Vocal has two reviews of
Wuthering Heights (the novel) and needed AI-generated images to illustrate them because it's not as if there were lots and lots of pictures of the novel in its many editions online.
It’s not often that I find myself so haunted by a novel long after I’ve closed its final page, but reading Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë left me with a lingering intensity that is difficult to shake off. From the very first chapter, the book plunges into a moody, brooding atmosphere that seems to wrap itself around the reader like the Yorkshire moors it so vividly describes. [...]
Visually and atmospherically, Wuthering Heights is exceptional. The moors are more than just a backdrop—they are a living, breathing presence in the narrative, symbolizing freedom, desolation, and the untamed forces that drive the characters’ actions. Brontë’s descriptions of the landscape mirror the internal turmoil of her characters, creating a powerful resonance between setting and story.
If there is any criticism to be made, it might be that some readers find the characters too harsh or the plot too bleak. The novel does not offer the comfort of redemption in the way many Victorian novels do. Its intensity can be overwhelming, and the emotional toll it takes on the reader is real. However, this is also a testament to Brontë’s skill—she does not write to appease, but to provoke and to challenge.
What I found most compelling about Wuthering Heights is its unrelenting honesty. It doesn’t shy away from portraying the ugliness of obsession, the pain of rejection, or the corrosive effects of revenge. Yet amid this darkness, there is a kind of tragic beauty. The novel captures the raw essence of passion, the ache of longing, and the quiet devastation of loss in a way that few books manage.
So, Wuthering Heights is a masterpiece that defies easy classification. It is neither a conventional romance nor a straightforward Gothic tale—it is something far more complex and visceral. I would wholeheartedly recommend it to readers who are not afraid to delve into the murky depths of human emotion and who appreciate literature that confronts rather than comforts. My final verdict: a bold, unforgettable, and hauntingly lyrical novel that stands alone in its intensity and artistic power. (Caleb Foster)
Wuthering Heights is not a book you simply read and forget. It’s a novel that gets under your skin, challenging your ideas about love, loyalty, and forgiveness. Emily Brontë’s masterpiece is as wild and unpredictable as the moors themselves, and its echoes linger long after the last page is turned. If you’ve never read it, I encourage you to take the journey. But be warned: you may find yourself haunted, too. (Snigdho Saha)
A contributor to
The Federalist gives '6 Reasons Parents Shouldn’t Blindly Trust ‘Classic’ Book Lists From Corrupt Academics', letting us know that prejudices are alive and well even in the book world.
It’s not a hot take to say that modern art is trash. While the greats of the past created works that embodied excellence and nurtured our noblest sentiments, the moderns make insolent ugliness that few but deranged college professors love. Yep, I am not saying anything new when I say that modern art is a departure from our Western ideals.
So when are we going to come to the same conclusion about modern literature?
As a high school English teacher, there are many “classics” on my school’s reading list that I don’t think should make the cut, such as “The Lottery,” Lord of the Flies, Ethan Frome, and Of Mice and Men. Some of my colleagues insist that although these works are bleak, they contain essential truths that are somehow going to make the young, impressionable minds reading them better thinkers and better people.
As conservatives, we consider ourselves to be the guardians of classics, protecting them from woke mobs. But works like Of Mice and Men were dubbed “classics” as our Western values were already coming to a close. I’m wary of books selected by leftist professors from the ’60s enjoying the same immunity status as veritable classics like Hamlet and Jane Eyre. The difference is that older classics are firmly rooted in our Western values, while many modern works are expressly fatalistic. [...]
It’s time to remove the authority of hippie professors from the ’60s to define what a classic is. Just because some literary experts insist a book has value doesn’t mean we have to subject our 14-year-olds to it. It’s no secret that our education system is failing to raise thoughtful, moral individuals. As we go forward, we need to create a literary canon that effectively inspires young people to become principled adults. (Meg Marie Johnson)
We wish that was an AI-generated parody, but alas, it doesn't seem to be, even if it does sound like one.
0 comments:
Post a Comment