Healthcliff and Catherine

Emily Bronte does such an incredible job at capturing the essence of what a love-hate relationship can possibly be like, between her characters of Heathcliff and Catherine. When Heathcliff first comes into the Earnshaw family, Catherine and her brother Hindley were very jealous of and resented Heathcliff, as he soon became Mr. Earnshaw's new favorite son. After awhile, however, Catherine falls in love with him, and they become inseparable playmates. I think that Catherine, being raised by her parents and surrounded only by "proper," "clean," and "feminine" ways of life (ways she ought to act), doesn't realize what she's missing out on, until she meets Heathcliff. He's described as a "dirty, ragged, black-haired child; big enough to walk and talk- indeed, its face looked older than Catherine's- yet when it was set on its feet, it only stared round and repeated over and over again some gibberish that nobody could understand" (29). Catherine was probably never taught to want to play with dirty "gipsy brats" (29) like Heathcliff, so when her father accepted him into the house, she didn't know how to react. When she realized that Heathcliff was different from the rest of her family, and almost had a certain alluring element to him, she couldn't stop her desire to be with him all the time. It's fascinating, especially in children, the desire humans have to want what they cannot have. Catherine cannot have what Heathcliff has, and so she and her brother Hindley are jealous of him; he seems to have some kind of freedom (as we discussed in class) that Catherine longs for in life.

However, when she is approached with the decision of who to marry, she defaults back to what she believes is "safe," and decides to marry Edgar, whom her parents and the townspeople would approve of. Here, she seems to lack self-confidence, or as people in class described it, "just wanted what she wanted, and that's that"... But I think she's actually a very smart girl, in this situation. Yes, she's desperately in love with Heathcliff, but she probably cannot trust herself to be with a person who is unacceptable and so incredibly straying from the norm of who she should marry and be in love with. She even says that "my love for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath- a source of little visible delight, but necessary" (64). Catherine seems to embody what we all might feel deep within ourselves; wanting what we can't have. It wouldn't make sense for her to marry someone who has no social status, and has no authority over anything, while Edgar has ultimate authority over Thrushcross Grange when his parents die. Little does Catherine know that Heathcliff ends up having power and authority over all of Thrushcross Grange AND Wuthering Heights.

It's just a shame that many of us (including Catherine) aren't able to follow our dreams/hearts because we know we won't come out as successful in the end. Catherine really is level-headed, I believe, but it's very saddening that she cannot be with the one who she loves, and instead has to deliberate and "pick" the smartest marriage during this time.

Spivak's Essay about Frankenstein

Initially, I was somewhat confused after reading the entirety of this essay, as the author proposes many philosophical and literary allusions that I had otherwise been unaware of. However, after a second read-through, I think I can grasp some of the major ideas better...

Spivak first intimates that it is absolutely crucial to remember that "the role of literature in the production of cultural representation should not be ignored" (262). This, to me, means that literature has a huge impact on how we view society, as well as how we define ourselves as a culture, and even as individuals. If we ever separate the two notions, Spivak believes we can never truly understand ourselves, let alone the literature we are reading. I think this is incredibly eloquent and a great way of viewing literature; I know from my personal experience that every time I finish reading something, I walk away from it feeling different... changed in some way... I love that feeling that a book, a simple story, can have on me in my everyday life and how I approach certain situations.

Spivak continues by explaining an absolutely fascinating notion about the three main characters (not including the monster). He parallels the lives and roles of these characters as "Kant's three-part conception of the human subject: Victor Frankenstein, the forces of theoretical reason or "natural philosophy;" Henry Clerval, the forces of practical reason or "the moral relations of things;" and Elizabeth Lavenza, that aesthetic judgement--"the aerial creation of the poets..." (264). This notion of a three-part human subject is absolutely intriguing to me, as I never really saw the three characters in that way. Frankenstein, as we've discussed in class, obviously has an affinity for natural philosophy and science. Henry Clerval, especially along his travels with Frankenstein, always had a conscience that we heard from often, requesting that they continue traveling, or that he had a bad feeling about something. And Elizabeth was clearly the aesthetic character, as she was the only person that truly made Frankenstein, a possibly senseless and feeling-less character, have feelings of passion, other than towards his affairs in science. Elizabeth had the moral reasoning, and seemed to reinforce the ideas of knowing right from wrong, especially during times when Victor was looking for help/ an answer to his problems.

While the rest of this essay has more key points and interesting parallels and aspects, I find this one to be most intriguing.