Thursday, April 19, 2007

Richard Laurine

12 comments:

Richard Laurine said...

Over the centuries, many books have been written, and a large handful have been challenged or even banned by societies. Certain books have better reasons to be banned than others and while some of those reasons seem valid, many will seem unjustified to readers. John Gardner's Grendel, published in 1970, is a prime example of having valid reasons for banning a book. Grendel is a alternate viewpoint of the Anglo-Saxon poem "Beowulf", written centuries ago, whose author is not known. It tells the same exact tale, the first story of Good vs. Evil, but from the villains point of view, in this case, Grendel 's. The novel describes Grendel's viewpoint and what he thinks and considers of himself and all around him. The story begins in the spring, and ends in the spring, and between those seasons, you read of how Grendel tortures men and their kingdoms all over the country-side, killing and eating, then finally meeting Beowulf for the final showdown. All these details are explained very in depth and graphically, which is a reason some have wanted to censor the book (Gonzales).

Grendel like all books have been criticized for its content, and also at the same time has been praised for its content (Grappling). When critics claim that it has much unneeded violence and graphic detail, they refer to the times Grendel terrorizing Hrothgar's kingdom, the main group of men Grendel seeks violence and death upon (Sova, 150-152). Critics also complain that Grendel's viewpoints are often nihilistic and existentialist, and they don't want kids to read such viewpoints, at least not without careful discussion within a classroom (Gonzales). Parent's often complain along with the critics, stating that the violence is senseless and overly graphic. They don't' want their children reading this, and want it out of the school curriculum (Sova. 150-152). Many of the same reasons for why the book should be banned, are some of the reasons Grendel has been praised. When critics complained of the depressing, and hateful viewpoints, supporters found them to help the book show its moral side. Supporters of Grendel often find that it is a highly moral book. Its viewpoints often share a view about the tale of Beowulf in a much different way, and extend the theme of the "Beowulf" poem's theme of "Good vs. Evil" much farther (Gonzales). The violence , and Grendel's lust for blood is another reason supporters of the book think it should not be censored or banned. It was part of the poem "Beowulf", and a great part of Grendel. The violence in the novel depicts Grendel's fantasies, and frustration with man (Grappling). Supporters say Grendel was the first villain ever in English literature, violence should be necessary, and with the viewpoints, it is most often the only way (Grappling).

Grendel is a very graphic and descriptive novel. Even a the most hardened reader will find that the scenes of violence and Grendel's thoughts very disturbing and vivid (Gonzales). For instance, every time Grendel attacks a town, he always ends up eating the men he kills and captures (Sova. 150-152). He always sacks his men, and goes out and eats them. Gardner writes vivid descriptions about "blood dripping and matting his fur", how men taste nasty, and how wonderful it is to kill. Grendel's viewpoints and thoughts might also be a reason for censorship. He is constantly thinking down upon himself, and depises all that is around him.. Grendel hates life, and is always venting out his hate upon man. Most critics do not want their children to read such books and negativity so they want it censored (Grappling). Another main reason for Grendel to be censored is the Dragon. The Dragon within the novel is very pessimistic and cynical, even though Grendel thinks that the Dragon is the greatest creature in all of Earth (Gonzales). But as Grendel finds out, the Dragon is the worst creature imaginable. The Dragon is completely cynical, and looks down upon everything, except his gold. He represents the two most powerful things in the world, greed and cynicism, and Grendel expecting to find enlightentment, finds nothing more than what he had before. The Dragon to the reader will seem like everything that is bad in the world, and shifts some of that burden onto Grendel, who goes insane with rage afterwards. The viewpoints and gritty and graphic violence are concerns for censorship (SFReader).

Only few groups have tried to censor and ban the book, but they have gone to far lengths to try and do so. Such as the parents of a Douglas, Colorado student who described the book as "foul", and had too much sexual and violent content. The student said "It made me sick and it made me feel dirty" after she had read the book. A Board of Education member at Douglas, John Sheehan , states he found it highly disturbing, and very difficult. He also said it was "gut-wrenching, existentialist, and very nihilistic" (Gonzales). The same thing happened at a Viewmont school, where a mother started a petition against the book. With some support, she had gathered a large crowd and started a large protest against it. But later, she withdrew her challenge, when the school board and teachers decided on a policy to help decide if controversial books should be taught. The board will review the books, and deem and limitations on it, and the censors will review the limits and book itself, and deem their approval for the book (Grappling).

Grendel is not banned anywhere anymore, nor is it censored anymore. But it is still somewhat limited in audience, as certain schools can only teach it at a certain grade level and age, while others are more free in their reading materia (Gonzales). Grendel, although with valid reason to be banned, is heavily supported and liked by teachers and literary critics everywhere. It should never been banned, or ever challenged, even with its graphic scenes, and unpopular viewpoints, Grendel is a great book, and should stay in our bookshelves forever.


http://www.echeat.com/essay.php?t=26448

Richard said...

In Beowulf there is a cetain amount of violence and over the centuries some countries have even banned the literature. I think that there is a certain amount of violence that can be placedwithin a piece of literature in order to make it real to the point but there is also a limit in which one knows when it hasbeen reached. I don't necessairly believe that banning a book is the key but making an edited version for those who prefere to read a less violent side may have to choose from.

Richard Laurine said...

Probably the main trend in contemporary Chaucer criticism is to look for a symbolic level of meaning in a poet whom most of us were taught to regard as a supremely realistic recorder of medieval life. Of course, realism and symbolism are not necessarily antithetical modes of expression, and a lot of misunderstanding will be avoided if we recognize that the choice is not one of either-or, a realistic Chaucer or an allegorical one. It is rather that we are beginning to see another dimension in Chaucer, something that should not surprise us in a great poet. It goes without saying that symbolic...

Dylan Bernard said...

I dont really understand this criticism...


...but I guess I agree that we cant really trust that Chaucer is giving an accurate description of society, rather than a biased one...


...if thats what its saying.

Brandon said...

Chaucer was most likely writing from his biased point of view of the Catholic Church. He dislikes the Church and he incorporates his resentment into his writing.

Steven Marconi said...

I agree with Dylan that this criticism does not make to much much sence. And we can assume Chaucer is giving a biased view on society rather then depicting the truth.

Eric Riger said...

Chaucer was probably disappointed in how the Church was being governed. There was alot of corruption in the Church and he used Canterbury Tales to symbolize the corrupt practices of the church. This goes with out saying that Martin Luther did the same thing and wrote Ninety-Five Theses On the Power of Indulgences. This exemplified the corruption of the Catholic Church, Although the indulgences were about 200 years after Chaucer wrote Canterbury Tales. I think Chaucer shared the corruption of the church in a very entertaining and symbolic way.

Chanel Riser said...

Chaucer provides a biased, one-sided view of the church. Therefore we only have one viewpoint to base our own opinions on.

Kirsten Albers-Fiedler said...

I agree with this author's observation that symbolism and realism do not necessarily contradict one another. The poet's (Chaucer's) use of symbolism definitely adds dimension to his work.

The Incredible Ben Reid said...

This criticism is very hard to understand butI understand that Chaucer provides a biased, one-sided view of the church. Which means we only have one viewpoint.

$cott Earl said...

This criticism is hard to understand. I would say that Chaucer is giving us a rather biased view of the Catholic church. He views it as corrupt, so that is how he describes his characters.

The Real Ayao S. said...

No lie, But i have no idea what this cristism means. I would have to agree that there are many symbolic level in this poem