As a person with a lasting interest
in philosophy, I have an intense interest in the concepts espoused by both the
dragon and Grendel, especially as they contrast with the beliefs of the men in
the novel.
Grendel begins as a classic existentialist, and as an existentialist, he is a
clear proponent of Absurdism, that is, the core concept that life has no
inherent meaning outside of that which we as sentient beings prescribe to
it. He sees little or nothing of value in life, and yet continues to
live. He even specifically says that the only way he could die would be
in a lunatic fit and jump to his death however I think it would not be so
lunatic from his perspective. In a life that his entirely meaningless and
devoid of happiness, especially one consumed by depression, why not jump? I would almost think that to him it would be
preferable to jump, to end his misery that engulfs him so entirely. But that fact that he chooses to continue his
existence gives credence to the idea that Grendel, at least before his meeting
with the dragon, is not entirely nihilistic.
And here we see a key tenet of existentialism that Grendel is ignoring: Authenticity.
Existentialists believe that people must find oneself and then live by that
self. They believe that the only actions that matter are those that are
born of the free will of individuals, and that these actions can cause one to
believe in some sort of meaning, and rightfully so. Grendel has displayed no willingness to seek
out a meaning to his life, he simply wallows in his trivial existence. That is not to say that Grendel has no desire to have meaning, he clearly
expresses that he wanted to believe in the Shaper and his words of God and
glory. Grendel is bound by the belief
that, and it is this which takes him to nihilism, it is impossible to have any
meaning, whether preordained or temporally created.
Grendel
could, for all intents and purposes be the poster child for existentialist
despair, the supposed void that those who take similar views fall into. And, as this relates to the existentialist
tenet of despair, the collapse of hope following the destruction of one’s worldview
and sense of meaning. This is said to
happen when one’s life takes a drastic turn, say you’re a janitor who closely
identifies him/herself with their position, and are fired. Such a situation leads to despair,
depression, etc. However Grendel does
not experience this, he never identifies a role for himself and loses it, he
begins by believing that he is meaningless rather than having meaning ripped
away from him.
I
believe in an existentialist existence can be a positive one, because meaning
inherited from a divine or natural force is not as powerful as a meaning that
comes from within, one that is inherently individual and free. Without such a meaning, or even a quest to
obtain one, Grendel is doomed to suffer his fate, which we all know is to die
at the hands of Beowulf, and worse, not just to die, but to die after
accomplishing nothing.
Yet, Grendel still desperately tries to find some sort of meaning in his despair. As such Grendel is a humanist. Yes he listens and accepts the Dragon’s philosophy but he still retains some aspects of the Shaper’s ideas such as why he actually kills the humans; is it the acceptance of the cold rationalism of the foundations of the human universe or the acceptance of the villainous in the stories? Still he does ignore the authenticity of the existentialism philosophy. Throughout the novel, he is guided and blindingly follows the philosophies of those who will him to follow without any input of his own personal philosophy. He is like a sheep that is not brave enough to find meaning of why he kills the humans. This also falls into the existentialism of the Crowd. This is the positive and negative of the crowd, the masses of the people. The Danes have become docile and domesticated animals that are faceless and listen only to the lies of the Shaper. Grendel is alone and rejects this crowd of collectivism. Yet ultimately the authencity of the friendship and honor found among each other is strong enough to preserve, despite Grendel’s conviction that the horde is faceless, he understands that the values that he rejects are just accepted from others because “that is what everybody does”. Thus it poses the question of how anything that is a collective form of existence be authentic?
ReplyDelete