Reading Comprehension

Question

Many critics of Emily Bronte's novel Wuthering Heights see its second part as a counterpoint that comments on, if it does not reverse, the first part, where a romantic reading receives more confirmation. Seeing the two parts as a whole is encouraged by the novel's sophisticated structure, revealed in its complex use of narrators and time shifts. Granted that the presence of these elements need not argue for an authorial awareness of novelistic construction comparable to that of Henry James, their presence does encourage attempts to unify the novel's heterogeneous parts. However, any interpretation that seeks to unify all of the novel's diverse elements is bound to be somewhat unconvincing. This is not because such an interpretation necessarily stiffens into a thesis (although rigidity in any interpretation of this or of any novel is always a danger), but because Wuthering Heights has recalcitrant elements of undeniable power that, ultimately, resist inclusion in an all-encompassing interpretation. In this respect, Wuthering Heights shares a feature of Hamlet.What does the paragraph convey? I totally couldn't understand it, all the bolder parts.

Mercy Jhansi · Accepted Answer

Hamlet is another novel

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Both Wuthering Heights and Hamlet defy attempts at comprehensive analysis.

I doubt that this refers to the recent young adult book "Hamlet: A Novel."

Anonymous · Answer

Many critics of EB's novel WH see its 2nd part as sort of commentary on the very different 1st part of the novel (but the 2nd part does not in any way contradict the more romantic 1st part).  That the reader should see the two dissimilar parts as a unified whole is naturally suggested  by the novel's sophisticated structure (multiple narrators and time shifts).  Although EB did not have the structural skill of a Henry James, for example, yet her use of complicated multiple narration and time shifts suggests a structural awareness, which is most evident in the two dissimilar halves of the novel, which nevertheless compose a unity.  That said, however, WH seems to defy attempts to unify all of its complex parts into a smooth-functioning whole.  The reason for this resistance to an all-ecompassing unity is not just that such a unity would shove the novel into a standard thesis category (which is a too rigid approach when working with novels), but because WH, as a work of art, has powerful human elements that defy definite classification (like Hamlet).

Reading Comprehension

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions