I feel that the transition of Beowulf from poetry to prose greatly effects the flow of
the poem. The prose version of the poem has no alliteration. This greatly detracts
from the original rhythm and the reader therefore has a more difficult time reading and
memorizing the poem. In general, the poem sounds better with the alliteration present.
"The prince when he fled from Sweden, sought safety. . ." is more effective than "the
banished Eanmund. . .which he handed over to Onela, the Swedish king." Also, the
prose version of the poem is not written in caesuras. Caesuras add a definite beat and
rhythm to the poem and makes its oral interpretation more effective. I also found the
prose interpretation to be more monotonous and dull than the poetry. The poetry
version utilizes kennings, which add variety and break up the monotonous passages.
For example, while the prose refers to Beowulf only be his name, which becomes
repetitive and mundane, the poem uses kennings such as, "brave king," "gray-bearded
lord of the Geats," and "Edgetho's famous son." In general, the poetry translation is
more effective than the prose, because it keeps the reader's interest and flows more
The tone of the poetry is also much more effective. The author of the prose
seems to treat the material in a detached, withdrawn way. The reader feels more
involved in the story when reading the poetry version. This may be because of the
great amount of imagery in this version, in comparison to the prose. The battles and
feats of the hero are depicted with much more description. This adds to the author's
more positive tone toward Beowulf in the poem. Lastly, the tone is much more positive
in the poetry version, because the greatness of the hero is stressed more. When in
prose, the constant description of Beowulf's virtues, present in the poem, becomes
...