Monsters In British Literature
A: In British literature, monsters are used as a tool for what the people of the Middle Ages believed they were supposed to do and created these monsters to be portrayed as something “bad” towards humanity. All of the monsters mentioned do share a few common characteristics of what they were supposed to do in British literature. To start, the monsters all inhabit some space outside of the realm of human civilization because they cannot or don’t want to be a part of the human world due to how different they are. Some monsters serve a purpose as being a part of a hero’s journey, such as the Giants and Serpents in the Wilderness of Wirral, which, when Gawain fighting monsters on his journey makes him look more like a knight. Some monsters possess
…show more content…
Being “feminine” would mean that one would possess qualities that were associated with women, such as being submissive, graceful, charming, and kind. By creating female characters possessing such traits possibly showed women that these were qualities that deemed as acceptable for what defines a woman as “feminine”. In the texts that we’ve read in British literature, women do possess these “feminine” traits. However, they have been also shown to have defined what femininity is and what they can do as women in so many different ways. For example, Queen Elizabeth I, she is faced the pressure to marry a year after she has descended to the throne in for reasons of establishing a possible alliance, but more importantly for the purpose of producing an heir to continue the monarchy after her death, which is far more important than anything when you’re a woman of royal blood. However, in her speech “On Marriage”, Elizabeth addresses Parliament with her response to marriage by stating that she will not marry and tells them simply to “put that clean out of your heads” (1077). She believed that God would provide a successor to rule after her passing and will “reigned, lived and died a virgin” (1078) and instead Elizabeth chose to be “married” to her country and her people in order to protect England. By not marrying, it didn’t make her more “masculine” nor less “feminine”, but due to her speech, it
Being “feminine” would mean that one would possess qualities that were associated with women, such as being submissive, graceful, charming, and kind. By creating female characters possessing such traits possibly showed women that these were qualities that deemed as acceptable for what defines a woman as “feminine”. In the texts that we’ve read in British literature, women do possess these “feminine” traits. However, they have been also shown to have defined what femininity is and what they can do as women in so many different ways. For example, Queen Elizabeth I, she is faced the pressure to marry a year after she has descended to the throne in for reasons of establishing a possible alliance, but more importantly for the purpose of producing an heir to continue the monarchy after her death, which is far more important than anything when you’re a woman of royal blood. However, in her speech “On Marriage”, Elizabeth addresses Parliament with her response to marriage by stating that she will not marry and tells them simply to “put that clean out of your heads” (1077). She believed that God would provide a successor to rule after her passing and will “reigned, lived and died a virgin” (1078) and instead Elizabeth chose to be “married” to her country and her people in order to protect England. By not marrying, it didn’t make her more “masculine” nor less “feminine”, but due to her speech, it