Do you like the theory that Heathcliff is Earnshaw's bastard son? I personally hate it: it kills the symmetry of the family trees (Linton and Cathy2 becomes cousins on both sides?) and it makes Heathcliff's revenge on Lintons meaningless (Edgar is not relevant as a rival if Cathy and Heathcliff were siblings to begin with). It just makes Heathcliff's acquisition of property (which is the plot of WH) meaningless because the problem is not social status anymore but incest. (1/2)
Furthermore I just don’t get that vibe from Mr. Earnshaw’s relationship with Heathcliff. And I think it’s more beautiful if the cause of all this tragedy is an act of charity. Heathcliff can still fit the “evil bastard child” archetype though; considering the circumstances he was found in, he’s quite likely illegitimate or at least of very low social status. I just don’t think that he’s Mr. Earnshaw’s kid. I’m interested in your opinion since I enjoy your analysis. (2/2)
Hi! Thank you for the question! It’s a pretty big topic and I have a very nuanced and complex answer to give, so naturally it turned out to be quite long, so get ready to follow me through my convoluted thoughts!
I would say that even though I don’t really subscribe to this theory, I don’t hate it, because it can trigger many interesting discussions about some important aspects of the story. At the end I see this theory as just that: a theory, both in-universe and at a meta level.
So what I like about it is its uncertainty. There is nothing in the book that really confirms it, except the mystery of Heathcliff’s origins itself, which can be interpreted as Mr Earnshaw hiding the truth that the child is his own. I mean, there is no clue for it, but that’s not implausible either, and if people like it, I’d say go with it. I just find it a bit unsatisfying when people use it as an explanation for everything, it’s way too definitive an answer, and it takes the risk to simplify a quite complex relationship. It kills the ambiguity, and the ambiguity is precisely everything I love in this story.
But that being said, I would argue that in the end, as I see it, it doesn’t really change anything if Heathcliif is Earnshaw’s bastard son, and I could even accept it. Let’s see why.
I admit I kind of like the perfect symmetry we would have had for Cathy jr and Linton? Both would be a mix of Earnshaw and Linton blood (even if Heathcliff would be a “half-blood”, and still illegitimate). The parallel between Edgar/Cathy and Heathcliff/Isabella is really obvious in the book, since their first encounter: two siblings on each side, discovering their mirror opposite. It’s yang-yang discovering yin-yin. Two wild children meeting two rich and civilized kids. What matters the most is the world they come from, and both Cathy and Heathcliff are children of the moors at this moment. I like the paralleling imagery. If they are actual siblings, it even makes the parallel more obvious (it’s not necessary, but it works).
And after all, Wuthering Heights is a family affair, with two very different families finally becoming one, where cousins finally marry each other. Everything stays in the family. So I don’t see bastard!Heathcliff as such a big deal, all things considered, it fits the family theme.
And for the rivalry between Edgar and Heathcliff, I don’t think it would change its nature. Heathcliff still loves Cathy and is very possessive of her, still wants to be with her, and it being legal or not doesn’t matter. If he is a bastard, he is still illegitimate, and only a half-something, with no name and nothing to offer, which is his core tragedy.
About Cathy/Heathcliff, incest and the nature of love
I want to discuss the incest for a minute, because if we say bastard!Heathcliff, Cathy/Heathcliff does become incestuous. But wasn’t it already the case in a way? And is it really an issue?
I know that many people hate the idea, but I don’t see it as a big issue, honestly. Firstly because Heathcliff and Cathy would only be half-siblings, in addition to having spent their early childhood separated. When they meet, they don’t know each other, they are total strangers. So it’s easy to understand the attraction between them since they weren’t raised as siblings from the start. They don’t know each other, and yet there is something familiar in Heathcliff for Cathy, something that makes them connect easily, while Hindley instantly sees Heathcliff as a rival. So it’s kind of ambiguous in the way the Earnshaw children interact with him. Even if none of them is sure who Heathcliff is, there is a big conflict about his belonging to the family, which elicits both love and hate. Well, we have many explanations for it without necessarily bringing the bastard!Heathcliff theory on the table, but the theory is consistent with what happens between the characters.
Furthermore, a forbidden love between a girl and her long lost half-brother she never knew is quite cliché in romances, and not unusual at all. And, well, I didn’t plan to bring Byron on the table here, but he had a big influence on the Bronte children, both as a scandalous figure and as a writer, and his affair with his half-sister Augusta was the kind to ignite the imagination. And even without the example of Byron himself (and a Manfred -like story), love between brothers and sisters has always been a thing in mythology and literature, and I think it applies very well to Wuthering Heights, thematically speaking. Incest between siblings is often condemned for its taboo nature, but that doesn’t stop it from fascinating the minds of many writers and readers. It’s a big theme in romanticism.
I would also say that psychologically, falling in love with a newly introduced member of your family, who comes to represent both what’s similar and different in someone else, is a very common response. The brother/sister as lover is even a kind of archetype, because it can represent what love is all about: you either love what resembles you the most, or what is the strangest to you. That’s one of the most important conflicts in falling in love with someone else. And I think it’s a central theme in Wuthering Heights, if not THE big theme.
We have two families, and a story that covers two generations. The crucial conflict in the story is best summed up by Cathy in chapter IX:
“Whatever our souls are made of, his and mine are the same, and Linton’s is as different as a moonbeam from lightning, or frost from fire.”
This is a very famous line, but not often quoted in its entirety, whereas I think the part about Linton is very important to understand the big conflict. Because that’s not just Cathy’s internal conflict, it’s something paradigmatic of romantic love itself: should I love myself or the other? should I remain the same, complete, unscathed, with someone who is a double of myself, or should I accept to be incomplete, to be only half of something, the counterpart of someone who will never really understand me, who is completely different from me? That’s the tragedy. Cathy has to choose between being and having, between being whole and lacking something. In loving Edgar she accepts the risk of having something she can lose. In loving Heathcliff she choose to remain true to herself, not having, not losing, just being, but in doing so she also rejects the world with both its dangers and promises (that’s the choice she makes when she dies). The tragedy is that in both cases, she loses. She can’t choose, and it finally kills her. Heathcliff is what she is, and she can’t betray that, but she needs Edgar Linton to mature, to grow, to create relationships with people, to be a part of a social world that isn’t just herself and her narcissistic desires. So in this scenario, Heathcliff is a brother figure, a twin, a double, and if he is her half-brother, it reinforces the antagonism of Heathcliff and Edgar even more.
I also think that seeing Heathcliff as a brother figure - and possibly an actual half-brother by blood - is interesting if we consider Cathy’s attachment for him, especially the fact that their love isn’t framed as sexual. Then, Cathy’s conflict becomes a little different, and is no more a choice between two lovers, but a choice between her love and fidelity for her family on one side, and her desire to be an adult and enter a new family on the other. And I think it’s a strong theme, probably important to Emily herself, considering the powerful bond and loyalty between the Bronte children. For Emily, I suppose siblings and family certainly plays a huge role in defining one’s identity, as is the necessity to remain true to what she is and not compromise herself in the world. Cathy’s love for Heathcliff is all about her fidelity to herself as well, her soul, her interiority, and it’s easy to see Heathcliff as this sort of twin brother she can’t imagine to betray. It tells us that we can love our siblings, our family, more than anyone else, and that this love doesn’t have to be sexual or even romantic to be indestructible. Actual brother or not, that’s what Heathcliff is for Cathy: her kin, the other part of her soul.
Cathy’s conflict also says something about marriage and what was expected of girls when they were forced to leave their family to join another. For Cathy it’s both an exciting discovery and a cruel separation, the loss of something she grieve immensely. She’ll eventually die of her marriage.
Anyway, all of this to say that I find the incestuous vibe very relevant and interesting to discuss, and I also think that the bastard!Heathcliff theory is a possibility that shouldn’t be disregarded nor confirmed. In a way, blood or not, since he is adopted, Heathcliff will always be Cathy’s brother. He both is and isn’t her brother.
All the tragedy of Heathcliff is that he is made of all the contradictions: he is and isn’t a Earnshaw, he is both loved and despised, recognized and ignored, he is always in between. Same thing in regard to Cathy: he is not exactly her brother, not exactly her lover. He is all these things and none of it. And the possibility of incest is part of the uncertainty of the relationship, and also a part of the doomed nature of Cathy and Heathcliff’s love.
The importance of doubt
I also think that one important aspect of them being half-siblings is that they aren’t aware of it. In the book, they certainly aren’t, and it doesn’t directly influence any of their choices. Even the 2009 adaptation, which plays with this idea quite clearly, shows Heathcliff and Cathy as ignoring the fact that they might be related (or at least they choose to ignore it, I don’t exactly remember how it is handled, but I think it remains ambiguous? Isn’t it just rumors that Mr Earnshaw doesn’t confirm or deny?).
So ultimately, I’d say it doesn’t even matter if he actually is a bastard or not, the important thing is that he possibly is, but he doesn’t know, and we doesn’t know, and no one knows for certain (well, Mr Earnshaw does know, but he keeps his secrets). Some people may believe it and some people don’t, but no one is sure what the child is, not even Heathcliff himself. And this only strengthens the discrimination he is subjected to, because the most important in the story as I said is that Heathcliff is always a half-something. He is not a “real” Earnshaw. If he is a bastard child, he is still an outcast, and not legitimate. Bastard or adopted, he doesn’t have the Earnshaw name. He’s just Heathcliff, and an outsider for most people. So in the end I don’t think it changes many things, but I think it’s very important that it remains ambiguous and not definitely answered.
So to me, the fact that Heathcliff’s origins are unknown is essential. It paints him as a kind of otherworldly character that people can fear and be paranoid about, seeing him as the “other”, the demon of old superstitions, the boy who can wear many faces. The fear he inspires is way more effective and visceral that way. And as readers, it’s just super intriguing, because we’ll never know the truth.
But I agree with you concerning the act of charity: I think that Mr Earnshaw’s selflessness in adopting the child he found in the street is important, especially because it highlights by contrast the discrimination and hostility that Heathcliff will face after Earnshaw’s death. It shows how one act of charity can trigger jealousy, hate and resentment, so yeah I would say this is more poetic that way.
Also I’m pretty fond of Heathcliff as a changeling figure, the mysterious kid that the father brought back from a journey and who’s given the name of a dead son. That would make Heathcliff a fairy child who literally comes from another world and I really like that fairy tale vibe. I find it pretty eerie and more inspiring that bastard!Heathcliff, but as always, I think every reading has its value and we don’t have to stick to one interpretation.
I think the core nature of Heathcliff’s character is his half belonging to the world and the Earnshaw family. If he happens to be Cathy’s half-brother, so be it, because the bastard narrative fits him. But at the end of the day I think that it doesn’t even matter, and that Wuthering Heights is more a matter of souls than a matter of blood.
