Character Stories – Enneagram and Encaustic

Story Enneagram of “Wuthering Heights” (the novel)

Is this a compelling story? It’s been made into many film versions, so the obvious answer is yes. But why? It tells of unbelievable cruelty. Somehow showrunners have twisted this plot into a romantic drama with Heathcliff as a hero. Let’s see what the book actually says.

ONE

Introduce the players and the two house locations. We are approximately six months before the present day.

The tenant of Thrushcross Grange (TG), Mr. Lockwood, is our entrance point. He walks over to visit his landlord Heathcliff at Wuthering Heights (WH). We meet some very unhappy people: Young Catherine (Cathi) and the rustic Hareton.

TWO

Lockwood returns the next day and becomes caught by a snowstorm and is forced to stay overnight. No one will help or take pity on him. Finally the housekeeper Zillah finds him a place to rest. This is Catherine’s room when she was a child. Lockwood sleeps in her cupboard bed and encounters her ghost. When Heathcliff finds him there he kicks him out and begs Catherine to come to him.

THREE

Lockwood, who caught a cold from his adventures in the snow, is bedridden. Nelly Dean, the housekeeper at TG and an old family servant at WH, entertains him with the story of Heathcliff, which is the majority of the book. Let the history begin . . .

CATHERINE EARNSHAW, EIGHT

This is The Cathy, the one everyone who’s seen a Wuthering Heights movie probably considers the protagonist. Her maiden name is Earnshaw, her married is Linton. Her daughter is named Catherine Linton, so the Cathys in this story pile up and become confusing.

However, this is the Cathy who loves Heathcliff. (The one Kate Bush wrote a song about.) They are wild children together, running over the moors. Later, when Cathy grows into a beautiful and eligible young woman, she drops Heathcliff in order to marry her respectable and gentle neighbor, Edgar Linton. She loves him, too, in a different, less volatile way.

And then Cathy dies. Remember, I’m looking at the book characters. Merle Oberon dies at the end of the movie; in the novel Cathy dies in the middle and the other characters continue forward through the second half. For someone who seems central to the plot, she disappears in a shocking way.

Also, when you read the book, Cathy’s cruelty is surprising. She spits on Heathcliff when she first meets him. She’s barbaric and unrestrained until an injury lays her up at the Linton house for a month. Their gentility and manners change her. Because she’s not the protagonist, though, her motivations are muddy. She dumps her soulmate, Heathcliff, for an elegant life. She claims she can’t live without him — Heathcliff is her soul — but then she does for a while. The conflict between the two men wears her down and her health succumbs to weakness.

Cathy is not a kind person or even an admirable one. She is passionate sometimes (as opposed to Heathcliff, who is on fire every moment). What Character Enneagram could she possibly be?

She’s no Head Type. It’s plausible that she’s a Heart Type, but compared to Heathcliff she pales. I think we need to call her a Body Type. Her reaction to conflict is to strike or react physically. She longs for the moors, the fresh air, and the unencumbered space to run free. I could argue that when she marries and confines herself to a lady’s life in the house, she begins to decline. Heathcliff wants to get her outside to revive her spirit; it’s the right instinct.

This is an Eight. She’s too unbound by rules to be a One, and she’s too eager for conflict to be a Nine.

Interesting. I complain often about Hollywood making their girl boss characters an Eight as a default position. Cathy is a true and complex Eight. She’s not heroic, but she’s strong. Why does she step away from that strength to marry Edgar? Social expectation? A desire for comfort and beauty? She and Heathcliff are two halves of one person, by their own admission, yet she parts them.

I’ll dig into the actual story later. My answer must lie there, I hope.

ELLEN (NELLY) DEAN, SIX

Who’s that, perhaps you wonder. She’s the narrator and housekeeper. If you’ve seen the Wuthering Heights movies, she’s that older lady in the background, a gentle and tender presence.

Heh. That’s some high artistic license, considering Nelly’s role in the novel.

Nelly is the only character besides Heathcliff who spans the entire story. She’s there at the beginning, a child in the Earnshaw household when the Master brings Heathcliff home. She grows up with him and Cathy. When Cathy marries Edgar Linton, Nelly follows her into the new household. She’s the primary caregiver for Cathy’s motherless daughter. Although Heathcliff is cruel to everyone who isn’t Cathy, he’s kind to Nelly. They’re old comrades. She can even speak frankly with him and upbraid him.

This is a major character who’s barely noticed in the films.

She’s a tricky one, though. As the narrator, she speaks well of herself and her own actions, yet some of her choices are ruinous. She’s a tattler; she doesn’t really like Cathy and she undermines her. If a literary survey course were to study novels with an unreliable narrator, this book should be at the top of the list.

I’ll delve later into how the story changes if Nelly is its protagonist (versus Heathcliff).

In the meantime, what is her Character Enneagram? Whew, yikes.

She is a single woman her whole life and shows no sign of wishing to be married. When she cares for Cathy Jr., whom she loves dearly, she doesn’t necessarily envy the Linton’s family. Let’s say she’s not a Heart Type.

She’s a terrible busybody. And she’s very confident. She knows her role as a servant, but she also pushes the boundary, perhaps because she was raised among them. I’m leaning toward a Head Type.

She strikes me as too good a liar to be a Five, and she’s not adventurous enough to be a Seven. What if Nelly’s a Six? She has a clear definition of what’s right and wrong, even though sometimes it’s only her definition. Heathcliff is dangerous to others, but Nelly doesn’t fear him. She’s categorized him over their lifetime together. It allows her to be bold with him because he fits in the box she’s defined. For Heathcliff, he hates weak people the most; Nelly is strong with him, so he finds her companionable. She doesn’t have a physical dominance over him; it’s a dominance of character, something a Six would do well.

HEATHCLIFF, FOUR

I’ve been re-reading Wuthering Heights. I’ll have something to say about the story later, but for now, let’s look at some Character Enneagrams.

First caveat: this is Heathcliff from the novel. More film versions of this story exist than I could possibly want to watch. Laurence Olivier gives one of the iconic portrayals, and it might be interesting at some point to compare the different well-known iterations of Heathcliff. For now, though, I’m looking at the book.

If you’ve only watched the movie(s) you might not know that Heathcliff is one of two characters who’s in the story from beginning to end — and the other isn’t Cathy. (Cathy dies halfway through. Most film versions ignore this.) The story arc in the book is labyrinthine and finding a protagonist is tricky, but focusing on Heathcliff as a throughline is a good choice.

He’s brought into the Earnshaw house as a child, probably at five years old. The Master finds him abandoned and begging in the city. Heathcliff is dark-skinned (maybe West Asian, maybe Native American) and speaks no English. He has obviously had a very rough life up to this point, and it doesn’t improve much. After the Master dies, his son and heir turns Heathcliff out into the stables to labor.

Heathcliff’s defining characteristic, after brutality and cruelty, is his love for Cathy. The novel barely touches on physical affection and never indicates that Cathy and Heathcliff are intimate. It’s their souls that merge and twine.

I want to say that Heathcliff is a Four. He is emotionally driven. Love for Cathy, hatred for Hindley Earnshaw, revenge on all who’ve hurt him — these are his motivations. Besides Cathy (and sometimes Hindley’s son Hareton), Heathcliff is temperate only to Nelly Dean, the housekeeper. Everything else is a high or a low, never a middle. He absorbs the abuse of his childhood, and the wonderment of a soulmate in Cathy, and sets them at his center. To contain the extremes of love and hate so completely seems very Four to me.

JO MARCH, FOUR AND EIGHT

Speaking from memory, I’d say that most of the Little Women movies keep Jo’s sisters fairly consistent. Amy, whether played by Elizabeth Taylor or Kirsten Dunst or Florence Pugh, is bold and confident. She knows her mind and pursues her future, probably making her a Three. Beth, besides being physically vulnerable, is consistently shy and reticent. She might be a Five or a Two, although ultimately it doesn’t matter. The effect of her death on Jo is what moves the story forward. Meg, who is deeply embarrassed when she’s caught breaking a rule, is probably a Nine. She’s solid and average, very much the eldest child.

However, Jo swings between portrayals. Katharine Hepburn and June Allyson both give Jo a physical, Body Type character. Winona Ryder’s Jo goes in a different direction. Her love of the family’s theater troupe is more intellectual than physical. We don’t see Jo sword fight with Laurie, for instance. She prefers the costuming and the exploration of authentic feelings. This Jo is possibly a Four. Her sisters are a social team she can’t bear to disband. She nears despair after Beth’s death, which leads Marmee to arrange the New York trip for her. When Professor Bhaer takes her on the opera date, the stimulation of music and spectacle overwhelm Jo. Much of Ryder’s Jo can be understood by emotion. The production itself leans into bright and cheerful horn music, the Victorian Christmas theme, and a May garden bursting with blooms. The visuals reinforce Jo’s relationship to her time and place.

Maya Hawke’s Jo lives in a different world. Father at war, which is shown during the opening moments, sets a darker tone. The family itself is less idealized and more realistic, with the sisters avoiding chores and responsibility. This Jo is often angry and probably an Eight. A Jo who’s a Body Type is what we expect, so this is a strong choice for the character. It’s only when she softens her shell and digs into her sorrow that she becomes the writer we know.

Saoirse Ronan’s Jo is the most difficult for me to Enneagram because, as I’ve made clear, I didn’t like the structure of her version. Her character development is difficult to follow because the section with Beth’s illness jumps back and forth in time. Also, the two endings — one expected, one surprising — make it hard to evaluate who she is. Before this movie I didn’t know that, although Alcott’s story about Beth and her sisters is based on real events, the boys’ home and Professor Bhaer are imaginary. It’s a fascinating theme to contrast our expectation of the classic Jo as a false front for a more complicated, realistic Jo. It’s only at the end at the publisher’s that we see the scope of who Jo is. The book and the real events of Alcott’s life can support this wonderful dichotomy. The tension in Jo — will she live a conventional, married life, or will she defy expectations and follow a professional career only — is the unique element in this version. Don’t introduce it at the Nine! The last shot on Jo’s face is mysterious. This was your movie. Start here and work backwards, building the shots and the beats that make this moment impactful rather than an end-of-story throwaway. Because this Jo has the potential for great highs and lows — because of the suffering in the tension between the two versions of Jo — I would guess she’s a Four.

If you look at my Enneagram reviews for the different iterations of James Bond, you’ll see they swing between Fours and Eights. It’s the same thing with Jo March. (Isn’t that interesting?) Am I saying that Jo and James — ruthless and unconventional in their lifestyles — are similarly constructed characters, or am I saying that Fours and Eights share so much common ground, as unbelievable as that seems, that a singular character can be either number? I don’t know. Maybe it’s only that writers are predictable, and Fours and Eights make for good storytelling.

LITTLE WOMEN (2019)

My breakdown of this version, Little Women (2019), is going to be very strange. If the filmmaker decides to take an extremely well-known story and change its ending, chaos can ensue. In this case facts about Louisa May Alcott are incorporated into the climax. I didn’t know any of these details and found the end confusing and infuriating.

It felt Author’s Message to me, and in a way it was. No matter how interesting real life information is, if you go against audience expectations, especially ones so deeply ingrained as they are for this story, you have to be crystalline. LW2019 doesn’t cross that bar.

It makes for a very interesting Enneagram pattern.

ONE

The girls are adults. The beginning of the movie starts near the end of the characters’ arcs. Okay, fresh and interesting. Jo sells a story, Amy is in Paris, Meg spends money recklessly, and Beth plays the piano. Professor Bhaer is introduced; he and Jo see each other at a pub and dance together.

I don’t understand why this scene exists. (The movie, at two and a half hours, needed trimming.) It’s Four-ish stuff put in the middle of the opening. That’s the danger of leading with your ending, it seems.

Jump to Seven Years Earlier. Meg’s hair is burnt by the curling iron and Jo’s dress is burnt by her carelessness. Classic scene. Laurie comes to the dance and the March family meets their neighbor. Meg twists her ankle, Laurie’s carriage takes them home, and here’s Marmee, Hannah, and the bustle of Orchard House.

You see the problem here, right? This is all Four stuff! Where is our anchor to begin the story? No scene is edited to stand out.

Except one.

LITTLE WOMEN (2017)

Every filmed version of a beloved story will have some things that are ho-hum and some that are the best of any of the movies. For Little Women (2017), a three-part miniseries, Emily Watson’s Marmee is a triumph. Top actresses are cast as Marmee, so the field is particularly strong. Watson’s work and the script she’s given to deliver are truthful, painful, and joyous. This is a must-watch.

Some of the other choices, however, are not as strong. Let’s look.

ONE

At three hours runtime, LW2017 can add details the others leave out. We get Father March at the war right away. Both parents are much more present throughout, giving a complete family in the storytelling.

The very first scene has the girls trimming a lock of hair to send to him for Christmas. It’s a very weird sequence, though. Close-ups, corset laces, shadows, scissor blades . . . why shoot this like soft-core thriller content?

TWO

As Marmee returns home she crosses paths in the road with Laurie in the carriage, coming to Grandfather’s house for the first time. Laurie is Trouble, of course. He disrupts the March life in many ways. It’s not the most visually descriptive or inventive Two, though.

THREE

I am utterly and totally making something up here. We see Father, still nursing the sick in the war, cover the body of a man who’s died. Again, this is a strange choice. It establishes Father, the war, and, most pertinent of all, death. We all know what happens later with Beth. Does this moment foreshadow or portend that? I don’t think so. We know nothing about this corpse and have no connection to it.

But here it is, sitting after the Two and before the Four, so it’s what we have to work with.

LITTLE WOMEN (1994)

(In honor of the month of December, I’ve pulled out a series that was written for my book but didn’t make the cut.)

For me, this version, Little Women (1994), is the gold standard.

ONE

Credits, beautiful music, snow, and a Christmas wreath. Time of year and era are established visually. Jo narrates. As you may know, I’m not generally a fan of narration. It’s more of a “tell” than a “show”. Because this story is a novel, Jo’s narration feels like she’s just reading to us. It’s not the worst use of narration.

Marmee comes home, chilled, and the family gathers to read father’s letter. Throughout, the film is beautifully framed, like a portrait. The arranging of the five women is evocative. You’re watching a time gone by. Perhaps you’re remembering illustrations from books you read as a child. This family is loving and close.

Also, this family is missing its father. The women are surviving and thriving, despite hardship. Whatever guidance a father would provide, whatever comfort or strength, is not weighed.

GHOSTBUSTERS

This review was originally written for my second book, but I didn’t consider the piece good enough to include. I still think about it, though. The franchise has continued to add more content, and I can see myself diving into the extended stories and characters. In honor of Halloween, I post this rejected child.

This is my first time watching Ghostbusters (2016), and it is an astonishingly bad film. I thought maybe people were hating on it because it remade a beloved franchise, but no, it’s genuinely not good. I’ll go over its Enneagram, and then I’ll tell you where it really went off the rails.

ONE

First caveat: I’ve seen Ghostbusters (1984) many times, but I couldn’t recite the specifics of its Enneagram to you without watching it again. I suspect, though, that this movie hits the same highlights as the original. Certainly, its One is similar.

A museum, the Aldridge Mansion, has a ghost appear to the tour guide. We all remember that the original movie begins at the library with an apparition. Introduce the supernatural: check.

Then we go to campus and meet Erin (Kristen Wiig). She links up with Abby (Melissa McCarthy), with whom she’s been estranged for years, and Abby’s associate Jillian (Kate McKinnon). The three of them go into the Aldridge to investigate the apparition. In the original we meet Bill Murray scamming psychology students; Dan Aykroyd reels him in for the library investigation. Again, we have the character we’re supposed to like best (Wiig/Murray) who’s the voice of skepticism and the long-time friend (McCarthy/Aykroyd) who is the enthusiast. They team up and away we go.

It’s strange. Murray’s Venkman practically begs you to find him repulsive, and yet we’re captured. Wiig’s Erin is much nicer and more sympathetic, but the whole opening is flat.

MABEL MORA, NINE

If you’ve read my other two reviews of the Only Murders in the Building Enneagrams, you’ll know that I’m dissatisfied with the character details. Too much of the continuity of the show relies on great acting to paste over awkward writing.

However, Mabel is the most clear cut. She’s a Nine. We don’t see Mabel perform great physical feats or generally exhibit Body Type traits. We do see her sense of justice, of sticking to the murder mystery and her podcast partners because it’s the right thing to do.

Meanwhile, she also has the Nine’s emotional disconnect. Oliver can carry all the feelings for the group, and Charles can hold down the curmudgeon corner, and that leaves Mabel free to drift. In some ways she’s a blank. She’s a Nine who only engages on the margins.

Selena Gomez plays a solid part of the trio, yet she can’t match the generational experience of Martin and Short. Those two will upstage every scene. I can’t say how much of Mabel’s blandness is due to the writing or to Gomez. However, it’s a perfect fit for a certain kind of Nine.