Beowulf Criticism

In the Essay by J.R.R. Tolkien, he explains why the story is not just a historical document but a work of art too. He starts by attacking previous critics like, Beowolfania. He says they think that Beowulf is a story full of empty meaning and just rambles on and on. J.R.R. thinks the writing that says that is actually guilty of the same thing, long pointless ramblings. He thinks that critics and scholars should look at the poem as a great work of art, a poem that is unmatched in quality by anything. The stance that scholars took on Beowulf before didn't allow them to get the full meaning of the story. they were too focused on the historical facts in the story.
The critics looked at the story originally and decided that it was a relatively weak fantasy story, a fairy tale. They were a dime a dozen in the medievel times. Hero kills monster, monster kills hero, the end. But beowulf has much more than your average fairy tale, it has some of the best writing ever to be produced, even today there is no match to the poem.
Had Tolkien not taken this stance on the story, it might not have been studied by schools. Scholars would continue to take it as a historical document that provides insight into the medievel mind and nothing more.