limestreet

[limestreet]

Like, I need people to get that when people who love Wuthering Heights say that Heathcliff shouldn't be played by a white guy, it's not because we're arguing for a colorblind casting, it's because (and I hesitate to use Wikipedia here but they cite their sources!) the text literally refers to him in pretty unveiled language to NOT be a white guy.

Like. This isn't a romance novel referring to a white British lord as "swarthy". This is characters in the novel making DIRECT references to the potential racial identity (not white) of a child who is brought in out of nowhere by this white guy who was ~traveling about~ and then treated like shit by the white family that "took him in".

[limestreet]

You've heard about the Madonna/Whore complex, now I propose Mary/Medea: a fictional mother must be an absolute perfect selfless saint whose identity revolves solely around her children, or else be a selfish abusive demon with no redeeming qualities whatsoever

[limestreet]

[limestreet]

I agree with all of this and would also note that it focuses Louis's (and the audience's) attention on the power and limits of Lestat's telepathy in a very minor and seemingly irrelevant way ("could he do this? No?") before asking a bigger and more important question ("could he control a large number of people at the same moment?").

ok can I ask this I feel a little stupid but I can’t quite figure out the meaning of Daniel bringing up the s1e2 plot hole where lestat is speaking to Louis telepathically, like, is it just supposed to be pointing out another error to softball his way into the larger revelations or was is part of the whole thing? Like is there supposed to be a larger implication that I’m not picking up on? Or is it actually just a simple Louis blunder. been feeling like a fool but I don’t really see anyone talking about it

i personally see it as supporting evidence of his point that louis' memory is inconsistent, he connects it so sam being in two places at once during louis' retelling of the trial and then leading it to the moment where lestat controls the soldiers. so i think it's just part of the whole picture - there are holes in louis' story and daniel wants to cast doubt on who put them there. like this is armand's reaction to daniel questioning louis on this, so he's clearly not pleased by daniel doing that

[limestreet]

[limestreet]

I love Cathy Earnshaw - she's one of my favourite characters in all of literature. Part of what I love most is that she *is* so vicious and so angry and so ready to throw hands at every moment. Cathy's not sweet or gentle, like so many other 19th century heroines, and her liveliness isn't tamed or tameable - she's wild and self-destructive and barely contained by the restrictive mores her society forces onto her.

And none of this is *nice*.

This matters because a lot of characters who take inspiration from Cathy *are* nice, as well as free-spirited and lively and backed up by the author as morally right to be so in their strict (usually Victorian) society. Cathy's not. Cathy's almost always described as "selfish", as toxic to the people around her. Cathy's cruel, an abused child who goes on to abuse others. Emily Bronte is pretty hands-off when it comes to audience reaction (esp compared to other 19c authors) but I don't get the sense she thinks Cathy is even mostly in the right.

And yet. Cathy's cruelty, Cathy's selfishness, Cathy's fierceness are all crucial to why she remains one of the great literary heroines. She's *interesting*. She doesn't invite sympathy; she demands attention. She's so, so angry at the way her life has turned out and there's not a shred of moral righteousness in her furious kicking against it. Often, even when doing something reprehensible, female characters are given some kind of moral motive (protecting a child, avenging mistreatment, etc.), but Cathy has no such figleaf, which is itself refreshing. My heart goes out to her not because she's so likable despite everything, but because her anger, her pain and her destructiveness speak so much to me. I hate the idea of hurting anyone, myself, but Cathy in her rage doesn't care - and that's very satisfying.

okay, so this is for the wuthering heights enthusiasts out here

for context, i am preparing a comparative literature exam on the them of negative empathy (like, a kind of empathy for characters -only!! no irl people- that are BAD, like objectively bad, but bcs of reasons you can't help but feel close to/root for them even though you can't fully accept their actions). throughout the course's lessons we discussed three pieces of literature that had characters that could potentially (bcs it is a subjective matter that depends on each individual's world view, morals etc.) trigger this empathy: Euripides' Medea, Shakespeare's Macbeth and Emily Brontë's Wuthering Heights.

i wanted to ask about wuthering heights specifically bcs i don't really have an opinion on it yet, but if anyone wants to talk about the other two works, feel free to do so!

i read W.H. for the first time for this exam, and I really loved it. Like, sometimes it felt really extra and the story complex but not really at the same time. But still, really loved it, especially for the narrator, I think.

but anyways.

Even though I really loved this novel, I hated all the characters (not counting Hareton), for one reason or another. So I wanted to know if other people had different opinions about the characters. like if you loved them, or hated them, and if so why and basically any thoughts you have on them

[limestreet]

https://x.com/tommchenry/status/1428891618770407428/

[limestreet]

The Iranian Regime is going to execute rapper Toomaj Salehi for supporting protests of Jina Amini’s murder by the regime in his songs.

Iranian activist Elica Le Bon says, “Iranians in the diaspora picked up on the fact that the regime tends not to execute people who become known to the international community. We have seen many examples of prisoners that were either released on bail or had their sentences commuted through our “say their names to save their lives” campaign on social media, using hashtags to garner attention for their causes, and even before social media existed, through getting the stories of political prisoners to international media outlets. Once reported on, and once the eyes shift to the regime and the reality of its pending brutality, realizing that the action is not worth the repercussions, we have seen them back down and not execute. For that reason, this is part of an urgent campaign for readers to talk about Toomaj as much as you can, using the hashtag #FreeToomaj or #ToomajSalehi. Every comment makes a difference, and if we were wrong, what did we lose by trying?”

[limestreet]

UK people, look north tonight - apparently there's a very good chance of being able to see the Northern Lights!

[limestreet]

[limestreet]

Camera falls from a plane and lands in a pig pen.

[limestreet]

Genuinely 90% of historical fiction would be so much better if more writers could get more comfortable with the fact that to create a good story set in a different time period you do actually have to give the characters beliefs & values which reflect that time period

[limestreet]

Polidori's <i>The Vampyre</i> was published in 1819 and was very popular/spawned a fair few imitators. Emily Bronte would almost certainly have been familiar with it. A bit anachronistic for Nelly to refer to it, I grant you.

Wuthering Heights was published in 1847 and is set mostly in the late 1700s

Dracula was published in 1897

Carmilla was published in 1872

But Nelly Wuthering Heights references vampire fiction in 1802.

anyway I guess vampire poetry was a whole thing in the 18th century well before Dracula? mostly in German, but translations are a thing, and I guess there were some major English language ones in 1801, so that's plausible.

(yes I'm nearly at the end and a lot of things are going on right now, but I had to get sidetracked by this)

[limestreet]

me reading one of the most famous books ever written: do people know about this book. do they know.

[limestreet]

Top-Tier Villain Motivations

They will be safe. It doesn't matter who else or what else burns as long as They will be safe.

I will be safe. The hunger and the cold will never touch me again.

Fuck any bitch who's prettier(/cooler/better-liked/better at making dumplings) than me.

Yes, Master

Love me. Love me. Love me. Love me. LOVE ME!

I know the terrible things these so-called "heroes" will do if I don't stop them (<- is absolutely wrong)

I don't want a better future, I want a better past!

No other way to get performance art funded these days

[limestreet]

can I interest you in some gay ancient roman matronae on this idea of march

[limestreet]

I have waited, Louis. I have patiently waited in vain…for you to love me as I love you. Just say it. Say, “Lestat, I am never going to love you.”