tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post7536967694233168609..comments2023-10-31T07:32:11.739-04:00Comments on Wormtalk and Slugspeak: Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07566889846240013567noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-42259161958158952502007-12-31T07:06:00.000-05:002007-12-31T07:06:00.000-05:00Professor Drout I received your Tolkien Encycloped...Professor Drout <BR/><BR/>I received your Tolkien Encyclopedia for Christmas - very excited! <BR/><BR/>On another front - I recently saw the Beowulf film in 3-D Imax and have started to do some blogging on it. <BR/><BR/>I am inrigued by the words in the poem - "ides, aglaec-wif" as a description of Grendles mom and whether this description is to translated as "monsterous woman" or "female warrior" - I've done some elementary research on this on my blog at Wotan's Blog Spot and would be great to get your comments and thoughts on this. Really enjoy your blog and your Anglo Saxon aloud is top on my Ipod! <BR/><BR/>Best, Andy Higgins (London)Dr. Andrew Higginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16695949868240167504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-11479341583661375322007-12-11T15:01:00.000-05:002007-12-11T15:01:00.000-05:00"Are you the one they call Beowulf?" She asks. "Th...<I> "Are you the one they call Beowulf?" She asks. "The wolf of the bees? The bear?" </I><BR/><BR/>That is one theory of what the name Beowulf means. But it could also be interpreted as meaning BEERWOLF, from "Beow-wulf." Beow (Byggvir in Norse) was the god of barley, and by extension, of BEER.<BR/><BR/>The movie certainly departed from the poem. The only possible justification I can imagine for making Hrothgar the father of Grendel is an obscure one. The poem says Grendel was a descendant of Cain, and according to the Book of Enoch the daughters of Cain interbred with demons and the resulting offspring were <I>eotenas ond ylfe, ond orcneas, swylce gigantas</I>. So, it is not entirely gratuitous that the <I>eoten</I> Grendel was the monstrous progeny of Hrothgar and a demoness in the movie.<BR/><BR/>I only wonder why the movie omitted the character of my namesake.Hrothulfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14154007607685356296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-20697071221450547072007-11-27T20:25:00.000-05:002007-11-27T20:25:00.000-05:00I went and saw this with LDW when I was visiting h...I went and saw this with LDW when I was visiting him in Exciting European Capital, and he liked it more than I did. That kind of surprised me, since he's taught an entire semester course around Beowulf, but then he's also much better on sf/f literary conventions and re-tellings/re-castings than I am.Another Damned Medievalisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05231085915472400163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-69093014388583370102007-11-26T13:11:00.000-05:002007-11-26T13:11:00.000-05:00I saw it last night and am also still wondering wh...I saw it last night and am also still wondering what i thought!Casdokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03497897393162856190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-40995985390709701192007-11-25T21:54:00.000-05:002007-11-25T21:54:00.000-05:00I'm still trying to figure out what I think of the...I'm still trying to figure out what I think of the movie more than a week after seeing it, but I do agree with what Meredith Arwen's arguing here.<BR/><BR/>That said, having now read the essays in the script movie book, I think we also need to be careful about discussing Gaiman's intent. The movie began as an Avery project (apparently a project that he spent 20 years on), with Gaiman being brought in after Gaiman suggested a solution to a particular problem Avery had run up against, and the entire vision for the movie changed when Zemeckis became director. (It changed in scope and vision, but also in the script. For instance, it seems to have been Zemeckis' decision to have Beowulf inherit Hrothgar's kingdom rather than return to home.)<BR/><BR/>Like Meredith, I think there's a lot going on underneath the surface. What that is, exactly, I'm still trying to figure out.John Walterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08185659717579864049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-30736195066975676692007-11-25T14:27:00.000-05:002007-11-25T14:27:00.000-05:00n.e. brigand: I'd have to see it again to get much...n.e. brigand: <BR/><BR/>I'd have to see it again to get much more involved in that discussion, as first-viewing memory is not something I'd like to put that much weight on. Although taking that route, the thing descends into slightly more narrative incoherence than I would expect from either writer. <BR/><BR/>Western is not my genre, so no, I wasn't reminded. I have observed, however, that stories, how they grow, how they're remembered, what they mean and what they're used for are major concerns of Gaiman in particular (I'm not nearly as much a follower of Avery) - and that his examination of them tends not to be simplistic along the lines of "the real story went like this, then there was a fake, look at how cynical you should be about the world!" It may use that as a jumping-off point, because that disparity is interesting, but the narratives tend to go other places. As a result, I tend to resist the impulse to think the most obvious thing is actually what's going on, even when he's writing for Hollywood, with all that implies (for instance, the dragon-battle was completely rewritten for shooting.) <BR/><BR/>As such, I don't think that the lamias and the dragons and the monsters are supposed to be a litmus test for story/not-story in this movie: they are part of reality, and they do change the tenor of the stories that are part of reality. And these things can be true and people can still lie about fighting them, the same way atomic bombs can be true and people lie about having built them, the same way terrorists can be real and people can lie about what they've done. There's a continuity of the nature of stories going on, whatever the setting: people lie, the lies become accepted, and then the lies become important in both good ways (Danish peace and prosperity, for all it's due to a monster that no one knows about) and bad (the eventual outcome). Just like truths. Stories can be important and in a real way true without having to have actually happened. And in the end, we're left in real doubt about which way Wiglaf's story is going to go<BR/><BR/>It's certainly not the best Gaiman meditation on these things that I've seen/read, but that's not surprising, given it's also a Hollywood movie. I just think there's something slightly more complex going on than a simplistic meditation on "the story vs the truth."meredith arwenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12609381191469025082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-22904085870640095042007-11-25T00:57:00.000-05:002007-11-25T00:57:00.000-05:00meredith arwen said:"People tell little lies that ...<I>meredith arwen</I> said:<BR/><BR/>"People tell little lies that don't really touch a core truth (he was attacked by huge monsters and survived - what does the number REALLY matter?)"<BR/><BR/>As <A HREF="http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2007/11/beowulf-movie-review.html" REL="nofollow">Scott Nokes</A> has observed, Beowulf might not have fought any sea monsters at all. (And Nokes thinks the number shown was more than three; I couldn't keep them straight, myself.)<BR/><BR/><BR/>"and those lies are sometimes very important - something reflected, I think, in movie!Wiglaf's vehement assertion that the 'official' version is the true one, despite the fact that he knows much better."<BR/><BR/>Was anyone else reminded here of <I>The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance</I> (1962) -- "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend"? Or of <I>The Gunfighter</I> (1950) and <I>The Shootist</I> (1976) in the scene where Beowulf and Wiglaf discuss the motivations of the Frisian invaders?N.E. Brigandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601573470596905112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-83347594403724379482007-11-24T21:52:00.000-05:002007-11-24T21:52:00.000-05:00"On the one hand, we have to believe that everyone..."On the one hand, we have to believe that everyone is lying when they tell their stories. On the other, there really are Grendel monsters, lamias and dragons."<BR/><BR/>Actually, I think Gaiman was doing something more subtle than that. The implication of the flashback to Beowulf fighting in the ocean is the moment that best illustrates it: he is shown fighting I believe two monsters (certainly not more than three) and then being distracted and presumably enchanted by a mermaid. This is what actually happened. However, when he *tells* the story, it's told "I killed nine of them and pursued them down to the depths" - the number is increased, and the distraction by pretty mermaid left out. <BR/><BR/>Which is a slightly subtler comment on these things than simple "we know they all lie" cynicism - the lies aren't straight-forward, they're not wholesale fabrications, and there are important truths in the lie (in this case, that the only reason Beowulf lost the swimming match is because he was attacked by monsters and had to kill them, making his feat much more impressive than his opponent's). People tell little lies that don't really touch a core truth (he was attacked by huge monsters and survived - what does the number REALLY matter?), and those lies are sometimes very important - something reflected, I think, in movie!Wiglaf's vehement assertion that the "official" version is the true one, despite the fact that he knows much better.meredith arwenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12609381191469025082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-62259789687383541392007-11-24T20:03:00.000-05:002007-11-24T20:03:00.000-05:00oooh, naked philology! it doesn't get much hotter ...oooh, naked philology! <A HREF="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a230/highlyeccentric/wordnerds-ulfruna.jpg" REL="nofollow">it doesn't get much hotter than that.</A><BR/><BR/>i'm going to see the film with a bunch of anglo-saxonists in two weeks. the temptation to shout out "Angelina is doing philology naked", it will be overwhelminghighlyeccentrichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14049193555531624608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3571309.post-26186901955672847292007-11-24T18:35:00.000-05:002007-11-24T18:35:00.000-05:00The above is probably a good explanation of why I ...<I>The above is probably a good explanation of why I haven't won any awards for film scripts</I><BR/><BR/>Don't worry: this <I>Beowulf</I> won't manage that feat either.N.E. Brigandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601573470596905112noreply@blogger.com