class 2/4-wuthering heights/ideology

On my blogs, I have just been writing my thoughts/opinions, but have not been writing those based on ideology.  "The main purpose behind an ideology is to offer change in society through a normative thought process. Ideologies are systems of abstract thought (as opposed to mere ideation) applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics" (Dictionary.com).  Now, I'll try to think of that more while writing.  Also, these blogs are not like papers, where a lot of planned thought is worked into it.  The thoughts presented here are given more "on the fly," so some words or phrases are not the best that could be used.  I hope it does not offend anyone.

"Wuthering Heights" is a fairly tough read for me, but not impossible.  So far, I like the story, but the language makes it hard at times to get at what exactly is going on, and I found myself reading a lot of things twice.  Some books flow really well when I am reading them and the book goes really fast, but it takes work to get through this book.  I almost have to muscle through it in a way.  The relationship between the characters is hard to figure out because they are both complex and hard to figure out in general, and some have the same names.  

Something interesting just mentioned in class is that Bronte is compared to a women Shakespeare.  This is the second author (also Woolf) compared to Shakespeare.  I don't know why this leapt out at me.  I immediately just Wikipedia'ed Shakespeare and a thought was that Bronte was pretty close in time to Shakespeare, but they were separated by a couple hundred years.  These female authors were British writers like Shakespeare, and he is known as the best ever, so it is natural to be compared I guess.  I guess what I was really wondering is if these female writers were happy/felt acclaimed by this comparison, or if they were trying to get out of a man's shadow and show that they are great authors and are women.  The media is always trying to appoint the next Jordan (in the NBA), and it seems to annoy the players because they want to be known as being great in their own way, not the second-tier version of someone else.  I guess that's what drew my attention to this, and I wondered if these writers were honored by this comparison, or wanted to be known for their own great works instead of being called a low-grade man.  I wondered if, by being compared to a man these women were being cut down in a way, or being highly esteemed.  Maybe thats dumb to think about, but for some reason it really drew my curiosity.