Emily Bronte’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ is an especially captivating novel for a plethora of reasons; it melds themes of love, revenge, death, and illness to conjure a breathtaking plot, despite the fact that the majority of it is a recount from Ellen Dean. To fit in with the more dreary nature of the novel, the following article will explore how the overarching theme of tyranny connects the novels key themes, as the men in the novel seek to serve their own interests, and ruthlessly subjugate those who oppose said desires. There is light at the end of this pessimistic tunnel, however, due to a fateful reality that eventually resolves this tyranny, either through finite vengeance or through reassuring development. The structure of this article will attempt to follow the chronology of the plot (from Ellen Dean’s perspective), although of course, there will be instances in which references to later/earlier instances in the plot are more significant than maintaining chronology.

The first form of tyranny that Ellen Dean exposes Mr. Lockwood to is the brutish conduct of Hindley Earnshaw enacted upon Heathcliff upon the child’s arrival at the Heights, which continues until he leaves. It’s notable that, at first, Catherine, Hindley’s sister and Heathcliff’s eventual romantic interest, also engages in this oppression, “spitting” at young Heathcliff. This changes after a short period of time, as Catherine begins to enjoy the company of Heathcliff. However, her small instance of hatred isn’t useless to this point, as it re-enforces the nature of both her short-lived disliking of Heathcliff and Hindley’s eternal disdain for him; it is founded upon a fear of the unknown. Catherine’s humanity helps her overcome this, but the hateful nature of Hindley causes this fear to manifest into bullying, which in turn, can be read as pure tyranny. The metaphor of Heathcliff being an “imp of Satan” to Hindley exposes that his ‘hatred’ for Heathcliff is at the lowest level it can possibly be- at which he assumes the boy to be associable with paganism. This verbal abuse is ultimately transcended by physical violence, with Heathcliff stating that his arm “is black to the shoulder” after facing lashings from Hindley. This represents a powerful yet vacuous tyranny, with an exclusive focus on the present torture, and no consideration for what could come of such tyranny. When Hindley becomes the master of the Heights, this tyranny becomes slightly more thorough; Ellen suggests “Hindley became tyrannical”, due to this decision to strip Heathcliff of tutoring and make him “labour out of doors”, thus stripping him of any potential fulfilment in life, however, it doesn’t account for Heathcliff’s eventual decision to escape the tyranny (although admittedly he is only pushed to leave after learning of Catherine’s engagement to Edgar Linton).

To this, the tyranny of Heathcliff is a foil. It is calculated and has a much higher level of impact, which ultimately makes it a more insufferable experience. Instead of letting Hindley’s child die through his errors, or “making amends” and killing the child after he is dropped, Heathcliff relents his inner cruelty for the time being, perhaps to minimise the guilt he would feel. Yet his later retribution is nothing short of cruel, moulding Hareton Earnshaw into an obtuse individual simply to repay the cruelties of his father. The metaphor “we’ll see if one tree won’t grow as crooked as another with the same wind to twist it” drearily alludes to the torture of Heathcliff, which he then inflicts upon Hareton, despite his admiration of the boy. Thus, the cycle of tyranny continues.

It’s fair to assume that this hatred is developed due to a naturally jealous trait inherent in Hindley, however another important piece to this hatred an aversion of those who are not like oneself. Hindley is born into a wealthy family, and is eventually educated at college, after which his tyranny continues to develop. The notion that he should be made to treat Heathcliff as an equal is especially absurd to him; we the readers, don’t know Heathcliff’s nationality, although the quote that he is a “little Lascar , or an American or Spanish castaway” indicates that he may be of non-white descent. This then allows a tyrannical mindset to flourish in Hindley’s mind, one of a belief in superiority over other races that was often shared during the 1800’s. However, readers can clearly see how ridiculous this animosity is, and the unsympathetic presentation of Hindley as ignoble and decaying allows the reader to criticise all aspects of Hindley’s horrendous conduct.

Whilst it would be unruly to suggest that the Linton family oppresses young Heathcliff directly, their class-fueled disdain for him acts as a symptom of a larger problem- the subjugation of the working-class, through policy, unfair labour practices, and, as seen in this instance, manipulative social views regarding the poorest in society. When the Lintons stumble across Heathcliff, they dehumanise him by labelling him a “Frightful thing”, and show racist and apathetic tendencies through calling him a “gipsy”. This degradation of Heathcliff is extended by the unflattering simile that his hair is “like a colt’s mane over his eyes” expressed by Edgar Linton upon visiting the Heights. Furthermore, the fact that Heathcliff holds “contempt” for Edgar, whereas the latter is outright ‘disgusted’ by Heathcliff indicates the social dynamic which keeps Heathcliff oppressed, and allows the upper-class as a whole to uphold its tyranny, in that the likes of Heathcliff are taught to respect higher society, despite their hatred for it, whereas the bourgeoise are afforded the privilege of viewing the working-class as sub-human. This oppression is even continued, perhaps subconsciously, by Catherine, as her litote of calling Heathcliff “dirty” adds to his shame, and is made even worse when she states “But that’s because I’m used to Edgar and Isabella”.

Whilst Bronte may not have been influenced by any specific political theory, Wuthering Heights can certainly be read from a Marxist perspective, and the reader will find abundant evidence to support this reading. Although it subsides in terms of the biggest tyrant (before Heathcliff leaves and returns), which is clearly the malicious Hindley, the tyranny expressed by higher society is one that causes Heathcliff to self-deprecate, which then manifests itself into a more hateful person upon his return to the Heights.

The tyranny of Heathcliff upon his return serves as the centre-point of the latter half of the novel, as he transitions slowly from misunderstood protagonist to a purely loathsome antagonist by the end of Ellen Deans’ narrative. Although Heathcliff’s conduct towards Edgar is full of disdain, the basis of their relationship as a rivalry prevents Heathcliff from exercising any form of subjugation of Edgar and Catherine Linton. With this, Heathcliff needs an outlet to exercise his vengeance on the Linton’s, which he finds in manipulating and alienating Edgar’s sister Isabella, gaining her hand in marriage, and therefore becoming heir to Thrushcross Grange. In her letter to Ellen, Isabella reveals that Heathcliff’s ambitions are oxymoronic to the purpose of marriage; “he is ingenious and unresting in seeking to gain my abhorrence”. Furthermore, the predatorial semantics in her suggestion that “a tiger or a venomous serpent could not rouse terror in me equal to that which he wakes” implies, without directly addressing, the abuse that she faces from her now-husband, which is also connotated by her suggesting that she ‘suffers’, and her direct labelling of Heathcliff as “the tyrant”. Even Heathcliff revels in his cruel treatment, believing that there is “gratification” to be had in “tormenting” Isabella.

In modern readings, the analysis of misogyny in Wuthering Heights has become increasingly prevalent, and here is no exception. Heathcliff’s brutal subjugation of Isabella represents a deep-rooted hate of women that aren’t Catherine Linton. Although the causes of this hatred aren’t exactly clear, it is left unchallenged by society, and therefore remains an integral part of Heathcliff’s character. Heathcliff uses the derogatory slur “mere slut” to reveal his contempt for his wife, and also labels her a “viper”, despite her saving his life through warning him of Hindley’s murderous intentions. Heathcliff’s conduct may serve as a warning against the tyranny of man that ultimately constructs a patriarchal model.

Heathcliff also represents a paternal tyranny; one in which his son, Linton Heathcliff, is damned for not being moulded into his father’s image. The dialogue of the measly and conflicted Edgar reveals the harrowing levels of the abuse he suffers, stating at first, perhaps euphemistically, that Heathcliff’s treatment is “very hard”, and then later telling young Catherine (Catherine Linton’s daughter) “leave me and I shall be killed!”. The exaggerative connotations of the latter imply heavily that Heathcliff is abusive both verbally and physically. This, in a sense, is tyranny in its most unhindered form; forcing those with lesser power to bend to one’s will. Even Heathcliff acknowledges this abuse, perhaps even revelling in it; “my presence is as potent on his nerves a ghost” is a clear remark of apathy, given that he feels no shame in what should be a deprecating notion. This tyranny manifests clearly into misanthropy when he kidnaps Cathy; “Had I been born where laws are less strict, and tastes less dainty, I should treat myself to a slow vivisection of those two, as an evening’s amusement”. The grotesque imagery that is soon juxtaposed through a sentiment of entertainment maybe be a psychoanalytical perspective of the inherent characteristics of those who crave unchecked power; violent urges are a symptom of individualist power, it seems.

Despite the complete vastness of tyranny in Wuthering Heights, it seems somewhat unfair to characterise this tyranny as inescapable. Whilst the novel isn’t overtly optimistic, in fact it’s quite the contrary, there is hope left at the end of the novel; despite the onslaught of abuse and neglect delivered to Hareton by almost everyone he has known, he rises above tyranny to reach an eventual state of self-betterment. Ellen’s remark that “His honest, warm, and intelligent nature shook off rapidly the clouds of ignorance and degradation in which it had been bred” is symbolic of both the corruptive nature of tyranny and the ability to deflect tyranny through companionship, perhaps echoing the childhood of Heathcliff, in which his life at the Heights is made bearable due to Catherine Earnshaw (even further exasperated by the fact that, upon their marriage, young Catherine becomes Catherine Earnshaw). Furthermore, the characters who do engage in unrelenting tyranny; Hindley, Heathcliff, and to some extent Edgar and Heathcliff Linton, all face a sickly demise- when Hindley and Heathcliff are at their weakest, the fruitlessness of their oppression is revealed in its fullest form.

William Blake’s poetry anthology ‘Songs of Innocence and Experience’ has often been acclaimed by both scholars and the wider public due to its impressively progressive nature, given that it was written in the late 18th Century. The poems tackle issues of the oppression of the lower-class, the damage caused by the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, racism, and the manipulation of God’s word to justify abuse and societal hierarchies. However, closer analysis may also reveal that selfishness unifies all of these issues, and acts as the root of all evil.

In his novel, ‘The Selfish Gene’, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins proposes, amongst other ideas, the theory that individuals act (subconsciously or consciously) for their benefit only, thereby ensuring the survival of the individual, but not the group. While Blake lived before the discovery of evolution, a similar idea certainly seems to be implied throughout Songs of Innocence and Experience, as individuals, with or without power, feign altruism and attempt to increase their own gains through the misery of others- instead of genetic, however, this value in only preserving oneself appears to be a disease plaguing humanity specifically. No poem makes this more clear than the Experience poem ‘The Sick Rose’; although only two quatrains long, the poem perfectly captures a despondent inference of the increasing vanity and seclusion of individuals. The floral imagery of a “Sick Rose” represents the death of what was once beautiful, perhaps similar to the destruction of humanity due to an increasingly hard-hearted population. The fact that the perpetrator is “invisible” represents a plague that cannot be seen, and it ‘flying’ “in the night, In the howling storm” implies that it is masked by darkness and harsh clamour- perhaps, given the context, the “howling storm” may be the tumultuous noise produced by the increasing number of factories. “His dark secret love/ Does thy life destroy” can serve as personification of selfishness at its peak; it destroys the lives of others, either for pleasure or for monetary gain.

Moreover, it is important to analyse how Blake presents the selfishness of specific individuals in order to emphasise the destruction of moral values due to a rise in ideals related to ego-centrism. ‘The Clod and the Pebble’ represents a disparity between two different beliefs in love, with the Clod suggesting “Love seeketh not itself to please”. The Pebble refuses to accept this, suggesting that true love is to ‘build’ “a Hell in Heaven’s despite”, and to only serve oneself. Such a selfish view on the purpose of love may represent Blake’s despondence with the ever-growing trend of selfish motivations in Western society- marrying into wealth became much more common, perhaps giving way to the view that relationships founded on love were becoming less common. The ‘Experience’ rendition of ‘Nurse’s Song’ is also a perfect example of selfishness corrupting an individual, leading to the misery of others. The first quatrain represents a deceitfully idyllic scenario, similar to the ‘Innocence’ rendition, however the “whisperings” of the children imply fear, and expectations are subverted by the Nurse’s face turning “green and pale”- with the colour green likely symbolising jealousy. The hyperbole “Your spring and your day are wasted in play” represents a preference of maturity and discipline over naivety and freedom, and it’s plausible that the Nurse may be projecting her own self-loathing onto the children- if the Nurse cannot enjoy the pleasures that exist outside of normality, then to her, neither can the children.

A bigger issue than the growing selfishness of certain individuals, however, appears to be the self-serving nature of privileged societal groups, which ultimately subjugates those not afforded the same privileges. This is most clear in the poem ‘London’, which details a mans stroll through the capital, allowing him to fully witness how the selfishness of those in power has lead to the plight of the average person. The repetition of the emphatic “every” dominates the play, showing how the selfishness of the few in power is omnipotent in its oppression. The “Marks of weakness, marks of woe” also serve as an allegorical representation of the unregulated free markets branding their workers; unfair labour practices allowed factories to work their employers for as long as they wanted, usually stretching far beyond the modern 8-hour working day. This then manifests itself into the exhaustion that Blake could be referring to when he asks the reader to listen to “the chimney-sweeper’s cry”, and “the hapless soldier’s sigh”, with the acrostic “HEAR” suggesting the prevalence of dismay in a society where only aristocrats rule due to a self-serving social hierarchy. This selfishness also extends to the malformation of religious teachings into manipulative jargon that causes children to obey horrific working conditions, as seen in both renditions of ‘The Chimney-Sweeper’. In the ‘Innocence’ version, “little Tom Dacre” has a dream in which he is persuaded to keep up his work, as “He’d have God for his father, and never want joy”. Given the subtle nature of the ‘Innocence’ part of the anthology, this dream may simply serve as a euphemism for a lesson taught to the child, either by his peers, his parents, or his employers. The ‘Experience’ rendition reveals fully to the reader the selfish nature of those putting their own children to work; the contrast of the child being “happy” to him being “clothed…in the clothes of death”, and him being “taught” his oppression represents the impact of his selfish parents, and highlights truly the dismal nature of child labour. The closing sentiment that the Clergy “make up a heaven of our misery” presents one of the biggest enablers of selfishness in society, due to their teachings that such practices are moral and even Holy.

It’s not clear whether Blake’s opinions of such selfishness are founded in pessimism or hope; it could be rational to conclude that, due to a lack of solutions given to solve the plague of selfishness, Blake takes on a pessimistic view and ascribes self-centered actions to being a direct human flaw that is irreversible, perhaps as a consequence of Original Sin. However, the pure nature of the children, and of those who don’t fit into societies most privileged roles may imply that Blake is actually optimistic regarding humanity’s nature to do away with sin; all it takes is revolution.

To many readers, the distinction between the atmospheric civilisation in Venice, and the abundant lawlessness in Cyprus is perhaps one of the more prominent inferences that can be had upon viewing or reading Othello, and for good reason. The majority of the violence in the play occurs outside of Italy, and the denouement of the play can be seen as man’s descent from civilised ideals to barbarism. However, although minor, there are often signs that the isolation caused by the characters’ placement in Cyprus is not the cause for their eventual lack of sanity; instead, it is the warped and false ideals of civilisation that follow the characters from a deceitfully primitive Venice, to an overtly maddening Cyprus that ultimately produces the plays grim nature.

Yet there is sense in claiming that the characters experience the biggest moral descent after Act 2. When the characters reach Cyprus, it becomes clear that they begin losing the apparent civility they once had- this is first symbolised by the “foul and violent tempest” that ‘parts’ the ship’s commanded by Othello and Cassio, which also foreshadows the eventual separation between a supposedly civilised Cassio and a morally-decaying Othello. The drunken brawl at the end of Act 2, Scene 3 represents the importance of upholding Judeo-Christian values and an abhorrence of hedonism and roguish behaviour, as suggested by Othello’s scold; “Are we turned Turks, and to ourselves do that/ Which Heaven hath forbid the Ottomites?”- clearly showing that, as a leader, Othello values order and wishes that those who he represents uphold this order. However, the introduction of the peripeteia in the third act ironically juxtaposes this sentiment, through the symbolic kneeling of Othello and Iago at the end of Scene 3, as well as the powerful religious imagery in “All my fond love thus do I blow to heaven…Arise black vengeance, from thy hollow cell!”. From this point onwards, civility is replaced by violence and oppression, such as Othello striking Desdemona, which Lodovico remarks “would not be believed in Venice”, and culminating in “the tragic loading of [Desdomona’s] bed” in the final Act. Such chaos, as well as a plethora of verbal abuse directed at all women characters, represents an abandonment of civility and the supposed virtue of “reputation”. However, upon closer inspection of the play, it becomes arguable that the characters’ values based on order and Christian societies are feigned in order for the cast to fit in- it is only the isolation of Cyprus that brings out the violent impulses of the cast.

Although Venice is only prominent in the first Act, which is slower paced and much less violent than the rest of the play, as would be expected, there are clear indications that ideals of a fair society aren’t held up to standards when it comes to the Senate’s questioning of Othello and Desdemona’s legitimacy as partners in Scene 3. Desdemona’s father Brabantio accuses Othello of witchcraft multiple times, suggesting that he must have used “practices of cunning hell…with some mixtures powerful o’er the blood”. Notably, the Senate takes these claims seriously, and, before learning that Othello is the accused, the Duke threatens the supposed perpetrator with the hyperbole of the “bloody book of law”. This response subtly implies a wish to condemn a man to death without any evidence, and it is clear that Othello’s “service” as a Venetian general is the only thing preventing the accusation being taking for a crime. Brabantio’s own conviction that Desdemona cannot “fall in love with what she feared to look on”, as well as his constant possessive referral to Desdemona as “my daughter”, reveals both misogyny and racism inherent in a man who wields vast power to his position as a Senator. This is the first indication that Venice’s mask of civilisation isn’t adequate; it almost openly conveys a belief that different humans deserve different treatment based on status (this is what saves Othello), race and sex, and it allows for a man to interrupt important political discussions for their own personal conundrums, simply because of their status.

A more thorough example of Venice’s lack of civilisation is the disregard for Othello’s PTSD by the entire cast, especially his own wife. After Brabantio’s trialing of Othello comes to an end in Act 1, Scene 3, the duke is imperative and politely demands that Othello “must therefore be content” to go on the “boisterous expedition” to Cyprus. This shows a complete lack of sympathy to Othello’s private affairs, but more importantly it also reveals an apathy to Othello’s troubles, despite his previous elaboration of the “most disastrous chances, Of moving accidents by flood and field”, his time in slavery, and his experience with “cannibals that each other eat”. The fact that this is what “won” Desdemona, which Brabantio suggests would ‘win his daughter as well’, indicates a general lack of consideration for Othello’s troubles, and instead a veneration of him fighting for the Venetian state. Later performances of the play have emphasized the affect trauma-in-conflict may have had on Othello; it can even be suggested that it ultimately leads to the murder of Desdemona, which he sees as a “duty”, similar to his military conquests. Although the term PTSD didn’t exist until the 1970s, that’s not to say that soldiers wouldn’t show psychological effects from basing their lives around serving their country. The negligence of Othello as a person, especially a racial minority, yet the reverence of his military service is clear hypocrisy, and serves to undermine the very foundation of civilisation as a way to tie all citizens of a community together through care and aid. Had Venice had the makings of a more progressive society, the tragedy may have altogether been avoided.

It remains entirely unclear whether or not Shakespeare was presenting Venice (as an allegory for his own British society) as a city lacking in empathy, without the true purpose of civilisation, which is to allow all citizens to prosper. It’s plausible that such a representation of Venice is simply meant to serve as a minor background, with no deeper contextual purpose or meaning. However, if we were to believe that Shakespeare was taking the more progressive route and was in fact chastising his society for its alienation of those without power, then there is an abundance of evidence in Othello to support this; Iago, a respected Venetian citizen, proves most of all that order can be feigned, and his solilquies reveal a disregard of moral values in favour of self-gain. Furthermore, the verbal abuse of Bianca by Iago and Emilia, as well as Cassio’s using of her reveals a disdain of the only character who likely belongs to the lower-class. Such actions reveal that the values of civilisation and reputation are only important to the characters when it benefits them- perhaps contradicting the idea of community in its entirety.