While Reading a Few Writers’ Guides Books…

Here’s a tip to the authors (who shall remain nameless): when citing books as examples of types of themes or characters or other literary functions, it helps to have actually read those books or at least read plot summaries of what happens in those books.

Case in point: Wuthering Heights being constantly referred to as a love story.

“One of the greatest love stories of all time, Wuthering Heights centers on the romantic relationships of several couples so as to explore numerous aspects of love and romance.”

One of the greatest love stories of all time.

ONE OF THE GREATEST LOVE STORIES OF ALL TIME.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!

Here’s a short summary of the main “romance” of the book (warning, there are spoilers):

The two people who make up the main couple are as follows. One is a selfish, spoiled brat who violently shakes babies and dumps her boyfriend to marry a rich guy so that she can be the “grandest lady in all the land” and boss him around. But that’s not good enough for Her Royal Highness. She wants her ex-boyfriend to live in the house with her too, because she wants to simultaneously have her cake and eat it and doesn’t give a toss about what either man feels about it. When she’s dying from complications in childbirth, she has the gall to blame everyone else but herself for her misfortunes until death finally shuts her up. Well, at least until she comes back as a ghost to haunt her ex-boyfriend.

As for the other? He starts off sympathetic at first, because he’s abused by his girlfriend’s brother. But he marries a woman that he doesn’t love just to spite his ex-girlfriend and he freely abuses his hapless wife for the crime of not being his ex-girlfriend. He also hangs dogs on hooks, mistreats his ex-girlfriend’s daughter to get back at her now dead mother, and mistreats his ex-girlfriend’s nephew to get back at his now dead ex-girlfriend’s brother. Oh, and he also tries to dig up his ex-girlfriend’s grave.

Oh, yeah, I can definitely see how these two belong to one of the “greatest love stories of all time.” *rolls eyes*

I can’t believe that people get so angry about writers misunderstanding and romanticizing Romeo and Juliet when miserable melodrama like this is still being hailed as a sweeping romance. People rant about how the play is supposed to be a satire, how Juliet and Romeo are immature idiots, and how the two warring families were the real focus of the story.

But you know what? Even if all of that is true, Romeo and Juliet is still a better love story than Wuthering Heights. At least the members of the couple actually shows signs of liking each other and don’t try to drag everyone else into their mess. At least they possess some sense of honor – ex. Romeo initially doesn’t want to get into a fight with Tybalt after he’s married Juliet because they’re now in-laws, Juliet doesn’t want to be unfaithful to Romeo even though he’s been exiled, etc. People complain about Romeo and Juliet being held up as a classic romance, but don’t say anything about Wuthering Heights? Sure, Wuthering Heights is not as well-known, nor has it had as much of a cultural impact. But why aren’t people decrying the rose-tinted view of this famous work just as much as Romeo and Juliet?

So, to those authors who are writing guides on how to write: no. No, Wuthering Heights is not a romance. No, Wuthering Heights is not a love story. If anything, the only "love story" that happens is the one that begins in the second half of the book after Catherine Earnshaw is thankfully dead and the one that almost nobody knows about because everyone is so wrapped up in Heathcliff and Cathy. No, Heathcliff is not a "hero" or "anti-hero," he's a downright nasty villain by the way he treats everyone. You could make the case that he's a tragic hero like Hamlet or Macbeth (who also do pretty nasty things), but please stop building him up like he's some romantic hero that writers should emulate when writing their own heroes and please stop trying to make his story look more romantic and heartfelt than it actually is.