Beowulf, without a doubt, accurately presents the symolism in the battle of good verses evil. Sense biblical times, stories have been written portraying a well respected, heroic figure defending his people, as well as himself against wickedness, and all that immortality entails. In most cases the good conquer the inferior. Justice is served. Whether the situation involved a horrific fight or loss of a character, the reader is pleased with the almost always predictable notion that malevolence was been defeated. Yet, how does the audience decide which is good, which is evil?
             The author plays a huge role in shaping the pre-conceived notions of the characters that interact in each plot. One might confer that the writer has already made up his mind who will be victorious in the end within the first page. He has. The common reader tends to agree with the author, due to indirect persuasion suggested in metaphors, foreshadowing, and literary conventions. These all assist the reader in making up his mind.
             Grendel may raise a few eyebrows to those that agree with this theory. He is not your average evil. Although, judging by physical appearance, you might say Grendel is above average. His reputation mirrors that of his looks. He seems to aquire the typical credentials of a monster. When introduced to him, it is immediately stated; "A powerful monster, living down in the darkenss, growled in pain; impatient". Meet Grendel. He is strong. His setting, which refelcts his life, is gloomy. He is unhappy. Of course he is unhappy. His own parents, descendents of Cain, were banished by God. However, their evil still flows through their own spawn, such as Grendel.
             Cain is known for killing his brother, one of his own kin. Based on Anglo-Saxon beliefs he displays pure evil. During Anglo-Saxon times, kinship was very crucial to the way of life. He is also similar to Cain in the sense that he is not welcome amongst others, and his ange...