@bookwormchocaholic / bookwormchocaholic.tumblr.com
The more I read "Wuthering Heights", the more I'm starting to realize that the reason we felt hatred towards many characters particularly Heathcliff and Cathy Earnshaw is because Nelly Dean told in her story that they're awful. Nelly herself is a decent person but I have a hunch not all the things we heard from her were true and there were some instances that she was biased towards some people she met.
(17) Wuthering Heights comic 12- souls
In light of all the recent Wuthering Heights discussion about Heathcliff's race, whether he's necessarily a man of color or might just be a dusky-skinned white man, and all the evidence that could point either way in the text, I'd like to share these comments.
When Heathcliff comes back after his three-year absence, Nelly describes his cheeks as "sallow" – a dull, sickly yellowish color.
Jane Eyre uses the exact same word to describe the complexion of Richard Mason, Bertha's brother.
I used to focus on that description of Mason as evidence that Bertha and her relatives are white Creoles (e.g. of Spanish or French descent), not part-black Creoles, and that besides ableism, the problem with Bertha's characterization is xenophobia, not racism. Charlotte Brontë called Mason's skin "sallow," not "dark."
But with the reminder that Emily Brontë used the same word to describe Heathcliff's complexion at one point, I realize it's ambiguous. On the one hand, that description might imply that Heathcliff is paler than we'd expect, and that by modern standards he might (just might) be an "ethnic white" man, not a man of color. On the other hand, the fact that an obviously POC-coded character like Heathcliff can also be described as "sallow" shows that this word doesn't necessarily mean Mason's skin is light.
Meanwhile, departing from the subject of race, rereading that scene of Heathcliff's return makes me notice its parallels with the earlier account of Hindley's return from college.
Both Heathcliff and Hindley come back after being gone for three years – the exact same amount of time – and are both greatly changed in their looks and demeanor. Both are better educated and more socially aware than they were before, both have become crueler and more ruthless, and both are ready to use the power society grants them – either through money, status, or the patriarchy – to "crush those beneath them," as Heathcliff says. And both, I now realize, are described as looking more sickly than before. Hindley more so, since Nelly describes him as thinner and paler than he used to be. But even though Heathcliff's body looks stronger and more athletic than before – which makes Nelly guess he might have been in the military – his complexion has turned sallow.
Throughout the book, sickliness is associated with over-civilization, while "robust good health" is enjoyed by simpler people attuned with the Yorkshire countryside and its culture. This is most obvious in the illnesses and premature deaths of Catherine (which happens because she betrays her true nature and becomes over-civilized), Edgar, Isabella, Linton, and Frances. But maybe it also appears in the thinness and pallor of Hindley and the sallowness of Heathcliff's face when they come home after three years of becoming more "civilized" and quickly turn to villainy.
I can't take Emily (2022) seriously because it's so histerically inaccurate that it's annoying to me. i'm not through with it yet, but my least favourite moment so far is when brandwell questions if charlotte loved and cherished emily. as if charlotte's love for emily isn't what inspired Sherley, a whole ass 400 page book. and like. it wasn't emily's book that charlotte stopped from being reprinted. so why this need to demonise charlotte??
also I must note as a certified Anne Bronte Stan (tm) that the reason charlotte chose to pull tenant of wildfell hall wasn't that she didn't like a the realistic portrayal of abuse but that anne was still getting shit for writing it after she was literally dead. that book was far more demonised that wuthering heights. chatlotte did what she did because she saw herself as the only defender of her sisters legacy. that's the same reason she wrote what she wrote about wh. can we stop acting like she is evil for that and understand it as the act of (perhaps misguided) sisterly love and grief that it clearly was?
like I have read actual academic papers which claim charlotte was a horrible sister because she wrote somewhere that anne was content with her death when it happened which apparently shows that she had no real insight into annes inner life. which may be partially true - but mainly, charlotte obviously wanted to believe her sister was content with her death. because she was grieving. defending this woman who has been dead over 100 years isn't enough I need a gun.
Every few years they come out with a new Wuthering Heights adaptation and every single time they manage to make it suck. Can we just get 1 (one) film director who is actually passionate about the book and doesn’t make the worst decisions please?
Why cast Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff, a character who is heavily implied to be Romani or dark skinned at the absolute least? It’s literally an entire facet of his character and why people have treated him a certain way his entire life. I think Jacob Elordi did wonderful in Pricilla and could act the hell out of this role but this change takes away so much context from the narrative.
Unless they are going to change a ton of things in the plot and make it more so “inspired by” Wuthering Heights, I don’t see this honoring the novel at all and I probably won’t bother watching it.
if you insist on putting margot robbie and jacob elordi in a movie together it should be a straight-to-streaming mid but enjoyable little romance movie where she is the phone obsessed career woman and he is some singer songwriter who shows her love again or whatever. literally two of the most knowing what emails are ass looking people and youre putting them in wuthering??? heights??? the literal embodiment of goddamn barbie and you cast her as kathy????? the whitest white boy in the world is fucking HEATHCLIFF??!!??!!? im literally killing everyone involved in this and then myself bye
The racism Heathcliff experiences and the way it alienates him is so key to his character and is part of the reason Cathy feels like she can’t be with him.
And a faithful adaptation needs to be able to explore that.
Ughh such a poor casting choice.
Do you think there's some executive reacting to the casting news backlash by suggesting they cast some POC actors to play the Lintons? Wouldn't that be hysterical?
I'm terribly sorry but this is the worst string of words I've read in a WHILE
I once read an essay on Jstor (it was this one) about how Jane Austen revolutionized female characterization by not classifying her female characters as “virtuous or not”. Her female characters are not defined by their relationship to sex, “purity” and sexual desire.
And I think the same is kind of true for Wuthering Heights as well, though Wuthering Heights is probably a more sexually charged work than Austen’s novels are. Catherine and Isabella (and Catherine and Cathy) are foils but the contrasts between them are not tied to their sexuality at all.
Yes, the female characters of Wuthering Heights are shamed for their sexuality by the men around them, mainly by Heathcliff and Joseph:
Catherine:
“‘Running after t’ lads, as usuald!’ croaked Joseph, catching an opportunity from our hesitation to thrust in his evil tongue. ‘If I war yah, maister, I’d just slam t’ boards i’ their faces all on ’em, gentle and simple! Never a day ut yah’re off, but yon cat o’ Linton comes sneaking hither; and Miss Nelly, shoo’s a fine lass! shoo sits watching for ye i’ t’ kitchen; and as yah’re in at one door, he’s out at t’other; and, then, wer grand lady goes a-courting of her side! It’s bonny behaviour, lurking amang t’ fields, after twelve o’ t’ night, wi’ that fahl, flaysome divil of a gipsy, Heathcliff! They think I’m blind; but I’m noan: nowt ut t’ soart!—I seed young Linton boath coming and going, and I seed yah’ (directing his discourse to me), ‘yah gooid fur nowt, slattenly witch! nip up and bolt into th’ house, t’ minute yah heard t’ maister’s horse-fit clatter up t’ road.’”
(Running after the lads as usual!' croaked Joseph, catching an opportunity from our hesitation to thrust in his evil tongue. 'If I were you, master, I'd just slam the doors in their faces, all of them, simple as that! Never a day goes by when you're away, but that son of Linton comes sneaking here; and Miss Nelly, she's a fine one! she sits there watching for you in the kitchen; and as you come in at one door, he's out at the other; and then our grand lady goes a-courting herself! It's fine behaviour, lurking in the fields, after twelve at night, with that foul, frightening devil of a gypsy, Heathcliff! They think I'm blind; but I'm not: nothing of the sort!—I saw young Linton both coming and going, and I saw you' [directing his discourse to me], 'you good for nothing, slovenly witch! run up and into the house, the minute you heard the master's horse coming up the road.')
(Chapter 9)
Isabella:
“Can I trust your assertion, Isabella? Are you sure you hate me? If I let you alone for half a day, won’t you come sighing and wheedling to me again?” (…)
“I’ve sometimes relented, from pure lack of invention, in my experiments on what she could endure, and still creep shamefully cringing back!”
(Chapter 14)
Cathy:
“‘Send Ellen, then, to let papa know I’m safe!’ exclaimed Catherine, weeping bitterly. ‘Or marry me now. Poor papa! Ellen, he’ll think we’re lost. What shall we do?’
‘Not he! He’ll think you are tired of waiting on him, and run off for a little amusement,’ answered Heathcliff. ‘You cannot deny that you entered my house of your own accord, in contempt of his injunctions to the contrary. And it is quite natural that you should desire amusement at your age; and that you would weary of nursing a sick man, and that man only your father. (…)
“‘It was three servants sent to seek you from the Grange,’ said Heathcliff, overhearing me. ‘You should have opened a lattice and called out: but I could swear that chit is glad you didn’t. She’s glad to be obliged to stay, I’m certain.’”
(Chapter 27)
Cathy and Nelly:
“‘It’s noan Nelly!’ answered Joseph. ‘I sudn’t shift for Nelly—nasty ill nowt as shoo is. Thank God! Shoo cannot stale t’ sowl o’ nob’dy! Shoo wer niver soa handsome, but what a body mud look at her ’bout winking. It’s yon flaysome, graceless quean, that’s witched our lad, wi’ her bold een and her forrard ways”
(It's not Nelly!' answered Joseph. 'I wouldn't move for Nelly—nasty good-for-nothing as she is. Thank God! She cannot steal the soul from nobody! She was never so handsome, but that anybody would look at her without winking [not staring at her beauty]. It's that frightening, graceless girl that's bewitched our lad, with her bold eyes and her forward ways—till—No! it nearly bursts my heart! He's forgotten all I've done for him, and taught him, and gone and pulled up a whole row of the grandest currant-trees in the garden!' and here he lamented outright; unmanned by a sense of his bitter injuries, and Earnshaw's ingratitude and dangerous condition.)
(Chapter 33)
Nelly:
“I heard Joseph asking whether ‘it warn’t a crying scandal that she should have followers at her time of life? And then, to get them jocks out o’ t’ maister’s cellar! He fair shaamed to ’bide still and see it.’”
(Chapter 32)
So, Wuthering Heights is not ignoring the reality that men often shame women for their sexuality or define them through their attractiveness. Yet I don’t think that Wuthering Heights the book itself is doing any defining here. Catherine, Isabella, Cathy, Nelly, none of them are “pure” or “impure”, they are just people. And though maybe Younger Cathy is defined partially through her beauty, we don’t learn that Nelly is “plain” until Chapter 32! So yeah, maybe this is an obvious observation, but I think female authors are often likelier to rise above the “Madonna” and the “Whore” archetypes.
I wholeheartedly agree!
And all these quotes from Wuthering Heights come from two men who clearly aren't meant to be agreed with: Joseph is a deeply unpleasant, mean-spirited man, and Heathcliff is at his most villainous at these particular points.
Thanks for providing those "translations" of Joseph's speeches, by the way. I never noticed until now that Joseph says he's seen 15-year-old Catherine stay out in the fields past midnight with 16-year-old Heathcliff. With than in mind, maybe it's more ambiguous whether Heathcliff and Catherine ever consummate their love than I realized.
I really don't get why the Brontës get put in competition with Jane Austen so much. They weren't contemporaries. They didn't even write the same genre. This is the definition of pitting women against each other.
emily brontë receives the first kill yourself anon in 1848
I need to reevaluate my “dislike” towards the romance genre because I’ve been enjoying Jane Austen, the Brontë sisters and Edith Wharton very well so far.
Revisiting Wuthering Heights, a book I have mixed feelings about, but I love the progression of Cathy being born Catherine Earnshaw becoming Catherine Heathcliff (in her journal) and then marrying and dying as Catherine Linton. Her daughter is then born as Catherine Linton, becomes Catherine Heathcliff (forced marriage - yikes), and then married happily to become Catherine Earnshaw. It’s so clever.
Maybe I’m the odd one out here, but I’ve never read Wuthering Heights as ending with Heathcliff trying to repent. Do I think his conscience is probably pulling at him a bit? Yes. But I don’t think he feels regret for what he’s done. I think he’s just too tired to bother anymore. He got what he wanted, but it’s a hollow victory, and he knows it. Like Cathy II tells him, no one loves him. He has no one, and no one will lament his death (besides poor Hareton, but even that’s a slap to the face because he’s Hindley’s son). He’s won, but Catherine is still dead, and all he has is his money and two living reminders of what he’s lost living in a house that is basically a tomb. I don’t think he “feels guilty” I think he just gives up and lets go so that he can get what he’s really wanted all along: reunification with Catherine upon the moors
I agree, though there's also the fact that he can't bring himself to harm Hareton anymore because he sees too much both of his own younger self and of Catherine in him. But even then, he hates that he feels this way and wishes he never had to see Hareton again.
To me, the fact that Heathcliff never regrets what he's done and never redeems himself is part of what makes the ending. The fact that Emily Brontë believably makes Heathcliff lose his will for revenge and creates pity for him, yet without giving him any belated, out-of-character guilt or repentance, makes his characterization so much richer and more subtle than some people think it is.
If Catherine and Heathcliff can’t be together due to being half-siblings, then why does Heathcliff hate everyone who gets between him and Catherine? These people aren’t responsible for them not being together! Make it make sense!
I hate all of this so much. It makes Heathcliff’s revenge so incredibly pointless.
@amourduloup Here is people thinking that Heathcliff and Catherine couldn’t be together due to being half-siblings.
Will someone tell the Victorian reviewers that they were supposed to notice this out-of-the-gate?
I just don’t get it. Adopting a random foundling is a pretty common thing in fiction and it doesn’t mean that the adoptee is a secret illegitimate child.
How much I like the characters in Wuthering Heights, ranked from best to worst:
