|
Post by Lauren on Aug 15, 2013 6:50:08 GMT
On the back of my copy of Grendel is a quote by Christian Science Monitor saying "It deserves a place on the same shelf as Lord of the Flies, Cat's Cradle and Cather in the Rye." I noted that all three of these novels are common High School English reads and it made me think: Was Grendel a satisfactory choice for an AP English required reading? What makes it any better for this assignment than other novels? Do you have suggestions of novels that we may have gotten more out of? I know many of us have already posted about how much (or how little) we enjoyed reading Grendel, but I'm curious to know our opinions on how well it did at fulfilling its job as a valuable summer homework assignment.
|
|
|
Post by haleyjensen on Aug 17, 2013 4:47:03 GMT
While I've found the book a little strange and lacking a distinct focus at times, I do think it was a good choice for our summer reading assignment. In my opinion and from my experience in honors English sophomore year, the best books to read as a class are the ones that spark genuine discussion. Honestly, I probably wouldn't choose to read Grendel on my own because I'm not a huge fan of the fantasy/fiction genre. But clearly from all the English posts that have been posted this summer, Grendel presents a LOT to ponder. Any book that deals so heavily with the meaning of life is bound to spark discussions. I also think it's a good length novel. It's long enough to deeply develop characters and see relationships play out, but it's short enough to really be able to dive into the text and look closely at certain passages of the novel. Gardner's novel has very relatable themes, such as a person's search for truth, how we view ourselves and those around us, and how we're impacted by the way we've been brought up and the values instilled in us. In Grendel's conversation with the Dragon in chapter 5, there was a line that stuck out to me that sums up my view of why the novel Grendel is a good group read. The Dragon says to Grendel, "You stimulate them! You make them think and scheme. You drive them to poetry, science, religion, all that makes them what they are for as long as they last" (72-73). I think what the Dragon says here is one of Gardner's purposes for writing this book--to make his audience think. Like it or not, it's a book that demands a response while reading.
|
|
|
Post by amysohlberg on Aug 26, 2013 20:20:33 GMT
I think Grendel was an interesting choice for a required reading, but I'm definitely glad we read it. In this novel, Garder writes in a fascinating and unique style that I haven't really seen imitated anywhere else. He takes a random character from a medieval epic, puts him in a story that lacks a definitive plot, brings it all to a head with an incredibly unsatisfying conclusion, yet still creates a novel that is complex and layered with different discussion points. I love the way he uses Grendel's crude language and meaningless outlook on life to create an almost-likeable character who perfectly mirrors the madness that happens in some of our own heads. Though I definitely didn't come away from Grendel with a clear message, I think Gardner's purpose for this novel is to force us to consider the meaning we find in our lives and whether it will sustain us. We'll probably read a lot of books this year with a clear purpose and a message that is translated through symbols, characters and plot turns, but I think Grendel is one of a kind. It's like a huge ball of knots that we're slowly untangling the more we think and discuss--and realize that we aren't really getting anywhere--but that's okay! There's something kind of beautiful in a book that you finish and think: "I have no idea what the heck that was about." If you can fully wrap your head around an idea, you have to ask yourself if it's really that grand of an idea in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by kevinle on Aug 27, 2013 2:49:19 GMT
I'm not too much of a literature fan, but I love to read books that are inspiring, mind-blowing, entertaining, and/or brain-engaging; I also like books I can relate to.
Grendel was all over the place. Yes, it sparked lots of interesting, deep discussion. It also challenged my mind to make sense out of the erratic, jumpy passages. However, it also created lots of unnecessary confusion. The writing itself wasn't too particularly amazing to me; it wasn't very attention-grabbing or elegant. The content was okay, but much of it was (excuse the colloquial term) just weird. I couldn't relate to much of it.
I may be a shallow reader when it comes to classic books, but I have my opinions...
A couple of books I think are good:
Born to Run (it's not just about running) It's definitely not written like a classic, but it theorizes the roots of human existence. It captures the change from ancient human behaviors to modernization, and how modern habits have dramatically changed human lifestyles. It's mind-blowing and contains incredible theories about human evolution.
The Trial (I read it this summer...) This question describes it... If you are arrested for a reason you do not know, but are undoubtedly innocent, and have no hope to continue anything close to a normal life, how would you live?
In short, Grendel was very interesting, but I did not like it.
|
|
|
Post by rileyhatfield on Aug 29, 2013 5:50:09 GMT
In my opinion, Grendel was all over the place. In one chapter he would be attacking a meadhall and in the next he would be meeting with the Dragon, but there would be no transition into this new setting with the Dragon. This made the novel pretty confusing to follow. Having said that, I found that I got emersed into each chapter once I dug into it a little deeper. As I really tried to focus on the reading more, I could start to see themes hidden between the lines of the reading. For example, a theme I found in later chapters was identity. Once Grendel had met with the Dragon, and the Dragon had told Grendel that "my enemies define me," (Gardner 91), Grendel took it almost as a self-fulfilling prophecy that he was supposed to be monster so that the humans would be scared and therefore evolve their ways to accommodate for the monster killing and attacking their people. Then Grendel began to realize he got pleasure out of seeing the people suffer and his state of mind shifted to more 'monster-like.' Therefore he struggled with an identity crisis because he was so easily persuaded by the Dragon. So, finding these hidden themes to me seemed like something an AP English or a regular English class would do and I actually enjoyed doing it. So I believe that it was a good choice for an AP English required reading. Along with that, I also really enjoy the fantasy/fiction genre, so the idea of a monster being the narrator of the story intrigued me.
|
|
|
Post by cassiecumberland on Aug 29, 2013 21:13:10 GMT
I very much appreciate Grendel because of Gardner's writing style. I LOVED the narrative aspect and getting to know Grendel on a face-to-face basis. I, however, did not necessarily enjoy the overall story (medieval and fantasy don't really work well with my personality type), but I believe that it was a great choice to change things up and definitely has many poignant comments about the world and society. Of course, everyone enjoys the typical fantasy hero and his quest against dragons and monsters and pirates, but, Grendel does not fit under that category- it has depth, which should be more appreciated, and snippets of action.
I really sympathized with Grendel's (overdramatic) feeling of solitude in the world, meaningless in the world, and disheartenment towards the human race. I find that us humans are constantly struggling with the battle of light and dark, and although I choose light, I found it very eye opening and interesting to read about Grendel's opinions and overall Gardner's commentary on this human struggle.
My favorite part of the novel was definitely the ending- cryptic, shiver-sending, and sad. The loss and defeat of Grendel is overall tragic. He was very odd, rude, barbaric, but honestly Grendel was a tragic hero in my eyes. Maybe he was right to reject the world.
|
|
|
Post by emwolfram on Aug 30, 2013 0:26:15 GMT
Although some students have differing opinions on this novel, I will be the first to say I loved it. There is a sense of humor in this novel that is so intricate I would find myself laughing out loud when I least expected it. I think this was ideal for summer reading because it is a true contemporary novel. There were many small things I loved including, the wit, the cynicism, and the narrative style. But the main reason this book should be included in the AP curriculum is because it is unique. This next quote is taken from Sammy Wong from the thread "The Prude Ruiner of Meahalls, Wrecker of Kings": "My theory is that Grendel is a character created for Beowulf’s purposes, a character that is designed for the mere purpose to be destroyed. This is why Grendel finds no meaning in life; his meaning is to be killed and he does not know his ending yet."
In the poem "Beowulf" Grendel was an insignificant monster that needed to be destroyed. In that poem Grendel is just a villain used to make Beowulf a hero. What Gardner did in writing "Grendel", was take static character that exists just to be killed and gave him a story. Gardner gives "the insignificant monster" a mother, a personality, an opinion on the world and a heart. So despite the flaws of the novel, the central idea behind writing "Grendel" is so unique and impressive I can't help but be taken with the book.
|
|
|
Post by keelycorrigan on Aug 31, 2013 6:51:25 GMT
John Gardner’s Grendel is like a strong cup of full caffeine coffee. For some drinkers (or readers), this wall of flavor and lingering, powerful aftertaste is the only way they are getting out of bed in the morning. Grendel’s cynicism, simplistic and casual tone, and tendency (or affinity? or affliction?) towards violence were a little much for me. Unfortunately, I take my coffee with a heart-attack’s worth of creamer and, on occasion, with a dash of Swiss Miss for extra chocolate-y flavor. What can I say? We all have different tastes. Grendel would have been an enjoyable read for me if it had the elements that make novels enjoyable for me, but, alas no Mr. Darcy once again.
Yet, simultaneously, there can be no doubt in my mind of this novel’s genius. While there were times when this book was so infuriating that I had to shake my copy a little bit and scream, I have to give this novel and its author credit. The issues that this novel raises about heroism, society, monsters, humans, language, death, meaning ( … the list goes on and on) were written about with such thought and precision that I found myself underlining specific quotes that forced me to stop and think. I try to mark up every single book I read if I feel it’s necessary. I underline a passage for a significant moment in the plot or if the words just co-habituate so beautifully in that particular line that the only justice that can be done to it is to highlight the magic for future prosperity. This novel, however, falls into a distinct and elite category of novels that I hated but still admired for mastery of story and language. My personal response to the novel and this novel’s ability to interweave so many topics so elegantly--and brutally-- and eloquently-- and frankly-- are the foundation of my support for its place in the AP curriculum.
|
|