doesn't look like you r getting much support there mate. Heres some critical commentary....
Unfavourable Reaction – There were a number of unperceptive comments towards Wuthering Heights. H.F Chorley, in the Dec. 25, 1847 issue of the Athenaeum, dismissed the work as a “disagreeable story”, appearing at a time when England needed “sunshine more than ever”. The Quarterly Review 12 months later described it as “unscrupulousness”. The critic even went out on a limb by saying the book could not have been written by a woman, or if it had been, then only a woman who had “long forfeited the society of her own sex”. The North American Review saw in the book an “attempt to corrupt the virtute of the sturdy descendants”.
Encouraging Response – Sydney Dobell’s review appeared in the Palladium, in Sep, 1850. “Let the critic take up the book” writes Dobell, “lay it down in what thought he will, there are some things in it can lay down no more”. He then goes on to praise, with special enthusiasm, the characters of Catherine Earnshaw, Nelly, and Joseph. He concludes with the remark “there are passages in this book of ‘Wuthering Heights’ of which any novelist, past or present, might be pound”.
Later Critics – in 1926 C.P Sanger published as essay titled “The Structure of Wuthering Heights” which includes a chapter-by-chapter timetable of the events in the novel, as well as a genealogical table, which appears early in the book. What Sanger is impressed with is the precision with which Emily Bronte handled the many details of her novel. The characters are always the ages they are supposed to be, act their age. He also praises Bronte for her specialised subject of the English inheritance law, and how it is handled with accuracy.
David Cecil concentrates on Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange as symbols of two ways of life, storm and calm, and sees, in the fatal meetings of the inhabitants of these two houses, the disturbance of an equilibrium that must be restored before the story can end.
