Grendel the Existentialist MonsterThe Grendel monster is the ironic eye through which the action is seen and from this perspective provides the reader with endless examples of buffoonery and self-parody. Often his statements reveal the Sartrean component in his composition: “I create the whole universe, blink of an eye” (Gardner 22). Gardner, of course, wants to emphasize solipsism here. There is more to the objective world than Grendel's ego. Of course the universe still exists when Grendel closes his eyes. Likewise, when Grendel says, “I observe myself observing what I observe,” (Gardner 29), he reminds us of Sartre's view of the self-reflexive nature of consciousness. As he said in his interview, Gardner intended to parody Sartre's ideas in Being and Nothingness in these sections of the novel. When Grendel says "then I am not the one who observes! I am the lack. Alas." (Gardner 29) plays on the French verb manquer (to lack) that Sartre uses in his description of the deficient quality of consciousness. This ability to observe what he observes is a clue to the philosophical underpinnings of the early chapters. Gardner's irony should be crystal clear: Grendel is having fun with Sartre's phenomenology. Now what is the reader to think of all this? A brief summary of Sartre's description of consciousness may be helpful. According to Sartre, man exists at the level of being-in-itself (as a body in a world of objects) and at the level of being-for-itself (consciousness). The key to understanding Grendel's worldview is this distinction between the in-itself and the for-itself. Since, for Sartre, being-in-itself is uncreated (he can find no evidence of a creator God) and superfluous ("de trop"), it reveals itself as a kind of absurd and meaningless external reality. But being-for-itself is instead the awareness that consciousness is not the being of the in-itself. His being reveals itself in a more paradoxical way: as a void at the center of being. How can it be aware of itself as an object? Impossible, says Sartre. Simply put, the for-itself is the absence or lack (hence Grendel's "lack") of the objectivity of the in-itself. It reveals itself as the nothingness that remains when you realize that your consciousness is not awareness of an object (like your body), but rather awareness of the lack of an object; or, to put it another way, it is awareness of an annihilated presence. Grendel is proof that only one