At the end of class today Laz gave us the opportunity to pick what we'll be talking about tomorrow, and some of us (tentatively) decided on the portrayal of females in the poem. I wanted to share some information I learned from the articles I read on this topic, and I also wanted to set up a post so we can talk about this theme and the others we'll be discussing in the coming days.
The idea of feminine monstrosity is one that is crucial to the story of Beowulf. One article I read discussed the monstrous nature of both Grendel's mother and Thryth. The difference between the two, it seems, is that Thryth, due to her social status as the daughter of a king, is able to function within society. Despite her evil nature and cruel actions, she is never outright condemned as a monster by the poet. Additionally, after her marriage, she becomes less evil. Is this a commentary on how men "tame" women once they're married?
Grendel's mother, however, is held as one of literature's greatest examples of feminine monstrosity. Described as greedy, grim-minded, an a monster woman, her entrance to Heorot strikes even more terror into the hearts of the men present than does Grendel's entrance. Another article I read, however, proposed the idea that Grendel's mother has received unfair treatment amongst literary scholars; some believe that readers are predisposed to read Grendel's mother as being monstrous due to all of the hoopla surrounding her character. This theory contrasts sharply the fact that the poet depicts, and most readers perceive, Grendel's mother as a horrible, grotesque monster, but does not do so with Grendel, who, in actuality, is equally as evil. Thoughts on this?
One aspect of this poem that I found interesting (as it relates to feminine monstrosity) is that the females in the story act in a more masculine way. Instead of exerting their power through words or through coercion of their husbands, women in the story actually use physical strength and weapons. I think if we compare the females from Shakespeare's plays (like King Lear) to those from Beowulf, this is one noteworthy difference. The poet of Beowulf depicts (some) women as evil, yes, but in a more literal, physical way.
Comments? Other ideas?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
First off, I thought you hated feminism Kelsie?
I think your theory on Modthryth's marriage resulting in her being "tamed" by a man is very interesting. It seems to fit in with the culture of the time.
As for Grendel's mother, I read a very interesting article that said, like the one you read Kelsie, that Grendel's mother received unfair treatment. The article claimed that the actions of Grendel's mother were not uncommon for the culture in which the characters live. Beowulf and his thanes killed Grendel, thus his mother came to avenge his death (which was a custom that was almost expected). Then since she killed one of Hrothgar's men, Beowulf goes out to avenge that man's death by killing Grendel's mother. But since Grendel and his mother had no other relatives, the vicious cycle of revenge halted. I just found it very interesting to put Grendel's mother in a different light. Often we focus so much on how she is portrayed as as "evil" as her son that we do not consider any other motivations for her actions.
Your last point I'm having trouble dealing with. There was an extreme lack of female participation in the poem. Aside from Grendel's mom, all the women in the poem just sat there and looked pretty. One of them actually talked though. So I don't see how you can make the claim that females used physicality and brute force, aside from grendel's mother. Unless you're saying that Grendel's mom represents all women, which I highly doubt you are. Or, unless you're talking about one of the many kernals in the poem, which I cannot remember the details of at the moment.
As for the lack of female participation, it's a definite representation of how women were in society in the middle ages. The men basically did all the work and once or twice you'd hear about a woman killing the king or leading the armies of such and such a country to vanquish the barbarians. Women just played a minor role in the middle ages.
On Grendel's mother's revenge, could that be illustrating the bond between mother and child? We see it in nature (mother bear protecting baby bear) and human mothers sticking up for their children, usually with unprecedented fierceness. So couldn't the monster analogy apply to how Grendel's mother acts after Grendel was killed?
Just a thought.
"So couldn't the monster analogy apply to how Grendel's mother acts after Grendel was killed?"
-Albert Chen
But yes, I do think so :D
@Anisha
I'm... still not seeing any significance from her speeches. All she's doing is congratulating him for beating Grendel. (lines 1168-1186)
Where specifically are you talking about?
First of all, I apologize for all my deleted posts. The last post Albert made is in reference to something I said, and then deleted. Sorry, Albert!
I think this topics broadened to the role of women, as a whole, in this play. Along those lines, I think we need to give some value to the women within this play, rather than just talk about their lack of participation. Obviously they have minor roles, but the roles they do have represent women of their time.
I read this article which claims that women are the center of the plot in Beowulf. Though I don't agree with the arguement for the most part (it made a fair few assumptions about the King taking the Queen's advice, etc), it brought up some interesting points.
Wealhtheow has somewhat of a hostesses role. During the mealtime, they come around and give drinks to the men. This job holds some value. The order of who gets the mead shows the importance of the people in the hall. This importance can be seen in the first feast in Denmark. The author specifically describes the order that Wealththeow gives the mead to everyone. She ends with Beowulf, maybe showing his outside status? Either way, this hostessing role can be seen as a way for her to show her opinions of the men in her husband's hall?
Hygd is another women in this play, and she has a relatively significant role. She offers the crown to Beowulf. SHE offers it to him. I think this shows a significant amount of power in the hands of a women.
Interestingly enough, the women in the "kernal" stories have roles as well. The article I'm reading calls Hildeburh a "peacemaker". She's married off to the King of Fin, though she's Danish. She's torn between two sides when fighting ensues. She can be seen as a (failed) peacekeeper. Some would argue that she's was forced into this marriage for political reasons. Regardless, I think it gives some value to women. They're supposed to be able to hold warring tribes from fighting each other.
These are three somewhat random examples of the powers of non-monstorous women in Beowulf. Obvioulsy, there is dispute about the validity of these claims (whether or not the story is being stretched a bit). However, I do think before we move on, we need to figure out what the place of women should be, as reflected by the story.
Feminism is really hard in a story like Beowulf, because women truly are not the focus of the story.
I think most of us agree that Grendel's mom represents some kind of female monstrosity. Perhaps she is the potential that all women have to be evil. (Think Eve and the forbidden fruit.) However, I do find it interesting how Grendel and his mother have a bond. The idea of wanting vengeance for her sons death is a human characteristic. It shows that Grendel's mother has the human-esque quality of loyalty. But her actions are far more bestial, like, as Albert sais, a mama bear protecting her cub.
As for the other women... Anisha, you bring up a good point about the kernal females. I want to loook into that. Though Wealtheow's role as a hostess was expected for her time, not necessarily showing her power. She does, however, have some influence over her husband's decisions, so that is signifigant. She advises hrothgar against adopting Beowulf.
Post a Comment