Watching it now too! And I HATE Heathcliff, always have. This adaptation is particularly hard on him (and easy on Catherine), though, I think. He comes off as a completely selfish asshole. Asshole with a hard life, sure -- but an asshole nonetheless. Too focused on hate and revenge to ever bring happiness to himself or anyone else (the way he treats Isabella! Rochester never did anything remotely that bad. Okay, locking your mad first wife in the attic isn't nice by today's standards, but I always thought he was trying to do right by her while also trying to salvage some happiness for himself after they both were screwed by their families (in arranging their marriage).

Ergo: Rochester is way better. And Darcy is in a whole other category!

Oh, I totally get why Miss No-Name marries de Winter. She's an orphan, she's never had any kind of means, no one has ever paid any attention to her, she's stuck taking care of a horrible old woman and probably will be forever. And then, Max. He takes her away from it all, he asks her questions about herself and listens to the answers, he elevates her in the eyes of the hotel staff. And she's like 20 or something. It's her first crush, and it's a doozy. All this, and money too. How could she say no? But... why did he ask? There was nothing about her to attract the attention of an older, wealthy man. Nothing except being the opposite of Rebecca in every way, which is a criterion that seems to exist only in novels where the female protagonist is plain and shy.

OP here.

Jane: "I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being, with an independent will; which I now exert to leave you.”

Responding to 22:12. Yes, I love Jane. She is something of a hero to me. She is such a feminist icon. Remarkable for the time. But I love Elizabeth Bennett too. The thing I don't understand about her is how she turned out so well surrounded by her silly mother and foolish sisters.

I also don't understand why the protagonist in Rebecca married Max de Winter. He never struck me as handsome, virile, or anything she would want. He seemed more of a (albeit dysfunctional) father figure to her. Although at the end she ends up taking care of him (just like in J.E.)

PP here - wouldn't say WH is horrible, but definitely overrated. The one I truly love above JE and P&P or any Austen is Middlemarch - Dorothea Brooke definitely tops the list for me.

Haha - watching it now too.

Anonymous wrote:Am I alone in thinking that Wuthering Heights is a horrible book? Bad pacing, not great writing, mashed plot. Ugh. I don't find it the least bit romantic or interesting.

No, I hated Wuthering Heights. Agree with your assessment 100%.

Jane Eyre is an all-time favorite. As for Rochester vs. Darcy... that's tough. They're both emotionally cut off and get into their romances for reasons that were never (to me) clearly articulated. I never "got" either of them as characters, didn't understand their motivations. (Off on a tangent, throw Max de Winter in that same category, maybe the most inscrutable of them all. For all Rebecca was published a century after its literary inspirations, I don't think Du Maurier understood men, or knew how to write men, any better than Bronte or Austen.)

But Jane is a much better character than Elizabeth. Jane is emotionally pure, wasn't even looking for romance. Elizabeth struck me as a social climber, no matter how much she protested.

Yes, I love Rochester and think Heathcliff is boring.

Anonymous wrote:I like them both. Wuethering Heights is like watching a train wreck happening. Fascinating (in a bad sort of way)

But, honestly, do you really like Rochester? I thought Rochester could have done better by his crazy wife. So, while I wouldn't want Heathcliff, I wouldn't want Rochester either.

I think Dickens has some more attractive heros. What about that guy in "Tale of Two Cities" who dies for his love by taking her husband's place on the guillotine?

Or the men in Austin's novels? I think Darcy preferable to any Bronte man...

OP here. Yes, I really like Rochester. I think he remained a gentleman (even though he didn't tell Jane about Bertha); he did not hurt anyone intentionally, unlike Heathcliff. I don't really think you can compare the Bronte's men with Austen's characters. They're really of a different genre. That being said, of course I love Darcy and also the male protagonist in Persuasion particularly.

Am I alone in thinking that Wuthering Heights is a horrible book? Bad pacing, not great writing, mashed plot. Ugh. I don't find it the least bit romantic or interesting.

Darcy all the way.

I like them both. Wuethering Heights is like watching a train wreck happening. Fascinating (in a bad sort of way)

But, honestly, do you really like Rochester? I thought Rochester could have done better by his crazy wife. So, while I wouldn't want Heathcliff, I wouldn't want Rochester either.

I think Dickens has some more attractive heros. What about that guy in "Tale of Two Cities" who dies for his love by taking her husband's place on the guillotine?

Or the men in Austin's novels? I think Darcy preferable to any Bronte man...

No, just recently reread the two and now I'm watching WH on PBS. So I'm just thinking about it and thought I would throw it out there. I've always loved Jane Eyre.

Agree. Heathcliff is overrated and annoying.

Are you writing a paper comparing the characters?

I don't expect to receive too many responses to this, but I was thinking about the Brontes, and I find Rochester (in Jane Eyre) far more appealing and sympathetic than Heathcliff (in Wuthering Heights). He is such a brute. What's the attraction? I don't even like Cathy that much. She's so weak. I find the novel Jane Eyre far superior. Any thoughts?