Podcasts

  • S2 E1: With... Jenny Mitchell - Welcome back to Behind the Glass with this early-release first episode of series 2 ! Sam and new co-host Connie talk to prize-winning poet Jenny Mitchell...
    1 week ago

Tuesday, October 29, 2024

Tuesday, October 29, 2024 7:48 am by Cristina in , , ,    No comments
A contributor to The Wellesley News discusses whether it is possible to adapt Wuthering Heights to the screen.
“Wuthering Heights” has a special eldritch place in my heart. Unfortunately, the silver screen has never done the novel justice. In light of Emerald Fennell’s upcoming adaptation, I critique earlier film representations of Brontë’s novel, specifically their representations of Heathcliff, and explore the effects of artistic license. [...]
In the novel, Heathcliff is described as “dark-skinned” and likened to a “Lascar, or an American or Spanish castaway.” “Lascar” is a term that describes sailors from Southeast Asia or the Indian subcontinent. Most frequently, he is referred to using a common slur for Romani people. While this word has been used to describe anyone perceived as not ethnically English, the more overt physical descriptions Brontë provides of Heathcliff do not conjure up visions of Jacob Elordi. The Earnshaws, much like the Australian actor, are fair-skinned with dark hair and eyes and are presented, in no uncertain terms, as English. All of this compels me to ask: Why didn’t Fennell cast a person of color for the role?
The whitewashing of the Heathcliff is not unique to Fennell’s rendition of the novel. The misrepresentation of Heathcliff and of “Wuthering Heights” in cinema, and in the popular imagination, is long-running.
The 1939 adaptation of the novel is a far cry across the moors from its source material. Heathcliff is played by the white English Laurence Olivier. Even though the film was well-received, Olivier’s Heathcliff is more stern than impassioned and ruthless. 1939 lacks the zeal and, yes, morbidity necessary to convey the intensity and anguish of Catherine and Heathcliff’s relationship. The entire film works to warp Brontë’s vision into a schmaltzy Tinseltown Romance. But “Wuthering Heights” is not a sugary Hallmark-movie-esque story. In the novel, passion is all-consuming, inflicting psychological and physical distress. Catherine wastes away under its weight. It drives Heathcliff to sadistic monomania. It corrodes the boundaries of selfhood. Brontë asks us a question: Is passion or love inherently unhealthy, obstructive, or transgressive in its rebellion against racial, class and social norms?
If the novel is stripped of its thorniness, the points of tension that foster these questions are lost. How can we see the tension between love and racial norms in English society if we continue to see white actors like Olivier and Elordi on the screen? 
Not all films attempt to sanitize the novel’s brutality, yet even the most faithful of adaptations are flawed. “Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights” (1992) works to evoke the novel’s gothic mood and reconstructs much of the plot. Ralph Fiennes is a delightfully disturbed but thoroughly human Heathcliff. The film shows us the character’s subjection to years of physical and verbal abuse, particularly at the hands of an aptly detestable Hindley Earnshaw. The film also captures the intensity of Heathcliff’s and Catherine’s childhood bond. However, because Fiennes is white, the picture ignores what the novel makes clear: the primary motivation behind Heathcliff’s mistreatment is racism. Catherine’s decision to dissolve their childhood bond and marry the white, well-born Edgar Linton is informed by classist and racist norms.
So far, only one film adaptation has cast a person of color as Heathcliff. I consider the 2011 version, in which James Howson portrays Heathcliff and Kaya Scodelario portrays Catherine Earnshaw, to be a solid film in its own right but a poor evocation of Brontë. Much of the picture focuses on Heathcliff and Catherine’s childhood development. In contrast to the 1992 iteration, this adaptation makes the racial motivation for Heathcliff’s abuse and rejection apparent. Nonetheless, 2011 overemphasizes the bleakness of the environs and circumstances to the point that the film exists in an awkward tonal space between the sedate and the earthy — in every sense of the word. This tonal trouble neutralizes the passion that, as aforementioned, gives “Wuthering Heights” its impact. 2011 is a fair portrait of desolation and trauma, but it is not Brontë’s portrait. 
Ultimately, my pedantic critiques gloss over the fundamental questions: Is it even possible for the medium of film to capture “Wuthering Heights,” a novel so ennobled by Brontë’s language, her successful descriptions of the supposedly ineffable and her foresight to create distance between the narrator(s) and the subjects they describe? If it is possible to revive “Wuthering Heights” on the screen, is it necessary? 
Surprise. I don’t have the answer.
What I can say is that it’s worthwhile to consider how differences in media and stylistic choices therein shape our understanding of narratives and themes. Fennell has, undoubtedly, considered the effects of artistic choices in her adaptation at length. And while I think her decision to cast a white actor to play Heathcliff erases much of the profundity of “Wuthering Heights,” I do hope her overall project pleasantly surprises me. 
“Wuthering Heights” has a certain extraordinary power. It is the kind of story that gets into our bones, that stirs somewhere deep in the consciousness, forcefully surfacing of its own volition, telling us about the very core of ourselves, long after we’ve read it. If we do keep resurrecting this incredible story, please, please, let us ensure that it wakes kindly and not in torment. (Victoria Llanos)
Again, there's no 'tension between love and racial norms in English society' or racial abuse per se (what Hindley resents at first is the attention his father pays to him) in the novel. It's all about class. In an adaptation you can make the point of the novel with a white actor--as has been done--but if you had any BIPOC or white actor playing a well-established Heathcliff the plot would simply not work. It's not race that makes Heathcliff the outsider, even if it may help towards it in the vague way that Emily Brontë described a foreign man, it's his position in society.

Arts Professional reports the appointment of Lucy Powrie as the Brontë Society's 'youngest ever' chair.
Aged 25, Powrie is the youngest person to lead the board of trustees at the society which was founded in 1893 and runs Brontë Parsonage Museum in Haworth, West Yorkshire.
Author of The Paper & Hearts Society series, Powrie is also an online content creator on a popular YouTube channel. She is passionate about neurodivergent inclusion and engaging with young audiences in the arts and heritage sector.
Powerie said she was “honoured” to lead the organisation, having been a member since she was a teenager.
She said, “As the youngest chair in the Brontë Society’s history, I am aware of the significance of being similar in age to Charlotte, Emily, and Anne at the time of their groundbreaking publications, a testament to the legacy they have left.
“I look forward to working further with my fellow members of the Brontë Society board and the team at the Brontë Parsonage Museum.”
Rebecca Yorke, director at the Brontë Parsonage Museum, said: “We are all very excited to have Lucy at the helm. Since being Brontë Society Young Ambassador in 2018, she has demonstrated that she cares deeply about highlighting the contemporary relevance of the Brontës and increasing access to their work and their former home, now the Brontë Parsonage Museum.
“I know she will lead the board with insight and thoughtfulness and I am very much looking forward to working more closely with her.”
The Johns Hopkins News-Letter recommends five autumnal reads and one of them is
Wuthering Heights, by Emily Brontë
This is my all time favorite book! Mirroring its inhabitants, the hauntingly beautiful — and sometimes just haunting — estates of Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange are closed-off, unwelcoming and miserable. In this entirely separate world, apart from civilization and respectable society, Brontë’s characters flourish as the worst possible versions of themselves. This is a book about hatred, sadness, jealousy and revenge: the perfect gothic backdrop for a night in. (Yana Mulani)

0 comments:

Post a Comment