Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As I said, if anybody at all is unhappy reading Wuthering Heights then feel free to put it down and read something else. Or take your time with it. This discussion section will remain open and everybody is welcome to comment however far into the future it is. As I recall Clavain said he might have a go at it in August. I'll be here (probably still trying to figure it out!)

 

It has come as a complete surprise to me but I am enjoying it and want to see how it ends.

 

I also posted links which may be of interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan, I think I have posted in the past that I mostly read for entertainment although I have read more serious writing along the way, but historical has never really appealed, particularly in the way casual punishment seems to be acceptable as a way of life. I feel a bit claustrophobic when encountering tales of squalid surroundings, stringent rules about religious practice especially when it doesn't improve anyone's behaviour and the lack of common courtesy. Maybe I'd prefer looking through rose tinted glasses and I seem to need goodness to prevail always. Yes, your review did have an impact but I think I wasn't totally committed to begin with so it didn't take much convincing that it wouldn't be a favourite read of mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have started to read and have reached Chapter VI.  It has taken me a few chapters to get used to to prose, but I do appreciate what a wonderful vocabulary Emile Bronte had - and she used it so well.  I am still left feeling so frustrated at the characters and at a loss still to understand why this book is so valued as a great novel.  However, I am going to read it through again (this will be the third time for me) and see whether I can get any more out of it.  

 

Some of your comments Dan have helped a lot - both the negative and the positive.  In fact I'm coming to the conclusion at the moment that the physical and psychological profiles of the characters are EB's strength. What I have never understood is why the story as a whole is such a great one.  The confusion over names does not help me either despite having read a great explanation in the forward notes in my copy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am thoroughly enjoying all your commentaries, folks. Thank you. (Am not re/reading it, 'cos I remember not wanting to read it again after I read it the first time.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome aboard Ting.

 

I'm up to chapter 24 so not long until I finish.  I must admit that I find the behaviour exhibited by all of the characters very strange and I am assuming that it's not usual behaviour for the people of the time/district.  It took me longer than usual to get used to the prose and I'm not as enamoured by it as I had hoped to be.  Like Dan and Barblue I'm finding it hard, so far, to understand why it's considered to be such as Classic but I may well be missing something, I also have no idea why Lord of the Rings is so fondly regarded and gave up reading it half way through as I thought it was boring.  I'll finish Wuthering Heights because I am actually enjoying it.  Perhaps the whole book will come together in the end for me and make everything clear.

Edited by lunababymoonchild

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm almost halfway done with this book and remembering each day why it was one of my favorites (and not just because there was a recent production where the delectable Tom Hardy played Heathcliff, sadly encumbered by a terrible wig).  I'm formulating some sort of theory about people suffering from following social convention and ignoring the true nature of those around them rather than being true to themselves, but I'm not sure where I'm going with it yet, so I will wait until I've finished to the book to see if it rings true.  

 

I find both Heathcliff and Catherine much more sympathetic than most of the rest of you seem to.  In the perfect world, old Mr. Earnshaw would have left something valuable to Heathcliff as to a younger son (I don't think inheritance laws would have permitted him to bypass Hindley altogether). I'm not saying that I think Heathcliff was his illegitimate son, although you could sort of see how that might have been possible, but that his love for Mr. Earnshaw was greater than the love of either of his children.  Then Heathcliff and Catherine could have married without concern for money and been one of those couples who love each other more than they love their own children.  Instead, Mr. Earnshaw has to leave his money to the odious Hindley, Catherine has to marry the pathetic Edgar, and Heathcliff has to go earn his money in some unspecified manner.  When he returns, it's clear that both he and Catherine are about driven around the bend by the fact that it's too late for them.  They aren't either of them well-suited to placidly accepting their situation.  And things only get worse emotionally from there.  

 

More when I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have finished the book.  I thoroughly enjoyed it but don't understand why it's held to be one of the greatest books ever written.  I still find it hard to believe, even fictionally, that characters can behave like that, although I'm sure that life in such a barren wilderness was both hard and short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finished the book over the weekend and must admit to feeling a little relief/happiness in finally finishing it. 

I began the book honestly believing the book to be some kind of "tragic love story" in the vein of Romeo and Juliet or maybe a little similar to her sisters book Jane Eyre. During the second part of the story related by Ellen Dean I soon saw the story was a lot darker than I expected.

It turned into a "cruel revenge" story where status, position and breeding seemed to matter more than anything and the way people are treated seemed to mirror the bleak desolate setting,

No regrets on reading the book, but not one I would advise anyone else to read.

Managed to find an answer to why the story was set half a century from when she wrote the book. Emily Bronte was born and grew up during the Romantic period and started writing the book at the beginning of the Victorian period.Her life straddled both periods and she reflected this in the book. Fascinating essay here. http://it.stlawu.edu/~slureview/2005/6.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finished this last night and really liked it.  I am still mulling my thoughts about "what does it all mean" and will post later if I decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite being on holiday last week with granddaughters I have managed to get through about two-thirds of the book.  This is my third time of reading although those readings were a few decades ago.  This time I am seeing it in a totally different light.  

 

The first thing I am struck by is that the majority of the book is Mrs. Dean's recollections of years gone by.  How much of an unreliable narrator is Mrs. Dean I keep asking myself?  Then if some of what Mrs. Dean says is true, I am left looking at Catherine and Heathcliff as very spoilt children/people indeed.  This has put a totally new perspective on the whole story for me and making is a much better read than my previous ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit it never occurred to me that Nelly Dean might have been an 'unreliable narrator '. In fact I felt like she was the voice for sanity, kindness and reason in the story. Usually when I feel that way about a narrator it is because there are either obvious contradictions or obviously self serving motivations in their narration, and none of Nelly's narration struck me that way. Plus it seems like more of a modern storytelling technique. But if she was exaggerating, or even just being very selective (and there was certainly selectivity occurring, a real tendency to focus on the negative) then that might change the whole dynamic of the tale.

Edited by Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Amanda Grange
      I'm probably being far too ambitious, but I'll try and post something every day about WH.
       
      Random thoughts:
      WH seems to come out of nowhere, like Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. With most works of art, it's easy to see a link with what's gone before, but WH is in a class of its own, I think.
       
      Here are some things I like/find interesting about it.
       
      Structure
      Doesn't pull its punches - follows characters and their actions to their conclusions
      Nature vs nurture debate. Does anyone know when this debate started? It's certainly clearly laid out in WH, when Heathcliff thinks, I'll see if one tree will grow as twisted as another with the same wind.
      The 'preacher' dream reminds me of Kafka, but WH predates The Trial by (?) a lot of years
      OTT romance
      Effortlessly creates exactly the right sort of psychological climate for these kinds of characters to flourish a lot of years before Freud.
      The last para - one of the most beautiful in the English language, imo
      Sense of redemption
       
      Btw, the story is based on Bronte family history. Can't remember all the details, but they had a relative in the past who had adopted a boy. The boy and old man loved each other, and the old man left everything to the boy, who had to marry the daughter of the house. The boy made the daughter's life a misery, because he was an awful character. EB changed the story, in that she made the boy and girl love each other. A way of empowering women, perhaps, and rewriting family history in a way which suited her?
       
      1st 3 chapters
      The story within a story is often criticised, but I think it works very well. It adds another layer of mystery, and allows for some very powerful images. I think the 1st person sets up the isolation of the book very well. As soon as there's a narrator, there's an extra person involved, almost a confidante for the character - at least, someone who knows and cares about them, but here Lockwood seems very isolated.
       
      I love the atmosphere. The 'solitary neighbour', the 'wuthering' weather, and morose Heathcliff. I love the power of the writing.
       
      I wish I could read WH for the first time again, because the opening doesn't give any sign of what's coming. The book appears to be about Lockwood.
       
      Chapter 2
      (Joseph's speech: 'What are you doing? The master's down in the fold. Go round by the end of the lane (? I don't know laith), if you want to speak to him.' - 'There's no one but the missus, and she'll not open it if you make a din til night.' - 'Not me. I'll have no hand in it.')
      I think curiosity is what keeps the reader reading in this chapter. The characters are unpleasant, but it seems like a traditional romantic set-up, with a likely outcome of the young woman escaping her awful relatives and blossoming with Lockwood. The unsettling part of this expectation is that we know Lockwood is also not very nice.
       
      There's a kind of black humour to the writing, eg Lockwood mistaking the dead rabbits for cats. I think this is one of the things that gives the book its power. The language and incidents are not those usually found in a romance. It creates a tension in the book that drives it forward. Another source of tension here is that Lockwood is completely out of his depth, and keeps putting his foot in it.
       
      The mystery aspects also draw me in:when Lockwood mentions Heathcliff's wife, we learn that she's dead. I think the book is interactive, which makes for an engrossing read. There's a lot for the reader to work out. Is Mrs Heathcliff's death the cause of all the hostility in the house? for eg. I think the advantage of the 1st person narrator is again evident. It's easy to empathise with Lockwood, who digs himself in deeper and deeper with everything he says.
      (Joseph's speech to Cathy, when he brings in a pail of porridge for the dogs: 'I wonder how you can bear to stand there in idleness, when they're all going out. But you're nothing, it's no use talking, youll never mend your ill ways, but go right to the devil, like your mother before you.')
       
      The mystery aspects deepin in Chapter 3, with the bedchamber Lockwood is given. Again, it's interactive. If Heathcliff doesn't want anyone in there, is it because his wife died there? It shares some characteristics with a romantic thriller - not as developed as in Jane Eyre, but they're there.
       
      I think the flashback for the main story, and the names on the window ledge, Cathy's diary, is a stroke of genius. These are awful people, and the only way for a reader to become sympathetic towards them is to become involved with them as children.
       
      (Working class note, following on from discussion on favourite romance thread. Cathy and Heathcliff are educated with the plough boy. Joseph takes on the role of father. There's a lot more interaction between the servants and masters in WH than there is in P&P, and they're treated very much the same.)
       
      (Joseph's speech, when they go downstairs: 'The master's only just buried, and the Sabbath isn't over, and the sound of the gospel's still in your ears, and you dare be playing! Shame on you. Sit down, bad children. There's good enough books, if you'll read them. Sit down and think of your souls.' - 'Master Hindley, Master, come here! Cathy's torn the back off The Helmet of Salvation, and [i've no idea what pawsed his fit means) to the first part of 'The Broad Way to desturction.' It's dreadful of you to let them go on in this way. Ech! The old man would have whipped them properly - but he's gone.!')
       
      The dream sets up an unnerving atmosphere, and prepares the way for Cathy at the window. WH is in part an excellent ghost story. Is the ghost real?
      The mystery deepens as Heathcliff comes in. It's the strength of the writing I love here. 'What can you mean by talking in this way to me?' thundered Heathcliff with savage vehemence.
       
      Savage characters, a savage setting - and then Heathcliff crying. I'm trying to think. Does the hero in any other romance cry? And not just a small weep, but 'an uncontrollable passion of tears.' This was one of the things that really grabbed me by the throat when I first read WH, and one of the reasons I think it's such a powerful romance. Love is at the centre of Heathcliff's being. Perhaps that's why people like reading about him, even though he's so unpleasant?
    • By Flingo
      While at my dad's over the weekend, I found a copy of this poem that I had set to music for my GCSE coursework. It reminded me that I had completely forgotten about the poetry of Emily Bronte - which is strange as I was completely obsessed for well over 18 months around my GCSE time.
       
      Anyway - it was obviously a favourite, so I thought I would share it with you, unfortunately I can't read it without hearing my tune now though!
       
      Come, Walk with Me
       
      Come, walk with me,
      There's only thee
      To bless my spirit now -
      We used to love on winter nights
      To wander through the snow;
      Can we not woo back old delights?
      The clouds rush dark and wild
      They fleck with shade our mountain heights
      The same as long ago
      And on the horizon rest at last
      In looming masses piled;
      While moonbeams flash and fly so fast
      We scarce can say they smiled -
       
      Come walk with me, come walk with me;
      We were not once so few
      But Death has stolen our company
      As sunshine steals the dew -
      He took them one by one and we
      Are left the only two;
      So closer would my feelings twine
      Because they have no stay but thine -
       
      'Nay call me not - it may not be
      Is human love so true?
      Can Friendship's flower droop on for years
      And then revive anew?
      No, though the soil be wet with tears,
      How fair soe'er it grew
      The vital sap once perished
      Will never flow again
      And surer than that dwelling dread,
      The narrow dungeon of the dead
      Time parts the hearts of men -'
×