A fool usurps my body!

"my mom is evil and i need to escape the tower before it kills me"

NEXT DAY...

in aotearoa, june isn’t our pride, it’s theirs. marsha p johnson and sylvia rivera are their historical figures, not ours. the phrase that “you owe your rights to Black trans women” is true there, but here we owe our rights to (mostly) Māori historical figures. i have the freedoms i do because of the legacy of an entirely different set of people operating in an entirely different context at entirely different times.

But because of american cultural imperialism, most queer people in Aotearoa don’t even know our own queer history. Carmen Rupe, Ngahuia Te Awekotuku, the Dorian Society, Gillian Laundon, Georgina Beyer, and the Wolfenden Association are some of our queer history. We should know their names! we should know what they did for us! but because of the power of the american imperial machine, we don’t.

our national pride month should be july, the month that the Homosexual Law Reform Act passed in 1986. our two largest cities hold their pride festivals in february and march, respectively. american queer history has very little (or nothing, depending on who you ask) to do with our queer history. anecdotally, from my own queries, queer youth in aotearoa know more about american queer history than our own.

Background In the book, Heathcliff is a child who was picked up from the streets and adopted into the Earnshaw family; due to his dark skin color, he’s treated and scorned unfairly with violence by everyone in the house; One servant in particular, named Joseph, is a strict christian who would always berate and chastise him throughout childhood; treating him as an “imp of satan”. Needless to say, throughout his life, he’s been subjected to both physical, psychological, and verbal abuse from the tenants of Wuthering Heights. Heathcliff then grew up to be immensely rich, and he would take over both the estates of Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange. All of his possessions are meticulously calculated to enact revenge for his tormenters in life.

Rogozhin is the son of a wealthy merchant who lives under a strict father - not really an Old Believer, but "it's true that he used to say the old faith was more correct" and "He also respected the skoptsy" (from wikipedia: Skoptsy is known for practising the emasculation of men, the mastectomy and the female genital mutilation of women in accordance with their teachings against sexual lust) as he would rent his estate to skoptsy tenants. Rogozhin was also subjected to physical abuse (even implied sexual abuse, due to his father’s association with the skoptsy). Just like Heathcliff, Rogozhin inherited his father’s wealth and remained a heartless rich merchant.

Both of these characters have religious trauma - or at least trauma formed from strict, fundamentalist practice of religion that focuses on punishment rather than love; religion used as justification to punish/condemn someone. Because of their past, they became hardened individuals who can only express their love through violent passion and possessiveness. Just like Rogozhin, Heathcliff uses money as a means of controlling and possessing an individual. Rogozhin attempts to own Nastasya by buying her and spending lots of money on her, while Heathcliff wanted to enact revenge on his oppressors and tormentors - through marrying Isabella and possessing her brother’s estate with his son Linton. Much like him, in a way, Rogozhin also wanted revenge against his father by indulging in “demonic” passions - through marrying Nastasya and wasting money with scoundrels.

Heathcliff took over Wuthering Heights, and Rogozhin took over his Father's house. Both of these houses are symbolic of repressed trauma; houses are meant to shelter people from storms and cold right? but both of the books described these houses as far from being a sanctuary. Wuthering Heights is cold, prone to extreme weather, while Rogozhin's house is described as gloomy and inhospitable; the point is that the two houses taunt and mock the characters with their past, because it's the very place where all of their sufferings began and where it sealed their fate. In the end, Heathcliff died adjoining Cathy's grave overlooking the moors, and Rogozhin "died" (loses his mind to brain fever) inside the house; Both houses fulfilled their role as a final coffin/resting place for these characters.

Bond Formed From Trauma While on the topic of trauma, it's interesting to see that the basis for infatuation for both Heathcliff and Rogozhin (respectively towards Cathy and Nastasya) is unhealed past trauma. Heathcliff, alongside Cathy, experiences abuse and bears witness to it together at the same time. While Heathcliff is often flogged, Cathy is often starved - and it only got worse after their father died and Hindley took over the house and became tyrannical. They became inseparable because they're the only ones in that house who understand the extent of pain each is going through: "The greatest punishment we could invent for her was to keep her separate from him; yet she got chided more than any of us on his account." Also, not to mention, both are minorities in Wuthering Heights; Heathcliff is a person of colour, while Cathy is the only girl in the Earnshaw family (her mother died not long after, and Nelly is a servant). Their bond is strong because it's them vs the world; "They both promised fair to grow up as rude as savages; the young master being entirely negligent on how they behaved, and what they did, so they kept clear of him." Cathy described her love for Heathcliff: "My love for Linton is like the foliage in the woods: time will change it ... My love for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath: a source of invisible delight, but necessary. Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being." while Heathcliff described his love for Cathy: "Two words would comprehend my future - death and hell: existence, after losing her, would be hell ... If he (Edgar) loved with all the powers of his puny being, he couldn't love as much in eighty years as I could in a day. And Catherine has a heart as deep as I have: It is not in him to be loved like me ... how can she love in him what he has not?" But their desire to be one is such in intensity that they did not care if it brought harm to others. If one of them is gone or dies, the other rots and defiles their surroundings.

Rogozhin and Nastasya are drawn to each other because they understand that they both have suffered, but they end up tormenting and pushing each other away precisely because of that. They hate each other because neither knows how to love without inflicting violence. Between them is a constant battle of hatred and desperation for condemnation, and both equally torment each other. This is why we see Nastasya always running back to him, knowing that both he and herself hates each other, and Rogozhin kept on pursuing Nastasya despite her constantly running away from him and kept postponing their wedding. Unlike Heathcliff and Cathy, even though Rogozhin and Nastasya experience similar trauma, they didn't grow up together, therefore dooming them to view each other as oppressors. Nastasya said to him: "I'll marry you, Parfyon Semyonych, and not because I'm afraid of you but because I have to go to my ruin anyway. I mean, what better way is there?" while Rogozhin described her: "Drowning or the knife! Heh! But that's precisely why she's marrying me, because she surely expects the knife from me!" Unlike Heathcliff and Cathy, the closer they are together, the more repelled they are by each other; both are stuck in a cycle of self-hatred and enabling self-destructive behavior. Rogozhin's relationship with Nastasya is more akin to Heathcliff's relationship with his wife, Isabella, where he marries her just to use her as "Edgar's proxy in suffering, till he could get hold of him."

Heathcliff and Rogozhin cannot bear losing their counterparts; both see death as a final, desperate attempt to finally unify them.

"Then, are you not afraid of death?" I pursued. "Afraid? No!" He replied. "I have neither a fear, nor a presentiment, nor a hope of death. Why should I? ... I have a single wish, and my whole being and faculties are yearning to attain it. They have yearned towards it so long, and so unwaveringly, that I'm convinced it will be reached - and soon - because it has devoured my existence: I am swallowed in the anticipation of its fulfillment ... O, God! It is a long fight, I wish it were over!" - Wuthering Heights, Chapter 33

"But don't you think and remember about how you beat me?" "Perhaps I do" I said, "I don't know." "And what if I don't forgive you and don't marry you?" "I told you, I'll drown myself." "I think you may kill me before you do that ..." - The Idiot, Part 2, Chapter 3

Betrayal Knowing their background, it's evident that both characters are written with a binding force in mind. What I mean is: the theme of love not as a blooming feeling between two people, but rather as an unseen, inevitable force that binds two souls together, whether it leads to a passion or destruction. What's surprising is that The Idiot also has the same intensity of soul-binding love not just with Rogozhin and Nastasya, but also between the male counterparts. The relationship between Rogozhin and Prince Myshkin is generally overlooked in this regard.

Rogozhin’s jealousy towards Myshkin on the surface is clear; he is jealous of him because Nastasya loves him, therefore the knife acts as an extension to release that jealousy. But textually, it is implied that Rogozhin is also jealous of Nastasya because his supposed “cross brother” still goes to her to check up on her. The cross-exchange scene is such an important detail; throughout the story, marriages are taken very lightly and don’t carry much emotional impact. Instead, it’s treated as something that one “had to commit to”, as if it’s just a mere social contract to fulfill a social duty, or for some underlying motive (such as money or, in this case, possession). In contrast to this, the act of exchanging crosses is seen as more intimate as it’s more emotionally charged. After exchanging crosses, Rogozhin took Myshkin to his mother, asking her to bless him. This is significant because he also did the same thing with Nastasya (even though he didn’t exchange crosses with her). Exchanging crosses culturally holds a very heavy connotation; it shows that you are soul-bounded by the other bearer of the cross; if one sins, the other has to bear it as well. But then what does it matter for Rogozhin anyway? He’s not religious, so why exchange crosses with Myshkin anyway? See how easily he raised a knife to him!

This is where their previous conversation about spirituality comes in. Before their cross exchange, Myshkin essentially orated to him that people need to place faith in others, and that faith is such a transcendental feeling that precedes even logical reasoning. The fact that Rogozhin asks to exchange crosses with him after this speech indicates that he wants to place his faith in him; In a way, they are both exclusive to each other now, but then, as soon as they part, Rogozhin stalks Myshkin just to see his supposed cross brother failing his promise not to see Nastasya! He betrayed his faith! How can he, the person he just exchanged crosses with, who knows the full torments he had, seek her? The prince cannot be for him exclusively - just like how Nastasya doesn’t want to stay with him, apparently, neither does his cross brother! He has no one! And all at once, his passion, jealousy, anger, and anguish at this betrayal, overcame him to seek him with a knife. The knife is an extension of his love for Myshkin, albeit a blinded love filled with jealousy and bitter anger. In his twisted logic, if he were to kill the prince in a state of jealousy, he wouldn’t feel remorse when he forever immortalizes the faith he has left for him (hinted back to Holbein’s painting of the dead Christ).

Relating back to Heathcliff, much like in The Idiot, marriage is also seen less as an emotionally charged ceremony, and more as a social contract; it’s a pre-existing practice to adhere to that prevents him and Cathy from uniting - in fact, it’s the very thing that drives them apart! Cathy said that "it would degrade her to marry him now", because of his status as a servant and his uneducated upbringing (Hindley’s fault for not providing him with education), as well as his skin color. She said if she were to marry him, they would end up as beggars! The point is that Cathy understands the world will not allow them to unite happily and will even actively sabotage their chance of happiness. She chooses a safe route, marrying Edgar (with an estate of his own and riches; she was to be secure of her monetary gains). Heathcliff, upon hearing this, felt betrayed! How can she, a person who mutually feels and understands that their souls are bound into one, who knows each other so well that they’re essentially the same person, say that they can ever part? How can she, on her own accord, choose Edgar? Much like how Myshkin “betrayed” Rogozhin for “choosing” Nastasya by visiting her, Cathy “betrayed” Heathcliff for “choosing” to marry Edgar. Unbeknownst to both Rogozhin and Heathcliff, though, Myshkin and Cathy didn’t intend to betray them in the slightest! Myshkin visited Nastasya out of worry, because he, on his conscience, cannot leave a broken person like that alone. To him, visiting Nastasya is nothing more than just a check-up. Cathy desires to marry Edgar for financial security so that she can uplift Heathcliff into a more reputable man and support him financially. Just like how Rogozhin opted to raise the knife to Myshkin, which left a mark on his soul (his epileptic fit), Heathcliff does the same - by leaving her in the night; metaphorically raising a knife to her soul and leaving a permanent scar on her that night. Just like Holbein's painting of the dead Christ in The Idiot, Heathcliff and Cathy are walking corpses, rotting as they trudge on earth because the universe did not allow them to unite. If we take it further, just like them, Myshkin and Rogozhin are also walking corpses in the end because they are separated (Rogozhin is sent to Siberia for his crime, and Myshkin is sent to Switzerland to treat his illness).

Conclusion Heathcliff and Rogozhin's characters serve as a cautionary tale of how excessive passion can fuel destructive tendencies, not just towards oneself, but also to innocent bystanders. Can one use trauma as a means to justify their abusive behaviours towards other people? Absolutely not, but it does give an insight into their behaviours. Their characters are classic examples of the abused to abuser pipeline because both are failed by their upbringing as well as their environment to nurture them into stable, functioning adults. Neglecting and repressing past pains and trauma without seeking help will lead to more damage in the long run. Rogozhin is unable to love Myshkin, the literal metaphor of unconditional love - the only person who is willing to love him without asking anything in return; The only way he can express his love is through the knife. The fact that Rogozhin would raise his knife at both Nastasya and Myshkin shows that he cannot bear losing them both; the only way for him to feel loved is through possession. Once they are within his grasp, only then does he feel secure, even if it means grasping their corpses. Heathcliff cannot love Isabella even though she's willing to see the goodness in him - he verbally torments her, locks her up, deprived her of basic human necessities. The same thing with his sickly son; he doesn't care if they both die, as long as he can use them as pawns for his revenge! Heathcliff is obsessed with Cathy and resorts to revenge, and Rogozhin is obsessed with Nastasya and resorts to the knife. Both stories end in tragedy because they fail to see the outcome other than tragedy. Myshkin tries to save Rogozhin, but how can he be saved when he's the one who rejected the hands that extend to him, all because he doesn't know how to reach out to those hands?

But at the same time, we also caught a glimpse of them being capable of redeeming themselves; seen from them reading books. Books are used as a tool of redemption in both Wuthering Heights and The Idiot. During Heathcliff's childhood, he would spend some time reading together with Cathy. But by the time he reached sixteen, he "...had extinguished any curiosity he once possessed in pursuit of knowledge, and any love for books or learning" and "he struggled long to keep up equality with Catherine in her studies, and yielded with poignant though silent regret.." At the same time, as Cathy spent more time hanging out with the Lintons, she grew distant from Heathcliff and, as a result, stopped teaching him and reading to him altogether - symbolically, becoming more "conventional"; as she tore away from her books in pursuit of a more conventional femininity of "fine clothes" and mannerisms. Books are synonymous with knowledge; to have an interest in books means to have an interest in pursuing the truth and expanding one's worldview. Therefore, in this case, the act of reading books is a healing procedure because it guides them to open their eyes to the possibility of a more hopeful life. This is also supported inthe ending of the story, where Hareton and Catherine (Cathy's child) bonded together and got closer by reading to each other; Catherine teaching Hareton to read, where previously she would mock him for attempting to. By reaching out to Hareton to read together, they both succeed in breaking the cycle of abuse. Heathcliff realizes this, and the sight of them both reading made him think of his endearing past with Cathy.

"Five minutes ago, Hareton seemed a personification of my youth, not a human being: I felt to him in various ways, that it would have been impossible to have accosted him rationally." - Wuthering Heights, Chapter 33.

In The Idiot, Rogozhin is also an "uneducated" man, but the only moment where he finds peace with Nastasya and Myshkin is when he reads with either of them.

"Do you know who the Pope is?" "I've heard of him," "Parfyon Semyonych, you haven't studied history." "I haven't studied anything." "Well, let me give you something to read: there once was a Pope who got angry with an Emperor, and the Emperor knelt outside his palace for three days without eating or drinking, barefoot, because the Pope wouldn't forgive him; what do you suppose that Emperor thought about as he knelt for those three days and what vows did he make? ... But wait" She said, "I'll read it to you myself!" she jumped up and fetched a book: "It's poetry," "What have you started to read Russian History for?" (Yet she herself once said to me in Moscow: "You ought to educate yourself a bit, read Soloyov's Russian History, I mean, you don't know anything") "It will do you good," She said, "go on, read it. I'll write you a little list of the books you ought to read first of all; would you like me to?" And never, never before had she talked like that to me, so that she even astonished me; for the first time I breathed like a normal human being." - The Idiot, Part 2, Chapter 3.

Also, another interesting comparison with Rogozhin and Myshkin is that, while the two men have their share of trauma and suffering during childhood, Myshkin is merciful and innocent compared to Rogozhin, who is resentful and temperamental. Correlating with knowledge/books being a healing process for the soul, it's no wonder that Myshkin is written as the more educated counterpart; he receives an education at a young age and knows how to write in cursive, something that Rogozhin lacks.

"I don't have the rights to express my thoughts, I've long said that; only in Moscow, with Rogozhin, have I talked frankly ... He and I read Pushkin together, read the whole of it; he didn't know any of it, not even Pushkin's name ..." - The Idiot, Part 4 Chapter 7.

(Even at the beginning of their meeting, this is something that was alluded to:)

"And so, Prince, did you study the sciences with that professor?" "Yes ... I did ..." "You know, I've never studied anything." - The Idiot, Part 1, Chapter 1.