Why doesn't Edgar re-marry?

The mortality rate is pretty high in WH, especially among the wives. Why doesn't Edgar re-marry after Catherine dies? Surely he must have wanted a male heir to prevent his property coming into possession of his enemy. I wondered why Hindley didn't try and re-marry after his wife died, but maybe he was becoming to dependent on alcohol by then. Heathcliff cannot re-marry for a long time, because he is separated rather than divorced or widowed, but I presume he never attempted to re-marry once she had died. Nelly says to Heathcliff about Linton that he's the only kin he'll ever have, well why? Heathcliff is hardly an old man. None of them appear to have mistresses neither. It seems as if hardly anyone up there is interested in sex.

Maybe Nellie said that to Heathcliff because of his tendency to be cruel, rather than for any reason regarding his physical abilities or other limitations. One theme of Wuthering Heights would appear to be lonliness and isolation and I think Bronte is reinforcing that by keeping them widowers and not allowing them to remarry.

It seems odd. I suppose it's very romantic that Edgar and Heathcliff both loved Catherine so much they can't bear to marry someone else after she's died, however not particularly likely. Perhaps they don't get out enough. Living up there on the moors, there probably are not very many ladies of the right social background they can meet without a big effort. Gimmerton is probably not a very big market town.

Most of the main characters seem to marry young. I have read somewhere else, that the average age to marry in the 18th century for men and women was twenty-eight. The characters in WH are hardly in their twenties when they marry and it seems like they have missed the boat by the time they reach thirty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kev67

I suppose it's very romantic that Edgar and Heathcliff both loved Catherine so much they can't bear to marry someone else after she's died, however not particularly likely.

---

I would argue that romance is not the issue here. Catherine I reminds me of the young Hjordis in Ibsen's play, The Warriors at Helgeland. Hjordis is ruthless, aggressive and as ideologically pure as her revered Viking ancestors. While the times have, in a sense, left her behind, everyone treats her with, not just respect, but veneration. She epitomises the fabled spirit of the old Norse gods.

Similarly, there is something beyond heroism in the pristine integrity of the equally radical Catherine. She, too, is manifestly superhuman, as even the nondescript Mr Lockwood relates. Common-sense Nelly also finds her unfathomable. Catherine impresses me way more than Austen's Elizabeth Bennet or Charlotte's Jane Eyre. How then could Edgar and Heathcliff remarry and replace her with pallid mediocrity?

This is some novel.

Yes, that's what my impression was. They are just not interested in any other women. Whether they just worship her on a romantic level or as a kind of goddess, is not really a issue, although the latter might explain things in a better way. The point is that neither of them will be able to 'do' with a 'normal' person.

In that 90s adaptation with Cryspin Bonham-Carter as Edgar, Edgar lets himself go of a broken heart once Catherine has died. Even to the point of ageing really fast. That was probably a pretty easy way of explaining this issue.

I like the goddess gloss :).

As to age:

I'm not sure whether the average age of 28 applied to all classes. Austen also makes Lydia Bennet comment about her sister Jane who is 23 that 'she will be an old maid' before long. The novel was initially written in the 1790s. I believe the lower classes had more of a motivation not to marry early: they had no money to get a place (whether it be enough income to rent a place, have a thriving business, get a tenant farm or save up enough to buy a place) and therefore to keep a family and a wife. They were also often tied to estates as servants or sons of tenant farmers. Servants had to make themselves a new life, which asks time (and money again), sons of tenant farmers needed to obtain a tenant farm as well; which were in limited supply.

The higher classes did not have this problem: they had the money to marry (in most cases), otherwise tey got it from somewhere else (the wife). The pressure to provide a male heir for heirs of estates must have been great. I would say, in their case, the more children, the better. Imagine you get married around 30 to a wife the same age. Your wife could die in her first labour. By the time you're 40, you might get potency problems, OK maybe not, but if you're 35 and your wife dies, you hae to get one fast, before you're totally written off (Note: this does not always apply if you're immensely rich).
However, you can get ill and never recover, you can fall from your horse, get a heart attack, or just die. If you marry a wife who is already almost 30, you're going to have only a limited amount of time to get a male heir in this world (if you're lucky and she survives her first labour). If you marry a younger wife, she's more likely to survive childbirth (I presume statistically the medical world also knew this 200 years ago), but she is also more likely to produce more children, so you've got more time to make a male heir. When you're 40, she's only 30, so you'll have about 10-15 years before she's likely to stop conceiving. Otherwise you've got 10 years tops.

To me Bingley seems young at 22-23 (?) to actually get married, but Darcy at 28 has been looking for a while. Tilney is round about 22, as is Edward Ferrars. They are all looking for a wife at that age. Colonel Brandon at 36 and Knightley at around 40 (?) are both seen as 'past it', whereas Wentworth at around 30 is quite late, but still 'acceptable' although his skin is whithered a little. I would contend their overall younger age upon marriage than the average one is down to their class.It can't be a coincidence.

**SPOILERS**

Well, Heathcliff marries Isabella when Catherine is still alive, so that clearly wasn't a problem for him. The thing is Emily Bronte hasn't provided anyone else for them to marry anyway, even if they had wanted to. The number of characters in WH is extremely small when compared to Charlotte's novels. First you have Hindley - Catherine - Heathcliff and Edgar - Isabella.

Hindley marries an outsider who gives birth to Hareton. Catherine marries Edgar and gives birth to Cathy. Heathcliff marries Isabella, who gives birth to Linton. Cathy marries first her cousin Linton, and then her cousin Hareton.

Catherine and her daughter Cathy each have a choice of two men. But the two males and Isabella have not been provided with an alternative. I suppose Bronte wanted the focus of the story to be narrow and intense, so she purposely isolates these characters.

To me, Heathcliff married Isabella purely out of spite. In the face of what he says about Edgar (or his father)'s will, I would not be surprised he married Isabella solely in order to obtain Thrushcros Grange and for no other purpose. It wasn't out of love, nor for financial gain, because he practically battered her so she went at some point with a gash in her neck (was it, quite shocking, that) and he already had piles of money.

You are right about the isolation, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

**SPOILERS** Well, Heathcliff marries Isabella when Catherine is still alive, so that clearly wasn't a problem for him.

---

Surely both Heathcliff and Catherine marry without the least diminution of their boundless passion for each other. That is more than obvious, and part of what makes the novel monumental, in more ways than one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gladys

How then could Edgar and Heathcliff remarry and replace her with pallid mediocrity?

---

I thought we were talking about marrying, not about boundless passion. If Heathcliff could marry Isabella even when Catherine was alive, it shouldn't have been an issue after she (and his wife Isabella) was dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiki1982

I like the goddess gloss

---

I don't, of course, see Catherine as a goddess but rather as someone akin to Emily Bronte herself. Both seem to possess a searing integrity of almost divine origins, that views culture, traditions and conventional morality as nought. Catherine's "I am Heathcliff" is essentially an ethical stance without precedent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

I thought we were talking about marrying, not about boundless passion. If Heathcliff could marry Isabella even when Catherine was alive, it shouldn't have been an issue after she (and his wife Isabella) was dead.

---

After rereading the thread, I still struggle to understand.

Heathcliff marries Isabella as part of his lifelong obsession with Catherine. With Catherine dead, how would remarrying advance his obsession?

Heathcliff marries Isabella to punish Edgar, get power over him, and get one foot inside the Grange. It has nothing to do with his feelings for Catherine. But we're probably talking about entirely different things, LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

Heathcliff marries Isabella to punish Edgar, get power over him, and get one foot inside the Grange. It has nothing to do with his feelings for Catherine.

---

Punishing Edgar and getting Grange are Heathcliff's short term objectives, which ultimately fail to satisfy, while obsession for Catherine is all-consuming, as the ending indicates.