Grendel Realized
Grendel interpretation
Grendel Movie InterpretationBeowulf does not give us a clear definition of the looks of any of the characters. Here are a few representations of Grendel. The third image is the most recent rendition of Beowulf. See the bottom for questions.
Which Grendel interpretation do you like best or least and why? Be specific about what visual elements are present. Also, what would you add, subtract or change if you had to create a Grendel visual image?
I like the first Grendel image because to me it looks the most monster like. I imagined him green.In the picture he looks giant which is what i pictured him to be. If I had to change it though he would have huge claws and fangs.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean "most like a monster"? Do we have a strict definition of what a monster should look like?
DeleteAs a contemporary reader we affix our connotations to Grendel's image, but shouldn't we consider what the Geats would have considered monstrous in appearance?
Huge claws and fangs definitely would make Grendel more animal like which is how he is characterized - subhuman.
i pictured grendel being most like the second one. the third one just looks rediculous
ReplyDeleteWhy? What specifically made you think the third one was ridiculous?
DeleteThe first Grendel interpretation is most what i pictured Grendel like because he's really big and angry. The second one looks like a bunny in the face. If I could change anything it would be that he was more of a bright green.
ReplyDeleteA bunny!
DeleteIt is interesting that so many of you associated Grendel with being green yet the text said nothing about his coloring. Do you associate all monsters with green color?
If you think about him as nothing more than a metaphor then couldn't he just be a strong man similar to Beowulf only driven by evil purposes rather than good?
I like the first image of Grendel the best because he seems large and strong enough to be an equal match for Beowulf. I like how the second one has visible claws, which are mentioned a lot in the story. I think the best representation would be if the first one had claws. The third one isn't how I pictured the monster at all and is the worst one.
ReplyDeleteHaha - I think it is funny that most of you dislike the third one which is the most recent representation of him from the movie. The movie tries to make contemporary the monsters from the epic. What until you see Grendel's mother!
DeleteI like the second representation of Grendel the best. I think he looks large enough and viscous enough to claw and eat 30 humans, but I can also see him getting afraid and wanting to retreat against a warrior as strong as Beowulf because of his bunny looking face. To make him what I imagined, he would have to be more reptile-like and "swampy". The third one looks way too weak and small to have eaten 30 men and the first one, I believe, looks far too strong and fierce to be defeated by a man and want to retreat from this man.
ReplyDeleteI am impressed so far two people have said the second Beowulf is "bunny-looking."
DeleteI like how you used specifics from the text to back up your reasoning here - makes it a solid argument.
In my point of view, I think that the first picture and the second picture was the best, but if I were to choose one, I would have to go with the first one because it looked more scary and monster-like. The second one does too, but it doesn't attract me that much. Its also the way the artist drew it with different colors and shadings and put him in a dark background. The one that I liked the least was the last one because it looked more like a zombie than a monster like the first picutre. I think that if the make-up producers added a little more flesh and muscles to the doll, then it would it look like Grendel, but overall, the first picutre was my favorite.
ReplyDeleteI like how you talked about the use of color and how that affects your affinity for the image. Also, to call the monster a "doll" definitely illustrates that you don't think he is fierce enough to battle 30 men!
DeleteI like the third picture of Grendel because he looks most like a human in this picture but not quite.. It sort of reminds me of Gollum from Lord of the Rings.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think "human but not" fits the description of the monster in the epic poem? I agree with you but I want to know what makes you think this way.
DeleteAlso, yes. Gollum.
I like the second monster. It looks different from what I imagined it would be. It also looks more lethal than the other two. However, the one that looks more realistic to the story is the first one.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think the first one is most realistic to the story? What makes it fit the description from the text best?
DeleteI agree the second one looks lethal - I think it has to be something to do with the movement of the image. He looks like he could harm you in one fell swoop.
The first depiction of Grendel shows him as a very fierce and strong character which is what I interpreted him to be. His red eyes definitely portray him as an evil character but his fists contrast the claws he had in the story. The second image is very pointy and makes Grendel seem like a wolf with multiple tails (or are those coming out of his elbows...? It's kind of hard to tell). The third image looks like a short elderly man who has recently suffered from third degree burns all over his body and has neglected to cut his fingernails. The first image most closely resembles what I picture Grendel to be, although if I had to change something I would make him a dark black color.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your analysis of the "red eyes" - what is more menacing than a monster who looks at you with red eyes!
DeleteMany people have been commenting about the lack of claws - good job picking up on that everyone. But, it is interesting that you are the first one to suggest he be dark black.
I would say that the third interpritation is most how I pictured Grendel because he seems more like he would be living in a swamp. I also think that just because he doesn't look strong doesnt mean that he isn't. If I were to change one thing about him I would make him look a bit larger, the picture that is gien doesn't give a great idea of how big he is.
ReplyDeleteInteresting interpretation you are one of very few who liked the third one. It looks most human as Marcus noted. Why does that draw you to him?
DeleteHe definitely looks like could have crawled out of a swamp recently. I also think the way he is looking at the camera makes him even creepier.
I see Grendel as a combination between the fist and the last one. Grendel should be huge like the in the fist picture but should be as ugly as in the 3rd picture.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Give examples from the text to back up your visual analysis.
DeleteI think it is interesting that you stress the importance of "ugliness." Why do we need our monsters to be ugly do you think?
I think the first picture is what I imagined Grendel to look like. He is definitely large enough to match Beowulf. Reading Beowulf I imagined this big giant creature and he matches perfectly. If he did have claws like in the second one that would make it better. The third one I didn't think matched up at all. I do agree it links to live in a swamp but it has a skeleton look to it which I didn't imagine Grendel to look like.
ReplyDeleteGood comments here. I like your point about the claws - nice job thinking about what little descriptions we do have from the text and including it. Why might the producers of the movie made him to look like a skeleton though? What were they hoping to accomplish do you think?
DeleteI believe that the first interpretation of Grendel is the best because this version is neither too humanoid nor too bestial, like the other two interpretations. I would say that this first version of Grendel looks like the best example of a deformed human who has been cast out by God, mostly due to his various mutations (ex. tail, hair along his back, pointed ears, red eyes). His sickly yellowish hue could be derived from his swamp habitat or from his lack of sunlight, and his fists look powerful enough to tear creatures apart. If I could change one thing about him, I would probably make him a bit smaller so that his size would look more compatible with that of a human.
ReplyDeleteExcellent analysis and link to the God/Christianity aspect of Beowulf.
DeleteI agree that the yellowish hue and red eyes really helps the image in creepiness. Good comments & thoughtfulness.
I like the second picture the best because he looks more simple than the other two. He still looks scary and frightening but I think it is more "realistic". The third one looks too much like a human and is just disgusting. It also looks very weak. The first one is almost too big and strong looking. I also don't like how that one doesn't have claws.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think the third one looks weak?
DeleteGrendel is "too big and strong" in the first one. Interesting - so he has to look somewhat fallible to be believed that Beowulf would be able to kill him. Good points.
I like the first picture of Grendel because it looks more like the Grendel I pictured in my mind than the other two do. In my opinion the second picture of Grendel looks too unrealistic, because i never pictured Grendel with those tail-like things coming out of his arms. In the third picture, Grendel looks too frail and he doesnt look intimidating enough. In the first picture, Grendel is muscular and frightening, which is more like how i pictured it in my mind, except i pictured him with claws.
ReplyDeleteWhy might the tail things out of his arms be bad for Grendel or why might it make sense for Grendel? Instead of what you imagined, think about how thematically the image connects to the points in the story.
DeleteMuscular and frightening definitely fits as you say because of the reaction and consequences of the first time Grendel came to the hall. If he weren't menacing in some respect, the men wouldn't stay away every night for 13 years!
I like the first picture of Grendel the best because I imagined him big like that. I like the second one the least because thats just not how I pictured him. If I was to make any changes I would combine the first and third pictures to make Grendel the size of the first one but look as scary as the third one.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying the third one makes the most sense but he should just be larger?
DeleteWhy isn't the second one specifically how you pictured him? What needs to be present?
I like the first picture of grendel because it shows how strong of a monster he is and why the village people were scared of him. The movie version of him i think does the opposite because in that image he looks kind of weak. I like how in the second picture it shows his talons like they were discussed in the book.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your first point that the strong monster needs to be intimidating. What about him makes him intimidating besides the bulging muscles?
DeleteI also agree that he needs talons though - the claws are an important image throughout the epic.
i like the second picture best because it talks about how swift yet strong grendel was and that comes off how i might picture him. I also like how there is blood dripping off his claws showing how brutally violent he could be.
ReplyDeleteThe second picture definitely conveys swift movement - good point. The blood has not been mentioned yet! How can you not love the blood imagery in the second image when Grendel is definitively associated with massive bloodshed.
DeleteI like the first picture the best because it shows a strong, fearsome grendel, where in the third one, he looks more like a zombie than a monster. To make the first one perfect in my mind, I would add some blood dripping from his claws like in the second one, make his fangs and talons more visual and make him look a bit more amphibious since the story said that he lived at the bottom of a lake!
ReplyDeleteI like the blood in the second one too. The talons and fangs would definitely add to his ferocious appearance. Why the first one if you want to add all this from the second one? Is it the muscles that solidified it for her?
DeleteI think the first one is the best. He's just enormous and monster-like, and he looks really strong. The second one kind of looks good and scary at first, but the rat head really subtracts from it. And the third one is so scrawny, anyone could take him on, I mean, come on. If I made a Grendel, I'd make him big like the first one, but I'd play up the scaly and reptillian aspects to him. He came from a bog, after all. I'd probably give him short, pointy aligator teeth, a nice greenish turquoise color, and maybe some spikes.
ReplyDeleteThe second one does have an abnormally small head - why do you think that detracts from its monstrous qualities?
DeleteThe scaly and reptilian point makes a lot of sense coming from a swamp. I like that addition.
I'm a fan of the first two images, particularly the first. While reading the story, although it may not have been clear in the description of him, I was lead to believe Grendel was much larger than the men and had monstrous qualities to him. He would need the claws and fangs to rip apart his victims, making the last Grendel representation seem ill-fitting and impractical in portraying the monster that was so feared in the tale. My own representation of Grendel, however, would slightly resemble the first, but with more humanistic qualities. At risk of being unintentionally humorous, I pictured him as being somewhat of a demonic Shrek.
ReplyDeleteThe last representation doesn't seem to include the claws and fangs as you said. He definitely is supposed to be "larger than man" as you said.
DeleteHaha, demonic Shrek! I like that. So you thought of Grendel more as an ogre.
I like the first two images. This is because Grendel does not come off to me as evil or powerful when I see the third. Also, if I were to change anything about the first two images I may take away a lot of detail and add more darkness and shadows. Grendel seems to be more of a feeling than a physical entity in my mind.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the third doesn't come off as powerful, but he doesn't look evil!!! I find that hard to believe. Darkness and shadows would be good visual images to associate with Grendel, but doesn't it look dark and shadowy in the first one?
DeleteWhat do you mean he is a "feeling"?
Hello, I posted my comment here yesterday but I guess it didn't go up?
ReplyDeleteI think the first image shows the most accurate image of Grendel just because of how fierce and stronger it looks than the others. In the book they show Grendel as this monster that terrorizes villages and Images 2 and 3 just didn't appeal to me as someone that can single handily take down a group of men. The size of Grendel in the first image is really what caught my attention to it. The 2nd Image is kind of lacking strength because it looks so small. The 3rd image just looks like it would die from one slash from a sword. I would definitely add some claws to the first image kind of like what the second image has.
I figured it out! I like pieces of all three of the pictures. I like the first one because it looks the strongest and I like the second one because it looks like it could easily rip people apart. The third is scary because it appears the most "damned by god".
ReplyDelete