This Final Draft is the culmination of what I have learned in the past six weeks. In it, all of the strategies that I have learned, including rereading the text in-depth, annotating the text, and last but not least, revising my work, have worked together to produce this piece of work that I believe is truly representative of my progress as a writer. Having completed this, I feel that I have learned much about the writing process and have improved tremendously since the beginning of this class.

    Frank R. Stockton’s “The Griffin and the Minor Canon” delves into the fantasy-typed genre, beginning with a griffin who wishes to see what it looks like and, upon learning that there is a statue made in his likeness, he immediately goes in search of it. By doing so, however, the griffin attracts unwanted attention and presents the main conflict between both he and the villagers. Though this is resolved by the end of the story, the events that Stockton uses to lead up to the conclusion sheds light on the idea that matters cannot be solved with simple “yes and no” type scenarios, that both sides must be examined in greater depth. Stockton’s usage of rhetoric in “The Griffin and the Minor Canon” highlights the illusion that what is perceived to be fundamentally good or bad may not actually be the case, that there exists, in fact, a gray area between the two.

    The Minor Canon essentially plays the role of the protagonist in the story and brings to attention the aspect of the good that exists within the common good versus evil trope. His moral behavior is most clearly seen when the villagers reach the conclusion that, because the griffin has taken a liking to the Minor Canon, his departure from the village should in turn also lead the griffin away from the town. Despite receiving such a ridiculous notion, the Minor Canon , for the sake of the village’s well being, follows their instructions in hopes of easing the villagers’ worries. From this, it is clear that the Minor Canon’s intentions pure; he shows signs of kindness and selflessness, even when the situation comes to the point where he must leave. Though he suffers on his journey to the woods, with thoughts of the villagers in mind, he feels that it is his duty and preserves. Thus, the Minor Canon shows that, though the villagers are ruled by feelings of selflessness and greed for their own skins, there still lies a “good” part hidden within the crowd. However, not even the Minor Canon, as good as his actions and intentions may be, can be perceived as entirely moral.

Though his actions do reflect the extreme amount of goodness in his character, the Minor Canon cannot be seen as perfectly good as well. Before the appearance of the griffin, the Minor Canon is described essentially as the traditional good Samaritan; he is always more than willing to help out the people of the town, including acts such as visiting the sick and the poor, as well as even teaching a school that is home to only the bad children that none of the villagers will have anything to do with (Stockton, 39-40). However, once he learns of news of the griffin’s arrival from one of the townspeople, his behavior completely changes. It is stated that he “would rather have had his hand cut off than go out to meet an angry griffin, but he felt that it was his duty to go” (Stockton, 40). Instead of heroically charging to confront the creature, he instead responds to the crisis by essentially saying that his willingness to confront the beast was only as a result of the responsibilities that he has attained as the Minor Canon of the town. He does not face the beast because he wants to, but completely because he has to. He shows traces of hesitance and unwillingness when first informed of the issue; thus, his goodness is limited by his own stature in the town. Had he not possessed the responsibilities and felt the duty to do so, there would be a chance that he would have not gone at all. Through this, the Minor Canon shows mostly traces of goodness but also subtle signs of evil, showing that even the most good of things can still be tainted by traces of evil. Similar to how the Canon presents behavior that is mostly good but not quite completely, the villagers also show behavior that follows this pattern but rather in the opposite sense.

The dialogue presented between villagers present a clear example as to where characters that would normally be classified as “good”, are actually not as virtuous as they seem to be. For example, before the griffin makes his appearance, the villagers do not seem to portray any immoral behavior. Their reactions to when the griffin appears seem reasonable due to it being an unusual event. However, after they are terrified by the griffin’s appearance, they immediately turn to the Minor Canon to help solve the problem. It is stated that “whenever the people wanted something done for them, they always went to the Minor Canon” (Stockton, 40). This scene occurs very soon after the story has just started to unfold, reflecting that the villagers show signs of cowardice, as seen by their automatic response of sending someone in their place, rather than even remotely trying to solve the problem themselves.

The immoral and selfish behavior that the villagers display is one that continues to reappear throughout the story. When it has become certain that their plan of luring the griffin away by sending the Minor Canon as bait is unsuccessful, they immediately move on to finding another solution, completely disregarding the Minor Canon, and instead become more preoccupied with how they intend to do away with this beast that seems to threaten their lives. To them, the Minor Canon is seen as just another pawn that they are more than willing to sacrifice or give up, in the hopes that they may be able to carry on with their own lives. Though the griffin does not take any actions, and thus remains harmless to the villagers, the coming of the autumnal equinox instills worry into the villagers, who fear that his upcoming meal will include them and their children. In order to appease the creature’s appetite, they become intent on offering him “the fattest mutton; the most tender beef, fish and game of various sorts, and anything of the kind that he might fancy” (Stockton, 52). However, in the case that this would not satisfy him, they would resort to telling him that “there was an orphan asylum in the next town” (Stockton, 52). This act in itself reveals the true nature of the villagers; their thoughts only go skin deep. While the Minor Canon was more thoughtful about how to deter the griffin from the village, the villagers instead choose the more cowardly alternative and attempt to offer him what they think he desires, in hopes that this will solve the issue. Their willingness to sacrifice even the orphans of the next town over, as a result of their desperation to save their own lives, reflects their desire of wanting to save only their own lives even at the cost of others and thus, their truely selfish behavior.

However, despite their selfish and cowardly actions following the appearance of the griffin, not even the villagers can be interpreted as inherently evil. After the griffin learns of what has actually been done to cause the Minor Canon’s absence, he immediately sets off in search of him and, after doing so, brings him safely back to the village. Following this event, the griffin leaves and the villagers are threatened by the griffin to praise the Minor Canon in accordance with his deeds regarding the town. At first, the villagers were in the habit of “[looking] up to the sky to see if there were any signs of the Griffin coming back” (Stockton, 57), but they eventually “[learn] to honor and reverence their former Minor Canon without the first of being punished” (Stockton, 57). This provides a significant contrast to their behavior at the beginning of the short story. At one time, they were selfish and cowardly; they were not reluctant at all to give even the lives of other people for the sake of their own. By the end of the story, however, with the help of the Griffin, they are able to commit to acts of goodness and thus, their behavior does not show them to be completely evil. The villagers, as a whole, show that even they, a group that was completely shrouded in the traits associated with evil, possesses the innate ability to exhibit good traits as well. However, unlike the villagers and the Minor Canon, who initially displayed behaviors that, in turn, changed significantly by the end of the story, there are also characters whose behavior remained similar throughout the overall story, such as the griffin.

The griffin’s persona serves as a direct example that effectively shows that while a character may be regarded as moral or immoral, it may actually not be as two-sided as it seems but rather, falls between the two. When the griffin makes his sudden arrival in the town, he simply wishes to gaze at the statue made in his liking. However, though he indicates little to no sense of danger in actuality, the villagers are terrified by his presence nonetheless, and try to rid of the griffin with the Minor Canon’s help. The effect that the griffin has on the villagers reflects the qualities that griffins are most commonly known for: their power. Zverev explains that the griffin is a “majestic and powerful creature” (“Griffin”), that the multiple beings that contribute to its overall shape and form, more specifically the lion and the eagle, are reflective of the powerful presence that it passively gives off. After the villagers send away the Minor Canon, time passes as they continue to try to find a way to rid of the griffin, but they are suddenly reminded of the autumnal equinox during which the griffin has his biannual meal. In an attempt at a solution to their new issue, they attempt to appease his hunger by offering him the best foods that they can provide. However, their actions are not received favourably, as the griffin lashes back at them, telling them that he “could not relish anything which was prepared by them [as] they appear to be all cowards, and therefore, mean and selfish” (Stockton, 52). With this, Stockton adds more clarity to the griffin’s character. Though he showed initiative and a sense of responsibility following the disappearance of the Minor Canon, as shown by his willingness to take the role of the Canon in the task of teaching the “bad” children of the town, this piece of dialogue sheds light on another aspect of the griffin’s persona, one that is filled with a sense of immorality. Though he is seen to be understanding and caring at other points in the story, what lies within is a creature ruled by his own set of values. To him, the villager’s selfish and cowardly attempts to save their own lives, even going as far as being willing to sacrifice the orphans from the next town over, appears as ugly and undesirable, whereas the Minor Canon’s brave and honest traits, solely for the the sake of the villagers’ well being, is one that delights him.

Furthermore, Stockton’s subtle usage of rhetoric in the same scene provides an additional example that supports the more corrupt part of the griffin’s character. After refusing the food offered to him by the villagers, he states that he would have only had an appetite for the Minor Canon, as he “was brave, and good, and honest” (Stockton, 52). With this case of situational irony, Stockton brings to light an unexpected revelation regarding the Minor Canon’s and the griffin’s relationship, as the bond between the griffin and the Minor Canon was developing into one that resembled a friendship, which would have least invited the idea of eating him at all. However, though he enjoys the company that the Minor Canon provides him, solely due to the Canon’s apparent bravery that he showed upon confronting him at the beginning, he continues to relish about thoughts of eating his seemingly close companion. Despite the actions that the griffin partakes in that would essentially mark him as a character that exhibits a sense of morality, it seems they serve as simply a disguise instead, to conceal his natural tendencies that may, in fact, be interpreted as dangerous or evil. Thus, the griffin’s character ultimately shows that even within the most evil of creatures, there can exist a just or moral side as well.

In general, the griffin plays the role of the “gray area” of moral behavior throughout the course of the story. In his presence, the true natures of both the Minor Canon and the rest of the villagers are shown, and the characteristics that separate the morally good from the morally evil are called into attention. However, not even the griffin, who has lived for many more years than any of the human characters and thus, acquired more wisdom, can be a true judge of morality. Though his intentions of doing what he can in the Minor Canon’s absence may appear to be good, as mentioned before, he is still guilty to the characteristic aspects that fall under the category of evil, such as in the case of his disliking towards the villagers’ cowardly behavior. Thus, the griffin’s character ties together aspects pertaining to both the villagers and the Minor Canon. Therefore, the griffin ultimately shows that the once-contemporary aspects of good and evil associated with fantasy are still relevant, but not as how they once were.

    The case of the griffin brings to light one of the most signature questions of fantasies, the argument of good vs evil. With his usage of the griffin in the short story, Stockton seems to argue that the classical trope is unable to keep up with modern times, that simply setting one against the other is no longer a viable way of treating fantasy-type stories. Miles also agrees with this, stating that “with the development of mature characters came the development of fantasy worlds a whole, [that] in order to have the protagonists face complex moral choices, the story situation had to adjust” (“Are Good and Evil Outdated?”). Rather than keeping the level of fantasy to a minimum by simply pitting the honorable and the immoral against each other, Stockton instead decides to break this norm of fantasies and adds in a third element, one that serves as a catalyst for both the protagonist and the antagonist, in this case the Minor Canon and the villagers.  With it, more depth is added to the typical aspects of good and evil and thus, the characters become more complex, to the point where Stockton has even the reader wondering whether the characters in the story should be praised or condemned for their behavior.

    Stockton’s story, as a whole, coincides with the ideas that Grossman presents, that despite the simple outlook of good versus evil that stories may present, they often hold much deeper meanings (“Wanted: Respect for Wizards, Orcs”). Had he not included the character of the griffin, his story could have just as easily become a typical fantasy story about how the Minor Canon, the protagonist, goes about attaining better treatment from the villagers in return for his deeds. Ultimately, by adding the character of the griffin, Stockton essentially adds a much deeper and complex meaning to the seemingly simple story and thus, adds another layer to delve into, in the seemingly simple fantasy story.

Stockton’s characters in the short story show that there is indeed a gray area that exists between the traditional labels of good and evil. The Minor Canon, though his actions and behavior towards the end of the story show positive traits, he was not willing to confront the beast that terrorized the town to begin with until he was forced to by the townspeople. While the townspeople showed extreme signs of cowardice and selfishness following the arrival of the creature, they showed morally positive behavior by the end of story, as seen in their efforts to praise the Minor Canon for his actions. Finally, the griffin completely took on the role of the gray area; though his appearances made him unto a creature that the villagers saw as bad, his actions showed otherwise. However, on the same token, though his intentions were good, his temper and disliking towards the villagers remained stagnant as well. Through these character traits and behaviors, Stockton essentially confronts the once-contemporary ideas of fantasy, that there was only a good and a bad side when it came to fantasies. Instead, he adds his own twist onto that ancient idea and shows that not everything is what is seems to be.

Works Cited

Gaiman, Neil. Unnatural Creatures. Comp. Briony Morrow-Cribbs and Maria Dahvana Headley. 1st ed. New York: HarperCollins, 2013. Gaiman’s novel provides the metaphorical backbone that the short story contains, including its deeper and complex meanings, as well as the rhetoric it has to offer.

Grossman, Lev. “Wanted: Respect for Wizards, Orcs.” The Wall Street Journal, 30 July 2011.

Grossman's article explains how fairytales are not to be underestimated and mistreated always as a children's genre, but shows that they can hold many real ideas, ideas that still apply in contemporary society, within them as well. He delves into how though they may consist of seemingly simple trademarks, such as good vs bad, they hold much deeper meanings.

Miles, Aaron. “Are Good And Evil Outdated?” FantasyFaction RSS, 21 Dec. 2013, fantasy-faction.com/2013/are-good-and-evil-outdated. This source goes in-depth about how the tags of good and evil are not enough to classify the themes in fantasy works today. They simply do not do justice to the more complex roles that modernized fantasy-type stories call for.

Zverev, Vitali. “Griffin.” Mythical Creatures, Beasts and Facts associated with them., 27 Nov. 2012. This source details the significance of the griffin within the short story. Representative of wisdom and power, this adds clarity as to why Stockton’s griffin is one who carries with it traits that appear to be dangerous but its behavior reflects otherwise.