After a year of attending classes in which I was able to continue learning about literature, theory, and criticism, thus expanding all my horizons, this journey is coming to an end (well, there is still the final dissertation to write). But from the very first day the big question has been: what topic will I choose for my dissertation? I was very clear about what I liked: the Brontë sisters, the Victorian era, romanticism, and gothic. However, I didn’t know if I would end up doing anything from that period, as I was learning so many new things in my classes, including different perspectives with which to analyse things and many other schools of theory. I didn’t want to close myself off to anything, so in my final dissertation I did an ecocritical analysis of the novel Jane Eyre. By this I mean that in the end I did something that I knew I was passionate about but from a point of view that I had never worked with before, it was completely new to me. So, I didn’t close myself to anything in case, once again, life surprised me in this way.
I considered several options: Victorian ghost stories analysed from a feminist perspective or from a Darwinian perspective. But the first lecturer I spoke to asked me the following question: are you sure you don’t want to continue along the same lines as your undergraduate dissertation? And I’m not going to lie, it got me thinking and reminded me also of my undergraduate dissertation supervisor, who told me that this work could cement the course of my research in the future, even going on to do, if I wanted to, a PhD. I pondered for a while investigating other options and concluded that I would like to continue along the same path I started out on because it is a field that is very fulfilling to me and continues to make me very curious. So, after several talks with another lecturer and after rethinking the main idea several times… Eureka! I came up with a topic close to what I wanted: an ecocritical analysis of the novels Wuthering Heights and Frankenstein, focusing, above all, on the nature/culture dichotomy. I would like to give you a small outline of what I plan to do. I know that some things will change when it comes to putting it into practice, especially the approach to the concept of “the sublime”, because I think I will have to focus on other rewritings and not only on Burke’s. Anyway, here is the draft plan:
In Wuthering Heights, the author constantly contrasts nature and culture. Represented on the one hand by Catherine and Heathcliff (governed by their passions) and on the other hand by the Linton family (representing social conventions). At one point these two worlds come together, and this collision causes the great chaos that governs part of the novel. For, the chaos prevailing in Wuthering Heights reaches Thrushcross Grange, corrupting, in this case, the culture. One can even study the slave/master dichotomy in relation to that of nature/culture, as Heathcliff ends up dominating both Catherine mother and Catherine daughter. However, we cannot speak of extremes in the novel, since Hareton would be the mixture of nature and culture: a coarse man interested in Cathy (an educated young woman), and he even learns to read.
In the case of Frankenstein, the dichotomy is also notable (in fact, one could study the novel from many other dichotomies, such as nature vs. nurture). But, focusing on the one that concerns us, Victor represents culture insofar as he is a scientist, but he represents a negative side of culture, as he plays God by giving life to an inanimate being. On the other hand, the creature is associated with nature, as he believed himself to be amid nature, since his creator and civilisation reject him. It can be said that culture (Victor, man) tries to break into nature, as it tries to imitate it.
Following this approach, I think it is relevant to analyse the descriptions of nature and how it is represented. I would like to focus, above all, on the use of the sublime in the descriptions of nature. In both novels we perceive that nature can be both beautiful and terrifying at the same time, like Catherine and Heathcliff’s relationship. In Wuthering Heights, for example, a mountainous, cliff-filled landscape is described, and we can also perceive a Gothic aesthetic in the description of the house (as if it were a haunted house). All this forms an eerie landscape full of awe, but at the same time, it is in these landscapes that Catherine and Heathcliff feel free.
In Frankenstein, nature is also used as an expression of the sublime, in that it is presented with grandeur in the face of human insignificance. The appearance of the Alps in the novel and Victor’s observation of them is interesting, as he compares his problems with the grandeur of nature and concludes that they are insignificant next to it. He even finds solace in nature, which is ironic because he has violated every natural law by giving life to a creature. Of course, we should not ignore how the sublime landscapes are related every time the creature appears.
This brings me to two other points I would like to address: how descriptions of nature are used to characterise the characters and whether the gender of the authors influences these descriptions, since the sublime is a rather generic concept. I intend to study the relationship between nature and gender and to discern whether these descriptions are related to the fact that the authors are women. To do so, I will rely on ecofeminism. In the case of Wuthering Heights, we find in the novel an infinity of metaphors related to gender oppression and narratives of male domination. We see this in Heathcliff, who subjects anyone who stands before him to his yoke. But also in Cathy Linton, an impetuous and independent woman who fights for her place. The point is to investigate how Brontë uses this narrative.
In Frankenstein, according to what I have been reading, it can be approached from the fact that there are almost no female characters: Victor’s mother dies, and Elizabeth dies on their wedding night, but before dying, she was the only one capable of calming Victor. Nature seems to do something similar with the creature, as she is the one who takes care of him during the first years since she is abandoned. My idea is to analyse whether Mary Shelly, from this representation, is criticising the patriarchal system of the time, in that through characters such as the mother, Elizabeth and even nature, she is showing the role of the angel in the house in women.