From the very first pages of Wuthering Heights, Heathcliff is presented to readers as a surly and exotic character. He is ambiguous as to what his unpleasant attitude and behavior can be attributed to. Is it his exoticism, the mistreatment he suffered as a child, or a bit of both? When asked to give an explanation of Heathcliff's character, or lack thereof, the text seemingly offers two options. The first suggests that Heathcliff has bad blood and that the introduction of this foreign street urchin to Wuthering Heights is the sole catalyst for the difficulties befalling its inhabitants. The second asserts that Heathcliff is simply a victim of circumstances. Of course, this text is far from explicit, and this dilemma between nature and nurture is more complicated than the two choices listed suggest. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Prolific literary critic Terry Eagleton elevates the nature versus nurture debate to one between nature and society. He strives to place the seemingly distant setting of this novel in a societal context, focusing on the social and economic structures at play. His discourse is particularly interested in how Heathcliff's disruption of this social order colors his relationships with other characters, particularly Catherine and Hindley. He explains these relationships mainly by carrying out a Marxist critique of the text. When seeking an explanation for Heathcliff's behavior that neither entirely blames him nor absolves him of his moral crime, Eagleton's Marxist exploration provides a more definitive answer than can be found in the text alone . Initially, the scene near the beginning of the novel which depicts an altercation between Heathcliff and Hindley over Hindley's foal and asks readers to speculate on whether or not Heathcliff's behavior might be linked to his foreign origins. In this passage, Bronte juxtaposes Hindley's abuse of Heathcliff, with dialogue filled with derogatory racist dictions. However, although Hindley's words are offensive and potentially damaging, they also almost foreshadow Heathcliff's future vengeful behavior. When Heathcliff attempts to retrieve Hindley's foal, his adopted brother hits him, calling him a "gypsy" and a "beggar trespasser" (Bronte 54). The language Hindley uses, however, seems cruel and unfounded when speaking to a little boy. perhaps Heathcliff is in fact the “imp” that Hindley claims to be (54). It is unclear whether or not the author holds Heathcliff's alien presence, and perhaps an inclination toward destruction, or Hindley's abuses as the cause of the tragedy that befalls this family and its estate. Eagleton almost absolves the infant Heathcliff of any intentional destruction, but he asserts that the boy's introduction to the Heights disrupts an already tenuous social order. He asserts that Heathcliff is “inserted” into the family structure as an “outsider,” emerging from a “realm of ambivalent darkness” outside the Heights' domestic system (397). Eagleton theorizes that it is not Heathcliff's otherness itself that disrupts the Earnshaw family but the fact that a foreign presence is introduced into a defined, but fragile, social structure. Although Earnshaw attempts to bring Heathcliff into the fold, Hindley does his best to ensure that his adopted brother is ostracized. He does this using violence which then turns into neglect. The violence that Heathcliff “involuntarily unleashes turns against him: he is chased out by Hindley, culturally.. 2016