Dec. 19, 1848— Only a year after the publication of Wuthering Heights, the single novel that assured her literary immortality, Emily Bronte died at age 30 in her family’s Yorkshire parsonage of tuberculosis, the same disease that had taken her older and troubled brother Branwell only three months before.
To my knowledge, there has never been a set of talented
creative siblings quite like the Brontes. The closest might be the Jameses—philosopher
William, novelist Henry, and diarist Alice. But the three Jameses managed to
survive well into middle age, enabling them to achieve a prolific output even
individually.
In contrast, Emily—along with older sister Charlotte,
younger sister Anne, and even Bramwell—died while still young; and the melodramatic plots and Gothic settings of their works—what biographer Juliet Barker calls “Wild Genius
on the Moors,” and what contemporaries often labeled “coarse”—could not be more
removed from the refined intellectual, urban content of the Americans.
One aspect of Wuthering Heights that especially fascinates me is how, even with its complex, multi-generational plot, it still leaves space on important matters that has invited considerable speculation.
(For instance, who
were the orphaned Heathcliff’s parents when Mr. Earnshaw discovers him on the streets
of Liverpool? And what was Heathcliff doing in the years away from Wuthering Heights
that enabled him to become rich and return to wreak vengeance?)
In the same way, Emily, perhaps the least documented
of the three writing Bronte sisters (two older sisters, Maria and Elizabeth, also
died of TB in 1825), also had gaping holes in her history that biographers
sought to fill—with perhaps even more speculation than has revolved around
Heathcliff.
Most of what we know about Emily came via Charlotte, either
directly (in her "Biographical Notice of Ellis and Acton Bell," two
pseudonyms adopted by Emily and Anne to circumvent sexist publishers and book
reviewers of the time) or indirectly (novelist Elizabeth Gaskell's biography of
Charlotte relied heavily on her friend’s reminiscences about her sister).
At the time, Emily had endured fierce criticism from
critics (e.g., “The reader is … disgusted, almost sickened by details of
cruelty, inhumanity, and the most diabolical hate and vengeance”).
Charlotte, desiring to protect the posthumous memory
of the younger sister she loved, depicted her, in a preface she wrote for Wuthering
Heights after Emily’s death, as a homebody who preferred seclusion, and
thus “had scarcely more practical knowledge of the peasantry amongst whom she
lived, than a nun has of the country people who sometimes pass her convent
gates.”
Recent scholars, like Juliet Barker in her epic biography of the family, have pushed back against such well-intentioned but
one-dimensional portrayals. Some have theorized that Charlotte, not content
with creating a genteel image for Emily, may have taken matters a step further
and burned a manuscript that was intended to be Emily’s follow-up to Wuthering
Heights.
(Emily’s publisher wrote her at one point to agree that
she shouldn’t send her the manuscript for her second novel until she was
satisfied with it. But the manuscript has never been found after Emily’s death.)
Charlotte might have been the driving force in the
publication of the sisters’ work, and, as I wrote in a prior post, she
certainly upended Victorians’ notions of what women could do with Jane Eyre.
But Emily’s genius is no less astonishing. As vivid and
evocative as the film adaptations (1939, starring Laurence Olivier and Merle
Oberon; 1970, starring Timothy Dalton and Anna Calder-Marshall) of Wuthering
Heights are, they don’t prepare viewers when they encounter the novel for
the first time.
Only full exposure to the source material enables one
to see how dexterously Emily Bronte handled its plot, setting, and the flawed,
selfish soulmates Heathcliff and Cathy who form its passionate center.
In addition, 175 years after the death of its author, contemporary
readers are likely to be more aware of themes that have become even more
relevant since the novel’s original publication, including inequality, domestic
abuse, social constraints versus the freedom of nature, and the agony of
displacement.
(The image accompanying this post comes, if you haven’t
guessed it already, from William Wyler’s classic adaptation of the story,
showing Laurence Olivier’s tormented Heathcliff visiting Merle Oberon’s Cathy at
her deathbed.)
No comments:
Post a Comment