Eliszard's Reviews > Wuthering Heights
Wuthering Heights
by
by
** spoiler alert **
Ah the classics. Everybody can read their own agenda in them. So, first a short plot guide for dinner conversations when one needs to fake acculturation, and then on to the critics’ view.
A woman [1:] is in love with her non-blood brother [2:] but marries her neighbor [3:] whose sister [4:] marries the non-blood brother [2:]; their [1,3:] daughter [5:] marries their [2,4:] son [6:]; meanwhile, their [1,2:] elder brother marries and has a son [7:]. Then everybody dies, 1 of bad temper, 4 of stupidity, 3 of a cold, 6 because he’s irritating, 2 because he’s mean and tried to rise above his station. 5 and 7 are the only ones left, so they marry. The women are all called Catherine, the men are mostly called Earnshaw, and through intermarriage everybody is a bit of a Heathcliff.
The Marxist critic: the oppressed and underprivileged [2:] revolts to improve his lot in life, but fails to make allies and loses everything, as always.
The Post-colonialist critic: once again the rich [1,3,4:] meddle with the lives of the poor [2:] under the pretense of improving them, in fact wrecking havoc.
The Feminist critic: if only the Catherines had read The Feminine Mystique…
The Freudian critic: repeated intermarriage and border-line incest make for such good stories!
The Shakespearean critic: Much Ado About Nothing
The Entertainment Weekly executive: stories told by sources close to the protagonists always sell well, because most people live vicariously. And dinnertime has always been the perfect slot for gossip.
A woman [1:] is in love with her non-blood brother [2:] but marries her neighbor [3:] whose sister [4:] marries the non-blood brother [2:]; their [1,3:] daughter [5:] marries their [2,4:] son [6:]; meanwhile, their [1,2:] elder brother marries and has a son [7:]. Then everybody dies, 1 of bad temper, 4 of stupidity, 3 of a cold, 6 because he’s irritating, 2 because he’s mean and tried to rise above his station. 5 and 7 are the only ones left, so they marry. The women are all called Catherine, the men are mostly called Earnshaw, and through intermarriage everybody is a bit of a Heathcliff.
The Marxist critic: the oppressed and underprivileged [2:] revolts to improve his lot in life, but fails to make allies and loses everything, as always.
The Post-colonialist critic: once again the rich [1,3,4:] meddle with the lives of the poor [2:] under the pretense of improving them, in fact wrecking havoc.
The Feminist critic: if only the Catherines had read The Feminine Mystique…
The Freudian critic: repeated intermarriage and border-line incest make for such good stories!
The Shakespearean critic: Much Ado About Nothing
The Entertainment Weekly executive: stories told by sources close to the protagonists always sell well, because most people live vicariously. And dinnertime has always been the perfect slot for gossip.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Wuthering Heights.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
January 1, 2009
–
Finished Reading
January 15, 2009
– Shelved
Comments Showing 1-32 of 32 (32 new)
date
newest »
message 1:
by
Ken-ichi
(new)
Jan 15, 2009 11:41AM
Your hilarious reviews of apparently mediocre books actually make me want to read them. Dangerous.
reply
|
flag
I conceived the review as a service to those who shouldn't waste time reading the book, but have a feeling that they should read it. Do not read it, unless you are stuck on a plane with a small child kicking the back of your seat for 11 hours straight, which is the only was you can appreciate how people can will themselves to die, as the protagonists of Wuthering Heights seem to constantly do...
that is a simply awesome review. I will now proceed to use its key points to bolster my unearned reputation for erudition as necessary.
Although I was a little more generous with my rating, I have to admit your review is right-on-target with my basic take of the novel. I read it because my it's among my Goddaughter's favorites. We had such a wonderful discussion after we both read Frankenstein, I thought we should read and discuss another novel - her pick.
How/why this is considered a classic love story is a mystery to me. If this is love, then I guess I like my hubby!
How/why this is considered a classic love story is a mystery to me. If this is love, then I guess I like my hubby!
I tried to read it in the spirit of the time, rather than as a contemporary novel, and that made it a bit more tolerable... to me, the main issue is that people - especially women - of that social class, in those times, were fundamentally bored, and boredom confuses the mind deeply! I'll try reading Frankestein - hopefully nobody is bored there!
that's exactly what I was thinking the whole time I read it - aren't there any other possible names we could use, just for clarity's sake??
exactly. everyone's a bit of a Heathcliff. that could be the thesis statement of a non-fiction version of the book.
This entertaining review will provide any English major with quotable lines to credibly mimic the views of their obsessed professor. Nevertheless, it is still one of my favorite books and I have read it four or five times. True story.
This is the best review I have ever read and I wish I would have read it instead of the book and saved myself some hours!
Please tell me you have a blog or a twitter account. Your review was much more entertaining than the book. You have me a warm glow after the bleak feeling left in my heart when I finished the novel
i have neve read a review better than this! in quarantine for becoming COVID +ve second time but the review made me laugh like anything :) P.S i love the book too
That was one of the best reviews I've read. Thanks for the chuckle. I, too, am not a fan of the book. No idea why people love it. Characters are insufferable.
Ahahaha loved this revew, made the book seem almost bearable. Almost.
Never been a fan, always preferred Jane Eyre 😉 thanks for the laugh
Never been a fan, always preferred Jane Eyre 😉 thanks for the laugh