WH Discussion Day 1

[writingwithheld]

Hello all,

I'm not really sure how we should do this. One big thread? Many threads based on themes/characters?

Last night I had a dream I was flamed because I made this post and did not offer my formal thesis on the first five chapters, haha.

[charlatti]

I would think separate threads would be easier, but I don't have strong feelings. Anyone could create a topic/question for discussion and others can chime in throughout the day or week.

Your dream is pretty funny. I've been feeling like I'm back in high school -- I don't want to read ahead, because then I might not remember the early stuff well enough to pass the quiz!

[writingwithheld]

I think it might be good on one just because we read so little. As we progress we may need to make multiple threads as more and more themes emerge.

First thing I noticed was the heavy use of animals (specifically dogs) as metaphor for the emotional climate of the particular scene. It seems the narrator finds the other characters rather animalistic, especially Heathcliff for obvious reasons.

[PinkSquirrel]

This week has been crazy and I haven't had a chance to start reading WH. I did quickly read the spark notes so I could at least know what was being discussed. Ha I feel like I'm back in high school. I will have loads of reading time this weekend so I'll catch up and be able to participate next week.

[bluelikejazz]

This is my first time through WH, so I can't comment too much, because I feel like at least for now, we haven't read much.

That said, I feel like I should be spooked. The storm and the creepy room and everything. I can't figure out if I am actually "spooked" or not yet.

Interesting about the animal metaphors. I didn't pick up on it, but will pay attention this week for sure!

[charlatti]

I didn't catch the animals either, but now that you pointed it out I can't see how I missed it. Lockwood definitely seems to think everyone at WH is barely human.

What do you think of Lockwood so far? He struck me as much more amusing than I remember the first time around -- he's so full of false modesty.

Joseph -- he's a servant but also a preacher? Is that common?

[writingwithheld]

Is Joseph literally a church leader or is he just really into religion? I didn't catch that we was a preacher for real. I thought he was just very preach-y to the other characters.

I also like Lockwood better the second time around (tried to read it once before but only made it halfway through). I definitely think he thinks he is better than everyone, especially in conjunction with the animal motif.

[charlatti]

May 23, 2012 13:29:47 GMT -5 writingwithheld said:

Is Joseph literally a church leader or is he just really into religion? I didn't catch that we was a preacher for real. I thought he was just very preach-y to the other characters.

I was thinking about the bit from Catherine's diary where she and Heathcliff had to listen to Joseph forever while her brother canoodled with his new wife. It says they couldn't go to church because of the rain, so Joseph preached. Just seemed odd to have a servant do the preaching, even in an unofficial capacity.

[whitepicketfence]

As another poster mentioned, since this is my first time reading WH, I don't feel like I can really comment on it yet since we've only read a handful of pages. I'll be honest though, I'm having trouble getting into the story. I always struggle a bit with classics but I feel like I often get confused as to what is going on and have to go back and reread certain sections

Hopefully I'll have something more insightful to add to the discussion next week

[sporklemotion]

May 23, 2012 9:01:57 GMT -5 writingwithheld said:

I think it might be good on one just because we read so little. As we progress we may need to make multiple threads as more and more themes emerge.

First thing I noticed was the heavy use of animals (specifically dogs) as metaphor for the emotional climate of the particular scene. It seems the narrator finds the other characters rather animalistic, especially Heathcliff for obvious reasons.

The animals were pretty much the only thing I noticed, too. Like others, I'm not sure what to think yet, because I feel like things are still getting off the ground.

I'm not sure how I feel about Lockwood, either. I can't tell if he's imposing himself on his neighbors and is rude, or if they're being overly forbidding and rude to him. I'll probably have to reread once I get more into the book, too.

I'm going to push through, though, because I have heard from others that it does get more clear as it unfolds. And I know that without you all, I would give up within a few pages .

[dorothyinAus]

I have been reading the book and listening to a Librivox audio version -- if only because I find myself skimming and not paying attention. It's been helpful because I'll hear things I missed in reading and I'll read things I missed when I was listening.

So far, I find the book has a very angry tone, which is probably why I gave up on reading it in high school (aside from the fact that I tended to resent "required" reading assignments). I find myself having trouble keeping the characters straight -- why do they all have the same or similar names??? And the edition I am reading, the Barnes & Noble Classics edition, has not only footnotes, but endnotes as well, so the text is cluttered with superscript. I am wondering if the Kindle version would be cleaner.

Other than the dogs and the pile of dead rabbits, I hadn't noticed a lot of animals in the book or even comparisons to animals. But often I have problems picking up on symbolism and other literary devices, so it may just be that any metaphors have just washed over me.

I am hoping that the story picks up a bit as it is slow going so far. I can see why the publishers were not interested in it at first -- my edition has 42 pages of preliminary discussion about the novel, detailing its importance and history, with a brief biography of the author(s) -- as it was discussed that Charlotte Bronte made edits to the novel before she resubmitted it for publication after her sister's death.

I can't honestly say I am enjoying it, but I am hopeful it gets better.

[charlatti]

May 23, 2012 19:16:42 GMT -5 dorothyinAus said:

I find myself having trouble keeping the characters straight -- why do they all have the same or similar names???

Is there a family tree in the beginning of yours? Mine has that and it's really helpful.

[mollymoe]

May 23, 2012 15:12:05 GMT -5 whitepicketfence said:

As another poster mentioned, since this is my first time reading WH, I don't feel like I can really comment on it yet since we've only read a handful of pages. I'll be honest though, I'm having trouble getting into the story. I always struggle a bit with classics but I feel like I often get confused as to what is going on and have to go back and reread certain sections

Hopefully I'll have something more insightful to add to the discussion next week

I've read WH before and I remember the beginning was really hard to get into. I think if you can stick it out, the story will get much more compelling.

The relationships between all the people in the book is a little confusing sometimes. Once the book gets going, I remember the relationships falling into place and it will make more sense.

[pthermal]

WH is considered gothic so it should have that spooky vibe to it. This is my third time reading and I totally never made the animal connection so I'm glad that was pointed out! Also Lockwood emerged as a different charater for me this time. I like the humor I see in him this time around. And I agree that it's hard to keep everyone straight at first. I've read it before and was like 'OK wait. Who are we talking about again?'

I'm excited to read this again at a leisurely pace. The first time I read was high school and I hated it. Then I read it in college but we only had a week so we breezed through it.

[kicius56]

First time reading and I found it a bit difficult to follow as others did. I had to go back and reread certain parts.

The names and who's who was confusing at first and it made me disinterested in reading further. I am usually a good sport and it takes a lot for me to get bored.

Of course I didn't pick up on the animal metaphors, but in hindsight they did hep frame the characters.and setting.

I can't figure out Lockwood just yet or I missed some piece of information. I don't know why he keeps imposing on Heathcliff. What is his motivation? Had he nothing better to do with his time?

[mollymoe]

It does seem that a lot of old books have these complicated relationships. Keeping the relationships straight can be the hardest part of reading a classic. I've made notes before to try to keep all the characters straight.

Mr. Earnshaw is an interesting guy. How odd do you think it was back in his time to just take a homeless boy off the streets and bring him home--and not as a servant but as a member of the family? I can see where he was trying to be kind but I don't understand why he would "rescue" Heathcliff but then allow the rivalry that develops between his children.

[BravoBravo]

May 23, 2012 19:16:42 GMT -5 dorothyinAus said:

I am hoping that the story picks up a bit as it is slow going so far. I can see why the publishers were not interested in it at first -- my edition has 42 pages of preliminary discussion about the novel, detailing its importance and history, with a brief biography of the author(s) -- as it was discussed that Charlotte Bronte made edits to the novel before she resubmitted it for publication after her sister's death.

This is what I read last night. I found it really interesting. I will be caught up for next weeks discussion.

[kicius56]

May 24, 2012 6:25:40 GMT -5 mollymoe said:

Mr. Earnshaw is an interesting guy. How odd do you think it was back in his time to just take a homeless boy off the streets and bring him home--and not as a servant but as a member of the family? I can see where he was trying to be kind but I don't understand why he would "rescue" Heathcliff but then allow the rivalry that develops between his children.

It really is strange to me that someone would take in a homeless boy like that. First thought I had: he's his son.

[mollymoe]

I never thought about Heathcliff being his son but I can see that. Not only is it strange that a wealthy man of that time would bring home a random homeless child, it seems even stranger that he would bring home a kid thought to be a gypsy. It could also explain why he favored Heathcliff and why Hindley was so jealous.