Is anyone else having this issue or is it just me?
22 September 2011
The Confusion of Stream of Consciousness Narration
Okay, these six chapters took me forever to read. It's not that I didn't like what I was reading (the diction is awesome) it was the fact that the narration jumped around so much. One minute I was reading about a goat and then the next there's something about a dragon. I think I might have read each chapter two or three times and I'm still kind of confused.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Yeah, definitely at times I had no idea what Grendel was thinking. I also find that the diction is inconsistant because I feel that the modern day slang and colliquialism distracts from the book's literary merit.
I also felt that Grendel could be confusing at times. I agree that the author jumped around a bit, which made it slightly difficult to keep up with.
Personally, I think it's worth the confusion. The stream of consciousness gave me much more sympathy for Grendel at times, and showed us some of Grendel's humor. I doubt any other viewpoint could have had quite the same effect.
I agree with Julie. If the author would have simply stated the events that happened, Grendel would still be the monster we see in Beowulf. The stream of consciousness made Grendel an actual person, not just a terrible, man-eating monster. It reveals his motives, his rational, his general attitude toward life, and the pain that isolation brings him. From this, the reader is led to sympathy, not the distate that they were led to in Beowulf.
I was having issues with the stream of conscience at first. I slowed down my pace a little and payed closer attention to setting and that help my confusion a lot. Personally I enjoy stream of conscience, it makes it a lot easier for me to feel sympathy for Grendel and I enjoy hearing all of his thoughts. Stream of conscience is a nice change from the third person narration of Beowulf.
I felt like parts of the reading were easier to understand than others but when it jumped to Grendel speaking to the dragon, that's when I really got confused. Often I was left thinking about how Grendel was feeling which generated sympathy towards him. While in Beowulf, Grendel is portrayed as the vicious and evil villain. So I'm assuming that the author made it intentionally confusing at certain points in the story, therefore made it challenging to comprehend.
I was defiantly confused at the beginning. Like Erica, I had to read the chapter a couple of the times and when I got to the part about the dragon I was super confused. I love how the author is creating so much sympathy for Grendel though. In a lot of classic stories the villain’s side is often forgotten and pushed aside so I enjoy hearing what is behind his behavior and actions. I didn’t feel like Beowulf really got into the story at all, I felt like I was reading a history book with absolutely no emotion and that it was simply a timeline. However, with Grendel it provided emotion to the actual events and I actually enjoy reading the stream of conscious compared to Beowulf.
I think Beowulf is written in a disconnected, observer kind of way because the narrator was simply telling a story. That's why I like Grendel so much. Even though he's the "villain," he's an easy character to become attached to. That has a lot to do with the time periods these stories were written in, too. Stories were told as they actually happened when Beowulf was written; of course they'll be in favor of the humans, because this is a good versus evil type of story. But giving Grendel's point of view is like the shades of grey. It's not a matter of good and bad as much as how Grendel got to being "bad." It seems like a more modern idea to me to look at the situation with sympathy and not just accept Grendel as the villain.
The stream of consciousness is confusing to me too sometimes. But I am really enjoying the story. I also think the connections to the zodiac signs are really interesting. I had no idea about those connections until class today.
I agree with Erica, I thought these first six chapters were extremely confusing. After we went over it in class today however, I understood it a little bit more, but I'm still a little lost. I also agree with Kaitlyn in that it is interesting that the chapters go with the zodiac signs, I probably never would have made that connection until class today either. I think that even though the story seems to jump around a lot it seems that a lot of authors like to confuse thier readers at first then as the story continues, bring the theme into focus. I hope that Gardner is the same way. I like the book much better than Beowulf, but I would like the story to eventually make sense, which it seems it is headed in that direction.
I agree that the stream of consciousness was confusing and difficult for me to read and follow at times, but overall, I like it much better than how Beowulf was written. I like how the stream of conciousness makes Grendel seem more like a human being with thoughts and emotions rather than a monster as Beowulf portrays. It helps me to see him in a completely different way and allows me to feel sympathy for him, whereas before I felt no sympathy whatsoever and just saw him as a monster out to kill everyone. Now, I am able to see how is childhood is the main thing that pushed him to have a terrorizing nature. So far I am enjoying the stream of conciousness very much and I llok forward to finish reading so I can see what else we find out about Grendel and his true emotions and thoughts, a side we never saw in Beowulf.
I agree Erica! Although it was written with a somewhat "simple" diction it was very hard to comprehend because of the tremendous amounts of figurtive language. Almost everything had a deeper meaning behind it, whether that be philosophical or forshadowing a later event.
I definitely agree, all of the narration seems a bit disjointed, which makes it incredibly confusing. But I also feel like it makes us pay attention more and makes us more aware of Grendel's point of view and outlook on his life. And even if we have to re-read it a few times, it gives us a greater understanding of Grendel's feelings and more opportunities to find symbolism and meaning within the novel.
Grendel had a way of thinking that varies greatly from most characters. It was very erratic and emotionally charged, even if there were conflicting emotions in only a single paragraph. This was the most intriguing interior dialogue I have ever read. It accurately was able to mirror the thoughts that a crazed but brilliant mind might have, shooting off thoughts with such speed and energy. This method of telling the story was very effective at showing the layer beneath Grendel, the portion of him that was highly influenced by his own surroundings. His rapid thoughts showed the extreme and tortured soul that lied within the beast that haunted Herot hall.
Obviously, Grendel isn't the most mentally or emotionally sound character ever. We may find his explanations vague yet the meaning of the work is universal and furthermore applies to Beowulf, written in a style completely different than Grendel. And though the way that Gardener makes Grendel's narrations disjointed and (in my opinion) a bit random serves to simply characterize Grendel as a creature of chaos.
SPEAKING OF CHAOS, it took my mom and I about half an hour and an account password change to make this stupid blog account. Ridiculous. I hate internet assignments. I'm losing points for something I could've written in thirty seconds. I've seriously debated whether to test whether 'Blogger' censors profanity or not, but I like Ms. Linneman too much to go so far. :/
Post a Comment