Annotated Bibliography

“Imperialism at Home: Race and Victorian Women’s Fiction”

Meyer’s overarching claim is that the novel Wuthering Heights criticises the British imperialism. She highlights the oppressive aspects of British society in the nineteenth-century observed by Emily Bronte, and that her novel suggests the retaliation of those who have been oppressed. Meyer argues that Bronte delightedly releases Heathcliff's potentials of confrontation, which gradually turn the previous oppressed as the new oppressor and through this depicts reverse colonization.

The article highlights racial differences in relation to the slave trade and ownership. In the early incident when Heathcliff and Catherine were caught in Thrushcross Grange the Lintons treat Heathcliff as the acquisition of Mr. Earnshaw. Meyer argues that the Lintons are egotistical towards Heathcliff but meanwhile, find him fearful because of his dark skin. Meyer notes that this “reductive and predictive reading of physiognomy,” (p.100), by the British to govern ‘dark races’ is being satirized by Bronte.

By mentioning the other critics who noted Wuthering Heights as having “threatening power” (p. 101), Meyer highlights that the unbearable cruelty of British society not only led to revolt, but it also provoked those subjugated to practice the same oppressive approaches of capitalism.  

The author confirms that economic injustice is an essential issue to the novel, nevertheless, she posits that under the British imperialism the economic injustice is imposed on the "dark races" rather than on the class system. The author justifies that Heathcliff never tried to make an alliance with the other working people and his progress from a state of extreme poverty to one of great wealth emphasises “the values of capitalism”, (p.102).  

The author claims that according to Wuthering Heights not only dark races but the white women are also subject to the cruelty of British imperialism.  Meyer states that Heathcliff and Catherine are being deprived in many ways. The oppressive mainstream society marginalises Heathcliff, causing him to have an incomplete identity as he has no surname. Likewise, Catherine is alienated and suffers from an unstable identity as she gets different surnames in Wuthering Heights and in Thrushcross Grange.

Mentioning the historical subjugations enforced by British imperialism on China and India, Meyer argues that Nelly’s earlier imagination about Heathcliff’s parentage of a Chinese emperor and an Indian queen is a restoration of history.  This imaginary scene implies that oppression may lead those subjugated countries to unite together and turn to retaliate the oppressive British. Furthermore, the assumption that Heathcliff having been in the army is associating with another colonial uprising in North America because his absence coincides with the Revolutionary War. As the “political anxieties about loss of empire”, (p.115) was one of the major issues of the time, Meyer argues that Bronte subtly connects Heathcliff to various rebellions around the world against the British imperialism. 

Meyer argues that Wuthering Heights is not an impressively feminist novel, and neither does it merely narrate women’s disempowerment under British imperialism. She finally asserts that this the novel is an instance of “complex transformations of the metaphor linking gender and race,” (p.125), in the literary work of British female writers in the nineteenth century.

Reference

Meyer, Susan. “‘Your Father was Emperor of China, and Your Mother an Indian Queen’: Reverse Imperialism in Wuthering Heights.” In Imperialism at Home: Race and Victorian Women’s Fiction, 96–125. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996.