Any comparison of John Gardner’s Grendel and the eighth century unknown poet’s Beowulf would have to begin with the most obvious and most significant of the differences between the two works. In Beowulf, we receive the story from the perspective of a narrator who obviously cherishes the virtues and values of the warrior society of which Beowulf is a member. Beowulf is the hero in this tale. In Gardner’s Grendel, we are treated to the tale from a different perspective, that of Grendel’s, the monster who is killed along with his mother by Beowulf in the traditional version. This narrative distinction is significant because in the traditional Beowulf the story revolves around the social unit which is bound together by ties of honor and interdependence. Thus, the omniscient narration underscores the communal nature of the theme. In Grendel, however, we get the story from the individual perspective, the traditional villain’s as opposed to the hero’s. This narrative form reinforces the theme that the individual alone will have difficulty surviving at odds against community. In fact, we get a fairly empathetic portrait of the monster in Grendel, seemingly a beast who laments his own beast-like nature as surely as Hamlet ever begrudged being born to set things right “Not, of course, that I fool myself with thoughts that I’m more noble. Pointless, ridiculous monster crouched in the shadows, stinking of dead men, murdered children, martyred cows. (I am neither proud nor ashamed, understand. One more dull victim, leering at seasons that never were meant to be observed.) ‘Ah, sad one, poor old freak!’ I cry, and hug myself, and laugh, letting out salt tears, he he!” (Gardner 6).
In Beowulf, we see that the community is presented as a wonderfully bound band of noble, honorable men who brook no threat to the community. Grendel is such a threat. When Beowulf rips off his shoulde
...