Gudrun, Brynhildr and Thokk.

I’ve just read an article by Thomas D.Hill called Guðrún’s Healing Tears, discussing the idea that expressing grief leads to healing and that unexpressed grief can lead to death. It argues that everyone tried to get Guðrún to openly lament Sigurð’s death because they were afraid that she would die of grief if she did not – and it seems to have worked, since at the start of Guðrúnarkviða in Fyrsta she was set on death, but by the end she leaves for Denmark to grieve and Brynhildr, who does not weep or lament, dies instead.

I have read other explanations for encouraging Guðrún to express her feelings – were they empowering her to survive her grief, or disempowering her by encouraging her to behave ‘as a woman should’, and therefore lose her agency for vengeance? It’s interesting, but as her own sister was the one who eventually got her to cry, and since Brynhildr was massively pissed off about this, I’d argue for the former. I think Brynhildr would have liked it just fine if Guðrún had died of grief – as, indeed, Guðrún initially intended to do – and cursed Gullrönd because she had saved her sister’s life by forcing her to express her grief.

Near the end of his article, Hill mentions the way Þökk thwarts all attempts to retrieve Baldr from Helheim by refusing to cry. I’ve never really understood this part of Gylfaginning, but looking at tears as a route to healing and inability/refusal to express grief as a road to death gives me a possible insight on it. I’m not a scholar, so my idea may be full of holes as far as I know. But I’d be really interested to read your thoughts and criticism on it.

Loki killing Baldr has always been a bit of a mystery to me. Eventually I concluded it was all to do with death being really important – so important that even a God shouldn’t be immune from it. Loki is Hel’s Dad, after all, and it’s my belief that Loki Himself has chthonic aspects to His nature (though, apart from His obvious link to both Hel and Sleipnir, this is my own UPG. I mean, I think that if you look at His children then you can make an argument for it anyway, but that’s not the point of this post). But that doesn’t mean He has to be happy about Baldr’s death.

My own understanding is that being immune from death puts you outside the natural cycles of…well, everything. I believe in the immortality of souls, but also that souls must all die and be reborn in different ways (so maybe I believe in recycling more than actual death lol). There’s nothing anywhere that doesn’t grow, ‘die’, renew and transform over some time scale or other. What happens to someone – or Someone – who exits this cycle? I know many people would see this as leaving the cycle of suffering and all, but I’m not seeing it that way. To remain still is to stagnate – and that’s fine, if it’s part of a process of decay and eventual renewal, but what if absolute immortality cuts off the important next step? Rebirth and renewal comes *after* death, after all.  Maybe Loki was saving Baldr from becoming a Norse Tithonus (

Another theory is that Óðinn Himself wanted Baldr safely in Helheim as a kind of insurance policy against Ragnarök, and that He and Loki worked together to achieve this. Either way, we all know what effect Loki’s refusal to weep had on Baldr and the rest of the Æsir. What I hadn’t really thought about before is the effect it might have had on Loki. 

Initially, Everyone is so shocked and grieved that They are unable to speak or weep – like Guðrún. Eventually, however, They all mourn (except Loki?), and then of course Hermóðr comes back with the news that *everything* must weep before Hel will ‘free’ Baldr. Whatever the reason was that Baldr had to die, Loki is now the only one standing in the way of it all going wrong. He is like Brynhildr – the cause of the death Everyone else is mourning, but (outwardly, at least) completely unrepentant and definitely not about to shed any tears…And therefore, possibly, fully conscious that He’s walking down a road that leads to death and pain. Almost like grief is a toxin that will kill you if you don’t get it out. Brynhildr kills herself, and Loki doesn’t exactly live happily ever after. I don’t recall Hel putting a time limit on the ‘weeping Baldr out of Hel’ thing, leaving the depressing possibility that Loki can never mourn for Him, and therefore never heal (not until after Ragnarök, anyways).

Hit me with your thoughts 🙂


4 thoughts on “Gudrun, Brynhildr and Thokk.

  1. I’m not so sure about him never being able to grieve, I think it was that everyone had to cry at one time, and now that the time has passed, Loki could grieve if he wanted to. Personally I think Odin needed Baldr to be there for humanity after Ragnarok, and so Loki went along with the plan as a blood-brother. I think Loki knew the pain he was going to see later from the action. Death is really important in that pantheon, and no one is immune from it (that I know of! Not well-studied here.) I had read on Krasskova’s wordpress that Loki is considered to be one of the 3 brothers who created the worlds, Lothurr.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I hope so! I agree that, whatever the reason, Loki knew the pain He was walking into with this. I can’t think of Anyone in the Norse pantheon Who is said to be immune from death – or even aging, if you take away Their apples (except Loki, apparently, which is interesting…). I also agree that Loki is identical with Loðurr; it was one of the early conclusions I came to through research, and more recently my UPG seems to confirm that (for me). Thanks for your comment 😊


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s