On your left you see Communism... We will be arriving at Wuthering Heights shortly...

     So I have to say that at first I was really confused about why we were reading about Communism. Well that was the first thing that pooped into my mind when I say Marx. After reading more about I found that the Marxist criticism was an easy way to look at Wuthering Heights. Plus the fact that one of the back stories that jumps out in Wuthering Heights of the "power struggle" between the characters, is like that of the "power struggle" in Communism, where each is pushing their idea as the correct one and fighting others' ideas down at the same time. 

      

     I can not say, or at least will not say that there was much that struck me about the reading itself other than the breakdown of Wuthering Heights. In all truth after reading the essays I was brought back to page 382 again and again just to re-read where Marx and Engels argue that economics provides the "'base' or 'infrastructure' of society." This one passage made me think of where each character is placed in the hierarchy that is touched on paged 398. Heathcliff is said to be a gypsy, but he is the only one in the character that seems to make a complete round about with his monetary situation. He comes into the Earnshaw house hold poor, leaves, and comes back as rich as can be. 

     

     Another passage on the 382 stuck with me as well. 

          "Marx later admitted that the relationship between base and superstructure may be

            indirect and fluid: every change in economics may not be reflected by an immediate 

            change in ethics or literature."

When I read this I was trying to place this in a fitting context within Wuthering Heights, but I was at a loss. I kept reading and when I read the definition of "homology" it hit me. This fits Heathcliff perfectly. Heathcliff is "sometimes unbalanced, often delayed, and always loose correspondence between base and superstructure. After everything that Heathcliff is forced to put up with from Hindley, he leaves. Coming back he is a changed man, his revenge plot is delayed by three years, and more so with the time for everything to proceed as planned. He is unbalanced in the way he acts, especially toward many of the characters. More so Catherine, who is treated with love one moment and contempt the next. Going back up to the quote above I want to point out that my observation does have its' flaws. Where it says that "economics may not be reflected by an immediate change in ethics or literature," fits Heathcliff as well. Though it is a more immediate change he has his moments where his "savagery" come out. Heathcliff was unruly as a child and did what he pleased most of the time, but when he comes back after those three years he is a different person. It is as if the fact he has money has changed him. I guess it does not completely change him since he does act unruly in some instances, but I will back those moment up with the "fluid[ity]" of the relationship between base and superstructure.