Wuthering Heights

I enjoyed my second visit to “Wuthering Heights” more than the first. This is partly because my first read was spread out over 4 –6 weeks (I think in 2005, though it could’ve been a couple of years either way), whereas my second read took 6 days, commencing from Emily Brontë’s 200th birthday, which is why I thought I’d give it another look.

I was also less enthused during my first read because I'd previously watched numerous adaptations of “Wuthering Heights” over the years, with all but one (which I saw after reading the novel) skipping much, if not all, of the story’s second half.

In short, my expectations were that this tale would revolve around Cathy and Heathcliff’s unique relationship. In a sense it does show more (won’t add more in case I spoil things for anyone), but from about halfway through, we see other characters emerge who rarely appear in most screen adaptations.

Another pre-reading influence was Kate Bush's song “Wuthering Heights”, which I’ve always loved, and this also made me think the main theme would be Heathcliff and Cathy’s passion for each other. Therefore, during my first read I felt a little disappointed that their relationship wasn’t as emphasised as expected.

When I approached “Wuthering Heights” for a second time, I knew what to expect, though after such a long gap since I first read it, I’d naturally forgotten a lot, especially events in the second half. This is by no means a beautiful love story, but rather a bleak tale of sadness, loneliness, loss, cruelty, and misery, yet it’s not entirely devoid of hope.

I admire how the author structured the narrative. It’s multi-first person, predominantly told by Nelly and Mr Lockwood, with smaller parts filled in by other characters. It all blends in very well together, and what makes the narrative’s construction even more impressive is that it’s not strictly linear. This type of thing can often prove messy, but Emily Brontë handles it smoothly.

One review I saw criticises “Wuthering Heights” for have no sense of place. This I must disagree with. In fact, I consider the sense of place as one of the book’s great strengths. I could vividly “see” the moors, the landscape, plus the rooms at the Heights and at the Grange.

My only real criticism is Joseph’s dialogue. Although I’m a Yorkshireman myself, much of Joseph’s broad dialect took some understanding – and the odd phrase I couldn’t fathom out – and overall his dialogue really slows the narrative down. I imagine anyone outside of Yorkshire – and even more so anyone outside of England – would have immense trouble understanding Joseph.

An interesting aspect to this story is of course the supernatural element. I suspect anyone who hasn’t read this book has at least seen an adaptation where, at the end, Cathy and Heathcliff reunite after death.

I was actually disappointed this wasn’t developed to a similar extent in the book, as it’s something special in the well-done adaptations where we see these thwarted lovers reunited. In the novel, however, their reunion is more of a casual reference. It's still a poignant moment – or moments – though, and reading it for the second time I appreciated it more than the first.

We also see Mr Lockwood endure a supernatural encounter at a window early on, which is one of my favourite scenes, and an important one.

I don’t always appreciate the supernatural seeping in to novels that are essentially “real life”, but in this case, the supernatural parts not only feel believable, they also add hope to a tragic story. Without the afterlife moments, “Wuthering Heights” wouldn’t hit the mark in the same way. The ending would’ve been too depressing. As it is, we’re left with hope for the living and for the dead.

While I feel Heathcliff and Cathy’s story is the novel most appealing element, I do like the story which revolves around the new characters featured in the second half, and how they interact with Heathcliff’s deceptive and despicable nature. In fact, my favourite character is the younger Catherine. She, along with Hareton and Isabella, are the three who I feel the most sympathy towards.

Most of the misery in this story stems from Heathcliff’s actions, though the likes of Hindley and Joseph don’t exactly spread light into the world. It’s hard to feel sympathy for many of the characters because of their selfishness and unkindness.

It’s debateable whether Cathy is more selfish than Heathcliff. Despite Heathcliff affecting more people’s lives for the worst, much – if not all – of this is through Cathy and her brother Hindley’s treatment of Heathcliff during his youth. While Hindley causes Heathcliff physical and mental torment, Cathy's brand of mental anguish is surely worse. I don’t think Cathy does this deliberately, as she’s too self-absorbed to realise how her motives will devastate Heathcliff.

The younger Catherine comes across as selfish and haughty many times, but I like her because deep down she has a good heart and she’s a bright character in a dark world. She’s horrible to poor Hareton, who deserves better, yet she goes out of her way to help Linton, who doesn’t deserve her attention.

Linton, in my opinion, is the most detestable character of all. Granted, some of his behaviour is owing to Heathcliff’s influence, but at heart Linton is a spineless, self-obsessed creature.

Heathcliff, whatever you think of him, is a fascinating character. The whole story pretty much revolves around his treatment of others, and how others treat or perceive him. He has that “lost soul” element about him, with his origins shrouded in mystery. I commend the author for creating such a vivid and memorable character.

I originally rated “Wuthering Heights” four stars when I added it to my Goodreads shelf in 2013. This was based on reading it circa 2005. After finishing it again in August 2018, I felt four stars was a fair rating; however, the characters and various scenes from the book have stayed with in the subsequent days.

Not many novels have this type of potency to “haunt” me, so on reflection, I feel “Wuthering Heights” deserves five stars. show less

Definitely the more interesting book out of Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights, and in my opinion, better in almost every way. The characters are much deeper and more interesting, the setting is better written, with a lot of mystique, the themes are more gray and I liked the prose more.

Heathcliff is a fascinating villain. Utterly depraved and unpredictable, which made for good reading, but also empathetic. You get such a deep glimpse into his character by following him from a child, and the moments he opens up to Nelly are heartbreaking.

This book is twisted. I wish Emily Bronte had more content to dig into because this one was fascinating. I haven't really read another book quite like it.

I anticipated an insipid romance: it was that, but not for reasons expected. Rather than mawkish and treacly behaviour, Heathcliff & Catherine display a wholly unexpected level of obsession (devotion?) to one another, contrary to any evidence of tender feeling or even physical attraction. Not only are they not doe-eyed in their expressions or interactions, each instead appears manic and possessive, verging on feral, and I am mystified as to what either sees in or feels for the other.

Beyond that central mystery, this is a bat-shit crazy novel. Perennial criticisms of genre fiction (which typically I consider unfair generalizations) legitimately apply here: the plot is preposterous; most everyone is cynical if not sadistic in behavior to show more one another; coincidence triumphs over reasonable expectation at every turn. How Brontë's novel came to be regarded as a Classic is frankly dumbfounding. How it came to be shorthand for Gothic Romance, is equally mystifying. Perhaps Heathcliff's & Catherine's obsessive devotion in the face of (what they apparently perceive to be) universal approbation by their peers and elders underwrites so many readers' love for these two. It only left me cold.

I do have some faint curiosity regarding Brontë's motives for writing the novel. Was this a cautionary tale? If so, whom did she expect to reach? The story involves mean-spirited people behaving selfishly at every turn with scarcely an empathetic character to be found. And then, Brontë chose to relay the story in perhaps the most convoluted way possible, as though recounting a soap opera family drama from the vantage of the mail carrier, and chronologically backward. (I freely acknowledge the "mail carrier", Lockwood, to be an hysterical character study worth the price of admission. To be accurate, however, he is merely the secretary, taking dictation from Nelly Deal, the house gossip who recounts him the tale over her knitting.)

It occurs to me my reaction here is similar to what I've read others describe in reference to The Catcher In The Rye. I find Holden Caulfield infinitely more sympathetic and relatable.

//

Reading presented an excuse to re-acquaint myself with the Kate Bush single: was the song perhaps critical of the couple? No, not a bit. Kate was 18, and apparently genuinely impressed with Heathcliff and Cathy. The vignette she captures in the lyric is the best part of the novel, and ignores the swaths I find so exasperating. Oh well, a good tune, but I found it wholly disconnected from my experience of the book. show less

Very few novels have intrigued me as much as "Wuthering Heights" by Emily Brontë has, and I have read many great books in my life. It captures a significant theme of the Victorian Era, one that so many writers chose to overlook: death, destruction, and the melancholy gardens we sow.
Among other authors, Emily Brontë transformed the faux pas of a bad ending into an approachable- nay controversial- subject. Her novel helped revolutionize the overall tone of pre-contemporary literature.
“Wuthering Heights” was originally published in 1847, and authentically captures daily life in that time-period. There are scenes that many of us recognize as being entirely victorian: maids and manservants, ruffled dresses, and the diction of their show more everyday conversation; however, drops of reality sneak into this realistic portrayal of life as it was in the 1800s. Prejudice, abuse; premature death, hysteria; unseen killers hidden in the walls and beauty products.
Each flaw has a story that has finally revealed by scientists with knowledge of lead and formaldehyde. In just the same way, every character has a purpose... which is why less than twenty people can be seen from the beginning to the end. Intentionality reeves in between the binding of this enthralling novel.
"Wuthering Heights" is steeped in melancholy and draped in veils of woe. Readers follow Heathcliff across the moors of the UK. His story is much different than the romantic tale of “Pride and Prejudice”, where two people fall in love and eventually marry. Instead, the story is founded upon turmoil, which leads to inevitable failure, though it brazes the mark so often throughout its pages. It crafts an understanding of the phrase "too little, too late", which becomes the main focus of the entire story.
Heathcliff did not stir this on his own, at least not entirely; he is abused and neglected after his adoptive father passes, outcasted and named a "g*psy" and "bastard" due to his uncertain heritage. He resents most of his house mates, excluding the girl who opened- and tore- his heart: Catherine Earnshaw.
Readers learn and discover the truth about Heathcliff through memories recalled by Nelly, the house maid, a majority of the time. By the end, one is left wondering whether they pity, love, or hate Heathcliff, leaving many with a sense of familiar dread (this time, in literature rather than reality). The purposeful writing of Brontë is revealed again and again, but never more so than when one analyzes her incredible skill for building characters.
This book is disturbing at times, and I admit it; but this aspect adds depth and truth to an otherwise perfect novel. It has become my favourite book, and one I will recommend to others as long as I have strength to speak. The year that I first read it was the year I reread it 15-16 other times. It truly has a certain magnetism that pulled me towards it, and for that reason, I give it a 5 star rating. show less

A tale of love and revenge... the revenge is still going... yep still revenge... i'll let you know if it stops.... not yet... nope still revenge... Yay! happy ending, well that makes up for everything ;) .

Is this a comedy?
I mean it isn't, but i also can't take it entirely seriously nor do i think i'm meant to. I have a very thin skin when it comes to physical or psychological abuse and there's plenty of both in this and yet... it rarely bothered me here due to the way it was presented.
Firstly this is almost all flashback which immediately takes the edge off as your somewhat forewarned as to how things will go. Then there's our very cheery intro character who always lightens the mood whenever we return to him. It helps too that the child show more abuse mostly happens to Heathcliff who is pretty immune to pain, in fact there's probably fanfiction around where the family find Kal-El (superman) instead of Heathcliff :) .
The final mitigating factor in what would otherwise have been a grim hell of a read, is that all of the characters are shown to be rather horrible. Undermining the normal empathy one would feel, although it still does make you feel something for them all, despite their flaws which is an achievement.
So i ask again, is this a comedy?, at least a dark comedy? because it had the tone of 'Cruel Intentions' with occasional forays towards 'American Psycho' or something similar and both of those are comedy's.... i think :P.
My point is that this is gleefully horrible as opposed to 1984 or something equally painful to read.

I struggled with the third quarter the most. After the half-way point it seems as if events are repeating themselves just with a younger cast. However by the end you can see that this is intentional and actually provides a nice symmetry.
As a fan of weird fiction the mystery of Heathcliff also provided a little something extra. In fact you could actually replace most of the characters with vampires and this would still work rather well i imagine :) .

Overall, i might be being a tad generous with my score but it has some excellent dramatic scenes and some very good characterization.
I'd recommend reading it when you have some time on your hands as i found being able to burn though several chapters at a time was a very useful way to get past the darkest sections and back to lighter ones :D . show less

This is my second read of this book. I can't imagine that I will ever read it a third time, but it was interesting to read it in context after being much more aware of the Brontes' lives and personalities.

Do I like the story, or the characters? No. I very much do not. It feels like people are often behaving in unnatural ways, and it's a struggle to relate to... well, to any of them.
But do I think that there are some interesting things going on with narrative technique? Sure, and I would certainly listen to viewpoints and analysis that would help me understand it a bit better.
What is most intriguing to me is that, since Emily Bronte left hardly any letters or other written work, this novel is one of the only windows we have to get a show more glimpse of her. And yet it's difficult to tell, at least for me, whom she sympathizes with, whom she agrees with, what her values are, etc. Whereas when I read Charlotte Bronte's books, I feel her pouring her entire heart into her characters and inhabiting them.
So, my main takeaway, rather frustratingly, is that Emily Bronte is and will remain... a mystery. show less

The opening of Wuthering Heights is unnecessarily confusing. The reader is dropped into a household with little context, where multiple characters share names across generations, and relationships are unclear. It takes time to sort out who is who—Catherine, Cathy, Heathcliff, Hareton, Linton—and until that clicks, the narrative feels disorienting rather than intriguing.

Once the structure becomes clear, however, a different issue emerges: this is often described as a love story, but it reads far more convincingly as a story of obsession rooted in petty injustices and emotional immaturity.

Catherine and Heathcliff are not tragic lovers in any meaningful sense. They are bound by fixation, pride, and an inability to grow. Catherine is show more vain, self-absorbed, and deeply immature—driven more by how she is perceived than by any stable sense of self. Her decisions are not tragic inevitabilities but the result of her own contradictions and emotional volatility.

Heathcliff, in turn, takes grievance and transforms it into a lifelong vendetta. His actions go far beyond revenge into sustained cruelty. The way he treats his descendants reflects not depth of feeling, but an obsessive need for control. His suffering does not ennoble him; it calcifies him.

The second generation is often interpreted as a form of resolution or redemption, but that reading relies heavily on Nelly Dean’s account. Nelly is not a neutral narrator. She is deeply invested in the outcomes of the younger generation, and her framing raises questions about reliability. If Cathy is truly “better” than Catherine, it is largely because we are told so—not because the text convincingly demonstrates meaningful change. There is reason to suspect that Nelly’s perspective is shaped by a need to justify her own role in how both generations were raised.

Rather than a story of love or redemption, Wuthering Heights reads as a study in arrested development, inherited damage, and the consequences of emotional immaturity left unchecked. The structure reinforces this: the past dominates the present, and the characters are unable—or unwilling—to break free from the patterns that define them. show less