Critical Introduction

John Gardner (1933–1982) was a prolific writer—especially in the arena of fiction and literary criticism. He is, perhaps, best known for his 1971 novel Grendel, of which a large portion is excerpted here. In the novel, Gardner retells the first two-thirds of Beowulffrom Grendel's perspective, exploring the character and trying to understand him. It is clear that Gardner does not accept the Beowulf-poet's dismissive explanation of Grendel's behaviour (he is evil) and instead delves into a careful character study. What he comes up with is particularly modern: there are strains of Frankensteinin Grendel's attempts to befriend Hrothgar's tribe, Catcher in the Rye in his social isolationism and outcast status, and Freud in his relationship with his mother.

Though clearly a more sympathetic treatment than Grendel had at the hands of the Beowulf-poet, the novel is not, however, a modern redemption project. Gardner's Grendel has all the impetuousness and isolation of a Holden Caulfield (the protagonist of Catcher in the Rye), but he also has the ability to exert his will and whim upon his surroundings— something most outcast characters in fiction seem to lack. That is what makes this version of Grendel so scary: it is a meditation on what might happen if a maladjusted, childish individual were given an enormous amount of power. Years before Mark David Chapman shot John Lennon or Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed twelve of their classmates at Columbine High School, Gardner plumbed the depths of the troubled outsider who is drawn to the power of violence.

Reading Questions

One of the more interesting angles of Gardner's novel is how he deals with communication. Grendel does all the narrating, but he cannot communicate with his mother and has difficulty communicating with the Danes. How does that correlate with other monsters you have read about? How does it contribute to Grendel's motivations in this version of the story?

Compare Gardner's Grendel to Beowulf and try to identify specific differences in the characterization of the monster. Are they effective? That is, does Gardner's Grendel or Beowulf's Grendel seem more monstrous? Why?