Interesting Noticings:

• Ralph Steadman lacks care for the “realisticity” of the drawings - #3 there is a bat skull smoking, #4 there are unusual animals communing together.
• Steadman emphasizes emotion/body position - #1 the “gait” is exaggerated, broad shoulders, long neck, #2 extremely long and mutated fingers, while Duke’s head is very long, Dr. Gonzo’s head is wide: juxtaposition of the two
• Incorporation of animals - #3  has bat, #4 has an obscure animals (look like birds) that are meant to represent humans
• Uses color very scarcely - in #1 Dr. Gonzo’s shirt is made up of three primary colors: these colors are so different from one another, the drawing seemingly revolves around the shirt, in #2 the car is the only thing with color: red, bringing attention to the car
• Drawings are continuous - when picturing him drawing, it seems that he doesn’t ever pick up his pencil, everything is uninterrupted
• A lot of smoking - in #1, Dr. Gonzo is smoking, in #3 the bat is smoking, and in #4 the birdlike animals are smoking as well
• Accentuates specific characteristics - in #1, Steadman draws Dr. Gunzo’s briefcase dripping with drugs, in #4, the animals teeth and tongues are emphasized

Ralph Steadman’s drawings lack care for the realistic aspect of what is happening. Because this, Steadman’s drawings are symbolizing a transcendence from the social “norms” of drawing. This is very similar to what the counterculture was; the counterculture was trying to be completely different from society and the morals bound to society. Other analysis about the drawings also related to the counterculture. For example, Steadman’s emphasizing specific characteristics (specific ones stated above) suggested his release from the bonds of normality. Because most of the novel speaks about Duke and Dr. Gonzo being high, this accentuating specific characteristics illustrates the hallucinogenic outcome of drugs on the two characters. The colors also give the drawings a feeling of craziness, something that is quite relatable to the craziness Duke and Dr. Gonzo are going through throughout the novel. Ultimately, the drawings helps highlight the imagination as well as creativity of Duke and Dr. Gunzo for the audience. Giving a visual depiction helps the audience understand not only what the characters are feeling, but also the effect of these drugs.  

“Any freak with $1.98 can walk into the Circus-Circus and suddenly appear in the sky

over downtown Las Vegas twelve times the size of God, howling anything that comes

into his head” (47).

The American Dream

When the American Dream looks into the mirror, he sees what he desires. American Dream sees money, success, and prosperity. When he looks even harder he sees that black convertible, the million-dollar-house, and a new Xbox 360. He sees no school, and instead, he sees himself playing basketball with his best friends.

And yet, he can’t help but see the darker side. The side that Reality tells him about constantly. The average house. The average person. The regular teacher, and not the astronaut.

Reality tells him to “be real” and “stop being a kid,” but the American Dream responds, hesitant and unconfident, stating “I am real. You’re just being cynical.”

In class discussions, whenever students are able to pair up, American Dream and Determination lock eyes. The call themselves the “Dynamic Duo,” and I got to give it to them, when they work together, things do seem to go right.

During passing periods, students make fun of the American Dream. Pessimist calls the American Dream “elusive” and “fleeting.” Criticism calls the American Dream “superficial” and “insidious.” American Dream stands there stoic, waiting for Confidence and Ambition to take his side. In the end, American Dream has staying power, and is exalted by his classmates for his fortitude and aspirations.

“In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity” (72).

Final Evaluation Letter

My novel Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson was recommended to me by my brother. At first I was a little hesitant about the novel because the Wikipedia article states that there are “lurid details of illegal drug use” and is told in a “drug-induced haze.” After reading the first chapter, I was intrigued by the writing as well as the pictures. I decided to read the novel.

In my first blog post, I talk about researching the “countercultural movement.” After talking to Mark and Ms. Romano, I changed my research to a “literary criticism” (because I could see the scandalous aspect of the novel). I looked at literary criticisms on the Evanston website as well as the New York Times, and they all talked about how great the book was. However, I wanted to find a literary criticism criticizing the novel so I could disagree with the writer. I looked for a long time but I could not find one, so I concluded I had to change my research. I also didn’t like that topic in the end because I wasn’t really researching something about the novel, I was researching the bigger picture (which wasn’t as interesting). I then decided that I would look into the countercultural movement. I finally picked this because I felt as though Thompson was criticizing the movement constantly throughout the novel, and it would be fascinating to look at his intentions. Furthermore, I wanted to look through the novel to see the smaller and more hidden instances that Thompson ridicules the movement. My research enabled me to do this.

One reason the novel is captivating is because of the detail and figurative language Thompson writes with. Because of this, my “golden thread” was me putting in quotes from the novel through my project. I picked specific quotes that I thought highlighted Thompson’s usage of imagery. Furthermore, many of these quotes elicit feelings of disgust and abhorrence from the audience - something that I think Thompson was intentionally doing  throughout the novel.

Another aspect of the book that I found compelling was the pictures drawn by Ralph Steadman. These drawings embodied the main characters lives perfectly; the drawings were full of originality and imagination, something that Duke and Dr. Gonzo had a lot of. I felt that analyzing four of these drawings in a genre helped me understand the purpose of these drawings and why they were incorporated.

I felt that I did a very good job on this project, however I also think that there is much more to the book that I didn’t analyze. For example, I made the claim that Thompson was criticizing the countercultural movmement, but I also realized he could also be denouncing the American public. Thompson exaggerates a lot in the novel, such as “three times the size of God,” and he could be trying to illuminate that American’s believe that things always need to be ‘bigger’ and ‘better.’ There are other examples in the novel that help vindicate this assertion as well. In the end, I think that my interpretation was just one of many.

Sincerely,

Ethan Goldberg

Limerick - Fear and Loathing

There once was a man in Las Vegas

He took drugs and was utterly shameless

He called it the dream,

Went completely extreme

Always thinking he was totally blameless

He even had an attorney best friend,

Even though it was mostly pretend,

Far from reality,

Even farther morality,

His life was a downright dead end

As he slumped on his bed in the city

Waiting to go to a narcotics committee

Tripping on acid,

And entirely blasted,

And even a little bit tipsy

He left the hotel in a mess

With only the maids to asses

Feeling half-dazed

Eyes fully glazed

He knew he would never confess

“We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold” (3).

Man Disregards Paying for Hotel:

Leaves Behind One-Hundred Thousand Dollars in Damages

An older looking man, later found out to go by the name of “Raoul Duke” leave a disconcerting mess in his hotel room at the Flamingo hotel. The manager describes the mess as looking like “a narcotic exhibit,” and it seemed as though “there was evidence, in the room, of excessive consumption of almost every type of drug known to civilized man since 1544 A.D” (188). After further scrutiny, the maids found “shards of broken glass embedded in the wall plaster,” and the bathroom floor was “six inches deep with soap bars, vomit and grapefruit rinds.” The rug, “mottled,” was “so thick with marijuana seeds that it appeared to be turning green,” and the broken mirror had “smears of mustard that had dried to a hard yellow crust” (188).

One maid finally gave privy to seeing Mr. Duke as well as his attorney, Dr. Gonzo before they left, saying that they looked “like cops” and that they seemed to be“here for the convention.” The two were in a “drug-induced dazed” as they harassed her. Finally they told her that they would “put her on the payroll,” and she would get “a thousand dollars on the ninth of every month” but “the first time she said anything about this, she would go straight to prison for the rest of her life” (183). We officers assured her that they she was not going to prison -- we also vindicated her suspicions of Mr. Duke and Dr. Gunzo being criminals as well as lying to her.

In this day and age, many citizens are becoming part of the “counterculture” - a culture that advocates for a transcendence of societal norms. Many of these “counterculture” advocates are convinced that by acting in such an imbecilic and unnerving manner they are pursuing their own American Dream. Some examples of this movement are manifested in the outrageous indulgence in LSD and marijuana, as well as a large antiwar sentiment. We, as officers, believe that this situation is a microcosm of this counterculture, and that this movement should be annihilated immediately.

“The room looked like the site of some disastrous zoological experiment involving whiskey and gorillas” (180).

Counterculture: Not so fun after all

Hunter S. Thompson’s novel, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, highlights the experience of a journalist, Raoul Duke, reporting in Las Vegas in the 1960's. Raoul Duke tells the story from his perspective; however, because Duke is always high, the perspective perpetually switches between Duke’s internal feelings and his outward sentiment, giving the audience a sensation of nausea. Thompson’s exaggerated writing through elaborate details help illuminate his views criticizing the counter-culture of American in the 1960's.

Raoul Duke and his attorney are given a boatload of money to report on a motorcycle/buggy race in Las Vegas. At one point, in the very beginning, Duke is looking all over Vegas to find drugs, and a  “Vincent Black Shadow,” an unnecessarily attractive car, when he tells his attorney, “...Just one hour ago we were sitting over there in that stinking baiginio…when a call comes from some total stranger in New York…expenses be damned...I tell you man, this is the American Dream in action! We’d be fools not to ride this strange torpedo all the way out” (Thompson, 11). Duke regarding himself having a conspicuous “Vincent Black Shadow,” exorbitant marijuana/mescaline/LSD/cocaine, and hundreds of dollars as being the “American Dream in action” reflects the American feeling in the 1960's. Thompson is satirizing the perverted sense that counter-culture advocates had of the American Dream. Kronenwetter describes the American counterculture as being “people who rejected the tastes and values of mainstream America” by “experimentation with psychedelic drugs” (Kronenwetter, 1).  In this statement, Duke is epitomizing this belief. Duke himself is not actually part of the counterculture because he is more individualistic that the countercultural; however, Thompson uses Duke to denounce the movement in America.

Duke alludes to the countercultural history a multitude of times throughout the novel. At one point, Duke chastises Timothy Leary, a leader of the movement, stating, “...selling ‘consciousness expansion’ without ever giving a thought to the grim meat-hook realities that were lying in it for all the people who took him too seriously” (Thompson, 178). Leary was a martyr for the movement, who “embraced psychedelic drugs and an unconventional lifestyle as the means for discovering one's true relation to the universe” (antiwar movement, 1). What’s ironic about Thompson’s writing, is that Leary was an earnest man, with truthful intentions. The idea of people “taking him too seriously” is conceivable, because Leary was serious. Thompson accentuates this idea further by stating, “This is the same cruel and paradoxically benevolent bullshit that has kept the Catholic Church going for so many centuries. ...a blind faith in some higher and wiser “authority...Pope, General, all the way up to ‘God’” (Thompson, 179). Thompson is suggesting that Leary had authority in the movement, much like the “Pope” has authority for the Catholic Church. At the same time, however, Thompson satirizes that Leary was given too much authority, because he compares him to “God,”  as if proposing that Leary was thought to be omnipotent.

Vietnam also plays a part in the countercultural movement, and in the novel as well. At one point, Duke and his attorney are in a hotel tripping on acid and the phone rings. Duke answers, stating, “What do you want? Where’s the goddamn ice I ordered? Where’s the booze? There’s a war on, man. People are being killed! The room clerk responds, “almost whispering”, and says “Killed?” Duke retorts, “In Vietnam! On the goddamn television” (Thompson, 123). The irony of the scene is that Duke doesn’t seem to actually care for the soldiers in Vietnam, he is using it as an excuse to get off the phone. Furthermore, Duke is stating this as he is tripping on acid. The idea that Duke would care so much about the soldiers in Vietnam, yet have an utter lack of care for his own well being (because he is tripping on acid), is ludicrous. Not only this, moments before Duke’s attorney raped a woman. The further emphasizes an absence of ethics his attorney has. As stated before, Duke and his attorney are not part of the countercultural movement; Nevertheless, Thompson is using this to make a social claim about the the hypocrisy of the movement. James Kirkpatrick describes the countercultural anti-war movement as  “attracting many young Americans, who began to have a vision of a world without violence, hatred, or prejudice;” yet these same Americans were taking harmful drugs (Timothy Leary, 1).

Duke describes the 1960's as a time where “There was no point in fighting -- on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave” (Thompson, 68). Thompson is satirizing the countercultural movement as being “invincible” and “untouchable.” Throughout Thompson’s complex exaggerated writing, Thompson is able to mask - but yet make perceptive - his antagonistic views of American countercultural in the 1960's.

Works Cited

1. Kronenwetter, Michael. "counterculture." American History. ABC-CLIO, 2015. Web. 19 May 2015
2. "antiwar movement." American History. ABC-CLIO, 2015. Web. 19 May 2015.
3. "Timothy Leary." American History. ABC-CLIO, 2015. Web. 19 May 2015.
4. Thompson, Hunter S. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. New York: Random House, 1971. Web. 19 May 2015

Ralph Steadman - Analysis of Pictures

#1




#3

#2

#4

Blog 2

The novel continues in a very intersting way, and, although still much about drugs, the meaning is different. This is first seen when Raoul Duke and Mr. Gunzo get into an enormous fight (when Mr. Gunzo is extremely high on acid), ending in Mr. Gunzo imploring Duke to "throw thhat fuckin radio into the tub with me" (60). Duke accentuates the philosophical aspect of this situation by stating, "One of the things you learn, after years of dealing with drug people, is that everything is serious. You can turn your back on a person, but never turn your back on a drug" (56). The drugs seemingly consume Dr. Gunzo - the drug embodies him to the extent that his own subserivent becomes subservient to the drugs will.

 This subordination of ones' own volition with the drugs' will appear later as well, as Duke is reminiscing about his first LSD trip. He walks to visit an LSD doctor, who seems to be in the house, while "his woman [is] out in the garden, pruning carrots, or whatever." However, later, 10 years later, he "recognizes that sound for what is was: Like Ginsberg far gone in the Om, -- was trying to humm me off." There wasn't a lady out there, , "it was the good doctor himself - and his humming was a frantic attempt to block me out of his higher consciousness" (65). The LSD had literally made the doctor completely insane. 

 Many of these stories seem to alter between reality and fantasy. Many times this alteration happens because of the drugs, but other times Hunter S. Thompson does it to suggests the general American notion at the time of the writing of this novel. At one point, Thompson states, "It was settled, of course, but I needed a beer or three to seal the bargain and stupefy that one rebellious nerve end that kept vibrating negative" (80). In this scenario, Duke drinks alcohol to try to completely ignore the dissenting opinion of some tiny bit of his consciousness (which could be the right thing to do, but either way he is drinking to try to forget it). This could be a reflection of the counter-culture at the time because earlier, Thompson states that the American culture seemed to be distinguished by a "sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Evil... Our energy would simply prevail" (68). I believe that with this quote, Thompson is highlighting the omniscience that the American culture thought they had - not what they actually had.  

Something that I now have been even more intersted in researching for this project is literary criticism of the novel. In my last blog post, I spoke about the 'scandalous' aspects of the novel -- these are still present. Also, researching criticism on this novel just a little bit, I sensed an overarching consensus of many cricitcs that the book portryed American culture in very grotesque and ugly light (which I believe is true). What I still want to look for is other criticisms regarding other aspects, as well as opinions in favor of what Hunter S. Thompson was portraying. 

Blog 1

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is an interesting book to revolve a project around because it doesn't seem to be riveting. The main character, Raoul Duke, is set to find the "American Dream" by going to Las Vegas with his attorney, Dr. Gunzo, to report on the Mint 400 Motorcycle Race. Raoul Duke is also given a boatload of money, which he spends on extremely addicting narcotics, such as mescaline, cocaine, ether, and LSD. Both Raoul and Dr. Gunzo habitually debauch themselves in these drugs, and the audience can't seem to read much without Duke speaking about the drugs, or being high on these drugs: the first sentence states, "We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold" (pg. 3).  

Although the novel highlights drugs and drug usage, it also illuminates the duo's search for the "American Dream." At one point, Duke states, "...another total stranger gives me $300 raw cash for no reason at all... I tell you, my man, this is the American Dream in action! We'd be fools not to ride this strange torpedo all the way out to the end" (pg. 11). Throughout the novel, Hunter S. Thompson illustrates the cohorts false pursuit of the American Dream, as if to make fun of people who actually believe that they can achieve the American Dream.

Furthermore, the novel expounds the counter-cultural movement of the 1960's, and suggests the failure of this movement. Besides the whole novel being taken place in a "haze," the audience sometimes has trouble distinguishing "fact" and "fiction." On the very first page, Thompson states, "And suddenly there was a terrible roar all around us and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car" (pg. 3). The audience is first struck by the lurid imagery, but then finally realizing that the bats aren't real.

For my research, I am thinking about first researching into the actual effects of some of the drugs written about, and comparing the actual symptoms with how Thompson depicts the effects of the drugs to be. I would not be doing this to challenge his credibility, but rather to see the differences in what the ramifications are actually, and how Thompson represents them in the book - if they are very similar (or very different), it would be interesting to note. 

Moreover, I also would like the research the 1960's counter-cultural movement. This would be fascinating because I could find more allusions in the text to the movement that I don't see now (because I am not very educated in the movement). On the same note, I want to research the aftermath of the novel. While reading, I can tell that this book is somewhat "scandalous”, so reading about the literature criticism would be interesting.

Blog 4

I think that Emily Bronte highlights love throughout her novel Wuthering Heights in an idiosyncratic manner. Bronte speaks about the idea that true love will always be recognized, but only few can capture it; however, one won’t be content until they do (this is paradoxical, I know).  She illustrates this idea by reliving the same moments with different people: something that I was able to recognize throughout the novel.

As I spoke about before in Blog 2, the first major love relationship seems to happen between Edgar Linton and Catherine (for they become married). However, this gives a false interpretation, with Catherine stating, ““If all else perished, and he remained, I should still continue to be; and if all else remained, and he were annihilated, the universe would turn to a mighty stranger,” illustrating the infatuation Catherine has for Heathcliff. On Catherine’s death bed, Heathcliff states “Be with me always--take any form--drive me mad. Only do not leave me in this abyss, where I cannot find you! Oh, God! It is unutterable! I cannot live without my life! I cannot live without my soul!” Heathcliff is in desperation, for if she dies, then he will never be able to be with her. Thus, it will drive him mad, and he will have lost his soul.  On the other hand, Catherine also did not obtain her true love - for this reasons she died ill-content, with Mrs. Dean stating (to Mr. Lockwood), “‘She’s fainted or dead,’ I thought: ‘so much the better. Far better that she should be dead, than lingering a burden and a misery-maker to all about her.” Catherine died in despair and anguish, unable to capture who she really loved. Heathcliff, who was still alive, suffered from this desolation throughout the rest of the book. At one point, Heathcliff has the sexton un-bury Catherine so he could make sure she “looked the same,” and make sure she wasn't “haunting him.” Later in the novel, Heathcliff states to Mrs. Dean, “‘ It is not my fault that I cannot eat or rest,’ he replied. ‘I assure you it is through no settled designs. I’ll do both, as soon as I possibly can. But you might as well bid a man struggling in water rest within arms’ length of the shore! I must reach it first, and then I’ll rest.’” Heathcliff is still brooding over Catherine, and he is so close to salvation. And, although he does not literally capture his true love, he does capture her in essence  - when he dies he dies in peace. I sense this because he dies in rain: “the bed-clothes dripped, and he was perfectly still.” From Foster, rain represents transformation, fertility and repose.

There also is a different love story in the novel - one that is impeded as well by another character (but the reader doesn’t know it is impeded till the end). At first, Cathy Linton falls in love with Linton Heathcliff. This relationship soon dissipates, with Catherine coming to the realization that Linton is not confident in himself, and is eternally under the authority of his father, Heathcliff. (Linton also dies which is another reason the relationship didn’t work).  However, in the end, she falls in love with another person: Hareton Earnshaw. Although it took her growth as well as transformation (the first time that they saw each other Cathy was “disgusted” to call him her cousin),  she finally did find her true love (I think this is what Bronte wants us to think because 1) Linton dies and 2) when Linton dies Cathy did not muse over Linton’s death like Heathcliff does over Catherine's).

The juxtaposition that Bronte suggests with these different love stories are very similar, but also different as well. They are both love stories, and both have characters thwarting the intimacy. However, on the other hand, they are also very different. For one, the first relationship (between Catherine and Heathcliff) is rooted in eternal love, and an everlasting relationship. However, on the other hand, the second relationship is rooted in transformation and change (both of these surmises are elaborated on in the able paragraphs). Furthermore, in the first relationship the “true-love” was never found - in the second, it seems that the true love was found. This suggests that the second relationship served as a ‘revision’ of the first - a very interesting idea.

Certain methods helped me to closely read this story. For one, I didn't identify with a character, which Nabokov tells us to do. This was important, because if I did, I would be ‘rooting’ for a specific person - such as Edgar Linton or Heathcliff - and to completely understand the story, I needed to have an unbiased view on the situation. Both Edgar and Heathcliff were at faults at times, and the reader needs to recognize this. Furthermore, I had to “acquire a certain language for reading,” which is something Foster recommends. There is a specific language that Bronte uses in this novel (it was written in 1847), and to fully understand what characters are saying (especially the housekeeper Jim) I needed to be in this mindset - looking for tropes and other words that had a somewhat different meaning back then. Furthermore, rereading was key in this piece - this is a strategy that Prose tells us to do. To comprehend what people were saying, and to whom they were saying it (there were so many characters) was paramount in this piece. Sometimes I needed to go back full pages to remember who were the two characters in conversations.

I definitely recommend this novel for a reader looking to be challenged. The way it was written is genius - having a ‘story within a story’ (which I talk about more in Blogs 1 and 3) as well as having two different narrators, make this novel unbelievably creative. If you want to read Wuthering Heights, just make sure to keep a dictionary by your side, and to be in the 19th century mindset.

Blog 3

The way that the novel is written is very intriuging. Starting off with the "real" story (although stories are never really real), and then transitioning into a reminiscence of a character makes me ponder what Emily Bronte's purpose with this was. Expecting a short tangent from the story at hand, Mrs. Dean's story proved to be much more - her story is the story I think of when I think of the book Wuthering Heights. Its unusual to represent a novel with a story inside of it rather than the novel itself. 

So what was Bronte's purpose with this? She must have had reason for not just starting with Mrs. Dean's story. 

One explanation for this could be the audience being more interested - at some points I even feel like Mr. Lockwood. For example, the in the first pages, Mr. Lockwood states, "Mr. Lockwood, your new tenant, sir. I do myself the honour of calling as soon as possible after my arrival, to express the hope that I have not inconvienced you...." This statement not only commences Mr. Lockwood's first presence, but our presence as well. We know nothing about Mr. Lockwood's past, just as Bronte knows nothing about us. As the dwindling Mr. Lockwood becomes more impersonal to us, we are once again snapped into place with Mrs. Dean stating things like, "But, Mr. Lockwood.....I'm annoyed now I should dream of chattering on at such a rate; and your gruel cold, and you nodding for bed!" However, we, as the audience, are still fascinated, just like Lockwood, with stating "'Sit still, Mrs. Dean,' I cried.; 'do sit still another half-hour. You've done just right to tell the story leisurely.'" I imagine the scene as I am the audience for Mrs. Dean's story. Another reason I resonate with the Mr. Lockwood character is because of the actual scene taking place. The whole book is seeminly being told at only a few sittings, and just as Lockwood sits down to divulge himself is her story, we do as well.

Another explanation for the purpose of the "story inside a story" is the idea that storytelling always seem to get the audience more connected. As we felt in The Things They Carried, this idea of the "telling" of stories evokes a stronger sentiment from the reader. I think that a big part of this is point of view. In Mrs. Dean's stories, the usage of "I" suggests that we are listening to her pour out how she felt the story went. Of course there is bias, of course some parts are opiniated. However it doesn't matter, and might actually personalyze the story greater. We are not gleaning the shear facts, we are gleaning how one person believe it went. For example, at one point in the novel, Hindley and Mr. Heathcliff get into a fight. Mrs. Dean states, "To my joy, he [Heathcliff] left us...and Hindley stretched himself on the heartstone. I departed to my own room, marvelling that I had escaped so quickly." Phrases such as "To my joy" and "marveling that I had escaped so quickly" suggest that biased and personal opinion of Mrs. Dean.

The novel of Wuthering Heights is very percular in the way that the story is told. It is told within another story, an "inception" of sorts. By doing this, Bronte has created an in-story-representation of the reader - the audience of the Mrs. Dean's story. This resonates with the audience, and we as a group are able to further submerge into the story. 

Blog 2

Mrs. Dean's story continues focusing on four main characters: Mrs. Dean (herself), Heathcliff, Catherine, and Edgar. While reading, Catherine’s disposition intrigued me greatly; her temperamental feelings towards Heathcliff and Edgar are very interesting.
One first senses this abnormal relationship between Catherine, Heathcliff, and Edgar when Mrs. Dean states, "for when Heathcliff expressed contempt of Linton in his presence, she could not half coincide, as she did in his absence; and when Linton evinced disgust and antipathy to Heathcliff, she dared not treat his sentiments with indifference..." Catherine, distraught that he two best friends despise one another, is in an awkward situation. She is the mediator between two men who both are fighting for her affection. This quote epitomizes the antipathy of Heathcliff and Edgar towards one another.
The relationship between the three escalates more when Edgar Linton asks Catherine to marry him. Catherine first states [speaking about Edgar], "I love the ground under his feet, the air over his head, and everything he touches and every word he says." Notwithstanding this, Catherine later states, "In my soul and in my heart, I'm convince I'm wrong!" Catherine is conflicted, first stating that she loves Edgar, and then earnestly convinced that she is making the wrong move - this illustrates Catherine's changing disposition towards her vexing situation. Catherine states later in the chapter, "My love for Linton is like the foliage in the woods: time will change it, I'm well aware, as winter changes the trees. My love for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath: a source of little visible delight, but necessary!" While Catherine's love for Linton fluctuates, her love for Heathcliff is infinite. During this soliloquy, however, Catherine also states, "It would degrade me to marry Heathcliff now." Frustrated by hearing this, Heathcliff leaves the house, not to be seen again for a very long time, in which Catherine and Linton get married.
Soon after the marriage, Catherine gets extremely ill.  Mrs. Dean states, "Mr. Kenneth, as soon as he saw her, pronounced her dangerously ill; she had a fever. He bled her, and he told him to let her live on whey and water gruel." At this point Catherine realizes that she rather be with Heathcliff, and her malady signifies that that. Catherine is sickened by knowing that she has to stay with Edgar the rest of his life. 

Catherine’s feelings towards Edgar and Heathcliff are ever changing, but she seems to finally find her true love. Nevertheless, Catherine is still confined to the little authority she has in her marriage with Edgar.  Hopefully, in the upcoming chapters, Catherine can transcend the bond that holds her to Edgar, and have a relationship with the man her heart desires.