Wuthering Heights

[Anonymous No.18780092]

What did /lit/ think of it?

Personally I am a bit torn on it. On the one hand I think it is brilliant. Its use of language, style of writing and prose are really fantastic, yet readable. Blew my mind as a non-English speaker quite a few times.
My biggest gripe with it would be that the characters are almost unrealistic. Both in love and hate, their emotions are so intensified that they lose their humanity. However at the same time, I do not mind the dramatisation. Realism is not always necessary. The characters are unique and memorable because of it after all.

They were all such massive cunts though

[Anonymous No.18780468]

>>18780092
>What did /lit/ think of it?
/lit/ is a pro-Emily board.

>their emotions are so intensified that they lose their humanity
It's not as exaggerated as you might think. Remember testosterone levels these days are a fraction of what they were. But yeah, it's expressionistic. Lots of (most) good art is.

>They were all so unsympathetic though
Older Cathy & Heathcliff have passion and honesty and courage but lack kindness and gentleness. The Lintons have the kindness but no backbone. Hareton and younger Catherine got most of the good qualities of both families. They are both, basically, fine people; it just takes a while for this to emerge, given their terrible environment.

[Anonymous No.18780488]

Peabrained hick Hareton and the Lesser Cathy are turbonormies, they could never understand true love like Heathcliff.

[Anonymous No.18780573]

>>18780488
Heathcliff is my favorite character in the novel because of his gigachad tendencies but IMO his relationship with cathy was not true love. It was obsessive infatuation with the idea of a perfect other. Neither of them actually knew true love.

[Anonymous No.18780585]

>>18780468
>pure cringe
i have yet to read a good female writer

[Anonymous No.18780600]

Bronte, like Shakespeare knew that true love is union between two souls in death.

>The marriage of sulphur and quicksilver, sun and moon, king and queen, is alchemy's central symbol, and in the light of its meaning we can clearly distinguish between alchemy and mysticism
>The starting point of mysticism is that the soul has alienated itself from God through turning itself towards the world and that it must be reunited with Him.
>Alchemy on the other hand takes the standpoint that through the loss of his primordial 'Adamic' state, man is rent with inward discord, and can only regain his full being when the two powers whose strife has robbed him of his strength have been reconciled with each other.
>Human nature's inward dividedness, which has become as it were organic, is moreover a result of its having fallen away from God, inasmuch as it was the Fall which first made Adam and Eve aware of their opposition and thrust them out into the vicious circle of generation and death.
>Conversely man’s winning back of his full nature, which alchemy expresses through the image of the male-female Hermaphrodite, is a necessary prelude to union with God though it may also be considered from another point of view as a fruit of that union...

>The marriage of the soul’s masculine and feminine forces ultimately opens out onto the marriage of Spirit and soul. . . which is none other than the mystical marriage.
>Thus the two states overlap: the realization of psychic plenitude leads to the soul’s giving itself to the Spirit, and the alchemical symbols have, correspondingly, more than one meaning: the sun and the moon can denote the two powers of the soul which are termed sulphur and quicksilver; at the same time they are images of the Spirit and the soul...
>Closely connected with the symbolism of marriage is the symbolism of death: according to some representations of the ‘chemical marriage’ the king and queen are killed at their wedding and buried together, thence to rise up rejuvenated.

Heathcliff's struggle ended when he knew he could finally wed Cathy in the grave.

[Anonymous No.18780605]

>>18780092
>What did /lit/ think of it?
You reap what you sow. Is that the moral of the story? I'm not sure, but I'm with Heathcliff. He was entitled to fuck them all up, however I didn't like how he treated his son and Hareton.

[Anonymous No.18780618]

>>18780605
I'm certainly not 'with' Heathcliff. he was sociopathic but I loved him as a character.
I don't think there really was a thematic message to the book. Moreso just a tragic story about people with severe problems.

>>18780600
only a woman would think of this as a romance story. It is a detestable view on love (just like shakespeare).

[Anonymous No.18780908]

>>18780092
too many run on sentences and while cool for changing the love game (one of the first love triangles done this way), it was just a bit annoying. This is pretty much older Twilight, still entertaining but we. I own a first edition copy, worth like $5,000+ but I wouldn't re-read this. Still a cool book tho.

[Anonymous No.18780954]

>>18780600
Lol manlets have to stand on the fucking sun just to be as tall as their woman

[Anonymous No.18780966]

>>18780585
>i have yet to read a good female writer
Me and yes I'm the first in history, by 2025 this whole board will be reading my shit

[Anonymous No.18781385]

>>18780966
what are you writing, anon?

[Anonymous No.18781401]

>>18780092
I disagree about the realism, I found it totally realistic. Mad passionate people do exist and some environments really foster those kinds of people. Some characters are quite stoic like Edgar Linton or reserved like Nelly. I think it helps if you're familiar with that part of Yorkshire, the landscape is a big part of it.

[Anonymous No.18781427]

>>18780600
The relationship between Heathcliff and Catherine is clearly not idealised, it's destructive and obsessive. Remember that Heathcliff uses romance to manipulate and abuse Isabella, going so low as to use their son as a way to gain property and revenge on the inhabitants of Thrushcross.

[Anonymous No.18781938]

It’s an interesting concept for a book
>what if I wrote a novel where every character was a piece of shit and let it all unfold

[Anonymous No.18782141]

Heathcliff was a total piece of shit. A dumpster fire of a human being.

[Anonymous No.18782698]

I thought it was a good story but I kept getting distracted by the frame narrative having long word for word quotes and being too reliable. Would have spiced things up if I had to figure out when the lady was trying to make herself sound good