Sunday, October 20, 2013

All the World's a TV Show/ And all the Characters in Grendel Merely Actors

     I love the idea of Grendel; really, I do. Besides the fact that Grendel is actually a very amusing character to listen to, the themes of the book delightfully shake your beliefs and challenge your morals in a way that makes your head hurt (and I mean that in the best way possible, if that's possible). His rants about life go a lot deeper than any teenager's loathing, yet it carries a meaning and questioning that all human beings--teens, adults, my parents--have in their mind, but don't quite have the words to explain. One of them particularly interested me: the idea of truth. We had an interesting and mind-bending conversation regarding Grendel and Plato's allegory of "The Cave" and the possible implications between the two. Grendel is so relatable because of the questions he asks, the philosophies he ponders. What is truth? Is it in the eye of the beholder? Where can we find absolute truth? And even then, does truth carry a meaning if there's no one around to interpret it? At which point, the truth isn't absolute anymore, but just another interpretation?

     I'm really tempted, every day in class, to slouch back in my chair and declare "I don't know, please don't ask again." But there's no fun in that, and I can't help but think about my own beliefs and how they match up with Grendel's. Throughout the book, Grendel contrasts the human version of truth against his own, and they definitely don't match up; the funny thing is, though, they're both essentially 'true.' This is the struggle that Grendel deals with. He seems to know his own version of life and death, all a pointless act that we live through aimlessly and hopelessly until the day we die--that existentialism exists, and nothing else. His solipsist view on life is true for him, and it is at its core true for everyone; we're born here, we do stuff, and then we die somewhere else. That's how life works.
   
     On the other side of the coin, the human beings that inhabit the 'real world' above Grendel's cave attribute all wins, losses, and natural signs as an act of God or other intangible force, a message that is passed down, telling people what to do in order to get to heaven (or hell). Religion, a spiritual existence, is what human beings strongly believe in and live their life by, and it's sure more comforting and stable than Grendel's daily rants of helplessness and wanting to jump off every cliff he passes by. For a majority of people, religion is their truth, and who can deny that? It's an anchor and a solace, and if it works then power to them. But Grendel knows this not to be true. For one reason or another, he knows that religion does not exist, and these people are just living in lunacy. He was born in 'hell', for lack of a better term, and for this reason I believe in this statement that Grendel does seem to know more than human beings do. He is part of the religious background, but isn't affiliated with it, and that's significant.

     What's most interesting about Grendel, however, is how willing he is to ditch his existentialist self and cross over to the more spiritual one, the human truth, regardless of its consequences. For example, upon hearing the Shaper's poem about how heroic man was for 'beating' Grendel, Grendel states,

"I knew very well that all he said was ridiculous, not light for their darkness but flattery, illusion, a    vortex. [...] Yet I was swept up. [...] My heart was light with Hrothgar's goodness, and leaden with grief at my own bloodthirsty ways" (48).

Despite what really happened--Hrothgar's posse burned inferior halls to the ground, "hacked down trees in widening rings [...] till the forest looked like an old dog dying of mange" (40)--Grendel wants with all his heart to believe that these people are doing good in the world, even though they aren't (at an existential standpoint). He wants to fall into the notion that man supersedes all, is good to all, and is willing to sacrifice for his own kind (in reality, Hrothgar wants to eliminate competition in his land and expand his kingly hand). Grendel battles with himself, especially in the fourth chapter, about the contrast between what humans say and what they actually do. They say they glorified their men in epic battles to protect their homeland; but weren't they just murdering anybody who got too powerful? And when Grendel bursts into Heorot, pleading mercy and peace, the men hacked at him with poisonous blades and he had to retreat in an effort to save themselves from a monster; but all Grendel was trying to do was express his guilt and admiration for the human spirit.

     And this is where I strongly believe that reading Grendel is like watching a TV show--and you're Grendel. TV dramas make such obvious plots, scenarios, for the watcher to fall into, be it romantic choices, conquering lands, singing your heart out to win the Glee cup. You already know how everything will end; the girl will get her heart broken, the king will lose his crown for being too greedy, the kids will lose because they had a shaky year and didn't practice hard enough. But you grind your teeth, you sit down in that sofa and believe as hard as you can that the opposite will happen. You are willing to disprove what you have believed will happen since you watched that first episode that none of it is true. And three months later, when the season ends, you're let down. See the parallel here?

     Grendel fights with himself, to try and believe two completely different philosophies. He wants the cut-and-dry good versus evil that man puts their hearts into, but he can't. There are too many contradictions in human nature for this to be possible for a non-human creature to believe in. "It was a cold-blooded lie that a god had lovingly made the world, [...] that one of the races was saved, the other cursed" (55). Every time Grendel gives mankind a chance to walk the walk, to act upon what the Shaper proclaims that mankind is, it is shut down by violence, cruelty, and unfairness, and reality. Is this not the definition of a monster, a definition that Grendel was supposed to fill, not mankind?

1 comment: