In beginning to read The Nibelungenlied, I would like to discuss the status of Siegfried in this story. Certain key descriptions of him make us wonder about his status as either ‘monstrous’ or ‘other.’ Some textual descriptions into his appearance and deeds convey a darker being than what we initially expect. The more we hear about the deeds of Siegfried, the more he turns ‘monstrous.’ In most conquests, the victor takes over that land and the defeated is now under their control. In a way, the victor takes the identity of his foe. In the same manner, Siegfried wins many challenges and take on the identity of the defeated, which is sometimes ‘monstrous.’
When the court of Worms is aware of the coming of Siegfried, Hagan exclaims, “this hero slew a dragon and bathed in its blood, from which his skin grew horny so that no weapon will bite it” (28). Siegfried’s encounter with a demonic presence has begun to make him demonic and ‘monstrous.’ The conquering of this dragon not only made him stronger, but it also provided him with this monstrous skin. Though Siegfried is still a mortal, his monstrous actions of immersing himself in the blood of the dragon, similar to a second baptism, and instead of coming out cleansed, Siegfried comes out with an advantage over normal warriors.
Another unique point in the story is when a messenger informs Kriemhild of their victory over the Saxons. The messenger describes the heroic deeds of Siegfried, but they are told in an unorthodox manner. The messenger states, “such sorrow did he bring to the ladies by slaying their kinsmen! The lovers of many ladies fell there too, never to rise again” (42). When one talks of the great deeds of another, they do not usually harp on the negative points. However, here, the negative points are seen as positive. We hear of the deaths of many men, but more on the level of the pain Siegfried has brought by destroying relationships between loved ones. When descriptions of deeds are depicted as such, one sees the damage this warrior has caused to others. However, the messenger states, “he has all the qualities that go to make a brave, good knight” (42). This monstrous behavior is the norm for warriors, just as we discussed for Roland.
Nonetheless, there is something unique to Siegfried that ostracizes him from the rest of the community. He is the only man who can fight against Brunhild. Brunhild herself is described as somewhat monstrous and Hagen exclaims to Gunter, “the woman whose love you desire is a rib of the Devil himself!” (65). Instead of woman being made from the rib of Adam, as stated in Genesis, Brunhild is considered made from the devil. As her ‘monstrousess’ is emphasized, it is also noted that Siegfried is the one who secretly fights her. In these scenes, the reader notices that it takes a monster to fight a monster. This appears to be the issue that stems the rest of the story. Since Siegfried has conquered Brunhild, she technically belongs to him. However, Siegfried’s actions were concealed, and Brunhild is tricked into thinking Gunter had proved himself victor. Also, since Siegfried is the one who defeated the demonic woman, he would then be considered somewhat demonic as well.
There are no clear monsters in this story, but Siegfried is the only character that comes close to this categorization by his identification with his winnings. In this manner, Siegfried could be considered the court of Gunter’s ‘monster’ just as Beowulf was for the Danes. Also, it is important to note that Siegfried only developed this ‘monstrousnes’ over time, with his encounters with greater beings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This is a very interesting point you make and I will be discussing the monstrousness of the four main characters (Kriemhild, Siegfried, Gunther, and Brunhild) in my presentation tomorrow. It is important to note that all the characters are ostracized in someway.
Your point on Siegfried being described in terms of ruining relationships is very interesting. As I posted on, the narrator's interjections further this point. The narrator indicates that the relationship between Siegfried and Kriemhild will bring about the destruction of many others. It seems as the though the text is trying to say something deeper about relationships in the text whether it be male-female or male-male relations.
Many of the points you made will be further explicated I don't want to give any thing away because that will ruin all of tomorrow's fun!
Hey Annie, I responded a bit in my post to yours, just playing a little Devil's advocate;)
Can't wait for the monstrous presentation Katlyn.
I think after reading the last section of, “The Nibelungenlied,” Kriemhild, out of all the characters, is transformed, into the ‘monstrous.’ Her grief seems to be the catalyst that drives this transformation, and motivates her thirst for vengeance. At the same time and as we discussed in class, in her pursuit of vengeance, she takes on both feminine and masculine attributes that also push her to embody the monstrous. This dualism makes her even more ‘monstrous’ because in possessing both feminine and masculine qualities, she seems to exhibit at times an unpredictability and calculating attribute assigned to the female gender construct, and yet the logic or rationale assigned to the male construct. Yet, I think page 260 and 261 quite literally establish Kriemhild as a monster, for in her thirst for vengeance, she’s becomes merciless, and exhibits the same ‘rage’ we’ve found in for example, Grendel, as well as the Green Knight. Kreimhild rejects the truce the Burgundian’s offer, and the text literally describes how Kriemhild possesses a ‘monstrous vengeance.’
Post a Comment