Is this a tragedy or a comedy...

Is this a tragedy or a comedy? I find myself routinely bursting out into laughter at the absurdity of the situations and the dialogue between characters

Attached: 9780199541898.jpg (362x550, 60K)

Romance is both tragedy and comedy

Also that feel when the Brontes.. They are so weird

I haven't read it, but according to a teacher of mine, it's a Melodrama... it's a pathetic vision, just like Euripides teather, Marlowe's plays or Shakespeare plays like Tito Andronicus, Richard II or A Midsummer's Night Dream. That's to say, Melodramas aren't bad, they're just simple minded. They're sometimes funny as fuck, like psichological duels like Sherlock Holmes or wachy encounters like Jojo Part 5.

>that feel when the Brontes..
when the brontës.. what?

Well wasnt she some rural hick shut in? I can see why it might be funny and a little over the top. Still some sad ass shit though

Not quite precise. The so called "Romantic Literature" ends up being Melodramatic Literature. Melodramas are literature perceived as "serious shit" by the author and the fans. Depending on the author skills, Melodramas can be breath-taking like, I don't know, The Count of Montecristo or Batman The Dark Night... or could be embarrassing as fuck like Racine's plays or Tommy Wiseau films.
That's to say, there's no tragedy... tragedy is something else. And, when you laugh, it's not comedy on purpose.

As others have mentioned in the thread, it’s a mix of both.


In my humble opinion though, this book is trash. I cannot fathom how this became part of any canon anywhere. There’s a scene where Heathcliff punches a tree in anger, I think? It reads like any weeaboo virgin’s katana wielding rage-fantasy of power display.

It was his head

>muh dichotomies

Attached: 1520688732079.jpg (365x330, 55K)

when they Bronte

There is, in fact, seven dramatic genres, not just two.

victorian literature is the absolute worst. it's so hoity-toity and gaudy and ornamental, and it was all written just so high society could parade around their favorite novels and poems to their so-classy friends. no wonder Bronte was so melodramatic, it was natural of women of the time to make such a big deal out of the littlest inconveniences to get attention from suitors and other broads. typical of that entire class during the time, not just women, but especially women. is there any reason NOT to hate Victorian literature? I mean even look at the staples of the era, people like Hopkins are practically the definition of ornamental with that ridiculous sprung rhythm shlock that throws everything out of the window in favor of easily-digestible dining-room-table-talkable bullshit and says "I'm too special for your mode of verse", or someone like Robert Browning who just screams self-important with his book-length diary entries disguised as poems. Don't get me wrong, if you like flowery language the Victorians are unmatched, but if you're older than 15 and have grown out of the stage in which you're impressed by pretty words I don't see much to get excited about.

I never really liked Victorian lit but I did like Wuthering Heights, so...

>There’s a scene where Heathcliff punches a tree in anger, I think? It reads like any weeaboo virgin’s katana wielding rage-fantasy of power display.

And your message reads like a talentless middle-school girl desperate to sound like her opinion matters. I think?????

what kind of writing do you actually like then?

what does that have to do with Victorian literature being shit? lmao

I'm want to see which writers you don't consider to be ornamental

'no'
faggot

I agree with you. I will be honest, I haven't read any of those books because of that impression. I'm sure there are probably some hidden gems in all that literature, like, I suppose, Pride and Prejudice... but I'm not ready to search those gems in all the shit around.

However, that thing you're talking about the flowery language can be also seen in Latin teather. Holy shit, what a waste of time Seneca and Terencious were. I suppose I can't burn those books because of their historical importance (Shakespeare five act scheme), but they definitely aren't good books. There is nothing like Aesquilus, Sophocles and Euripides... they are, indeed, classics.

your big paragraph post wasn't funny or interesting, so I'm glad that you aren't even gonna try and defend it.

defend it against what? all you did was ask me my favorite authors in an attempt to disparage my person to devalue my opinion. if you disagree, you should give me a reason why so I can explain myself. dumbass lmao

>Brontë, Hopkins, Browning are flowery ornamental shit
>who do you like/who isn't ornamental and shit?
>i'm not telling you teehee
yeah you can fuck off now

authors I like have nothing to do with Victorian literature being ornamental. if you disagree with the statement, maybe you should prove otherwise lmao i'm not going to do your arguing for you lil bb boy

She's literally dissing on the romance and the fiviolity of the problems reported in her era. How is that hard to understand?

Because someone like Hopkins is so obviously not flowery or ornamental that I can't understand what your criteria for "ornamental shit" actually is.

As I said, I've haven't read it. If it's like you said, it's probably a good and misunderstood book.

Damn u got triggered hard. Lashing out because you got bullied in high school?

>thinks 'comedy' means 'funny'

Attached: 1551726605217.jpg (768x768, 45K)

wuthering heights is literally a 10 fuck yall

i define words according to myself, servile brainlet

Not with that awkward af narrative framing device it isn't.

Reading a story as fillered through two people disconnects you too much from the action. This is especially problematic for something trying to be an emotional melodrama.

>Three types of laugh

1. Grotesque laugh: When you see something your mind can't process, like a dead body on streets or a heart sugery. It gives us relief to the pain or anxiety.

2. Funny laugh: When you see something witty but inconsequential, like sitcoms, puns or memes. It's just a lazy and automatic laugh.

3. Comical laugh: When you see other people's pain without any compassion, like bullying, cruel jokes and actual comedies like Seinfeld, Woody Allen or Curb Your Enthusiasm. It educates and prevents people to do ridiculous things in social coexistance.

Based

Idk but this book gets me rock solid

Do people unironically thinks this is a "romantic" novel? As in, a beautiful love story? All I get from this is a story about savage rednecks. I mean it's a great book in a way that it examines the minds of terrible people, but I really don't consider this a love story.

>Reading a story as fillered through two people disconnects you too much from the action
>t. never read the greeks

funny, make me laugh

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 17K)