4 ms·

Whatever "moral valence" they do have, you've put there in your reading of the text. Beowulf is just a story about a famous warrior who takes a group of his sup

Whatever "moral valence" they do have, you've put there in your reading of the text. Beowulf is just a story about a famous warrior who takes a group of his supporters to help a king with a monster problem.

dvt 9y ago
Really? Why is Grendel characterized as "evil" and a "fiend in hell"? Why does Beowulf exemplify traits of courage, bravery, and self-sacrifice? Why is Beowulf already famous for his "good" and "glorious" deeds? I was re-reading the intro, and ran into this gem[1]: 105 the wretched creature ruled for a time since him the Creator had condemned with the kin of Cain; that killing avenged Totally forgot about this literal reference to Cain (of Cain and Abel fame). I mean, you're about as wrong as wrong gets. [1] http://www.heorot.dk/beowulf-rede-text.html http://www.heorot.dk/beowulf-rede-text.html
- krapp 9y ago
  Because the story of Beowulf that we have is a Christianized version, rewritten by monks. We have no idea what the actual moral framework or symbolism of Grendel was, or wasn't, in the original story.
  - dvt 9y ago
    I know this. What's your point? My argument still easily defeats the original article.
    - krapp 9y ago
      My point is only that we can't really know whether Grendel is supposed to be some meaningless animal force or symbolic of something with a moral dimension because the original story and its context is lost to time.
      - dvt 9y ago
        You don't have a point. Ms. Nichols' argument is that moral face-offs are (and this is an exact quote) "a recent invention that evolved in concert with modern nationalism" -- Beowulf -- Christianized or not -- is a hard counter to that argument. Christ was born, and Beowulf was recorded, much earlier than modern nationalism. For what it's worth, I can even win the harder argument (considering Beowulf as a piece of non-Christianized Norse mythology), but that's beyond my scope. Margins too small, etc.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
yetanother1980 9y ago
> a monster problem. A monster - literally evil personified in semi human form. You can't really get more good guys Vs bad guys than that.
- Sangermaine 9y ago
  No, a monster is just a beast, without any necessary moral qualities.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - carapace 9y ago
    > Derived from the Latin monstrum, the word usually connotes something wrong or evil; a monster is generally morally objectionable, physically or psychologically hideous, or a freak of nature. ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster I have to disagree. The word "monster" is used for things worse than beasts, "something wrong or evil".

dvt 9y ago

Really? Why is Grendel characterized as "evil" and a "fiend in hell"? Why does Beowulf exemplify traits of courage, bravery, and self-sacrifice? Why is Beowulf already famous for his "good" and "glorious" deeds? I was re-reading the intro, and ran into this gem[1]: 105 the wretched creature ruled for a time since him the Creator had condemned with the kin of Cain; that killing avenged Totally forgot about this literal reference to Cain (of Cain and Abel fame). I mean, you're about as wrong as wrong gets. [1] http://www.heorot.dk/beowulf-rede-text.html http://www.heorot.dk/beowulf-rede-text.html

krapp 9y ago
Because the story of Beowulf that we have is a Christianized version, rewritten by monks. We have no idea what the actual moral framework or symbolism of Grendel was, or wasn't, in the original story.
- dvt 9y ago
  I know this. What's your point? My argument still easily defeats the original article.
  - krapp 9y ago
    My point is only that we can't really know whether Grendel is supposed to be some meaningless animal force or symbolic of something with a moral dimension because the original story and its context is lost to time.
    - dvt 9y ago
      You don't have a point. Ms. Nichols' argument is that moral face-offs are (and this is an exact quote) "a recent invention that evolved in concert with modern nationalism" -- Beowulf -- Christianized or not -- is a hard counter to that argument. Christ was born, and Beowulf was recorded, much earlier than modern nationalism. For what it's worth, I can even win the harder argument (considering Beowulf as a piece of non-Christianized Norse mythology), but that's beyond my scope. Margins too small, etc.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]

yetanother1980 9y ago

> a monster problem. A monster - literally evil personified in semi human form. You can't really get more good guys Vs bad guys than that.

Sangermaine 9y ago
No, a monster is just a beast, without any necessary moral qualities.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- carapace 9y ago
  > Derived from the Latin monstrum, the word usually connotes something wrong or evil; a monster is generally morally objectionable, physically or psychologically hideous, or a freak of nature. ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster I have to disagree. The word "monster" is used for things worse than beasts, "something wrong or evil".