my maid of honor speech for my sisters wedding!
14 years ago
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Election Day: Which Anglo-Saxon for President?
In spirit of the upcoming Election Day (and to celebrate the ending of our reading of Beowulf), vote for our new president: Beowulf, the Slayer of Monsters, or Wiglaf, the (Only) Loyal Geat. We have analyzed Beowulf's convincing speech to gain Hrothgar's trust and to defame Unferth, and have taken a closer look at Wiglaf's speech to Beowulf's troops. Although Wiglaf fails where Beowulf succeeds, Wiglaf does prove himself -- unselfishly -- by being "the one left standing" at the end of the epic. Make sure you examine character, past accomplishments (military experience included), and mastery at persuading an audience, all essential qualities the American people look for in a reputable president. Cast your ballot -- Beowulf or Wiglaf for President? And...what would this mean for the American people (Obama and McCain -- look out!)?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
I proudly cast my vote to Wiglaf, the warrior who was loyal and would make an excellent president. Do we want a president that is already a hero or one who will prove to be one? Beowulf killed lots of creatures. He didnt take the time to understand their view or compromise. We know he lied and we know he exagerates. Beowulf brings up treasure multiple times. He is clearly after the fame and glory that comes with protecting the people. He belittles Unferth who is his competition of the time. Beowulf was at a superior position in relation to the soldiers. If Beowulf won the battle with the dragon he would be able to once again proclaim all the glory. It's absurd how selfish he is. Wiglaf had the heart to understand the situation and help out a leader who clearly needed back-up. He could have stayed behind as a coward with the other soldiers, but he proved himself a leader. People don't always do what they are told to do. But a person has instincts and knows how to follow their heart. Wiglaf proved himself that he can be a leader and that he knows how to respond to bad situations. He has fought as a soldier so it is clear he can work with other people and is not set out on getting the glory and fame. He has skills that Beowulf does not possess. The American People need a person like Wiglaf. He wasn't a recognized hero but he became one. Wiglaf could definetly be the tie breaker between Obama and McCain. He has the military experience that voters look for, he has a good head on his shoulders, good instinct, and is definetly a hero.
(Kado= Katie just so you know..)
I agree with Katie, I think Wiglaf would make the better president. There are times when you should follow orders, and then times when you should just trust your gut. Wiglaf knew when to trust his gut, which makes him better than Beowulf in the sense that Beowulf was determined to defeat the dragon alone. Beowulf should have had his hand-picked soldiers help him, but he figured he would be able to do it alone. If Wiglaf had not come, Beowulf's story would not exist. Beowulf was also only concerned about his importance, if you will, and not about everyone else. Everyone else came second to him. That's not the kind of leader a country would want at its head.
But, now that I'm thinking about it, if we were looking at their accomplishments through an Anglo-Saxon point of view, I would vote for Beowulf. Honestly, he's like, the perfect hero for the time period. So it sort of depends on which time frame we're coming from.
As for Wiglaf and Beowulf going against McCain and Obama, I think that Beowulf would threaten both of them and that Wiglaf would be the person who people would vote for cause 1. they don't like McCain or Obama, or 2. he possesses qualities that the American people want, like a militarist experience and a kind heart. All in all, Wiglaf=winner :]
Although I understand what both of you are saying, I would have to vote for Beowulf for a few important reasons. First of all Beowulf has experience not only fighting but leading people while Wiglaf although seemingly good-hearted does not have that experience. Beowulf’s people all supported him as well as respected him and his accomplishments because he saved them from evil. One might argue that he did this for fame, but in actuality who cares why he did it, he did, and it helped the general public. Beowulf is also a great public speaker who could potentially convince people of what is needed which could unify a nation. He also provided for his people safety and comfort. Wiglaf, although probably the only character who may have a kind personality does not have the same experience as Beowulf. Wiglaf is not only younger (not as much time to develop his opinions etc.) but he also proves that he really is not a great public speaker. If he was a good public speaker the other men would have come with him to help Beowulf to defeat the dragon. We also do not know much about the battle that Wiglaf won. For all we know the dragon could have tripped over his own tail allowing Wiglaf to get a cheap shot (much like Grendel and fate). Although I do understand that Wiglaf may be somewhat more considerate and kinder he still must not have related very well to the soldiers unlike Beowulf. Why would I vote for someone who can’t even gain support from the people that he probably spends most of his time with?
I can honestly say that I most likely would rather be friends with Wiglaf than Beowulf because of his personality, but I believe that Beowulf would make a much better president. I don’t have to like someone’s personality in order to agree with what they would accomplish for a country.
It is interesting the parallels that one could make between Beowulf and McCain and Wiglaf and Obama. (I’m NOT saying that they are exactly alike.) For example Beowulf and McCain both have a lot of experience and are older while Wiglaf and Obama do not have as much experience and are much younger.
Though this question is rendered moot by the death of Beowulf at the end of the poem (and Wiglaf's replacement of Beowulf), if these two figures were competing for the "office" of President (King of the Geats, whatever), Beowulf would be the obvious choice. He has proven himself time and time again in battle and competition, and has ruled his kingdom for many years with distinction. The demonstration of good leadership beats potential success every time (since Beowulf has actually led people, there is no reason to favor the inexperienced wiglaf over him).
An argument could be made against Beowulf on the basis of character; one might say he favors his own fame above all else. This is not true. His main grab at fame was the defeat of the "Grendel family", and that was the actions of a young Beowulf in a different setting. We see him among his own people towards the end (in the situation with the dragon) and he fights for them, not for his own gain. Also, we all want a little bit of fame, and it should not be counted against Beowulf that this was his motivation to kill Grendel, as a rather large group of people benefited (even if it was second on Beowulf's mind).
When compared to the current candidates, Beowulf would likely win because he has demonstrated capabilities that far transcend what is found in politics today. He even is a capable speaker: he managed to eloquently convince the hostile Danes that a Geat could and would save them, and humiliated a pompous criminal. That is not to say that the two candidates are not worthy of consideration, however. PLENTY of people like them both, and their areas of experience differ wildly from Beowulf's. Though i think his experience as a leader (50 years in office!!!) would trump the others, it is difficult to say. Many people seem as inspired by Obama as they might be by a modern-day epic hero, and many value McCain's experience as much as they might look up to a leader of ancient times.
(A bit long...)Okay, I get that Beowulf was a really good persuasive speaker and he killed monster, but why on Earth would I want someone like HIM to be President? And why would I want Wiglaf as a President? I don't know enough about him. I'd vote for Hrothgar if he was a choice. But I guess I'll pick Wiglaf for now.
When it comes down to it, the only things Beowulf had as advantages over Wiglaf are strength and charisma. Wiglaf was more compassionate and caring, and that showed when he wanted to help Beowulf against his orders. I would definitely want a President who knows what is best for a country, even though it might be breaking a rule or something. He also obviously had the experience in the battlefield. Beowulf, on the other hand, was arrogant and selfish...and stupid. He was arrogant and stupid (in a way) because he practically killed himself because he was so convinced he was going to defeat the dragon. Clearly, he wasn't as strong as young Beowulf, and he wasn't Hrothgar, who wisely chose to have Beowulf to kill Grendel instead of fighting Grendel by himself. He was selfish for obvious reasons. ("I want a barrow to be built for me and name it Beowulf's Barrow!!" Blah blah)
Wiglaf might've not succeeded in rallying the other warriors into helping Beowulf, but the fact that he tried to with such a great speech still showed his leadership skills. No one can deny Wiglaf's status as a leader.
I would be scared of Beowulf being a President. He reminds me of Hitler with the way his charismatic skills were described. He could practically convince anyone to agree with his opinions, even though they're wrong. Beowulf convinced Hrothgar that he could kill Grendel's family. Hitler persuaded millions of people about the German race superiority. I'm not saying that Beowulf is just like Hitler, but his strength and his charisma sound like a recipe for dictatorship to me. That thought scares me...
Wiglaf and Beowulf definitely have Obama and McCain beat. They give speeches that actually sound good, especially Beowulf. Beowulf beats both in experience...while Wiglaf beats only Obama for military experience. However, Obama and McCain are better characters than the Anglo-Saxons. and McCain and Beowulf are old...and Obama and Wiglaf are young. Looks like a tie still...so VOTE FOR HROThGAR AS A WRITE-IN!
Well, I am currently writing an essay on which of the two, including Hrothgar, would be more effective in addressing their kingdom as an Anglo-Saxon king. What I mean by addressing is…who is more influential in delivering their views to the public? I know what Marielle means by having a compassionate and caring leader as a good thing, but if the leader does not present a firm and confident voice, then how would he get his message around, how would he convince his nation that his path is considered virtuous? You might as well have a weak confederate government, where people stand up to civil disobedience. The reason why Wiglaf failed to persuade his fellow comrades in supporting Beowulf because he didn’t provide a strong argument and defensive claim to support his reason. Unlike Beowulf, he didn’t display his heroic attributes and boast of achievements in his speech, which left his audience questioning whether his decision is righteous to follow. I do agree that Wiglaf is less boastful and self-interested than Beowulf, but these characteristics only make up what type of person he is. He does possess the modern heroic qualities that we American people want, referring back to what Steph said: a militarist and a peoples’ leader. Although, if someone was running for president, and that person failed to influence the public opinion, do you think it’s reasonable that that person would be effective in addressing his/her issues, plans, and voice to the public when in office? I don’t think so! Wiglaf did not have the ability to justify his rationale. Beowulf, on the other hand, took a strong defensive stance against Unferth by defaming his character and recognizing the Danes’ needs to defeat the monster Grendel and regain a safe environment. I also want to comment on Angel’s mention of the importance of being an experienced leader. I do agree with her that personality shouldn’t account for a person’s ability to run a country. She mentions that Beowulf is more experienced therefore he would be more successful in directing his nation, and he is more like McCain. I do slightly disagree with her statement on that because it shouldn’t matter whether a person is experience to be qualified as a good leader. I believe the most significant qualification of leader is how effective someone is in influencing the public interest. In this case, Beowulf will make a better president because first of all, he won Hrothgar’s trust (his enemy) and gained the respect from the Danes, making him an influential leader. Accomplishing civil obedience should come first before anything else.
OK, I just posted an entire thing and it wouldnt post sooooooo.... now that I am frustrated, I will retype that entire entry...
Ok so yes, I agree with Angel and Aaron. I would want Beowulf as my president. Firstly, he has more experience. He straight up defeated three monsters. Even if you do take into account the help he recieved from Wiglaf and God/ fate, he is the hero and he defeated Grendel, his crazed mom, and the dragon. Beowulf is a military powerhouse while Wiglaf is the newbie. I would feel more secure if Beowulf were my commander in chief.
Beowulf's public speaking skills are excellent also, influencing my decision. After analyzing his speech to Unferth, we see that he identifies with the other side, admits mistakes, and has intensity, all things that a great public speaker should have. I havent really looked at Wiglaf's speech. Part of this is because we didnt look at it in depth in class and honestly, Wiglaf doesnt attract as much attention as Beowulf. Wiglaf might be like the Ralph Nader; always there, always in the background, doesnt really recieve any credit, and never wins. In terms of media and publicity which is HUGE in an election, Beowulf would crush Wiglaf.
In a modern comparison, Obama and McCain would have a little of both in them. McCain is more experienced militarily and has more political experience in general. Obama is kind of the newbie, but still has some experience like Wiglaf. Also connecting him to Wiglaf is his loyal following, becuase some people are huge Wiglaf fans. Connecting Obama to Beowulf are his public speaking abilities which are admirable. Even though I am more partial to Obama and he is more closely connected to Wiglaf, I would still want Beowulf as my president if I were a Dane at that time.
Hey guys it's Scarlett. :P And sorry, we're not learning about Anglo-Saxons in my new honors english class... ._.
I can't really put my two-cents in but I was just messing around online and decided that I'd pop in and say hello to my old English class. D: I miss you guys.
PS- Miss. Winkler, tell SAFE club I said hi. :]--- you can delete this if you want since it's not related to school at all but... yeah.
:]
hi scarlet!
anyways...
okay so i definitely understand where beowulf fans are coming from. Beowulf has that charasmatic (sp?)side that modern day ppl definitely focus on. As we talked about in class and Faith mentioned, Beowulf presented a great speech and admitted his faults. It shows that he is human and is going to make mistakes just like everyone always will. And we really don't know Wiglaf as much as Beowulf so that obv gives Wiglaf the upperhand because there hasn't been much time for him to make mistakes. He proved himself heroic ONE time versus Beowulf's multiple..? And we really dont know how Wiglaf will adapt to the fame and honor that a hero gets. Sure Beowulf (in my opinion) acted very poorly and let greed/fame/glory overcome proper moral, he still continued to be successful. And a hero doesnt last forever... so i think if we focus on Beowulf's accomplishments before his death influenced by fate, we can see he has def. did more than Wiglaf. He demonstrated heroic values and he's a tough guy. I mean I'm not saying i would vote for Beowulf because i LIKE Wiglaf soooo much more. But i understand why you ppl have those thoughts and i agree with some of ur points for sure... just putting that out there.
Also..... i have a question: If Beowulf did become the "new Bush" do you think he would be in the position that Bush is in today (aka liked by practically no one)?
What about if Wiglaf was president?
Okay, going along with the majority of previous posts, I would gladly cast my vote for Beowulf as Anglo-Saxon President.
I'm being somewhat hypocritical because I love Grendel, but I understand that Beowulf's ability is most effective for the job.
Beowulf's capability to persuade his audience is what makes him the greatest candidate. He knows what his people want to hear. Taking advantage of his situation, he embraces others weaknesses and uses them to his advantage; some could call it unfair, but it's politics. For instance, Beowulf condemns Unferth's deceitful nature and cowardice. This in turn, makes the Danes realize Beowulf's capability. Although he may be incredibly conceited, his confidence is a measure of his strength. I don't know about you, but I would want a president who sticks by his word.
In a modern light, Obama and McCain both make up a little of Beowulf. I don't mean to get into politics here, but it could be argued that Obama's ideals deal a lot with the common man, and how we can get everyone on the same page. In essence, he fights for his people, which is what Beowulf does, but on a more literal sense. In comparison, McCain has much more experience than Obama, and considering the fact that Beowulf has fought numerous battles, and won, experience is clearly on his side.
I know, rather late to be posting something as election day is way past date.
Anyway, the better equipped president would definitely be Beowulf, the Slayer of Monsters. To put it simply, he has the military experience and the charisma to become a good ruler/president. Beowulf has slayed two of the epic's monsters all by himslef and who knows how many others, thus leading up to his credibility in experience and accomplishments. Beowulf demonstrated his charismatic ability when he persuaded Hrothgar to let him help with Grendel, depite their people being previous enemies.
Although I would definitely agree that Beowulf is not the best person, he does have the necessary qualities to become a great leader/president. After all, the question is not whether we like him as a person and a friend, but rather if he will get the job done right.
As for Wiglaf, I definitely agree that he is the better person with the better morals, but he, without the experience and the charisma (he was unable to convince the soldiers to stay and fight during the battle with the dragon), he is better suited as the Vice President.
Looking at how today's election went, I would say (not that I agree with it) that Beowulf would be president and Wiglaf his VP. Bewoulf is the best of the best as far as public speaking goes, but seriously annoys me the way Obama does. Wiglaf, who I agree with more, is more like Joe Biden =). As for a Palin, I think the queen would fit that because of the whole being second in command and not really having a voice (not justtt because shes not too bright). Then again, if the queen represented Palin, the democrats would form a bond with the republicans because everyone thinks sh'e good looking so I'm betting there'd be more drama with her and Mr. Clinton which would drag Hillary back into the picture as well. So, back to the big question... I think Wiglaf would be a better guy to dirct the president from below... like Dick Cheney (plus he'd probably be capable of hittin someone with a bullet while hunting cuz he's a good shot) while the big speaker, Mr. Obama/Bewoulf would get all the spotlight. I'm sure Obama felt like screaming his name in a Beowulf-like manner after he won the election. I don't think we know enough about Wiglaf from just the last section to make him President (wait, is HE Palin??) but he seems like a strong character. Lastly, he went against Beowulf's word to save him, which is like how Biden said Obama would face a "crisis," but with the opposite effect. So, I guess that didn't really say who I would want as president, but I think it's pretty much implied that I "strongly dislike" both Obama and Beowulf, and only like Wiglaf because there's no one better (c'mon, we know McCain would get too stressed out and he would die then we'd be stuck with Palin, who's a character but I definitely don't trust as President) =)
I know this is way after the election, but I really wanted to post for this blog.
Wiglaf seems more appealing to me as the worthy President. He's more down-to-earth than Beowulf, and he has more humanistic qualities. Democracy rules, and I just feel like people would have liked Wiglaf more. Beowulf is an exaggerated character; he possesses strength, and he seems to me to be more of a celebrity than a good leader. Although I'd probably feel physically safe under Beowulf's reign, I think that Wiglaf possesses qualities of the "common man" that would appeal to a more democratic audience.
I would have to agree with Ai-Tram on this one, I would vote for (that is if I were to be able to vote)Wiglaf. I would vote for Wiglaf without any hesitation. As Ai-Tram said Wiglaf is the more down to earth of the two. I mean it's a question of who I would rather have for president, a crazy man that would just go to war at the first chance that he could, or one that was a great warrior, but would think things through first. All Beowulf really cares about is his reputation, so his actions would be more based on would people still like me if i did this or not, rather than how his actions would affect his people. Wiglaf seems to care more about what the consequences of his actions. Also Wiglaf seems to be the Obama of the two. The let's fight this out with words first before I procede with beating you up, type of person. So hands down in this election Wiglaf the greatest of the Geats would win my vote.
I'm gonna have to say Beowulf. Neither are truly full "heroes" in my eyes. Beowulf boasts and brags and is selfish, even though he does accomplish a lot of good for the community, it is not based on their need as much as it is on his selfishness and lack of care for others. Like others have said, Wiglaf, does not have the experience. I believe a lot of experience can be gained "on the job". However, he needs a little more training. Though I do not like Beowulf, he is a powerful public speaker and does accomplish good. At this point, I don't know how well Wiglaf can rally the masses.
So...Beowulf...but I want a cabinet to make him realize he needs to truly care more about the people than himself...or I'm leaving the country. =)
Ok so this post is like wayyyy past the election, but I proudly cast my vote for BEOWULF!!
Although Wiglaf is very loyal and refuses to leave Beowulf in his time of need, he is incapable of running a nation if he can't even convince Beowulf's own men to help him. Beowulf, on the other hand is a POWERFUL speaker. He convinced and entire enemy country of his good intentions, and gained their trust. If Beowulf can get his enemies to trust him he will obviously have no trouble convincing his own people to vote for him. Also, unlike Wiglaf, Beowulf has proved himself to his people countless times. He has provided them with safety by defeating monster, and shown his great military power and experience. He ahs also given his country his own treasure as a way to make sure they are always taken care of. Although Beowulf is not really the "common man" that we have come accustomed to seeing elected, it is his fate to lead and be great and that is why I would vote for Beowulf.
I would cast my vote for Beowulf. As a well- known hero by the time he arrives at Hrothgar’s kingdom, he proved his physical strength in the past and would continue to prove it again through his successful battles with Grendel, Grendel’s mother, and the dragon. More notably, he was able to convince King Hrothgar that he was a capable leader through his remarkably well- worded diction after Unferth, one of Hrothgar’s own warriors, challenges him to be a liar and coward. Possibly one of the most astonishing qualities that Beowulf displays was his ability to turn the malicious accusations which Unferth directs towards him around to make his accuser appear to the relatively hostile crowd as a drunken fool. In doing so, he wins the approval of the rival clan, the Danes- in fact an early form of “crossing party lines”. Therefore, Beowulf’s ability to make not only people who had previously respected him, but also those who had once distrusted him, be willing to support him battle is a strong reason for him to be a capable leader.
Although I have to say that Beowulf would, without a doubt, be the victor in an election during his time, Wiglaf would be the President of America right now. The only thing Beowulf provides is a sense security…and that’s it. Unlike our actual candidates, he only has one platform and one idea of the future of our country. Wiglaf, on the other hand, would look out for the good of all his people. Not only would he protect us in foreign issues (sure, not to the extent and possibly success of Beowulf) but also he would keep a more democratic order domestically. Wiglaf seems more “normal” in that he is untainted by the horrors of egotism and stardom. He had been a citizen recently and knows what is needed for the betterment of the nation. I feel safe in all ways possible with Wiglaf there to protect me.
My vote goes to...Wiglaf!
Cause he's Wiglaftastic.
What do I mean by that? Well, Wiglaf is, in my opinion, the most human character in Beowulf. He is not an out-of-reach hero that none can aspire to, he is the average Joe (six-pack?). Which is inspirational to the American people. True, Beowulf has some commendable speeches, but sometimes seems to be looking out only for number one. Beowulf may have been involved in more battles, but Wiglaf's commpassion for his allies will prove to be more beneficial to his troops.
The public WILL notice Wiglaf's humanity. Instead of support out of fear for Beowulf's warnings, people will have support through understanding of the issues. This is because (the most important point of all), Wiglaf will have a more leve; head on times of crisis. Revenge or immortality takes a back seat to logic and compassion.
Post a Comment