I often wonder how Heathcliff, whose acts are often mean spirited bullying, is often seen as a Byronic hero, romantic in either the Byronic or the modern sense? (Polite note to avoid misunderstandings: I do know the differences between the two).

[John]

When I hear women describing Heathcliff as a romantic figure, I'm reminded of the girl in David Brin's post-apocalyptic story "The Postman", who comes to believe that the ultimate cause of the catastrophe that ended civilization was women choosing bullies and rejecting men of integrity, leading to bullies running the world. She starts a movement to convince mothers and girlfriends that they have a moral responsibility to eliminate bullies from the gene pool.

[Lucinda]

John wrote: "When I hear women describing Heathcliff as a romantic figure, I'm reminded of the girl in David Brin's post-apocalyptic story "The Postman", who comes to believe that the ultimate cause of the cata..."

Lol,that sounds fascinating, John.

[Kelly]

David wrote: "a: people are afraid to call old books crap, and this surely is crap
b: we're all getting Heathcliff mixed up with Laurence Olivier in the film version, which cuts out the 2nd, drivelish, half of t..."

Wow. Harsh. I guess everyone has their opinions. This is my favorite book and in fact, Heathcliff is my favorite character of all time... It is not that I necessarily "like" him. His character is fascinating to me. I think that Bronte deliberately left a lot unknown about Heathcliff. Sure, he is a jerk, but you can discuss his character forever, which was probably her intention. I think a lot of people feel like they need to love the characters to love the book, and I just don't feel that way. Having a well developed character and allowing the reader to somewhat interpret things on their own is best.

[Jeni]

Kelly wrote: "I think a lot of people feel like they need to love the characters to love the book, and I just don't feel that way. Having a well developed character and allowing the reader to somewhat interpret things on their own is best. "

I agree with this 100%. I feel the same way about Riddick or Dexter. They aren't good guys, but I am just fascinated by them.

But enjoying a character because they are interesting is completely different than wanting to marry someone just like him.

I start boggling a bit at those who sigh and swoon over how wonderful and romantic Heathcliff is. He has never been a romantic figure in my mind. He's a psych major's dream thesis topic, maybe, but a potential romantic figure? No thank you!

[Kenya]

In a lot blogs and journals, people refer to Heathcliff as terribly flawed. Butm they admit that his one reedeming quality is his complete and utter love for Catherine. That would be romantic, except Catherine and Heathcliff weild love as a weapon - they use it to hurt each other and innocent people. The affection between Heathcliff and Catherine is so twisted and ugly, that I'm not even sure you can call it love. Love should make you a better person.

[Lucinda]

Kenya, Kelly and others, I know what you mean; is it love, or obsession? I think haunting is sometimes called 'obsession' in occult writings, and the two seem to meet here.

As I have said, I am frankly puzzled as to how readers do find Heathcliff a romantic figure. As you say, he is certainly a fascinating psychological study.

I do think that if Emily Bronte had been a more intrusive author, and gone in less for an apparently 'author neutral' position as narrator, this dichotomy wouldn't have arisen. Part of the problem is that Nelly Dean is limited by her unimaginativeness and the twists in the plot, which oblige her to act unwisely quite often; yet for all that she invariably shows humane compassion when it is called for (for instance, towwards Heathcliff when Catherine has just died)and her conclusions about the main characters may well be meant to be taken more seriously than they often are. She is the voice of common sense. There wasn't the slightest chance, in that age particularly, that Catherine's idealistic schemes about having a close relationship with both Edgar Linton and Heathcliff could possibly be seen as anything but degrading for them by either man.

Even apart from his mean spirted acts,which degrade his character, Heathcliff's prosaic, penny pinching lifestyle as a farmer and 'hard landlord' hardly goes with a romantic image,as he gloomily takes his miserable supper served by the prosing Joseph in the unswept kitchen of Wuthering Heights. He prosaically calls the younger Catherine 'chuck' when he is trying to get her to sit with him at the end, and somehow, this is incongruous in a Byronic character, though totally in character, of course, in a Yorkshire 'gentleman farmer'.

[Lucinda]

So agree with you, Nicole. As a matter of fact, in some ways Heathcliff makes me think of an embittered dictator who has become abominably warped through suffering injustice, on a mini scale.

I must admit I haven't seen any of the recent films.I saw a ridiculous one dating form the 50's, which seemed largely to comprise cooing outbursts of 'Oh, Cathy!' and 'Oh, Heathcliff!'

[Gina]

Lucinda wrote: "So agree with you, Nicole. As a matter of fact, in some ways Heathcliff makes me think of an embittered dictator who has become abominably warped through suffering injustice, on a mini scale.

I ..."

The Monty Python skit, in which they perform Wuthering Heights in semaphore, is much better. Check it out on YouTube!

[Lucinda]

Lol, I'll have to do that, Gina.

[Hermione]

Romantic love is supposed to be blind. We do not see the faults of the other, but imagine them to be perfect. There are other types of love. This one though would enable Heathcliff to be anything and still magnetic to his lover.

[Lucinda]

Hello, Hermione, welcome (are you called after 'The Winter's Tale?)
I cannot in any way see the 'love' or obsession, or whatever it is, between Catherine and Heathcliff and Caherine as romantic; there is supposed to be an unbreakale bond (which has hints of a sort of quasi incest in it, as he's been brought up as her 'brother')but it seems oddly asexual and Catherine has no jealousy at the thought of him marrying Isabella, were he to 'like' her.

He's madly jealous, she isn't. She revels in Edgar's physical attractions in her confession to Nelly, and after his return, she tells Heathcliff flatly she wants to make lots of heirs with Edgar. This remark doesn't seem to be made in an attempt to make his jealousy worse, and she even seems puzzled by it. The preface I was talking of with CCose above, where the writer (was it Patsy Stoneman? Can't remember) suggests she has some Shellyian ideal, which of course, in patriarchal Victorian Yorkshire would have been regarded as outrageous beyond belief. Perhaps Emily Bronte can only hint at it (on the advice of the pragmatic Charlotte?).

[Melissa]

Someone above said Heathcliff was a sociopath, while this is true, I always think of him as more of a masochist. What would he be with out his own glorious suffering? I think he might have killed himself out of boredom if he really had got what he wanted out of life. If Cathy truly had loved him and wanted to be with him, I have absolutely no doubts he would've pushed her away with whatever means he could have, or maybe killed her out of fear someone might take her away form him. I don't think he was emotionally mature enough to ever be in a real relationship. (Not to mention emotionally stable) And what about Cathy? She never really outgrew her 14 year old self. Even when she died (I feel) it was because she was mad at Edgar and Heathcliff and wanted to make them feel bad for making her upset, so she locked herself in her room until she went crazy. What would have happened if Heathcliff had come back and been a true romantic hero, he could have easily seduced her away from Edgar because she only picked him because she was mad at Heathcliff.
(As you can tell I've thought of many what-if scenarios)

For me Wuthering Heights is one of those books that will always remain an enigma on some level because of 3 things:
1. We can never truly know what Emily Bronte was trying to accomplish because the book was for many years overly edited by her sister (edited isn't the right word here I think, but I can't find a better one)

2. There is SO much going in the story that no matter which character you look at and pick as the hero/heroine there will always be some thing to make you second guess yourself.

and 3. The story is told by a narrator who wasn't present for many of the books events. Who's to say she hasn't spun a few things to make for a better story for her poor sick patient? I always take her story with at least a few grains of salt.

[Victoria]

C-Cose wrote: "Since posting my first comment, I've taken more time to read other comments in this thread and am .... bewildered.

Specifically comments #16 (Susan) and #17 (Victoria) have me baffled. Many of the..."

Returning to this discussion! Heathcliff is like no other! His character is "beautiful" because it is art work. Its exactly what you call it : baffling!
I also found my self asking how could I love this character! How in the world! I try to pinpiont it now,(this may sound cliche) but I think it was when he first laughed. It was bitter and wild and the darkest humor. And that's when you know there is depth! And you want to discover the mystery. And you want the heart to be healed.
You say he was incapable of love! He loved with a burning passion none could rival! Getting carried away :)
Heathcliff was quite the contradiction. I love a character of contradictions!

[Victoria]

Amy wrote: "I'm very intrigued by this very intelligent discussion! I must re-read Wuthering Heights soon. What I do remember from this novel is that Heathcliff, crazy and disturbed as he is, cannot separate h..."

:)

[Lucinda]

Victoria, welcome back to the discussion. No need for me to repeat my views about how very unromantic and in fact weak (in his lack of any real identity that isn't centred about Catherine, a problem more usually suffered by women rather than men, this lack of self) I find Heathcliff of the porridge-for-supper and habit of slapping women around! It's interesting how our views so radically differ.

But doesn't repugnance at his treatment of the pregnant Isabella, his hitting Catherine about the head for trying to retain her mother's picture, etc,make you feel that any attempt to 'heal' him (and in this society, women are great ones for 'healing' damaged men) would be making the same mistake as poor Isabella? Isn't she shown as an example by the author of that sort of self abnegation regarding a truly damaged and destructive man?

[Priyanka]

I completely agree with you! I believe that if you truly love someone with the passionate love that Heathcliff supposedly had for Catherine, he would have done anything, sacrificed everything, just so that she would be happy.
I always felt his intense desire for revenge and destruction were to assuage his hurt ego. He loved himself, only himself.

[Lucinda]

Priyanka, Hello, and it certainly seems questionable that what Heathcliff calls his 'love' for Catherine is what he says it is. Perhaps it is more of a hateful obsession?

There is also another puzzle; Heathcliff believes that he is in some sort of spiritual communion with Catherine from the time of her burial, that they will be reunited in some way (obviously not in the orthodox heaven) on his death (it is never made clear why he doesn't kill himself to hasten this, as he has no spiritual qualms about divine retribution and goes to his death thiking he has been completely in the right).

Why, then, does he never worry about how upset she must be to see him abuse people she cares for, particularly her own child? She hasn't exactly been portrayed as a maternal figure, but she can hardly be indiffrent to his brutality to Catherine (or indeed, Hindley and Isabella).

When she is trying to disillusion Isabella with him, she says that she never tells him not to do injury to another because it is wrong, but because it will displease her. Why then doesn't he fear her anger on the other side of the grave, if nothing else, when he tries to destroy her family?

[Victoria]

Cateline wrote: "Victoria wrote: "Heathcliff was. Heathcliff was downright malicoius and villainous to say the least. He was frightening and a cold hearted nightmare. He was a deeply disturbed emotionally. He was m..."

It may have not been "true love" as we see it. The fairy tale kind. The i'll sacrifice my life for you kind. But does that make his love any less true. For him it was real. His every descion hinged on the fact that he had to avenge that lost love. Perhaps it was a selfish love.
Maybe the distinction here is really between passion and compassion. He loved Catherine with passion but he did not show her compassion...

[Victoria]

Lucinda wrote: "Victoria, welcome back to the discussion. No need for me to repeat my views about how very unromantic and in fact weak (in his lack of any real identity that isn't centred about Catherine, a proble..."

I dont think Isabella thought he needed to be healed.
In fact she worshipped him. She had such an obsession with him that she was blind to his faults.
Blind love.
I think Heathcliff led a tortured life.

[Jeni]

I would argue that John Hinkley felt just as passionately about Jodi Foster before he shot the president to get her attention.

Heathcliff is, in my own opinion, tyrannical, overbearing, controlling, and abusive. Nothing in that sentence says "love" to me. He was obsessed with owning her for whatever reason, but he did not love her.

Again, my own opinions and impressions. :)

[Victoria]

In many ways I think love is too abstract to dispute. Mixing up the kind of love you feel is right or you would like to receive doesn't change the word. Love comes in many forms.
I think he was selfish in his love, passionate to a fault, and reckless. He was abusive and malicious plotting his own downfall by plotting that of others.
Maybe it is because I love any character who confuses me. I think i love passion. Linton was so wholely unapealing because he had no passion. Sometimes he exhibited a stiff quiet love but Heathcliffs was unbridled.
Yes he was tyrannical and possessive.
But he was quirky. I think judging him by his deeds is a narrower way to view him. Calling the man a monster instead of looking at the monster but also seeing the man.
But Lets have another look at some of his deeds. Yes I may have liked him from the begining when he laughed. But how about when he opened the window and screamed Cathy. How about when he had the opportunity to kill Earnshaw but didn't. What redeemed him at the end was how he stopped the cycle of revenge. He let Cathy and Hareton find a (perhaps small and grudgingly) sense of joy.
I wouldn't get too worked up about Heathcliffs actions. Without him being the way he was the book falls flat. It shows how tirless and sickly cyclical revenge is. It shows a wild man a vengeful man may find no peace. It shows how love should not be tossed for money and stability. Into the human soul and how we stubbornly suffer through the choices we make. And all this with the help of our dear heathcliff
But I definatley say bravo to Emily Bronte.
If heathclifff didn't steal your heart from the becoming then it must have been hard to sympathize. But once it stolen he has a stranglehold on it. Hes probably a character you either love or hate.

[Lucinda]

Victoria wrote: "In many ways I think love is too abstract to dispute. Mixing up the kind of love you feel is right or you would like to receive doesn't change the word. Love comes in many forms.
I think he was se..."

Fascinating stuff, Victoria. I think (as I have said above) that for sure we should distinguish between a man (or a character) and his awful deeds.

But if we don't have an opinion based on what a characer does, which you argue is narrow, (I'm not saying 'judge' because judging someone sums up prissy, tight mouthed moral self-righteousness) into what moral quagmire does one descend about cruelty
and horror perpetrated by characters who might well protest that they were not to be defined by their actions...
I wouldn't call Heathcliff a monster, merely a person seriously warped.

What concerns me is women readers thinking that he is a romantic figure (and possibly, extending mistaken notions about 'fixing' abusive and damaged men into their real lives; I realise, of course, that entertainment and fantasy is one thing, and real life another).

It is true that without Heathcliff's brutality the story wouldn't exist - and it's a fascinating read.

I don't hate him as a character, but I do think he is a 'sad case' and emotionally stunted and find him totally unromantic and not sympathetic.

If he had repented, I would feel more symapthy with him over his miserable life, but he remains self-rightous to the end.

I don't have a copy to hand, but my recollection is that he had an ulterior motive for not killing Hindley - a financial one, I vaguely recall,though I have fogotten the details? I thought to continue to beat him when he was unconscious was cowardly.

Sparing Cathy's child abuse might have been more useful than shouting her name into the night. A good bit of drama, that, though...

I agree with the view that 'a man who uses violence to women isn't a man at all' and as he does that, he becomes contemptible to me.

Having said that, I have to say I found Edgar a cold fish, too, and dull. I thought, in fact, both Cathy's admirers were in some ways far weaker characters than she was, which is interesting.

I also thought that none of the characters seemed remotely able to laugh at themselves, which often made them ludicrous in their excesses.

I thought Heathcliff striking dramatic poses in his prosaic surroundings in between down to earth farmer's talk such an incongruous combination that I did find it downright funny.

[A.L.]

I think because he should marry Catherine, but he is bullied and tormented by Hindley and the others because of his class and jealousy. He reacts as many who have been victimised react by the use of violence themselves.

Linton, well he is shall we say a bit wet and snobby. Heathcliff is mysterious, dangerous and sexy. Most women find this attractive. He is also wronged. His love for Cathy transcends love but yet she turns to a man rather unworthy as she would degrade herself, or so she thinks so Heathcliff is condemned to unhappiness until he dies.

[A.L.]

Look at the track record though-
Erik vs Raoul in Phantom
Heathcliff vs Edgar
Dracula vs Jonathan Harker

The bad guys tend to been seen as anti heros or romantic heroes. Dracula maybe not a good example but certainly in the other two the "bad guys" have a reason to be bitter. The good guys seem a bit wet and shallow. Someone says Heathcliff is nasty from the start to an extent that is so but who know what he had to put up with before- almost certainly a street child. Cathy is kind to him and he adores her, the young Earnshaw is mean to him and he hates him. He does love his foster father to an extent. He may dominate but so do all the men vs the women. He takes the power where he can get it.

I love WH. It is one of my fav books, one I have read multiple times.

[Lucinda]

Welcome Alexander, I have always found Heathcliff and Cathy's relationship decidely asexual, perhaps because Emily Bronte almost certainly had no experience in that department...]

For sure, I hope most women don't find a man who abusive to women attractive...

Melissa, Just read your post and I think your comments are really intriguing. Heathcliff a masochist; there is much in what you say of his wallowing in self-pity ('It's not fair, she chose somone else').

For sure he is a sadist and likes hitting pretty girls, has leanings towards necrophilia, and had a kick too out of: -

a/hanging spaniels
b/using his wife as a target for knife throwing
and
c/ quasi incest...

[Kelly]

Victoria wrote: "Maybe it is because I love any character who confuses me. I think i love passion. Linton was so wholely unapealing because he had no passion. Sometimes he exhibited a stiff quiet love but Heathcliffs was unbridled.
"

Totally agree.

[[deleted user]]

Alexandra wrote: "Look at the track record though-
Erik vs Raoul in Phantom
Heathcliff vs Edgar
Dracula vs Jonathan Harker

The bad guys tend to been seen as anti heros or romantic heroes. Dracula maybe not a good e..."
Huh...I never noticed that!

Let me clarify that WH is NOT romantic, and Heathcliff is not a hero. He may be a sadistic, dog-hanging villian, but he never did anything to hurt Cathy or her husband (out of respect for her), whereas Erik, on the other hand, kidnapped Christine and almost drowned Raoul and the Persian. You're right about Dracula not being the best example, he just always wanted blood, blood, and more blood.

[A.L.]

Oh I agree most women shouldn't find abusive men attractive but sadly many do. The b**tds or this world are never short of a girl friend.

Personally I think Heathcliff is a strong character. The other men seem ineffectual, petty and rather weak. But that is just my view.

SOmeone said if H really loved C he would sacrifice everything. He did to an extent. He had nothing but her love and that was lost, at least for a while. She married someone else, as did he. (Isabella was both weak and foolish.)

WH is a book about revenge, love, hatred and class.
I probably have a twisted sense of things so I like H.
I tend to side with the anti hero:)

One of the things which annoys me is the whole venacular with Joseph - I hate that character so much.

[A.L.]

Kelly wrote: "Victoria wrote: "Maybe it is because I love any character who confuses me. I think i love passion. Linton was so wholely unapealing because he had no passion. Sometimes he exhibited a stiff quiet l..."

I agree. Heathcliff was passionate, despite what else he may have been. Linton was wet and rather stiff. He was also a snob.

[Victoria]

I agree that hes warped. I really would like to find a middle ground between our opinions!
I also mentioned before that I too was baffled on why my attentions were so loyal to heathcliff after all he had done. So its not that I don't recognize his cruelty.
I do not find his abusive tendencies attractive though Im having a little trouble recalling instances when he did this ( whoops blind love:)
I think that sadly today girls find abusive men attractive. They like violence had unpredicatablily.
I do not like his actions but I still love his character.
In terms of men though there definatley is a medium to be found between heathcliff and Linton. And some may lean more towards the other.
Personally I think a Catherine was a fool to throw away love for stability and money and spoiled manners.
It may remain a mystery why heathcliff endears himself to me. Maybe my sensible self knows those arent characteristics I search for in a man but it was certianly fascinating to see it played out. I also don't hold the misconsception that good girls can heal broken men (rarely to nill, healing comes from within) but never the less I want him to be healed. To find solace in some way.
If you have ever seen or read the count of Monte Cristo. He also reaps a wicked revenge. Yet somehow he comes out clean pristine. Heathcliff s revenge was sickly because he took out his revenge on everyone but Catherine was the one who turned him away. Most of all he felt rejected and discriminated agianst because he came off the streets Linton Isabella who avoided him and made fun. even his guardian hindley abused him. Did he over pay his revenge?
So do I have sympathy for him yes. Too much? Perhaps.
I think I should reread it. I want to see exactly why I love heathcliff.

[Helen]

Rebecca wrote: "Well now I feel I can confess that the Timothy Dalton is my favorite of all the versions I own. He is just so damn good in everything he does. (his is my favorite Jane Eyre, too). You can't help lo..."

Have you seen Ralph Fiennes as Heathcliff? He was fantastic ... dark and brooding.

[Gryph]

Alexandra wrote: "Oh I agree most women shouldn't find abusive men attractive but sadly many do. The b**tds or this world are never short of a girl friend.

Personally I think Heathcliff is a strong character. The o..."

Greetings Alexandra :)

This discussion has been in the back of my mind since I first commented some time ago.

For some reason, perhaps your unabashed clarity, has me thinking about WH in new ways ....

I remember my first introduction to this work in Gr. 12 English class .... many years ago now ... lol. Rather than have the students dive right into the book, our teacher decided to try a different approach. He started his introduction by playing a vinyl record of "Wuthering Heights" by Kate Bush. I was irretrievably hooked before Kate Bush had finished the first stanza!

Who was this women singing plaintively from the moors? Why was she pleading to be let in? Who was the man that denied her wishes? Their "love" was painful and profound ... why were they separated?

I devoured WH in two days flat. I even rushed through math homework (which I LOVED) in order to return to the tale that Bronte was presenting me with. I should mention that until this point in time, I absolutely abhorred English class ... with a passion.

Looking back on that time, keeping in mind the many books that I've read over the intervening years, I begin to wonder if Bronte wasn't trying to give us a cautionary tale mixed in with the dark romance, obsession, and dichotomous characters.

You wrote, "WH is a book about revenge, love, hatred and class."

Might it be that Catherine (who I've always thought of as Kate ... due in part to "Taming of the Shrew") was an example of a woman that was "too strong" for a woman of those times? Did Kate symbolize what happened to a woman that wasn't "womanly"? Was her love with Heathcliff the tale of two immense forces, equal and balanced against each other, eventually crashing as they drove into each other? Were the Lintons a statement on "old money" falling into lives of complacency, largesse, and disfavour? Was Heathcliff v. the Lintons about "new v. old money"? Were elements of the story cautionary tales about stepping out of one's place and the consequences one may face?

In the end, I can only conclude that WH is definitely about more than a confused, painful, and hurtful love between Kate and Heathcliff. It may be about all the questions I asked above .... or none.

But .... it's the possibility of it being about them that keeps me coming back to WH time and time again :)

[Melissa]

For me WH isn't really about love or hate, but obsession, pure and simple. Every character had some kind of obsession however small at some point or another.

Heathcliff - Cathy

Edgar-Cathy

Cathy - Heathcliff/Edgar

Isabella - Heathcliff

Hindley - his wife/his demise

Catherine - Linton

Linton - Being what his father wanted

Joseph - the Bible

Mr. Earnshaw(Cathy/Hindley's father) - Heathcliff

Nelly - being right(IMO she always justified her actions, but was also the only one telling the story so she had the benefit of hindsight)

Lockwood - Knowing the story of what happened


Helen wrote: "Have you seen Ralph Fiennes as Heathcliff? He was fantastic ... dark and brooding. ..."
Worst adaptation of a book to movie ever!

[Meryl]

Hey Lucinda!
This is Meryl from India. When I got to read the book, I was rather shocked when I came across Heathcliff.I equate him to the devil himself! How can anyone call him romantic in the first place?
Regards
Meryl, India

[Anna]

I read this when I was 16, ready to be impressed and was hugely disappointed. I couldn't for the life of me work out what Cathy and Heathcliffs relationship had to do with love. She needed to get out more and meet more men and he was just foul. If anything it was about power or lack of it.. Having said that I do like the final line and some of the setting. Interestingly my 16 yr old daughter has just read it and had exactly the same reaction - and I promise I didn't try to influence her!

[Priyanka]

Is it possible that Emily Bronte meant for the storyline to be a warning and a moral to young women? It was obviously difficult for people to openly discuss topics like sex in those days..
Perhaps she meant to warn young women that blind love for someone, without knowing their true character was dangerous.. that women should know more about the men they choose to marry..(Isabella's storyline).
Maybe she wanted to show people how obsessive love was not 'romantic' but could lead to abuse.. I don't suppose women spoke out about domestic abuse those days. I also feel that she probably wanted to bring attention to the mental aspects of abuse...
Also, is it just possible that she meant for Heathcliff and Catherine's doomed tale to be a warning about the practicality of marrying someone of your own social class/education level?

[Tonya]

I love this thread reading everyone opinions gives me many different view points. I tried to read this book many times before I finally finished it. Most of the time I read for enjoyment and all of the characters in this book seamed so miserable I had a hard time reading it.

[Denisse]

I think we can all agree that Heathcliff is not a hero at all, but more of an anti-hero. He possesses characteristics that are both villainous and heroic, his vengeful spirit and passionate heart, for example. I think this duality in Heathcliff is what makes him most interesting and unforgettable. I also see it as a kind of man/beast sort of thing, since it is unknown where he comes from and he tends to behave in a rather brutish manner. This is why I "forgive" or look over his "evil" side, if it can be called that at all. Heathcliff is a naturalist character, I believe, and lives his life accordingly, seeking what pleases him and avoiding what hurts him. In all, I absolutely love the complexity of the character and the story.

[Library Nymph]

I may be the only one who felt this way after reading Wuthering Heights, but I felt that Heathcliff was almost an example of what happens when you don't let go of anger and move on. When one is bent on revenge in the end they may realize that the bitter reality of getting revenge is they kill what they loved. Heathcliff was so bent on revenge he lost everything he wanted vengeance for. . .or at least , this is how I saw it. :) He was more of an antihero.

[Roselin]

They actually belong with each other this is one of my all time favorite books and i read it serval times heathcliff is a damage soul destroying everything in his path in the name of love and revenge hes scorned and i blame cathy for her selfishness. Cathy influence his character she made him who he is so is really hard to say that heathcliff wasnt a all time hero but i cant really say he was a villian either this story is just tragic based on betrayal of love great book

[Roselin]

Add me by the way i need for friends :)

[Melissa]

This is the only book I reread every year and I honestly don't know why. I've said it's my favorite book for years and it is, but I don't even like any of the characters, the only ones who have any redeeming qualities are Hareton (because he was put in a situation before he knew any different - his is a classic tale of nature vs. nurture for me) and Hindley's wife, and that's just because she died before she had a chance to do any real damage. Although now that I'm typing this she might be the reason Hareton isn't really like the rest of them. He has the DNA of someone who wasn't raised in WH or TG. Also, had she not died, most of the book probably would never have happened, Hindley didn't go crazy until after she was gone.

But I digress, I keep coming back to this book every year, maybe hoping to find something else in the text that will make me change my mind about the characters. And every time I read it there is something I find (although it usually makes me like them less) that gives me a new perspective on someone.

This is why people love or hate this book. Have you ever heard anybody say WH is an OK read? It makes you think, and that's why we can have these kinds of discussions. Sure we all agree Heathcliff is a just the worst kind of bastard, but on the other side of the argument he was fighting for what he wanted and would do whatever he thought it took to achieve his goals.

I've forgotten where I was going with this, so I'm going to stop now before it goes on any longer. Discuss.

[Ela]

@pryiyanka an interesting idea; I don't pretend to kow enough about
Emily Bronte to comment on that, but I like that idea.

[[deleted user]]

His (Heathcliffe's) bad behaviour and treatment of Isabella is revenge on Edgar Linton, Edgar posessed the woman Heathcliffe loved. Heathcliffe is tormented and angry that Cathy forsaken her own heart. His love for Cathy is so fierce he asks her to haunt him, he even contemplates digging her corpse up to ease his tortured heart. It's a dark and brooding tale, and I absolutely adore it, because it is a tale of passion, turmoil and revenge. Lucinda , READ it again, and remember that Cathy is 17, 18yrs and is selfish, impetuous...her bad choice in choosing Edgar ruins many lives. Alison

[Melissa]

alison wrote: "EAD it again, and remember that Cathy is 17, 18yrs and is selfish, impetuous...her bad choice in choosing Edgar ruins man..."

I do actually always forget that! She died at 19 and Heathcliff lives until almost 50.

[Lucinda]

Alison, Welcome to the discussion. Thank you for your suggestion, but reading it three times (the last time two weeks ago as I said in my review) hasn't changed my mind about Heathcliff behaving in an inexcusable way, so I don't think reading it a fourth time is likely to do so.
Forgive me for being pedantic, but Heathcliff was in fact about 38 when he died, not nearly fifty, as the time scale in some of the editions shows.
I've always been struck by the youthfulness of the characters. I can't see how Heathcliff's abuse of Isabella is excusable by his own disappointment in love. Taking out his disappointment on women and children is to act in a disgusting way.
Certainly Cathy was as immature as you expect, her position was hardly enviable, a pretty young girl torn between two admirers and lacking any but Nelly's necessarily unimaginatie guidance and her brother's ambitious wishes for an alliance with the Lintons. She can be seen as selfish, she wanted to have two men at once, I think, an unforgivable attitude to a couple of patriarchs like Heathcliff and Edgar Linton.
As I have said, both of them srike me as being weak charatrs in their different ways. Anyone who is motivated by hatred, envy, etc, is always operating from a basis of weakness, as Heathcliff is.
Victoria: I know what you mean, and I like anti-heroes too, and in fact the main character in my own book is an anti-hero, a rascal, but gallant to women.
I expect you sympathise with characters whom lots of people dislike; I often do that myself, for instance, I have always felt sorry for George Osborne in Vanity Fair, dismissed by most critics and readers as 'contemptible'. I even felt some sympathy for Chaval in Zola's 'Germinal'. If a character is condemned out of hand by other characters and most readers, you feel like acting as Devil's advocate.
Do you know, though this isn't an example from the classics, I am probably one of the few people in he world to feel sympathy for Valentine in 'The Mortal Instruments' when reading it to my daughter when she was ill because his habit of jumping through a portal with a quip was so funny?

Alexandra: I'm glad you agree with me about abusive relationships. I found the ending very bleak, as I have said above; if only Heathcliff could have seen how wrong he had been, then the story could have ended on a true note of forgivenes and reconciliation.
I feel sorry for Heathcliff as a damaged and therefore dangerous man, and like Nelly (whom people tend to judge too harshly, I think) feel sorry for him in his anguish, but think that his acts should be condemned heartily and he certainly shouldn't be seen as a romantic figure.

Actually, I do think, as I said in my review, that there are many glaring faults in the novel, fascinating and strongly written though it is. The melodrama often tips over into farce, ie the bit about Cathy grinding her teeth so hard Nelly wonders if she will splinter them, etc. The combination of a prosaic Yorkshire farmer background for Heathcliff along with his dismal meanness (He's a notoriously 'hard landlord' to the peasants and Catherine even wonders if he'll spare Lockwood a cup of tea) and his brooding Byronic persona is incongruous.
Yet it's a powerful book. I agree people don't usually remain indifferent to it; readers are drawn in.

That's enough seriousness for now from me! A skit, 'Heathcliff talks to Dr Freud (with Jung listening in)' would be so funny...But other obligations call...

Great contributions, everyone, been ill in bed for two days.
C Cose: Welcome back. What did you make of that preface that touches on the theme of Cathy and Shelleyian concepts of non-possessive love?

[Gryph]

Lucinda wrote: "C Cose: Welcome back. What did you make of that preface that touches on the theme of Cathy and Shelleyian concepts of non-possessive love? "

Hello again Lucinda :)

I've been trying to find an online copy of the introduction to no avail, so I've been searching for a copy that I can either loan from our local library or buy :) You wouldn't believe how difficult it has been!!!

[Lucinda]

CCose: I've had the same about books supposedly easily available. My local lhbrary found the one I read about a month ago, so it must still be generally available.

[[deleted user]]

Melissa wrote: " alison wrote: "EAD it again, and remember that Cathy is 17, 18yrs and is selfish, impetuous...her bad choice in choosing Edgar ruins man..."

I do actually always forget that! She died at 19 and H..."
Um, no. She was 22 when she got married.

[Gryph]

Lucinda wrote: "CCose: I've had the same about books supposedly easily available. My local lhbrary found the one I read about a month ago, so it must still be generally available."

Greetings Lucinda :)

Sadly, our own local library, which is located in the Capital in New Brunswick, doesn't have this edition *grrrr*.

But, I did take the drastic step of sending an email to the Director of the "Centre for Victorian Studies" at the University of Hull (UK), in the hopes that she may be able to help me track down an online version of the preface by Dr. Stoneman.

I'll update on my progress :)