We're experiencing a bit of wuther-y weather here as a nor'easter blows through town. But, rain and wind will not put a damper on our Thanksgiving tomorrow since what's going on outside will not stop turkey dinner and the inevitable food coma. My contribution to the family meal will be pumpkin-shaped sugar cookies. Yum!
Let's get into character...
Who's Telling This Story, Anyway?
Wuthering Heights is a story (about Catherine and Heathcliff) within a story (told by Nelly) within a story (told by Lockwood). By the time we read it, it's all third hand information. In a comment to another post, Maxine describes our narrators as "boring, normal." Their normalness helps add some believability to the story, yet they are also unreliable. After the first encounter with Heathcliff, Lockwood tells us, "No, I'm running on too fast: I bestow my own attributes over liberally on him" (p. 6). While recounting Catherine's convalescence at the Grange and her return to the Heights, Nelly attributes these words to 12-year-old Heathcliff:
I vociferated curses enough to annihilate any fiend in Christendom (p. 61).
I shall be dirty as I please: and I like to be dirty, and I will be dirty (p. 67).
The first line happens to be my favorite quote from the entire book. But, seriously, what kid talks like that? Nelly is clearly inserting her adult vocabulary into Heathcliff's mouth. The second line is more what I'd expect from a cranky pre-teen, even one from the 18th Century.
What do you think about our narrators? Do you find them believable or unreliable? How can we, as readers, separate "fact" from "fiction" in this novel?
Catherine and Heathcliff
It cannot be argued that Catherine is a strong woman. She marries Edgar for status, money, and comfort but refuses to give up her lover. She tells Nelly, "Who is to separate us, pray? They'll meet the fate of Milo!...Every Linton on the face of the earth might melt into nothing, before I could consent to forsake Heathcliff" (p. 101). However, it is the conflict between husband and lover that drives her into madness and eventually the grave.
Throughout the novel, Heathcliff is described as being fiend, devil, and ghoul. Despite this, I find it unable to think of him badly. In my mind, he is the quintessential romantic figure. Ana mentions below that her feelings changed toward him as she read the book: going from disliking him to rooting for him and back again. In a way, Catherine does the same thing. She loves him yet calls him her murderer. Heathcliff, similarly, is both her master and her servant.
What's up with these two? How do you feel toward them? Is Heathcliff really a fiend?
Edgar and Isabella
Besides a fit of rage at finding Heathcliff in Catherine's sick room, Edgar never exhibits much above a whimper. He shows no passion toward Catherine, and likely marries her because of her aristocratic family. Whenever he shows up in the book, I find it difficult not to compare him to an undercooked and unbuttered slice of toast. Isabella, on the other hand, shows more emotion even if it is misplaced. In describing their elopement, Heathcliff says she pictures "in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion" (p. 186). She's correct, in a way, but only Catherine is the recipient his devotion. Edgar and Isabella are polar opposites of Heathcliff and Catherine, yet the four of them manage to entangle themselves in a love quadrangle.
What's up with these two? And with the four of them? What draws the opposites together while pushing the likes apart? Is there really a love quadrangle or is Isabella incidental to the love story?
Everyone Else
For me, the rest of the characters mean little except for how their stories relate to Catherine and Heathcliff. Hindley separates them when he returns to the Heights after the death of Earnshaw. Hareton is devoted to Heathcliff. The second Catherine and Linton are pawns in Heathcliff's plot for revenge. And, Joseph, well, I can't understand anything he says.
What are your impressions of the other characters? Are they important in their own right? Or are they tools used to advance the story?
My edition of Wuthering Heights includes introductions, a family tree, commentary, and a reading group guide. Although I've had this copy for several reads, this go around was the first time I actually looked at it all. It's helpful information, and I'll be borrowing from it to talk a little bit about the novel's structure.
The Setting
In the editor's preface, Charlotte Brontë writes of the setting,
With regard to the rusticity of "Wuthering Heights," I admit the charge, for I feel the quality. It is rustic all through. It is moorish, and wild, and knotty as a root of heath. Nor was it natural that it should be otherwise; the author being herself a native and nursling of the moors. Doubtless, had her lot been cast in a town, her writings, if she had written at all, would have possessed another character (p. xxxii).
Complementing the Yorkshire moors, the very word "wuthering" adds to the novel's rusticity by connoting blustering weather. As children, Heathcliff and Catherine grow up rambling through this wild environment. Nelly describes the former as "a sullen, patient child" (p. 47) and the latter as "a wild, wicked slip" (p. 52). Yet only four miles away is Thrushcross Grange, the home of Edgar and Isabella, who are "petted things" (p. 60) according to Heathcliff.
How important do you think the setting is to the story? Do the moors and their wildness effect what happens? If Heathcliff and Catherine are wild due to the environment, how are Edgar and Isabella insulated from being influenced by it?
The Timeline
At first glance, the novel's story may seem jumbled—beginning in 1801, jumping back nearly 30 years, returning to 1801, etc. Emily Brontë, however, followed a rigid timeline when constructing her story and I have yet to find a flaw. Near the end of the novel, Heathcliff tells Nelly he is tormented by Catherine's ghost and says, "It was a strange way of killing! not by inches, but by fractions of hairbreadths, to beguile me with the spectre of a hope, through eighteen years" (p. 357). After consulting the handy family tree, I figured out that she had been dead 17 years and 5 months by this point in the narrative. That's pretty good continuity for a novel that was written by hand.
Did you find the timeline hard to follow? Was jumping in and out of time a distraction from the story? If you had no problems following the timeline, what helped you keep track of events?
Symmetry
In addition to the well-constructed time line, Brontë also uses symmetry to add structure to her story. There are two houses of two families with two children each. The story is told by two narrators. Even the book itself is in two parts, with the division being at the first Catherine's death and the second Catherine's birth. Amidst all this neat symmetry, though, the author throws in a wild card: Heathcliff. He fits into the story neatly for a while as part of the double couple (Heathcliff and Isabella; Catherine and Edgar) forming a love quadrangle, which later collapses into a love triangle when Isabella departs.
What do you think about Brontë's use of twos? Is Heathcliff the wild card? Or is something else at work disrupting the "neatness" of the two houses?
Let's get started with our fiftieth discussion: Emily Brontë's Wuthering Heights. I believe there's a lot to talk about in this novel, so I'm hoping to dedicate the entire week to it. Rather than our usual one or two posts about a selection under discussion, I am planning a series of topics which I hope will be engaging to everyone who stops by to participate.
My Best Book Ever
I've made it no secret that this is my all-time favorite novel, now read 13 times—a much higher number than any other title I have read more than once. I can retell the entire story in detail, quote sections by heart, and can open the book, by feel, to within pages of a particular scene (the copy I own has been read at least five times). Yet, I cannot claim to be an expert. Each time I read it, I find a new aspect of the narrative to focus on and discover something I missed during all of the previous moments I spent with the book. Each time I return to WH, I approach it with enthusiasm because I know I will get something new from it.
Was this your first time reading Wuthering Heights? Or have you read it more than once? If you reread it for this discussion, did you discover anything new?
Appearing on a Syllabus Near You
A Technorati search for "wuthering heights" leads to many blog posts from students reading it for a class. For the most part, they're all behind on pages and they all hate it. A high school Brit lit class was my introduction, and it remains one of my few educational experiences that didn't ruin a book. In that same class, for example, I read The Mill on the Floss and hated it. I have since reread MotF and Silas Marner and Middlemarch and still cannot figure out why George Eliot is considered such an important author. All I can assume is that school forever scarred me against her. (A glutton for punishment, I currently have MotF in a TBR pile and will eventually get around to it again. Maybe age and time will help me warm to her.)
What was your introduction to Wuthering Heights? Did you ever have to read it for a class? If so, what was your impression at that time? Has school ever ruined a book or author for you?
A Classic, But Is it Great?
Emily Brontë's only novel was written at a time when Gothic fiction had fallen from popularity and received little critical acclaim at the time of publication. A year later, she died of tuberculosis. Her sister Charlotte, who edited and published the second edition, defends the work in the editor's preface against "what are termed (and, perhaps, really are) its faults" (p. xxxi). In it, she provides some explanation about the author, the novel's setting, and its characters. Yet, despite acknowledging Emily's talent, Charlotte wonders, "Whether it is right or advisable to create beings like Heathcliff, I do not know: I scarcely think it is" (p. xxxvi). Even today, the Brontës have their critics. During the recent unpleasantness of the Books, Inq., discussion, they were praised by some as being among the world's greatest novelists and reviled by others as writers of highbrow romance.
What do you think? Trash or treasure? What makes it trash? Or what makes it treasure? (Please provide concrete examples as evidence for your position. Simple statements like "It sucked!" or "Loved it!" are not very illuminating.)
Our discussion of Wuthering Heights kicks off in a week. I'm excited, and I hope a lot of people stop by to participate.
Wuthering Heights has inspired many artists, including the music makers. There have been operas, stage musicals, and, unfortunately, MTV's bleeding-ear update set in a converted lighthouse called The Heights. I also shouldn't fail to mention the eponymously named Danish symphonic-folk-speed-metal band. If you're a metalhead AND a fan of classic literature, check out their Tolkien-inspired album, Far from the Madding Crowd (not to be confused with the Thomas Hardy novel), which includes an electric guitar-heavy instrumental called "Bad Hobbits Die Hard" [sample via iTunes].
And, of course, there's Kate Bush. When her squeaky tribute to Cathy's ghost first came out, a lot of people didn't know what to make of it. But, it's been well-liked enough to be covered by artists across several musical genres:
I'm not embarrassed to admit that I own and enjoy both Bush and Benatar's versions. However, I am embarrassed that, until now, I had no idea there was choreography:
Anyone who sends me e-mail knows I'm terrible at reading and responding to it. Despite spam filters, my inbox gets about 1,000 new messages each day, consisting of a hodgepodge of junk, bookish press releases, and personal mail. I flip through it quickly to look for mail I'm expecting, so it usually takes something catchy to get me to read anything unsolicited.
A few weeks ago, I received an e-mail from Andrei of bookblog.ro asking if bookblog.net would be interested in a link exchange. Exchanges don't generally happen on this BookBlog, mainly because nearly all linking goes though posts to the homepage. This way, most links come with a thoughtful explanation and I personally prefer to only recommend things I've thoroughly checked out. However, Andrei's e-mail caught my eye because he described bookblog.ro as "the most important blog dealing with book reviews in Romania (that's Eastern Europe :) )."
Although I already know where Romania is located, the smiley-faced geography lesson made me chuckle. His e-mail was being sent to an American, and it's not unreasonable for folks outside the U.S. to think that most Americans are geographically-challenged since, frankly, a lot of us are. Just last night I watched the Kentucky coal miner and wife get eliminated from The Amazing Race and say, "I need to get out and take my kids to see the world. I don't want my kids to be like me; I want 'em to experience life, because I never experienced life." It's a shame how so many of us don't have the luxury or opportunity to see what lies beyond our borders.
Map skills aside, Andrei also pointed me to his site's review of La răscruce de vânturi, the Romanian translation of Wuthering Heights. I couldn't read it, but I think the reviewer liked the novel since it received 4 out of 5 stars. If you happen to speak Romanian, though, check out bookblog.ro for more reviews and book information.
Update:I feel the international love. Thank you, also, Andrei, and I hope you reach your goal of conquering Google. Well, all except for the number one search spot for "bookblog," of course. ;)
I have just returned from a visit to my landlord—the solitary neighbour that I shall be troubled with. This is certainly a beautiful country! In all England I do not believe that I could have fixed on a situation so completely removed from the stir of society. A perfect misanthropist's heaven; and Mr. Heathcliff and I are such a suitable pair to divide the desolation between us. A capital fellow! He little imagined how my heart warmed towards him when I beheld his black eyes withdraw so suspiciously under their brows, as I rode up, and when his fingers sheltered themselves, with a jealous resolution, still further in his waistcoat, as I announced my name.
Since a book needs to be posted for our next discussion and no one else has volunteered to moderate, I've signed myself up for November and have chosen Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë as the selection. Although it is sort of a school book, assigned in nearly every English lit class everywhere and already heavily discussed, I chose it for a few reasons.
It is extremely rare for me to reread a book. There is so much good (and bad) literature out there that one lifetime isn't enough to devote to only a few titles. In my living room alone are 140 TBR books, and that's not including the uncounted ones scattered throughout the bedroom, the office, and the attic. I also don't keep books that have been read; I much prefer willing them to others for their own enjoyment. Wuthering Heights breaks both those rules for me. I've read it more than a dozen times and always keep a copy in my home. It's been so well-loved that I'm currently in possession of my third copy, which already has ripply pages.
When Daisy posted her list of best books ever, I couldn't come up with a comment so I didn't add my own thoughts to the thread. I constantly change my mind depending on my mood and genre phase (most recently, non-fiction featuring death but no destruction). Although I'd have a hard time settling on a list of, say, 20 favorite titles, I could start one, and I'd put Wuthering Heights at the top.
November will bring our 50th book discussion. 50 books. I can't believe our little blogging book club has lasted this long. It's very special to me, and I wanted to mark the occasion with a special book. I hope you'll join in.
I'm adding this entry to set the record straight: it's Wuthering Heights.
Despite being a Victorian novel, Wuthering Heights is unique. It does not moralize, it does not paint a picture of genteel society, and it is not filled with fainting women and simple but resolute men. No one in this novel is nice. The characters hate and hate openly, and are unable to draw a definitive line between where hating ends and loving begins. They are forces of nature, much like the decaying yet heather-covered moors that both isolate and free them.
I've already mentioned here that I've read Wuthering Heights about 10 times. I realize that borders on being obsessive. However, everyone else should read it at least once.
While we're waiting for everyone to read a chunk of this month's book before discussing it, I thought I'd follow suit and write a quick post about my favorite, Wuthering Heights. Between school assignments and my own free time, I think I've read it about 10 times.
Besides being a well-constructed story, I think I'm drawn mostly to the whole love/hate theme. In Heathcliff and Cathy's world, there isn't much differentiation between the two because they both love what they hate most and simultaneously hate those they most love. There isn't much of a fine line between those two themes in this story.
Secondly, I'm also fascinated by the characters. Cathy is probably one of the most complex female literary characters of the day and Heathcliff is, well, hot. Ever see the first Wuthering Heights movie from 1939? Laurence Olivier nails the character and is, well, very hot.
