blogging My blog for the bloggers (Bible of Hell)

Wowzer. Sandra Gilbert's, Emily Bronte's Bible of Hell opened my eyes to a lot of interesting parallels between the novel Wuthering Heights and for the most part the religious realm, but also between nature and culture.
First, I will begin with some of the more confusing aspects of this reading. Consistently, Susan makes parallels between Catherine and HeathCliff as characters. Often she ties in the fact that HeathCliff is "female in his monsrosity", to Catherine's feminine personality. For me anyways I always thought of HeathCliff as representing manhood and masculinity in this novel. Which also is confusing because they compare HeathCliff to Satan and Catherine to Eve; which makes sense and has a lot of validity, but when i envision satan I believe in a masculine empowerment, one that for me HeathCliff represents throughout Wuthering Heights. I have absolutely no reason to believe that HeathCliff shows any representation of femininity; He's rough, mean, manipulative(maybe female quality?hah), self-empowering, big in stature, dark, twisted; and overall just manly, probably even has a lot of chest hair to go along with his manliness.
When First reading this, she talks a lot about a Miltonic View; one which after researching and looking into makes a heck of a lot more sense. Milton's parallel to the bible portrays Satan with many heroic qualities when matter of factly in the end he of course does not turn out to be the hero, thus opening the parallel with our favorite man, HeathCliff. Satan/HealthCliff is the ruler of Hell/Wuthering Heights? While Thrusscross Grange seems to be heaven in a sense? These questions seem to me to make sense, however in Sandra's view she often complicates the two and if fact on pg. 389 when she is discussing the children looking into Thrusscross Grange and speculating that if they were inside, " we should have throught ourselves in heaven!" Then sandra goes on to say that, "once the children have experienced its Urizenic interior, they know that in their terms this heaven is hell. This for me was a confusing parallel, because in my eyes I liked at the two places although similiar in many aspects as basically heaven and hell, thrusscross grange and wuthering heights. However she then goes on to say that the hierarchy of being at the Grange signifies and represents a westernized heaven, whereas the chaotic and overbearing environment of the house and house itself, not to mention the owner, represent a satanic Hell.

Hell seems to be a near invevitable fate for all characters in the story. Thus, the difference of the two houses and seemingly between heaven and hell, in reality(of the book) have no difference at all. All characters run as far as they can as Sandra says, but only come closer to the fate which they are trying to escape.

Beginning Wuthering Heights

I am amazed at the complexitites of the character relations thus far in Wuthering Heights. From what i can tell the tale and the events surrounding wuthering heights seem to be very skewed through the different accounts from very different character bias'. So far Nelly seems to be the only truthful and reliable character, although their seems to be an air about her as well that as gone undected by me so far.
The most interesting character, or should I say the most conflicted character, in the story so far would be Mrs. Linton or Catherine. She is unbelievably selfish and childish in almost every scene she is in. She doesn't know what she wants yet still seems to be very protective over HeathCliff despite her marriage to Mr. Linton. At first i was indifferent about her character, but after reading further I have come to hate her. The way she throws her husband to the wolves(heathcliff) possibly in hopes of HeathCliff taking her as his own. That is the only conclusion I can draw; she seems still very much connected to him despite his evil being; most likely cause it ties so deeply with her inner evil, despite her ability to dress up and ultimately put on a cover to win over Mr. Linton. Mr. Linton seems to be very level headed and understanding of his wife's craziness but attempting to slightly befriend or at leat welcome HeathCliff into his home despite the knowledge he has of their previous relationship. When the reality of the situation should be and comes to be as Mr. Linton puts it on pg. 89, "This is insufferable!...It is disgraceful that she should own him for a friend, and force his company on me!......I have humoured her enough." He know's he has been wronged by his wife, and although I wish I were much further in the novel, he in my hopes will abondon the childish witch and see her for the same evils he see's within his adversary, Mr. HeathCliff. When Catherine is discussing her marriage to Linton earlier in the novel is goes to prove her arrogance and incompedence as a women. Also, it in my opinion foreshadowes the events coming between her wrongfully reasoned husband and true love; especially so when Catherine and Nelly are discussing when Nelly first states, "did it never strike you that if Heathcliff and I married, we should be beggars? whereas if I marry Linton, I can aid Heathcliff to rise, and place him out of my brother's power." Nelly replies on pg 64, "I think that's the worst motive you've given yet for being the wife of your Linton." Nelly seems to be, for the most part, level headed yet she still carries an obvious bias with her throughout her own accounts, where she continually and conveniently leaves out any part showing her own self in a bad light.
All of this conflict revolves around the estate of Wuthering Heights; how it is all connected i do not know. The appearance of the ghost earlier in the novel raises some huge questions about Catherine's existence as well as the accountability of Mr. Lockwood. The ghost appears to be real but he is in a half asleep state and cannot distinguish for himself. I am looking forward to discovering the ties between these convulted relationships.

I am torn between feelings of empathy for the creature's existence as well as believing the he is an abomination.
First, empathy. These were my initials feelings upon Victor's first reaction to the creation of such a wretched being. He is ugly beyond belief but yet a scientific marvel. He is but a baby in a man's world yet has a body that can dwarf any man on earth. I believe Victor in most circumstances got what he had coming to him. Responsibility out of Victor's seemingly many virtues is not something he seems to have been taught throughout his delightful childhood. He is the sole creator of this being and for that reason alone, must take responsibility for this BEAST BABY; to put it simply. All of Victor's glory seems to lie within this creation when he says, "No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success. Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and exellent natures would owe their being to me." (51) Well Vicor, your wish was the wretch's command; The monster owed his entire being to Victor and thus also his vast feelings of rage and abondenment. For this reason alone I feel empathy. Victor claims that the beast is eloquent in his speech and that you must not be persuaded by his intellectual arguments; however as eloquent of a speaker he is; his arguments are extremely logical. The wretch's alludes to this very fact by stating, "I am malicious because I am miserable....You, my creator, would tear me to pieces, and triumph; remember that, and tell my why I should pity man more than he pities me?"(173) The correct answer is: You shouldn't Mr. Wretch. 1 point for the wretch -- 0 for his God/Creator.
"None but those who experience them can conceive the enticements of science."(47) Well put Victor; now that you have created such a scientific marvel you can now reep the benefits of his benevolence;.... Oh my bad i mean maliciousness. He is alone and abondoned by every human he has come in contact with even the family which he grew to love; only to get his heart shattered by the prejudice of man. Is it then right to destroy Victor? Yes, and No. Human rights would suggest the latter, no where in the world is it alright to murder men and children, and frame the innocent. However, is the wretch human? and where does morality come into the equation? I believe personally the monster is indeed human with his his self consciousness, ability to feel vast emotion (love and hate), and also his ability to sympathize with those of his kind. Human morality would suggest no validation for such acts, in which case i would consider this monster an abomination. However, if you believe in, an eye for an eye; The wretch has got reason to damn Victor to misery. Humanely speaking i would like to award 0 points to the wretch and 0 points to Victor. Therefore settling the score in favor of 1-0 for the wretch! Bottom line Victor needed to man up and accept responsibility for his actions.
To sum things up, my feelings are empathetic. he deserves the right to humanity or at least the right for consolation from Victor his father, creator, and God.