Skip to main content

Fear of a just judge // Ian Blair

    Well, like-son-like-mother I suppose. The second part of Beowulf is definitely a bit more interesting than the first in my opinion, mainly due to the fact that we see the hero of the story have to adapt to aquatic combat; something that was uncommon in the time period it was written in. This sequel of sorts is what I was anticipating when we read Homer’s Iliad last semester, so it’s a relief that we get some story continuation here. The fight with Grendel’s mother once again hinted at previous stories written by the Greeks and Romans with the sword on the wall of the underwater vault that looked like it was made to slay giants. The decision by the writer of the original tale to keep continuity with the older stories adds a unique dynamic that really helps the world-building of the epic. I find it quite ironic that the only people who really stayed to see if Beowulf would return were the people he traveled with, just goes to show who out of the bunch actually had faith that their hero would finish the job. The faith that the Geats had in Beowulf is not unlike the faith that we are called to have in Jesus; and much like the Geats, when we have unwavering faith we see the influence of God in our lives. An example of this is seen when Beowulf gives credit for the defeat of Grendel’s mother back to God: 

“I barely survived the battle under water. It was hard-fought, a desperate affair that could have gone badly; if God had not helped me, the outcome would have been quick and fatal” (115).


    Beowulf leaning on his own strength is formidable, but slaying God-cursed monsters requires the aid of the God who cursed them in the first place; this detail enforces the lesson the story teaches about having respect for the Lord. It seems as though this theme of leaving the outcome of the fight in the Lord’s hands will eventually see Beowulf defeated. Will this theme continue into part III? I suppose there’s only one way to find out.

 

p.s. I commented on Micah's and Haylee Lynd's posts.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Overanalyzing Everyone's Intentions Here-Rachael Gregson

 First off, I'd like to say this is going to be a two part blog post, because a lot of things happened in this reading assignment that demands to be discussed.  As with any war I've realized, it's tricky not to fall into the initial perspective I am given. I began this book skeptical of Hector because I was bias toward the movie Troy, which was told mostly through the eyes of Achilles, but neither were what I was expecting. It's actually funny that they both hold values completely opposite from one another. Hector represented everything related to city-state pride, honor, and humility whereas Achilles was everything wild, reckless, and unpredictable solitary. This isn't to say that Hector is all good and Achilles all bad. Both had instances where I rooted for the other more or less. I just thought it was interesting how their two personalities represented something that basically causes all wars: the clash between civilization and savagery.  Secondly, I'm not de...