Tolkien vs. The Critics

Tolkien argues that the critics who primarily focused on the historical aspects of Beowulf shouldn’t have. To Tolkien it is more important to focus on the details of the writing. Such as focusing on the literary elements and actual structure of the poem. He says that the point of Beowulf isn’t to be historically accurate but instead to give perspective and create an emotional connection with its readers. Beowulf has its original story line but at the same time there are underlying and more meaningful, dark ideas behind the poem which is what Tolkien thinks should be focused on. He doesn’t think that this is the greatest epic story ever written but with the character and detail put into it he says that it is definitely a story/poem worth reading and studying, even though many other critics (who are history centered) don’t agree.

I strongly agree with Tolkien’s arguments and the fact that he thinks that the character and structure of the epic is more important then the history. It shows a great deal of detail and it shows that whoever originally wrote this down didn’t just throw it on a page, they took time and tediously recorded this story. In Beowulf the monsters represent evil and sin (killings) and are crucial in making that actual story. They make Beowulf the “hero” he appears to be, so by adding the monsters they move the story in the direction it needs to be a noteworthy story. The monsters are not only enemies of the men, but of the gods as well. Whereas in other great epics monsters are generally only enemies of men, and sent from or came from the gods. This makes Beowulf literarily unique and as Tolkien said, worth studying.