So, I'm writing an essay comparing Beowulf to the general prologue of the Canterbury tales. My general topic is 'words and deeds'.
What I can think of so far, is that in Beowulf, the words and deeds match up and then the deed embellishes on the 'words'. As in, Beowulf says he will do something, and then does it in a more grand way then the words indicated. The exception to this is the last segment with the dragon, where he fails. Perhaps some indication that his words were too 'grand' for what he could handle.
Chaucer is different as the words and deeds contradict each other. Chaucer, the narrator, states that he is basically an idiot and isn't trying to criticise anything or do anything but portray these people he met. But when he gets into the story (which is what I'm interpreting as the deeds) he is geniuos and then criticises everything.
I was thinking that this is largely due to customs at the time, but also that Beowulf is most likely oral, and Chaucer is written. This lends more complexity to Chaucer and allows more 'underhanded' techniques since Beowulf needs to be easier to follow in one sitting. Aslo, a written comment on anything makes it easier to get in trouble, so while Beowulf wouldn't need to 'hide' its motives as much, Chaucer definitely did.
The problem is that, that's really as far as I seem able to go topic wise. I need a specific topic that is polemic. And I've had nothing but this ^ for three hours. I keep asking the 'so what' question and answering with 'I have no freaking clue!'.
This is the assignment:
Throughout this course we have touched upon the importance of the connection between words and
deeds. Develop an argument and demonstrate it through close analysis of how words and deeds are
significant in one text from category a) and one from category b):
a) Chaucer's General Prologue, Everyman, Second Shepherds' Play.
b) Beowulf, Sermo Lupi ad Anglos
What I can think of so far, is that in Beowulf, the words and deeds match up and then the deed embellishes on the 'words'. As in, Beowulf says he will do something, and then does it in a more grand way then the words indicated. The exception to this is the last segment with the dragon, where he fails. Perhaps some indication that his words were too 'grand' for what he could handle.
Chaucer is different as the words and deeds contradict each other. Chaucer, the narrator, states that he is basically an idiot and isn't trying to criticise anything or do anything but portray these people he met. But when he gets into the story (which is what I'm interpreting as the deeds) he is geniuos and then criticises everything.
I was thinking that this is largely due to customs at the time, but also that Beowulf is most likely oral, and Chaucer is written. This lends more complexity to Chaucer and allows more 'underhanded' techniques since Beowulf needs to be easier to follow in one sitting. Aslo, a written comment on anything makes it easier to get in trouble, so while Beowulf wouldn't need to 'hide' its motives as much, Chaucer definitely did.
The problem is that, that's really as far as I seem able to go topic wise. I need a specific topic that is polemic. And I've had nothing but this ^ for three hours. I keep asking the 'so what' question and answering with 'I have no freaking clue!'.
This is the assignment:
Throughout this course we have touched upon the importance of the connection between words and
deeds. Develop an argument and demonstrate it through close analysis of how words and deeds are
significant in one text from category a) and one from category b):
a) Chaucer's General Prologue, Everyman, Second Shepherds' Play.
b) Beowulf, Sermo Lupi ad Anglos
