On a scale of 1 to 10 . . .

Given our examination of villainy and monsters that lurk in the dark shadows, how do you rate the Green Knight?  We've seen the earliest type of monster, in Beowulf, who is the easy -- if mysterious -- personification of pure evil; we've jumped ahead to take a look at a very modern, and very human monster, who agonizes over many of the same things we do in his misguided approach to meaning and purpose.  Where does the Green Knight fall in this spectrum?  How has this monster evolved since the days of early Grendel, and how is he still not "modern?"

It's all a matter of perception . . .

As you know, writers depend on their readers' history and background knowledge in order to construct meaning.  With this in mind, what are you noticing that is ODD about this story?  Do you see evidence of the Round Table's renowned chivalry?  What sorts of things in this story are being CONTRASTED in order to emphasize tensions and possible meanings?