Post by keelycorrigan on Aug 27, 2013 6:17:21 GMT
Much of the novel is, consciously but subliminally, a study of the relationship between perspective and evil—the way that one’s perspective is (more often than not) biased into believing that they are the baseline for “good” and that others who may differ from that baseline are “evil.” This theory is so evident in the ways the two dueling forces in the novel see their counterparts. To Grendel, humans, despite the complicated and interdependent relationship between them, are “others” that can fall on a spectrum from despicable to beautiful but are more often lumped together into disdainful. Oddly, enough Grendel’s viewpoint in the novel evolves from incomprehensible admiration of the humans to a violent, power-seeking, destructive, fatal duel. Obviously, the humans are not that fond of Grendel, either. Both sides, however, have moments of, or are depending upon one’s viewpoint, good. Grendel treats his mother, who irritates him beyond belief, with patience and gentleness. The humans, while often evil toward each other, are capable of love and kindness, as well. Yet, they both seem to believe that their counterpart is evil, in so many words. Grendel, who is desperate to get validation, hears the way that the humans tell of him, " [The Shaper] told of an ancient feud between two brothers which split all the world between darkness and light. And I, Grendel, was the dark side, he said in effect. The terrible race God cursed," (51).
As to the spiral of reactions that perpetuates the relationship between foes, you could think about the literalities or logistics of their relations—the way that each violent act from a side provokes another violent act and so on—and think that in the natural cycle of enemies there is no way to reset or completely sever the pattern without some kind of monumental turning point. Unfortunately, Grendel and the ancient Europeans cannot afford each other that leverage.
How do you see the concept of good vs. evil portrayed in the novel? Do you think that it is shown to be subjective or objective? Why? More universally, how do you think the subjectivity (or objectivity) relate to our cultures today? Does it hinder humanity from seeing the truth or does show us the truth? Why do you think we, as human beings, think/see goodness this way? Things to ponder…
As to the spiral of reactions that perpetuates the relationship between foes, you could think about the literalities or logistics of their relations—the way that each violent act from a side provokes another violent act and so on—and think that in the natural cycle of enemies there is no way to reset or completely sever the pattern without some kind of monumental turning point. Unfortunately, Grendel and the ancient Europeans cannot afford each other that leverage.
How do you see the concept of good vs. evil portrayed in the novel? Do you think that it is shown to be subjective or objective? Why? More universally, how do you think the subjectivity (or objectivity) relate to our cultures today? Does it hinder humanity from seeing the truth or does show us the truth? Why do you think we, as human beings, think/see goodness this way? Things to ponder…