Test 1

Category I – Option B
The monster is something that is present in every work of literature we make. Over the years, it has evolved and become more abstract: more of a concept than a physical thing. I believe the reason for this is that, in our gradual dominance over earth, we have all but eliminated the natural enemies that once plagued us. Without a common enemy to focus on, we turn inward, battling inner demons. The monster becomes more cunning, something intangible and often imperceptible. Thus, there is a perceptible change between Beowulf, Faerie Queene, Shakespeare’s Othello, and Holy Sonnet 9.

In Beowulf, the monster is obviously Grendal, his mother, and the dragon. They are physical creatures with an insatiable hunger that mere humans cannot reason with. They are also completely separate monsters with different reasons for fighting Beowulf. As described in the text, Grendal, “nursed a hard grievance. It harrowed him / to hear the din of the loud banquet / every day in the hall.” (87-9). The text further described the kinds of sounds being made, which give the impression that Grendal found not just the loudness of the noise offensive, but also the mention of god. He holds no personal grudge against Beowulf, as he was not there, but more against humanity as a whole. Grendal’s mother, however, had a personal grudge against Beowulf’s band of heros as shown in the following: “his mother / had sallied forth on a savage journey, / grief-racked and ravenous, desperate for revenge.” (1276-8). Finally, the dragon was “moved into a wrath” (2222) by “a slave / fleeing the heavy hand of some master,” (2223 – 2224) so it was not a personal attack against Beowulf, but it was Beowulf’s duty as king to protect his people. However, they are all definitely monsters and leave no conceptual gray areas to dwell on. Grendal “dwelt for a time in misery among the banished monsters, / Cain’s clan, whom the Creator had outlawed / and condemned as outcast.” (104-6) Since Grendal is part of “Cain’s clan”, Grendal’s mother was a “monsterous hell-bride” in more than just character. Finally, the dragon is, of course a fire-breathing, hoarding, greedy, giant lizard with barely any human-like characteristics.

In Faerie Queene, the monsters do not pose much of a threat against humanity as a whole and are, instead, a series of obstacles Redcrosse has to overcome. They are cunning and intend to corrupt the honorable knight and his pure lady as much as they wish to destroy them. The first monster was “Halfe like a serpent horribly displaide, / but th’ other halfe did womans shape retain” (Canto 1, 124-5) and did not have a name. Instead she was linked to the Catholic Church as described in verse 177: “Her vomit full of bookes and papers was,” as are the other monsters within the book. She was the least deceiving of the monsters in the whole book (from what I’ve seen) as the Catholic Church is also manifested as a monk who persuades Morpheus, god of sleep, to corrupt Redcrosse with indecent dreams of his lady.

In Othello the monster is not a single person, although you could say that Iago is most likely to fit the monster concept. Othello, the “hero”, could also be considered the monster as he kills his own love. However, the true monster is the seed of jealousy that resides in every human being. This “green-eyed monster, which doth mock / The meat it feeds on.” cannot be killed physically and is a constant source of misfortune, sin, and wrongdoing. Thus, the true monster is never killed in this story.

In 17th century holy sonnet number 9, the speaker refers to the monster is that which is inside us: “Why should intent or reason, born in me, / Make sins, else equal, in me more heinous?” (5-6) Previously he mentioned the apple and snake seen in Genisis as things more worth the term monster than what humanity has become.

Category II – Option D
Sonnet 130 seems the most interesting of the sonnets you assigned. As I read the poem, I got the impression of a man looking through a mound of poetry in the hope of finding one that accurately describes the woman he loves. This coincides with verses 1-8 as he compares the appearance of his mistress to that commonly found in poetry describing women. As the poem continues, his tone becomes one of incredulity at the high bar poetry has forced women to conform to. Indeed, in verse 9 he adds, “I love to hear her speak”, which starts to infuse the thought that his mistress does not need perfect beauty for him to love her. Further, in verse 11 and, especially, verse 12 he mocks the thought that a woman must be otherworldly in order for him to love her. After searching through flowery words, he concludes, “And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare / As any she belied with false compare,” since he has not found what he was looking for. Additionally, the last two verses finish the transformation from comparison of his mistress to poetry to comparison of the love he has for his mistress to the fake love written of in flowery poetry.

Required Question
The text I had the strongest emotional reaction to was Sonnet 93 as it describes what I have long thought the three men that have fallen in love with me have felt. “So shall I live supposing thou art true, / Like a deceived husband; so love’s face / May still seem love to me, though altered new— / Thy looks with me, thy heart in other place.“ (1-4) The speaker first uses metaphor to compare his woman’s faltering love to that of a cheating wife. At first, I deceived myself in believing that it was love I felt. I was inexperienced, confused, and eager to please and help others. I am still one to help for little gain, but I digress. Months passed by and I was still in love but I started to doubt myself. It was in my nature to seek time alone and even to disappear for days at a time. Unfortunately, the men I fell for were the clinging type and it worried me that I wasn’t feeling the same way they were.

Thus my uneasiness grew, although there wasn’t a tangible difference as portrayed in the next lines: “For there can live no hatred in thine eye; / Therefore in that I cannot know thy change. (5-6). I never hated them, but I did start to hate myself. I wanted to know what was so wrong with me that I could not show the same devotion as they did to me. After a while they started to suspect that I was having doubts: “In many’s looks and false heart’s history / Is writ in moods and frowns and wrinkles strange;” (7-8) I would suddenly have sour moods and push them away. However, I kept my feelings to myself and when they asked me what was wrong; I lied and told them naught.

“But heaven in thy creation did decree / That in thy face sweet love should ever dwell; / Whate’er thy thoughts or thy heart’s workings be, / Thy looks should nothing thence but sweetness tell.” (9 – 12) To this day, I still believe that they love me and that I have done them wrong. Many times I have thought of myself as a bane to man as shown in the last verse’s visuals: “How Eve’s apple doth thy beauty grow / If thy sweet virtue answer not thy show!”(13-14). It is always I that breaks up with them. There is also the visual of grass on the other side. They cannot be with me anymore and it takes them a long while for them to get over it. I am not saying that I am unique in this respect, but I do not know much about relationships nor had many friends growing up. Furthermore, I’m usually not one to talk about my feelings readily and I doubt if I have any true friends. Fortunately, I don’t mind it.