Beowulf isn't Brave?

Okay, first things first I won't lie about my confusion. Coming into this class a little late definitely threw me off , but while I'm confused, I'm super intrigued by everything.

Where to even begin? I'm not going to be shy about the fact that every few hundred lines, I'd have to stop and think "wait, what just happened?". So, this blog is going to beg the question: is Beowulf courageous? I think not, and I'll tell you why.

Socrates had an idea of what courage looked like. He also had an idea of what could be perceived as courage, but wasn't really hitting the mark.

In a philosophy class I took freshman year, we talked about what constituted courage based onLaches and other old Greek guys ideas that are still considered. The example we used was bull-fighting. Bear with me here. If someone enters a bullfight, why are they doing it? Is it for fame? Rewards? Pride? If they are entering the bullfight for selfish reasons, that's not courage, because courage (as we defined it in class) is risking your own life without any promise of reward, for someone who didn't do anything FOR you.

I may be rambling a little, but long story short, Beowulf doesn't fall into that definition of courage, he's doing it for a reward. Not that that even matters, because who cares if Beowulf is courageous? Is that even relevant to the story? Probably not.

But even when you think about whether or not he is brave, I say no again. I made a grave error and didn't mark the page, but in the book there is a comment about Beowulf that he is "indifferent to death". Then to me, by default he's not brave. Bravery suggests some kind of courage in risking your life to save others, and if Beowulf isn't really scared of dying, is he a brave man? 

Alright, well that concludes my ramblings about Beowulf's courage/bravery/lack thereof. I hope it made sense/was a somewhat interesting take! 

Does Beowulf Have a Happy Ending?

When I first studied Beowulf in High School, I did not understand why there would be this whole epic poem about a dude who goes and gets himself killed in the end. I have done a lot of reading since I last encountered Beowulf and I think I have a better understanding of the choices the author / authors of Beowulf made in their epic. As my philosophy professor, Dr. Reichard, would say: "Everyone dies at the end of their story."

Still, even with this unpleasant truth in hand, one is left to wonder why the text does not end after Grendel and his mother have been killed: the two creatures who terrorize the Danes for the most part of the text. Typically epic quest poems end at the resolution of the main conflict: The Odyssey ends when there is peace in Ithaca, not when Odysseus dies.

That being said, if we look back at the cultural concerns of the narrator and the characters of Beowulf, it makes sense that we are present for our hero's death. One of the most important characteristics in Beowulf's culture is that a warrior should die a valiant death in battle. Despite the fact that all his troops turned and ran when it came time to face the dragon, Beowulf fought on until his death, with only a shield in hand. In this sense, Beowulf does get the ending that suits him.



Furthermore, Beowulf's demise is anticipated by Hrothgar's long warning regarding the dangers of pride following Beowulf's earlier victory. The fact that Beowulf faces his final foe full of pride indicates that perhaps avoiding hubris is one of the crucial lessons of Beowulf, in that a great person can accomplish many things but will fail as soon as they believe themselves greater than they really are. This seems to coincide with the Christian cultural beliefs than the corresponding Nordic culture, which might mean that Beowulf's battle with the dragon was added to the original text. If so, Beowulf doesn't really get the happy ending, but we all get a neat lesson about being too full of ourselves!      

Beowulf meets his end.

 And so we have reached the end, Beowulf too for that matter. As I read the final lines of the poem, I had mixed feelings. I found the way the story was told to be interesting and exciting, but the events anticlimactic. Pretty much Beowulf attempts to kill a dragon, but cannot really do it on his own, but refuses to let his men help him.

 I am seeing that Beowulf is like the sword itself. When battling the dragon, Beowulf attempts to slay the dragon with his sword, and instead it “shattered…the [sword] weakened at battle, / ancient and gray” (2680-2682). By this point, Beowulf himself has aged and is no longer the strong, valiant man he makes himself out to be. Earlier in the poem, the sword is said to ‘had never failed / any man who grasped it” and that “it was not the first time / that it had to perform a work of high courage” (1460-1464). In his prime, Beowulf was described in similar words. Follow me a little on this…. A sword is only as good as its wielder, and a soldier/king, what have you, is only as good as his men/comrades in battle. So ultimately, Beowulf’s pride leads to his demise. This is made evident when Wiglaf is addressing the men, he states that Beowulf was “intended to perform / this act of courage all alone, / because he has gained the most glory among men” (2643-2645). This points how Beowulf truly needed the help of his men, and instead refused it. This point is further underscored when it is Wiglaf who delivers the fatal blow to the dragon. The lines here are quite powerful, “they felled their foe- their force too his life- / and they both together had brought him down” (2706-2707). Sometimes you just need a little help from your friends!

 

On a side note, Wiglaf’s courage and loyalty was giving me major Beowulf vibes.

Wiglaf killing the dragon

Beowulf killing Grendel

     

You Probably Went to High School With Beowulf

Beowulf is a classic tale highlighting the ambiguities that exist between good and evil. What place in our culture weaves a better narrative of heroes and villains than the American high school? Some may argue that it’s too rudimentary to boil such complex characters down to such trite teenage tropes, and to them I say, “You’re probably right.” But just as Beowulf blazed bravely into battle against Grendel, I too will face my own foe: high school social structure.

Beowulf as The Popular Guy You Didn’t Like But Could Never Really Pinpoint Why

           

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/troy-bolton/images/2142394/title/troy-photo

Maybe he was a standout athlete, or the star child of the arts department.  Or, if he was truly a 16-year-old Renaissance man sent to walk among the masses, both. No matter his forte, this kid was loved by your teachers, your classmates, and probably even some of your friends. You, on the other hand, could detect some underlying disingenuousness. You really didn’t have concrete evidence as to why you thought this guy was secretly a jerk, so you certainly didn’t try to rock the boat and expose him for the person you suspected he was. There was just something about the way he walked around performing deeds of manly courage and name-dropping his dad that rubbed you the wrong way. But, you decided to just go with it because everyone else seemed to like him. Everyone else but one…

Unferth as  The Perpetually Angry Kid  

http://meangirls.wikia.com/wiki/Gretchen_Wieners

The Perpetually Angry Kid was not-so-secretly jealous of the popular kids and made it their mission to defame them all.  Perhaps the student was born that bitter. Perhaps they were popular until The Popular Guy came to your town from Nebraska and took all the glory. Perhaps The Perpetually Angry Kid killed their brother and has just been really sour about everything since then. No matter the tragic backstory, this kid made it their mission to let everyone know that they were truly deserving of admiration and everyone else wasn’t good enough. How did we learn to cope with such insufferable creatures? It can certainly be credited to one of the most valuable of all high school treasures…

Hrothgar as The Teacher Friend

http://buffy.wikia.com/wiki/Rupert_Giles

 Just as Hrothgar plays an important role in Beowulf’s journey to heroism, The Teacher Friend played an important role in your journey to graduation. While it’s likely that your Teacher Friend didn’t give you the OK to slay beasts on behalf of their classroom, they probably did let you make photocopies sometimes. And although your Teacher Friend (hopefully) never gave you a ring, they certainly did give you sage advice that you may or may not have implemented.  One mentor’s warning against extreme tenacity and pride is another mentor’s warning against college application procrastination.

 After this brief jaunt through the halls of your high school memories, I hope that you, too, can see how nearly every character has a classmate counterpart from your past. While some stories are naturally more difficult to teen-ify, it’s certainly still easier than trying to figure out where to sit in the high school cafeteria.

Anti-Hero

            The winters are cold, harsh and hard. The once green grass is covered in a thick layer of snow. There are sharp thick long icicles that have been frozen from the last melt of the sun. The snow layer is thicker than the snow Frederick County experienced in the last couple of years. It is deeper than during the East Coast Snowmageddon where we had more than ten feet of snow. The ponds are covered with thick layers of sheet ice. The layers of ice thicken as the winter carries on through the months of November, December, January, February, and March. The ice is thick enough to walk on, and the water below is cold enough to freeze the fish. Beowulf has carried his people through fifty winters of increasing peace and community without hunger. Beowulf aspires to prove himself to his people. He wants to make amends for his shortcomings as the King. Beowulf talks about the men he has known over the years and how they were taken from this world by circumstance, debauchery, and battle. This particular winter, Beowulf must defend his people against a dragon that attacked his village and castle.

            It is debatable whether this text or any mythology from the Norse regions that consisted of Germanic people including Scandinavia, France, German, Belgium, and Great Britain, demonstrated any desire to glamorize, glorify, or worship the ground on which villains stood. It can be said that Beowulf surely isn’t an antihero. He is not a villain, so it isn’t possible to suggest that these people have an obsession with evil. They merely desire their villains to be powerful and awe inspiring.

            The dragon is a wise, brilliant, creature that was stirred into a rage because a thief, along with his consorts, wandered into his cave to steel his precious hoard of gold and gems. The thieves looted everything from the dragon’s cave. The dragon follows the thieves’ footprints into the village which he then attacks in retaliation. The narrator in the text treats this dragon foe as a strong, intelligent, adversary who just wanted his money back. Today, the thieves would be considered trespassers and arrested on suspicion of burglary. The dragon would probably have been able to retrieve his treasure.

            In battle, the scales of the dragon gleam, and the fire from his mouth blazes. The audience is supposed to sympathize with the dragon enough that Beowulf has to rile the dragon to force himself to fight the dragon. Beowulf has to draw on his internal rage to draw the dragon out and inflame the hatred between them. This creature isn’t a super villain. He does not want world domination. The dragon hates like a wounded animal locked in a cage deprived of food and water. Hate is something human that has to be learned otherwise hate comes from fear.

            Let me exaggerate. What other evil, black, terrible villain of this story does the narrator, or the audience, or even Beowulf and his men show sympathy for in the book? Beowulf and his men show little if any sympathy for Grendel’s mother. Yet, the audience can muster sympathy for a woman whose only son has been murdered. He was the only person who lived with her in their cave. She has no one left. She has every right to be upset, but in the end it was Beowulf that made the jump on Grendel’s mother. These villains aren’t antiheros. The dragon does not wake up one day and decide that he is going to give his gold away. Grendel’s mother does not admit that she made a mistake in raising her son to be a blood thirsty beast. Grendel does not go to therapy for the habits he can’t kick such as eating human flesh.

            We are mostly sympathetic to Grendel because of the way Grendel is introduced as friendless, isolated and living in a solemn and hermit-like existence with his mother. Grendel seems to have made a lot of mistakes in his life. It would have made a better read if in some twisted way Beowulf was some mass murdering hulk. I mean he is, but I’m talking about the evil kind that ignores the rules of engagement. The evil kind that has to thrive off murdering women and children, or defenseless animals. If the old men of the Norse period sat around and talked about their past heroes that committed mass genocide, what kind of world would we live in? The Germanic people certainly weren’t Nazis-like.

"Coat of Arms of Germany." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 06 Sept. 2016.

"St. George (Raphael, Louvre)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Sept. 2016.

"Winter Posters and Prints." CoolAntarctica. CoolAntarctica, 2001. Web. 06 Sept. 2016.

I affirm that I “have neither given nor received any unauthorized aid on this paper”

Alex Cooper

Alexander Stephen Cooper                                                                             7th September 2016

Grendel vs. fire breathing dragons

Beowulf really should have listened when he was told to not let his little bit of success get to his head. He also should have picked different men to back him up. I dont know about anyone else, but the way they just left him to die was NOT okay in my eyes. These men are supposed to be men of valor, men of strength and courage, not men who run away when times get hard. “his comrades, hand-chosen, sons of noblemen, did not take their stand in a troop around him with warlike valor—they fled to the woods and saved their lives,” (2596-2599).

Of course while I don’t blame them, because I would probably do the same thing, I’m not sure why Beowulf didn’t “Hand choose” these men much better.

What makes it even funnier in a way, to me that is, is while Beowulf’s life had just ended the men came to see him, the men who left him when he needed them. “those ten weak traitors all together/ who had not dared to hoist their spears/ when their lord of men needed them most:/ now shamefaced, they carried their shields…” (2847-2852). they knew that instead of sticking around and dying for meaning they are now looked down upon… Wiglaf tells them “Death is better/for any earl than a life of dishonor!” (2890-2891.) Wiglaf would have stuck around. 

I cant be entirely upset about Beowulfs death just because he did it to himself. Really, only Beowulf can be mad and Beowuld for getting himself in to something he shouldn’t have in an effort to prove himself to be this great soldier. He thought because he killed Grendel he could kill fire breathing dragons… and that is just foolish to me. There is absolutely no comparison in my eyes. Beowulf says himself he can handle this has he did Grendel and his mother, with no idea that they were not the same. I mean I guess they both look pretty scary...

But the dragon still takes the cake. 

Always will. No enemies are the same, and Beowulf should have taken the advice he received and maybe he would still be alive, maybe if he took the time to learn his enemies he would have defeated them. I dont know, I guess the adrenaline was cruising through his veins. Beowulf died a very Courageous death, and I feel like thats all he would have wanted anyways, another reason why I cant be too upset over his death. He died stupidly, but with much valor

Dragons are Cool.. So Beowulf Wins..Then Dies?

     So first off even though the dragon is another foe for Beowulf I still think it’s pretty cool. Dragons are interesting creatures to be the bad guy in a story. When the narrator was talking about the dragon setting the town on fire I could help but imagine the dragon that Harry had to fight in the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. As well as Dragon from Shrek and how they were both protecting something like the dragon in the story, one was protecting a golden egg and the other was protecting the castle and Princess Fiona.

      Out of the foes that Beowulf had I really liked the dragon. Maybe it was because when you think about a dragon you kind of get this cool, bad-ass vibe. Plus all the dragon wanted to do was protect his things and when he set the town on fire he became a problem that Beowulf couldn’t help but fight. Kind of like Grendel’s Mom who just wanted to avenge her little boy.

       Beowulf’s soldiers suck! I get that they don’t want to be a dragon’s lunch but they kind of signed up for the job when they became soldiers. Especially if Beowulf needs you to be there even if you’re just bait so he can regain his strength you have to do your job. You may not have signed up for that particular job, but it’s your job.

      Beowulf should have listed to Hrothgar when he was talking about Beowulf not getting a big head and being humble. Maybe if he did he would still be alive. It was portrayed well when the narrator stated, “…he did not dread that attack, nor did he worry much about the dragon’s warfare, his strength or valor, because he had survived many battles…” (Lines 2347-2350). Maybe if he wasn’t so full of himself he would have been more careful. Although he did win his battle which is also kinda cool and has the legacy of defeating a dragon before he died. He died a great hero.

Beowulf Wins! Then Dies...

First I want to address this dragon. When it was talking about how the dragon was setting fire to the town, it reminded me of the dragons in Game of Thrones only instead of protecting their mother, this dragon was protecting itself from thieves. I kind of feel bad for the dragon because he was just trying to protect his treasures but he kind of went off the deep end and started burning the town down which Beowulf could just not let happen. I'm really interested to know where all of these non-human/supernatural foes keep coming from? Is there a set amount in the world that they live in or do they spawn from some foreign world? If it's the latter, they will be fighting these monsters long after Beowulf's death.  

Beowulf really should have heeded that warning not to let all of his successes go to his head, because maybe he would still be alive. When he was preparing to fight the dragon, the narrator talked about how he was not afraid of this fight because he had already "...crushed Grendel and his kin in combat,..." (Line 2353). I know how facing your fears/enemies head on is seen as a good thing in this society (which in some cases I agree) but Beowulf's fight with Grendel was not easily won. He especially did not "crush" the fight with Grendel's mom where he almost died. In this instance, choosing to quit while he was ahead would have been a much better option. 

I'd also like to address Beowulf's terrible soldiers who just abandoned him when he needed them the most. I understand not wanting to fight against a huge dragon because you don't want to get eaten by it, but the job they signed up for of fighting with and for Beowulf literally could have been that same situation everyday. At least there was Wiglaf who stood by Beowulf's side even though he could only offer "...a little life-protection..." to him (Line 2877). I completely agree that the ten traitorous soldiers shouldn't receive any treasure and be stripped of land rights but I think it's a little extreme to punish everyone in their tribe. It kind of reminds me of the three generations of punishment that North Korea imposes on those who they feel have betrayed the government. The only ones who should be punished are the soldiers.

Beowulf: The Desolation of Smaug

As I opened Beowulf today, ready for another tale of macho monster-slaying, I found myself feeling a sense of deja vu. Something about this felt incredibly familiar to me. As I got to the part where the dragon lays waste to the countryside, I finally realized why on Earth I felt like I'd seen this before- it reminds me of The Hobbit. Specifically, the three films that that one book spawned.

The unnamed dragon is said to have "guarded his hoard in the high heaths and the steep stone barrows; the path below lay unknown to men. Some sort of man went inside there, found his way to the heathen hoard - his hand ... inlaid with jewels." (Pg. 187, lines 2212-2217) What, exactly, does this remind me of...?

It sounds exactly like the Lonely Mountain, home of the dragon Smaug (and his treasure hoard) in The Hobbit, if you ask me. But the comparisons didn't end there- the tale goes on to say that "He (the thief) got no profit there, though he (the dragon) had been trapped in his sleep by a thief's trickery: the whole nation knew, and all the people around them, that he was enraged." (Pg. 187, lines 2217-2220) These lines immediately bring to mind Bilbo's encounter with Smaug:

At first, when Bilbo enters the dungeon, Smaug is asleep beneath his massive treasure hoard, but the sound of Bilbo moving around (and perhaps some inconvenient timing as well) awakens the dragon before too long. The dragon proceeds to interrogate and toy with the Hobbit, calling him a 'thief', suspecting (correctly, to an extent) that he had entered the Lonely Mountain to steal his treasure. Although the events don't play out quite exactly the same in Beowulf (the thief escapes and doesn't awaken the dragon) the parallels are clearly evident.

After these events, the enraged dragon razes the countryside as vengeance for the theft of his treasure- "Then that strange visitor began to spew flames and burn the bright courts; his burning gleams struck horror in men. That hostile flier would leave nothing alive. The worm's warfare was widely seen, his ferocious hostility, near and far, how the destroyer hated and harmed the Geatish people, then hastened to his hoard, his dark and hidden hall, before the break of day. He had surrounded the people of that region with fire, flames and cinders..." (Pg. 193, lines 2312-2322) As I mentioned previously, this was the point where I realized the similarities between Beowulf and The Hobbit, because the dragons vengeance reminded me of the beginning of the third film in the trilogy (The Battle of the Five Armies)...

...In which an enraged Smaug rampages and lays waste to Esgaroth, the Lake-town, setting it ablaze and forcing its people to flee.

I know we brought up in class at one point that some group in Lord of the Rings speaks Old English, and after having read through this and seen these parallels, it seems to me that Tolkien was clearly very heavily influenced by Beowulf... Or, honestly, maybe Hollywood was. I know these movies took a lot of creative liberty with stuff that didn't happen in the book, so maybe events didn't play out exactly like this in the novel. (I can't recall. It's been ages since I actually read The Hobbit.) Either way though, I'd like to think we can all agree that Tolkien had some sort of inspiration from Beowulf.

How Old is this Freaking Geat

Beowulf, this is how your age mates are doing.

How old is this freaking Geat, for Pete’s sake? I mean, let’s assume he was at least twenty when he killed Grendel and Grendel’s mother. Then, he’s King for fifty winters before he does what? Slays a dragon? This man has got to be seventy-something years old, and he is about to slay a dragon. Um...okay…and what was the average life expectancy of a man during this time period?

Whatever, all mathematics and real-world logic aside, I still don’t know how I feel about the structure of this dragon/worm/serpent section of the poem. The narrator begins with an attempt to rationalize the hoard, which the dragon seems to guard:

“There were many such

antique riches in that earth-hall,

for in ancient days an unknown man

had thought to hide them carefully there,

the rich legacy of a noble race,

precious treasures.” (Lines 2232-2236)

(Wait – “noble race”? Hm, that’s a strange construal coming from Europeans – not.) In addition to this vague explanation for the entire existence of the hoard and the dragon, footnote three on page 187 clarifies a critical reference: “a cup is taken from the dragon’s hoard.” Is this The Holy Grail? DUH. Okay, I understand that literature likes to drop subtle hints and leave things up to the imagination, but my imagination is too big for this. If you’re going to provide me with a backstory, give me the whole backstory, please! Now, I have about four note pages of thoughts. Did this unknown man find The Holy Grail, or had it always been in his possession? How? Why would the dragon be there? Did a demonic or Holy body place the dragon there? Did the unknown man die and get reincarnated as a badass dragon to protect his stuff? Could Beowulf commit suicide and come back to kick his ass as a maximum CP Zapdos? Does this dragon just have hoarding disorder? Can he sell it on Let Go? Isn’t there a Spongebob episode about this? These are my real questions.

On a serious note, this section made me realize just how thematic “fair fights” are to this poem, and from a historical perspective, that makes perfect sense. Battles between two people or even two countries used to be consistently fair. Each opponent would have a chance to prepare, they’d have the same grade of weapons at their disposal to use, and they’d usually be allowed to surrender. We can’t know if anybody in this poem would have cared if his or her opponent suddenly waved a white flag, but that part doesn’t matter so much.

Beowulf’s battles are fair because he performs them out of vengeance for the lives his opponents took first, and I think that sort of replaces the idea that Grendel, Grendel’s mother, and the dragon didn’t get a chance to prepare. One could also argue that his opponents aren’t human; therefore, they don’t know nor abide by the moral rules of battle. Beowulf also uses only the weapons he needs to match his opponent’s abilities. His technical reasoning for this has something to do with wyrd or fate. Beowulf believes the party that's supposed to win will always win, regardless of who is more powerful. I don’t know about that, I think it’s just nice to try and play on level ground. Winning feels sweeter that way. For some reason, today's world doesn’t fight the way Beowulf fights. We sneak up on each other, steal, lie, and cheat with our own interests in mind all the time. We’d do anything for a Klondike bar. What is wrong with us? Why don't we want to fight fairly anymore?

Beowulf, II. ed. by R.M. Liuzza