives the reader a new perspective on the classic "good vs. Evil" plot. From the start of the book the reader can tell that there is something very unique about the narrator. It is evident that the narrator is a very observant being that can express himself in a very poetic manner. The story is one the reader has most likely seen before, the battle between the glorious thanes and the "evil" beast. In this case, however, the "beast" is the eyes and ears of the. reader. This, of course, forces the reader to analyze situations in the book in the same way that Grendel does. By using this viewpoint, author allows his readers to see the other side of the coin. Therefore, Throughout the course of the novel the reader is able to understand how important to Grendel in defining the human. & nbsp; Grendel's first encounter with the human beings that he literally defines is not a pleasant one. After accidentally trapping himself in a tree he is discovered by a group of thanes out on patrol. Grendel expresses absolutely no hostile intentions towards these "ridiculous" (ch. 2). pp.24) creatures that "moved by clicks." (ch.2, pp.24) The thanes do not understand what Grendel is and are very uneasy about the whole situation.
Before meeting the dragon, Grendel had been labeled a monster by himself and the people of Denmark. His only purpose had been to spend his days in a languid stupor only punctuated by his acts of violence to the Danes. For the Danes, Grendels’ function had been to serve as, in the dragons’ words, “the brute existence by which they define themselves”(Gardner 73). However, Grendel find this dissatisfying and yearns to find his deeper purpose. The dragon sarcastically tells Grendel that it does not matter whether he is monster or not. After all, all labels are meaningless to a nihilist. Instead the dragon encouraged Grendel to “find gold and sit on it”(Gardner 74). Basically the dragon is saying for Grendel to cease measuring himself based off mans’ false labeling and find something tangible and rational to give him purpose.
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
Grendel's interludes with the dragon portray, at their onsets, the dragon as a worldly, wise creature with much to share. The dragon haughtily informs Grendel about his vast store of knowledge as he teases him with how much he knows. As Grendel's interests are piqued, the dragon expends the cumulative result of his travails: "Know how much you've got, and beware of strangers…My advice to you, my violent friend, is to seek out gold and sit on it" (Gardner page #). Although the dragon serves as a vessel to point out the necessity of Grendel and makes some pointed observations about mankind, all his respectability is lost with those two short sentences. The author is making an observation about materialism and the falsehood of wisdom always accompanying age. After all his years of intense scrutiny, the dragon can only grasp from human- and animalkind alike that possessions are the key to life's existence.
John Gardener’s Grendel is another version of the epic Beowulf, except in a differing perspective. This story is retold from the viewpoint of Grendel. Gardener wants us to empathize with Grendel through his own thoughts and emotions. The way one sees the monster in Beowulf is completely different than how one would think of him in Grendel. One is forced to view someone else’s opinion versus getting to form an opinion for oneself.
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.
Grendel as a character is very intelligent, he is capable of rational thought at all times. Because of this, at sometimes during the story I would forget Grendel is a monster, the way he acts in his thoughts and actions I would mistake him for a human; at times I was even feeling bad for Grendel because he is a very lonely person who tries to understand all of the meaningless of the world around him. Grendel can never get to close to
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
In Grendel, each character tells of his or her view on philosophy, theory, and life. Grendel is a monster who is not sure where he fits in life. “Grendel is not just searching for one philosophy; he is just searching for the best way to live in the world” (Simmers 183). He goes to extreme limits to discover his character. Grendel shows a self-centered approach to the world as he exclaims, "The world resist me and I resist the world" (Gardner 28). Nothing in the world is going right for Grendel. Grendel feels resistant to life. Therefore, if society does not need him, then he does not need the society. The Dragon also views the world negatively, as a result of his praiseworthy perception of himself. Out of all the characters in the novel, the Dragon is one of Grendel's closest companions greatly impacting Grendel. The Dragon’s destructive philosophy views the world as meaningless. The dragon shares his selfish approach of life with Grendel telling him, "My advice to you, my violent friend, is to seek out gold and sit
...n very human feelings of resentment and jealousy. Grendel was an unstable and saddened figure because of his outcast status. Though Grendel had many animal attributes and a grotesque, monstrous appearance, he seemed to be guided by vaguely human emotions and impulses. He truthfully showed more of an interior life than one might expect. Exiled to the swamplands outside the boundaries of human society, Grendel’s depiction as an outcast is a symbol of the jealousy and hate that seeks to destroy others' happiness and can ultimately cripple a civilization. This take on the outcast archetype ultimately exposes the Anglo Saxon people’s weaknesses, their doubts and anxieties towards the traditional values that bounded nearly every aspect of their life.
This illustrates an inner problem of a suppressed evil side to society. Beowulf and other men that battled Grendel had trouble defeating him with weapons. They all had to tussle with Grendel and everyone except for Beowulf failed at this challenge. Symbolically meaning that that evil side to society will always be there no matter how much people try to fight it. Grendel also plays the role of envy. Imagine him being an outcast with no joy in his life hearing the mead-hall at night and all the laughter, he must have felt envious and longed to be a part of that world. Another symbolic role is revenge. Upon learning that Beowulf has hurt her only child Grendel’s mother becomes angered and seeks revenge. Her and Beowulf battle it out and the mother loses the battle. Relating this back to Cain, Grendel’s mother wants to kill Beowulf and get revenge and just like Cain, she faced her punishment, for her it was
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.
As Grendel dies, he whispers the words, “ Poor Grendel’s had an accident, so may you all” (Gardner 174). I believe that this is a blessing because throughout the story, it is clear that he has fundamentally changed. Although he does not like society, he is not wishing death upon them, rather he is wishing “an accident”. Moreover, it seems that Grendel has finally understand his change as death draws near, when he sees “cold, sharp outlines, everything around me: distinct, detached as dead men. I understand” (172). He sees the harshness of reality. Grendel has changed, understanding that his search for whatever meaning there was in the world, was essentially and ironically meaningless. This is because his true role was something else and he