Editing Wuthering Heights (section)

===Twentieth century===
Until late in the 19th century "''[[Jane Eyre]]'' was regarded as the best of the Brontë sisters' novels". This view began to change in the 1880s with the publication of [[A. Mary F. Robinson]]'s biography of Emily in 1883.<ref name=Lcr>[http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/novel_19c/wuthering/critics.html "Later critical response"], [[City University of New York|cuny.edu]]</ref>

Modernist novelist [[Virginia Woolf]] affirmed the greatness of ''Wuthering Heights'' in 1925:
{{blockquote|''Wuthering Heights'' is a more difficult book to understand than ''[[Jane Eyre]]'', because Emily was a greater poet than Charlotte.{{nbsp}}... She looked out upon a world cleft into gigantic disorder and felt within her the power to unite it in a book. That gigantic ambition is to be felt throughout the novel{{nbsp}}... It is this suggestion of power underlying the apparitions of human nature and lifting them up into the presence of greatness that gives the book its huge stature among other novels.<ref>Virginia Woolf, ''The Common Reader: First series'', 1925</ref>}}

Similarly, Woolf's contemporary [[John Cowper Powys]] referred in 1916 to Emily Brontë's "tremendous vision".<ref>"Emily Brontë". ''Suspended Judgment: Essays on Books and Sensations''. New York: G. Arnold Shaw, 1916, p.319.</ref>

In 1926 Charles Percy Sanger's work on the chronology of ''Wuthering Heights'' "affirmed Emily's literary craft and meticulous planning of the novel and disproved Charlotte's presentation of her sister as an unconscious artist who 'did not know what she had done'." However, for a later critic, [[Albert J. Guerard]], "it is a splendid, imperfect novel which Brontë loses control over occasionally".<ref name=Lcr />

Still, in 1934, [[Lord David Cecil]], writing in ''Early Victorian Novelists'', commented "that Emily Brontë was not properly appreciated; even her admirers saw her as an 'unequal genius',"<ref name=Lcr /> and in 1948 [[F. R. Leavis]] excluded ''Wuthering Heights'' from [[The Great Tradition|the great tradition]] of the English novel because it was "a 'kind of sport'—an anomaly with 'some influence of an essentially undetectable kind.'"<ref>Michael S. Macovski, "Wuthering Heights and the Rhetoric of Interpretation". ''[[ELH]]'', vol. 54, no. 2 (Summer 1987), p. 363.</ref>

The novelist [[Daphne du Maurier]] argued the status of ''Wuthering Heights'' as a "supreme romantic novel" in 1971:
{{blockquote|There is more savagery, more brutality, in the pages of ''Wuthering Heights'' than in any novel of the nineteenth century, and, for good measure, more beauty too, more poetry, and, what is more unusual, a complete lack of sexual emotion. ... Emily Brontë, striding over the Yorkshire moors with her dog, did not conjure from her imagination any cozy tale of happy lovers to console women readers sitting snugly within doors.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-buffalo-news-daphne-du-maurier-on-wu/153814179/|title=Great Love Stories Romantic Humbug|work=The Buffalo News|page=19|date=April 10, 1971}}</ref> }}