Page: 17 Pages
PDF Source: producer.csi.edu
Tags: Beowulf, J. R. R. Tolkien, Legend
Share this info:
Beowulf: The Monsters and the Criticst. Questions of Literary History, Date, and Authorship; Beowulf in the Light of History, Archaeology, Heroic Legend, Mythology, and Folklore. …
J. R. R.
Beowulf: The Monsters and the Criticst
In 1864 the Reverend Oswald Cockayne wrote of the Reverend Doc-l tor Joseph Bosworth, Rawlinsonian Professor of Anglo-Saxon: ‘I have . tried to lend to others the conviction I have long entertained that ,\, Dr. Bosworth is .!l2!. a man so diligent in his special walk as duly to read the books … which have been printed in our old English, or~ so-called Anglosaxon tongue. He may do very well for a professor.’l ~ These words were inspired by dissatisfaction with Bosworth’s dictionary, and were doubtless unfair. If Bosworth were still alive, a modern Cockayne would probably accuse him of not reading the ‘literature’ of his subject, the books written about the books in the so-called Anglo-Saxon tongue. The original books are nearly buried. Of none is this so true as of The Beowulf, as it used to be called. I have, of course, read The Beowulf, as have most (but not all) of those who have criticized it. But I fear that, unworthy successor and beneficiary of Joseph Bosworth,.l-have not peen a man so diligent in my special walk as duly to read all that has been printed on, or touching on, this poem. But I have ~ead enough, I think, to venture the opinion that Beowulfiana is, while rich in many departments, specially poor in one. It is oor in cri .. , criticism that is directed to the understandin s a oem. It has been said of Beowulf itself that its weakness lies in pacIng t e unimportant things at the centre and the important on the outer edges. This is one of the opinions that I wish specially to consider. I think it profoundly untrue of the poem, but strikingly true of the literature about it. Beowulf has been used as a quarry of fact and fancy far more assiduously than it has been studied as a work of art. It is of Beowulf, then, as a poem that I wish to speak; and though it may seem presumption that I should try with swich a lewed mannes wit to pace the wisdom of an heep of lerned men, in this department there is at least more chance for the lewed man. But there is scrmuch that might still be said even under these limitations that I shall confine myself mainly to the monsters-Grendel and the Dragon, as they appear in what seems to me the best and most authoritative general criticism in English-and to certain considerations"of the structure and conduct of the poem that arise from this theme. There is an historical e:qJlanation of the state of Beowulfiana that I have referred to. And. that explanation is important, if one would
t From "Beawulf: The Monsters and the Critics," Sir Israel Gollancz Memorial Lecture, Proceedingsofthe British Academy, 1936, pp. 245-95. Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins. I. The Shrine, p. 4.