RE: Supernatural strength

 Clynton pointed out that Beowulf was a supernatural man, much like Gilgamesh here. I really didn't think about that until after class. It's rather interesting that the tellers of his tale didn't feel the need to explain how Beowulf got his "powers".  It's almost as if they took it for granted. It just happens sometimes.

We know how Gilgamesh got so strong, he was part god, and Superman was an alien, so where does Beowulf's strength come from? In my attempt to figure out where Beowulf's strength came from I found several instances where people pointed out that Beowulf seemed to rely less on his strength in each subsequent battle. Also, his weapons seem to fail him. source

I think Clynton was on to something when he wondered "if one wrote about a mortal with super natural strength, maybe that was a desire for the ancient time." In ancient tales the hero often had supernatural strength. Hercules, Achilles and Samson are a few that come to mind. It seems that all had supernatural beast to fight as well. Samson and Achilles did both fail in the end, much like Beowulf so perhaps this was the ancient formula for story telling?

This line of thought made me curious, what does Grendel represent? Micheal Delahoyde claims he "represents everything a warrior should not be." source  He further muses that Grendel's mother is the opposite of what a woman should be, as women were thought of as the "peace-weavers". The dragon also serves as an opposition to a good king, as a good king is generous and a bad king is miserly.

With these things in mind, maybe Beowulf was more of a cautionary tale. The people who were hearing the tale would know what a good warrior, wife and king is and know that the monsters were the opposite. It could be said to be a cautionary tale, on which they could base their lives.

Death in Beowulf

It seems as if death is a fairly constant theme so far, perhaps because that was the reality of the times they lived in, death was a fairly constant concern. Beowulf does not seem terribly concerned about his seemingly ensuing death, for many did not think he would be returning to his homeland again.

I found it very  interesting that Beowulf advised the king "Sorrow not, wise one! It is always better to avenge one's friend than to mourn overmuch."  In this way he reminded me of Marcus Aurelius and the stoic philosophy found in Meditations.


The deaths always seem to be foreshadowed, I don't know if the creator of the story did this as a way to remember what came next better, as this was originally an oral story, or as a way to keep interest. I did enjoy the line "They sank into sleep- one paid sorely for his evening rest, as often happened when Grendel guarded the gold-hall."

It also bears noting that Grendel, much like Humbaba seems to serve a purpose in the story. While Humbaba guarded the forest, Grendel seems to be punishment for lack of humility, or perhaps practicing pagan religion. On page 1210 we see that "he bore God's anger." He seems to be described almost as a demonic being. 

One small inconsistency confused me. The story said that there were prayers offered to pagan gods, and they had even called on the devil for deliverance. When Beowulf arrives, he obviously believes in God and offers glory to his name for his success, as does the king. Is Grendel able to be defeated because they are not practicing pagan ways? When did they make the shift from pagan to seemingly Christian? Am I just reading too much in to this?

The most demonic depiction of Grendel I could find.

Midterm Essay

I've been kicking around a few different ideas for my mid-term essay. For me the topic is the first half of the battle when it comes to writing essays. Maybe I just over think it? Here I am going to present my most promising idea at the moment.

Compare and Contrast of Gilgamesh and Creon: It seems as if Creon and Gilgamesh have quite a bit in common. They are both set in their ways and it seems as though, in practice, they don't necessarily do what is best for the people.  Perhaps intent is really what separates them. Creon seems to genuinely believe he is doing what is best for the people when he refuses the burial of a traitor but Gilgamesh doesn't seem to care how what he does effects the people.

Both Creon and Gilgamesh are stubborn to a fault. Creon refuses to listen to reason when told that he is more or less defying the gods. Gilgamesh presses on in his quest for immortality even though the gods tell him it is futile.

Extreme circumstances are necessary for both to see the light. Creon doesn't realize he's wrong until it is too late, his son dies as does his wife. Gilgamesh has to go through the entire  journey to Utnapishtim to find the secret to immortality, not letting go until he is defeated by the "little death" of sleep.

The period of time seen in both tales makes it a bit difficult to fully analyze the character's growth. Gilgamesh, by means of his long journey is able to grow and learn that death is a necessary part of life. Creon is not given that opportunity, but since this is a Greek Tragedy I can only assume he would have killed himself in some dramatic way had he been given the chance.

*Sources thanks for the reminder. :) Found on google books Gilgamesh Epic by Jeffery Tigay I wasn't able to find it in the public library database so I will have to use it from google books.

Also on google books The Three Thebian Pays

Oh that I should ever see a poem as lovely as a tree

Reading the variety of lyric poems this week was enlightening. The styles and even the level of seriousness with which the poets seemed to view themselves was interesting.  I never really gave much thought to how important poetry can be. To think that it was part of the tests one had to take to be a member of the government in China is mind boggling. I don't know that we would ever see "write a poem about the President" on an entrance exam to be the Attorney General or FBI agent.  This just illustrates how much times have changed and how different our cultures are. 

I think it would be interesting though, if civil servants did create poetry relating to their field of work. Members of the DEQ could write about water quality and the loss of species. Civil engineers could write about roads and traffic. Senators could write about their beliefs.

Perhaps it would be a good idea if politicians were to write poems instead of debate. It would certainly be less headache inducing as they couldn't simply insult their opponent.... Or perhaps they could. I think the hardest part would be making sure they didn't hire a "poem writer" and had to write their own poetry.

On second thought, I'm not sure this exercise would tell us anything about the candidates other than how imaginative they are.

Creon v Antigone

According to dictionary.com, a tragic hero is "a great or virtuous character in a dramatic tragedy who is destined for downfall, suffering, or defeat: Oedipus, the classic tragic hero." link With this defintion in mind I can see how both Creon and Antigone could be considered to have two tragic heroes. Both are destined to suffer and in the end both are "defeated" in one way or another. I would have to say Creon suffers more. He loses not only a son, but a wife and loses credibility as well.

Creon feels he's in the right, after all, why should a traitor be honored in death? I'm not sure if that's the "new" mindset or the "old" mindset but he's very sure that's the way it should be. He seems to have the support of the people. That is until Antigone is brave, or foolhardy, enough to oppose him in this view.

The chorus, or rather the people, came to agree with Antigone, and even Creon's son tries to help him see the error of his ways. Haemon insists "there is no disgrace for a man, even a wise man,/ to learn many things and not to be too rigid" He warns Creon of the danger of being too rigid and points out that the trees which are too rigid are destroyed.

It is not until the soothsayer reasons with Creon that he realizes he has acted hastily.  By then, of course it is too late. His son is dead and his wife is soon to follow. Creon is really the focus of the story, we see how he goes from certainty that he's right to realizing he's mistaken. He's the most dynamic character and the one all the other characters interact with. Creon is the tragic hero as far as I can see.