Thoughts on jane eyre? Read it last year and it's one of my favorites, it was touching...

Thoughts on jane eyre? Read it last year and it's one of my favorites, it was touching, passionate and hit me really deep.

Is it up there with the rest of the greats?

>Is it up there with the rest of the greats?

No, but it’s not bad.

Well I think 19th century novels in general are 'overstudied' but yes, i think it stacks up well with them. I prefer Emily though, WH is a raw unsophisticated emotional masterpiece, and an aexample of the type of book only a young writer could produce.

ITS ME IM CATHY IVE COME HOME AND I'M, SO CO-O-O-OLD

...

Not as good as Wuthering Heights. WH is unironically one of the best books of the 19th C, and a well-deserved all time classic. Jane Eyre.. less so.

Plebs in this thread think Wuthering Heights isn't good.

femanons in this thread think WH is good. I counted over 170 errors the last time I read it. Stop Memeing --your killing me. . . with laughter.

>femanons in this thread think WH is good
Reminder that WH was almost universally praised by the critical press when it was first published under the name of Ellis Bell, and then panned as soon as it was revealed Ellis Bell was a woman.

Women hate WH without fail. Every girl I’ve ever met who has read it always tells me there are no pikeable characters. Jane Eyre is the one they love.

meant for

Watch BookTube and learn otherwise.

This. With only a couple exceptions, the only people I've known who enjoy WH are men.

by modern standards it's shit. who cares how it was received in the cave woman days?

Most of the women I know who read WH liked it.

How many errors should be overlooked before it's judged a POS?

Just admit it's included in Lit because there wasn't any other vagina based stories to hold up in the time period. Fuck Middlemarch too, while we're arguing over nothing.

>by modern standards it's shit
It isn't. By modern standards its even better. You might as well say the Iliads shit. Or Madame Bovary. They all react to literary movements and ideas of their time. You have to get into the head space of that era to appreciate them. Wuthering Heights is a great book, and Heathcliffe is a great character.

Not sure if you're making fun of Kate Bush, but that's actually a great fucking song.

CATHY I'VE COME HOME STICK THE KETTLE ON LETS HAVE A LOVELY CUP OF TEA OY!

>Just admit it's included in Lit
It was a genre defining book and incredibly historically important.

Fuck, how pleb can you fucks be.
>hurr a she got a vegneir so dur books only canons b curz she got vegenir.

No one knew what to make of WH, because it was different from what came before it. It represented a change in the popular literary tone and imagery. It's a literary classic for a reason, and it was canonized before anyone cared about women's equality. Even Harold Bloom loves it.

Wrong, people have changed the name and submitted it for publication--to be rejected many times. It's shit by modern standards. Zero logic or believability in any age, no clear point of view. Unsympathetic and convenient characters. By what criteria is it good?
Protip: it isn't.

citation needed

Still no reply, because as soon as you pick a number, I'll serve up as many mistakes as you can eat. It's a Lit Fuckup buffet: word salad of a disturbed individual. She invented horror did she?
inb4 le projecting meme.

Verbose middle-class drivel.

If it weren't public domain it would have gone out of print and remained there. This is obvious to all but a small percentage of readers.

Just read the commentary from the time period, and read the current critical articles.
> She invented horror did she
No, that's not what I said. The book is the first instance of this kind of gothic novel. It shows a shift in the romantic preoccupation, and it does it extremely well. It's a particularly 19th C account of a tragic protagonist, a romantic hero. It is as important as Coleridge's Mariner, and more important than Stoker's Dracula.

That's why they had to vanity print it, because it was universally praised, right? I think you meant despised and soundly rejected.

Is this thread gonna be about Jane Eyre anytime soon?

This must be anecdotal evidence but I'll bite. The only people I've known who enjoyed Wuthering Heights were women.

autumn and winter are here, therefore I will only listen to glorious Kate Bush

I would floss my teeth with her Kate Bush if you get what i'm saying haha vagina pussy

Are you under 20? I bet the women you asked actually only pretend to like it or didn't actually read it. And I bet the men you know who don't like it will like it more if they read it again when they're older.

>I think you meant despised and soundly rejected.
You haven't done your research, bud.

I'm 25, don't know why you would think I was under 20, user. I don't know any men who like it, I don't know any men who read to be honest.

People will always pretend to like something to fit in with others, but I do know women who have actually read it. If I can't accept whether they loved it or not based on their own word of it then we're at a stalemate.

but why would you expect any book written in the 19th century to be accepted for publication now? that says nothing about whether it's a good book or not.

>don't know why you would think I was under 20, user

Because I hated the book when I first read it, but later I grew to appreciate it. It's okay if you don't though. I can understand why not everyone would like it.

Egnlish Novel threads (those about Brontes and Austen especially) are the ultimate pseud litmus test.

What are you saying, user? I loved it too