I wasn’t able to do a rumination for week one when we read Beowulf and there was something that I defiantly wanted to talk about, is Beowulf really a hero? He does all the heroic things, slays the monster, finds the treasure hoard, he even takes down a dragon. However his actions are only one half of the equation. To some degree the thing that matters the most is his intentions. It is my belief that Beowulf is no hero until he reaches the final confrontation with the Dragon.
We begin with Beowulf’s reasons for traveling from his home to this land. Is he coming to free them of Grendel? No. Is coming to forge an alliance? No. He is there for one reason and one reason only, to feed his ego. Grendel is supposedly unbeatable, an indestructible, un-Godly force that no man can possibly defeat. For Beowulf this sounds like a challenge. He travels across the sea for personal glory not to defend those in need. This sort of rampant hubris is again seen in his fight with Grendel, and this time it saves his life. Beowulf believes he can defeat the beast with his bare hands, and he is lucky he decided this. Due to Grendel’s protection from all weapons, any attempt to strike him with a sword would have been wasted and might have cost Beowulf his life.
Not long after Grendel’s defeat, Grendel’s mother comes and takes away Beowulf’s trophy (Grendel’s arm) and kills one of Hrothgar’s most trusted warriors. In response Beowulf proclaims that he will kill Grendel’s mother. However we must once again ask ourselves, why is he undertaking the job? Does he feel his job is not done and that the people are still in danger? Does he feel that an abomination like Grendel’s mother cannot be allowed to continue to exist? Possibly, but I feel the more likely reason is wounded pride. Grendel’s mother came in and defied Beowulf, stealing his trophy and killing one of the men. His response is a thoroughly self-centered one: Kill the beast that embarrassed me.
So when does the famous hero Beowulf finally become a hero? In some ways he does in the last fight with the dragon. Now much older, King Beowulf faces his greatest foe yet. His decision to go after the dragon is a bit more in line with a hero. Partially he wants to go up against something that no man can possibly defeat one more time and prove that he is the greatest and the strongest. Yet on the other hand he has a sense of duty for the first time. If the dragon is not defeated he will wind up killing everyone, either by direct means or by burning the fields and destroying the food supply. Beowulf walks into the fight knowing he will most likely die and yet does it anyway, and that is admirable.
Without the final part, which some have argued may not have been part of the original text, Beowulf is no hero. Instead he is a glory hungry man with an ego that has reached such a momentous size that it is becoming self-aware. His only saving grace is the sacrifice against the dragon, without which Beowulf is just another empty character.
When I originally read Beowulf I felt the titular hero came off as being arrogant, only concerning himself with both his ego and reputation. As I read through the poem I questioned his heroic actions, only because I felt the motives behind them were simply to further his reputation as royalty. Yet as I continued to read I realized the poem wasn't a question of Beowulf naturally being a hero, but instead his transformation into one.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that there is something very different about Beowulf's first two fights and his later confrontation with the Dragon. He is more mature and his motivations are nobler. But, I still think Beowulf's actions in the first half of the story make him a hero. He is clearly a man who is out for his own glory, but I don't think a hero needs to be totally selfless in his motivations. Beowulf's hubris is a driving part of his character and it drives him to do heroic deeds, and to me that makes him a hero. I also don't think his motivations were only related to his own glory. When Grendel's mother kills the King's friend Beowulf shows genuine compassion for the man.
ReplyDeleteI too wonder if Beowulf is actually a hero. He certainly does fit into the requirements for what is a literary Hero in the sense that he experiences a call to action, goes on a journey, find and seeks aid, slays the monster, returns home, etc. However, as a person I find his values and personality to be pretty questionable. He seems to be overly cocky and has way too much pride and confidence (as seen in the way he gloatingly decides not to use weapons against Grendel).
ReplyDeleteInteresting rumination!
I also had the opinion that Beowulf wasn't necessarily a "heroic" character. This poem was made before the official idea of chivalry totally came together, so his values definitely reflect those of a culture that are very hard to understand completely or sympathize with. I never realized it, but I agree that his battle with the dragon was his turning point from displaying his physical prowess to becoming a "hero" of sorts. But, (in my opinion at least) a person can't really become a canonical "hero" alone. Of course you can do heroic deeds and all but to become labeled as a true "hero", you need an audience or a witness of sorts to recognize you as a hero. The concept of "hero" exists only in the mind of the witness or audience, and it's only made true when the hero inspires heroism in another. Reading back on it now, I think that the moment Wiglaf breaks ranks to save Beowulf (lines 2592~2668)is the true moment that Beowulf becomes a hero. Just watching Beowulf battle the dragon, inspires Wiglaf to take action in the face of fiery death.The hero that Beowulf becomes is the archetypal hero of the Old English time; the brave, wise (though much braver than wise), blood ancestor warrior-king.
ReplyDeleteAlbert, you have a really great point about the concept of a hero. I agree with Nick's original idea whether or not someone is a hero depends on their intentions. However, as Albert said, what really matters in the end is what other people, a hero's audience, PERCEIVE the hero's intentions to be. A hero is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. This idea really connects the idea of Beowulf as a hero to the heros that we see portrayed in pop culture today - all people whose intentions differ, but who have audiences that look up to them and want to emulate them within the stories (Spiderman comes to mind).
ReplyDeleteThis is such an excellent post! As I read Beowulf I was thinking the exact same thing. Every seemingly heroic act he portrayed was fueled by his addiction to glory. On the surface one may consider his decision to go into Grendel's mother's lair alone, with the certain likelihood that he would be killed, as a selfless and heroic act. However it is significant to note that he was not risking his life for the good of the people, but rather for the potential of incurring further glory to inflate his ego.
ReplyDeleteThis was a really good point to make because it made me rethink what the idea of hero, or heroic, mean to me. I completly agree that intentions matter most when determining if someone is heroic. After thinking about all of this I've decided that someone can be a hero without being heroic. Beowulf was a hero to many people, however he was not heroic. Perhaps thats where we can say intentions come in to play. If one's intentions are sincere and for the betterment of others above oneself, then they are heroic.
Again, great post.. I really enjoyed thinking about this.
I am really glad that Beowulf was brought back up in a Rumination. I have been reading Plato's "The Republic" and it is basically about what makes a person a good person. What qualities must the posses ect. Within the book, it talks about how the matter of a reputation comes into play when deciding if a person is good or not. The argument was that people act justly or unjustly, because of the reputation they will receive. Is someone a good person because they do a favor for a friend because they just wanted to, or did they do the favor because they know they will get a good reputation.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much more that "The Republic" talks about that can be relation to Beowulf. The matter of increasing his reputation is exactly what motivates Beowulf. His reputation and ego are what he looks to feed when he does good deeds. He would not qualify as a hero, or even a good person if comparing him to points made in "The Republic."
I think one of the big questions is, what exactly is a hero? What does it take to be one? So I googled it: Hero: a man distinguished by exceptional courage and nobility and strength;
ReplyDeletethe principal character in a play or movie or novel or poem.
According to these definitions, Beowulf was a hero. But, I would agree with you, that it does seem that Beowulf's actions are rather self centered, so would we be able to call him a "true hero?"
The other thing we need to consider, though, is that we cannot know Beowulf's true intentions. He is not the one telling the story, this is from an outside, third person, perspective, so we can't, in the end, truly know what was going through Beowulf's head. Maybe it was purely self-centered? Maybe it was for the good of other people?
Maybe it was a two for one: Here's this people being tormented by a giant beast. I'm super strong and wanna prove that. Kill two birds with one stone!
i think there are a lot of connotations for the word "hero." Beowulf was not perfect, but according to the epic he was one of the greatest heroes you ever lived. just to clarify, i dont think this story is true; but, Beowulf kills Grendel's Mother he uses a giant sword he finds that was "so big only Beowulf could wield it" (67). today we have a lot of heroes. we may call a doctor, a soldier, or even simply an extraordinary person a hero. but when i think of heroes today i think mostly of sports figures. people have always valued and respected physical dominance. Muhammad Ali was an egotist, but i'd still say that he is a popular cultural hero in the same way Beowulf is.
ReplyDeleteBeowulf was definitely my most entertaining reading assignment so far in this class and I spent alot of time thinking about the characters throughout the story. Beowulf definitely seems to be a "hero" who wants praise and admiration from the people, rather than standing up against a monster for the good of the cause. When he has at dinner, he makes a point of embarrassing the man who underestimates Beowulf's ability. Beowulf tells the great tale of him swimming across the sea and killing the sea monsters to boast about his strength, rather than to warn society about these demons. Even though Beowulf should definitely receive recognition for all that he accomplishes, I did see arrogance and a self-centered attitude behind his actions. When Beowulf goes to fight the Dragon, it was the first time where I really admired him. Also, it was the first time that Beowulf every doubted his ability to slay an enemy. Seeing this humanistic side of him made me more sympathetic and hopeful that he would come out victorious in the fight. I did wonder how society viewed Beowulf's actions. We know that he is praised for taking them out of danger, but do they see Beowulf has too confident and arrogant as well? Or are they blindsided by their appreciation of his victories?
ReplyDeleteOf course Beowulf is an empty character, but sometimes that is what makes Epics just that.
ReplyDeleteBeowulf is one-sided; he is indeed a musclehead. However, the fact that he can best such creatures like Grendel with just his hands (because he already knew that no human weapon coud hurt it) and Grendel's mother with a gigantic slab of iron is a feat that gives him character that supersedes his muscleman status. Of course he may have been feeding his ego, but that is a characteristic which is devoid in empty characters, is it not?
I'm not exactly sure if Beowulf's only intention was to feed his ego in defeating Grendel. I think that Beowulf had a big ego in believing he could defeat Grendel.I think Beowulf may have had a deeper connection, feeling obligated due to his fathers relationship with Hrothgar. I'm not saying he didn't have a big ego, or that he wasn't addicted to glory, but I am saying that I think there was a little more to it than just that.
ReplyDeleteAs the above comments state, this is an excellent point and one that most of us agreed with when reading Beowulf. His arrogance was alarming, but perhaps we are breed to believe that a 'hero' in society has the right to an inflated ego; thus, overlooking his arrogance. Either way, good point!
ReplyDelete