Grendel,
the Queen and her Vagina: A Cultural Analysis
Grendel is nursing his
feet, moping in his cave and thinking about the
beautiful Wealtheow. He is "teasedtortured"
by her hair, her shoulders and her chin. Grendel is
moved toward disbelieving the dragon. His chest
insists that a glorious moment is coming. He watches
the Wealtheows hand move across the old
mans arm and is reminded of the shaper. Grendel
is frustrated by the illogic of his desires; he falls
first for the shaper, then for the hero and now for
the queen. His mother breaths heavily, runs her hands
through her hair and moans, watching her son (Oedipus
anyone?). The next night grendel bursts into the mead
hall intent on the queen. He slams into the bedroom
and grabs Wealtheow by the foot, "her unqueenly
shrieks were deafening" (109). No one came to
her rescue. Grendel pulls her legs apart while she
calls for the gods. He decides to kill her slowly,
"I would begin by holding her over the fire and
cooking the ugly whole between her legs" (109),
he laughs. He will teach them the truth about life
while squeezing her feces between his fists, "nothing
alive or dead could change my mind!" But Grendel
changes his mind. He quotes the dragon realizing his
action and this event is only "one frail,
foolish flicker-flash in the long fall of eternity"
(110) so he lets her go. Later, Grendel concentrates
on "the memory of the ugliness between her legs
(bright tears of blood)" and figures hes
been cured. But he is not, inside he is still of two
minds.
In the first paragraph
Grendel is acting the voyeur, dwelling on the
Wealtheows attractiveness. He watches her and
the old man with eager jealousy. Grendel knows what
is coming, as Wealtheow moves her hand across the old
mans arm; he likens watching her to listening
to the shaper. Sex is a new longing for him.
Culturally, we are torn between abundant sex and true
love. On one hand Maxim and James Bond espouse
easy, no strings attached sex and the playboy life
style. While on the other, we have Hugh Grant and
Julia Roberts in Notting Hill espousing sweet-touching
commitment and (fated) love. Which is it? Gutteral
sex or tender whispers? Both are idealized and both
are largely fictional. Grendel is caught between
these two stories like he was caught by the hero-myth
and the shapers words. Grendel attempted to
communicate with the humans and belie the
shapers words, "I am not a monster!"
but he fails, the humans do not understand him and
they reject him; Grendel is alone and miserable. Next,
after talking to the dragon, Grendel decides to play
along with the shapers description of him and
act like the monster the humans think he is. He makes
up his own name, "Grendel, Ruiner of Meadhalls,
Wrecker of Kings!" (80) he is his own hero. But
again, he is their monster now more so than he was
before; Grendel is still alone, and miserable. Now,
here is Wealtheow, tenderly demonstrating the idea of
man and woman, "the idea of a queen" and
Grendel wants this myth. But Grendel is a monster;
his mother is a female monster, it is impossible. His
mother is the whore, like old depictions of Eve as
the fall of mankind, she is lewd and abhorrent.
"My mother, breathing hard, scraping through her
hair with her crooked nails, watched me and sometimes
moaned" (108) from previous descriptions I know
that Grendels mother is grotesque, especially
compared to a culturally ideal-female, she is fat and
hairy like an animal. Here his mother behaves like a
female sex object, running her fingers through her
hair, breathing heavily, moaning and affixing her
beau with a come hither stare, but she is not Marilyn
Monroe. His mother perverts this image. Rather than
increase her sexual attractiveness her actions make
her more ridiculous, she is pitied and reviled,
tragically trying to work wiles she doesnt have.
In this paragraph Grendel is confronted with two
women, one who fits an ideal vision, Wealtheow, and
one who does not, his mother.
Men fart, women do not.
Men can be lewd, guttural and dirty, women are demure,
proper and pristine. Grendel bursts into the mead
hall like a man, he is aggressive, driven and
superior/cruel (he laughs at others fear).
Think of any action movie or western. In the pitch of
battle the man sweeps in a grabs the girl. Here
Wealtheow, like any woman in danger (in any movie),
screams. In movies the image of a screaming woman, is
a different kind of sexy. But for Grendel, her
screams ruin his illusion. She becomes coarse and
human, her shrieks are "unqueenly" and no-one
would defend her. The scene Grendel has created would
not happen in a typical action movie here is the
monster to get the girl, but where is James Bond to
rescue her? Where is the suggestively slipping dress
strap? Instead the scene is ugly and cruel, it is
both sexually and heroically, disillusioning.
Wealtheows screams and the mens failure
to rescue her are written next to eachother, it is as
if once one myth (the pristine, superhuman image of
their queen) is dispelled, the other myths (such as
the hero) fall away as well. Now that the myth of the
myths has been exposed, everything is painfully real,
human frailty and isolation are tangible. As evidence
of this Weatheow calls on the gods while Grendel
pulls her legs apart; the gods do not come, though
Grendel waits for them. Myth is not reality.
Though women are
portrayed as sex objects in the media and our culture
the actuality of their sexual organs is not
considered sexy. Breasts are idolized, but
womens vaginas are foreign, frightening
territory. The vagina has little presence en in slang,
unlike "penis" which may be favorably
described through innumerable euphemisms, the vagina
is relegated to four or five, most of them derogatory.
The missionary position carefully avoids any visual
contact with this area, and though blow jobs
performed by women on men are popular subjects, a man
performing oral sex on a woman is rarely portrayed,
much less with any pleasure, by the media.
Menstruation, related
to the vagina, is another unspoken element of female
sexuality. Women do all they can to avoid it and
ignore it, and men would rather not know about it. A
typical embarrassing scene for a man or a woman, on
TV, in movies, books and magazines, involves buying
feminine hygiene products in the grocery store. So,
when Grendel pulls her legs apart he destroys
Wealtheows mystery or illusion as a sex object;
none of the men will come to her rescue now that she
is no longer holy/untouchable. Grendel decides to
kill her slowly, by "cooking the ugly hole
between her legs", destroying the visceral/guttural
part of her which, like her piggish squeals, ruins
the myth of her divinity or Beauty. Grendel decides
again to kill her, "yes! I would squeeze out her
feces between my fists" feces are not womanly,
they are not even human, they are something that
animals produce. Making her feces prominent, Grendel
emphasizes Wealtheows connection to animals she
is ugly and base (like Grendels mother). The
use of the verb "cook" in connection to
Wealtheows genitalia is interesting, given that
culturally, one of a womans or wifes
primary occupations is to cook for her husband.
Grendel decides to kill her, in something of a
womanly way, to shatter the Thanes illusions
regarding her holiness. Perhaps, the reality of a
wife is similarly disillusioning for men. Certainly
in sitcoms, becoming a wife often transforms a
previously svelte beauty into something cranky and
covered in cellulite. But moreover, in focusing on
Wealtheows hole, Grendel links sex with
violence and indignity. He would teach them "reality":
love is not tender, sex is not meaningful. People are
animals, they have shit and holes like animals; their
sex is merely instinctual drive, not holy union.
But Grendel changes
his mind. He changes his mind because he remembers
the dragons theory, killing her would seem
meaningful for the moment but ultimately nothing
would change. Whether he lets her live or not, the
act is meaningless. At this point killing and raping
her would be culturally expected of him. Grendel, the
big hairy "man" comes bursting into a
womans bedroom and pulls her legs apart. He is
a "monster" what do you think will happen
next? He either rapes her and the audience weeps or
he rapes her and the audience is titillated. But
Grendel chooses neither. He leaves.
Grendel remembers
" the ugliness between her legs (bright tears of
blood)" (110) and thinks himself cured from his
desire for love. Menstruation is still a dirty thing
we avoid talking about. Women are not supposed to
have gross bodily functions, a woman is supposed to
smell of "gardenias" or the "summer
breeze". I could tell a dozen jokes which
describe menstruation in a gross and smelly way.
While Rite-Aid and Walgreens stock an abundance
of perfume and scented "feminine hygiene
products" to keep her "fresh".
Grendel calls himself
a "sly old devil" but the words rang false;
Grendel still wants the illusion. He remains of two
minds "and one of them saidunreasonable,
stubborn as the mountainsthat she was beautiful"
(110). Our culture does the same thing, not just
regarding women, but regarding celebrities in general.
We both want them to be human, and want them to be
perfect. Looking at a magazine photo of a model we
know intellectually that the photo has been touched
up, but at the same time we want to fall for the
illusion and believe she/he is actually beautiful.
What idea emerges from
all this? Nothing is perfect. Grendel finds out that
even queens are made of flesh and blood; the reality
never lives up to the myth. The contrast between
Grendels mother and Wealtheow seems significant.
Grendels mother behaves lasciviously (you may
think that interpretation a stretch) yet is never a
sexual object, nor are we confronted by her genitalia,
whereas Wealtheow behaves innocently and is a sexual
object, yet we do see her genitalia. There is
something, I want to say "visceral", about
women that men are repulsed by or afraid of.
Culturally, Grendel is goes from lover/voyeur, to
strongman, to rapist and finally to weak man; Grendel
changes his mind, how unmanly! And fails to complete
his mission, also unmanly, but by not raping her. By
refusing to become "the rapist" does
Grendel elevate himself or imply that he is beyond
the humans trivial mythmaking? He chooses not
to fulfill what would be expected of him, he leaves
Wealtheow neither queen nor victim. No role is met,
Grendel wrecks another human theory, yet in so doing
he fulfills his own, "truth-teacher". But
despite his words Grendel remains torn between the
two theories, mans and his own. He is
unsatisfied and disappointed. Grendel is not his own
myth; reality is not the same as its description.