Reviews with content warning for Religious bigotry - The Secret History

This book was definitely something. It was way longer than I expected it to be and also quite slow paced but for some reason I still could not put it down. I read it in pretty much a day. It was kind of like a train crash you can't look away from but not because it's bad, just because it's so insane.

The story gets told to us by Richard who is the new guy and through whom we get to know the other protagonists. The setting and the whole group of strange classics students is very intriguing and you just want to know more about them. But as the story continues their behaviour becomes stranger and stranger.

So much is happening that I don't even know how to properly summarise my thoughts on this book. I think the easiest would be to talk about each character individually:

- Bunny:

I have to say that I did not like Bunny. I did not like any of the characters really but they still intruiged me. Bunny though is pretty much the exact person I would hate to be confronted with in reallife. He is manipulative, selfish, elitist and very prejudiced. We find out right in the beginning that by the end of the story, he will be dead and I can't say I was very unhappy about that. He is the first one who actually talks to Richard and includes him but after that good first impression it pretty much just went downhill. I feel bad for him, not just because of his family and upbringing but also because he was murdered by his best friends. I wish we got to read the message he left for Julian in full. He seemed so desperate and scared (and for good reason) After all the bad things he said and did, it humanised him to me again.

- Richard:

He is new and wants to fit in with the others in the group very badly. He is a very morally grey person. As a reader we are automatically sympathetic to him because we learn about everything from his perspective. Still I do not like him.

- Camilla and Charles:

I can only talk about the twins as a pair. Honestly for the majority of the book they were my favourites. Yes they were complicated and also involved in the insanity going on but they were kind and very welcoming to Richard. At least to me the further development of their characters was very surprising. Charles goes completely off the rails and I can't fully merge the kind Charles we get to know in the beginning with the reckless driver-sleeps with and abuses his sister-alcoholic-irrational-tries to shoot someone with a gun-Charles he is towards the end. Camilla was also quite different when I first read about her. To me she was a sort of Artemis figure like how she is described during the Bacchanal. I didn't like how later in the book instead of developing her character individually she just becomes this romantasised love-interest to pretty much everyone except Francis. I didn't like that she was just depicted as this callous woman who likes making people fall in love with her. I also don't believe she was actually in love with Henry. He rescued her from a terrible situation but I don't think he is capable of love. I think he was obsessed with her and very much liked to possess her and she knew that too.
The incestuous relationship between the twins was teased a couple of times but even though I was supicious of it I liked them too much to actually think it was happening. When they kissed in front of Richard I was very shocked. But even more so when Camilla tells him that she is scared of Charles and that he abuses her. I saw that coming even less with how close they seemed to be.

- Francis:

I felt quite bad for Francis a lot of the times. Not only was one of his best friends a raging homophobe who he can't even be alone with for that reason, the boy he actually likes pretends nothing is happening between them and prefers to sleep with his own sister. He is also so stressed about everything happening he has a panic attack and later tries to kill himself. Still through all of that he is not a good person either. (None of them are).

- Henry:

Oh Henry. He's a complicated one. I was very intruiged by him in the beginning as well. He was my second favourite after the twins. Not only is he very generous he's also very focused on his studies which seem to be everything to him. He's clearly very intelligent but in the beginning you don't see that as a bad thing. The more the story continued though, the more I started to doubt him. Many things about him never get explained. He clearly is a psychopath and a very dangerous one too. He's the only one who actually kills anyone. The others were just there and so loyal to him they didn't turn him in. I don't think I will ever fully understand him. Did he leave the plane tickets out for Richard to find? It seems like a stupid oversight that's very unlike Henry. I think he wanted Richard to know. I don't understand why he killed himself. Did he really think he would survive? I don't think it was because of anything like remorse. What was the actual relationship between Henry and Julian? It was way closer than between Julian and the other students but we never find out.
I'm also very curious if Henry would have continued killing if he hadn't died. I really think he would have. He said himself that he enjoyed it and he was the one doing the actual killing. Also even though he denies it I am convinced he tried to kill Charles too. Charles may have been a bit irrational but I think he was very justified and correct in being scared of Henry and what he might do to him.
Henry for a majority of the book had control over the group. He's the one who makes decision and tells them what to do. He tells Richard about everything. The biggest warning sign was when he poisoned his neighbors dogs to to try out the poison with which he wanted to kill Bunny. Thats psychopath 101

- Julian:

I expected Julian to not only play a more important role in the story but also just to show up more. Except for being the one who chose every student individually he doesn't really have much to do with the story. Unless of course there is something we don't know. Henry looked up to him very much and he's the one who came up with the idea for the Bacchanal. So what if the idea was actually Julians? That would perhaps explain why he ran and cut contact with them all. Julian is definitely a very strange character. He's not a good person either but we don't actually know how much of an influence he had on his students. He isolated them and made them rely solely on him and each other. I wish we got a few more answers about him and his perspective and intentions.

Okay now that we went through all the main characters let's move on to some theories and thoughts I had while reading.

1. I think it was Richard and Francis who are driving together in a car when they have to stop and they see something that is neither a deer nor a dog and they say it's a big cat. As soon as I read this part I was CONVINCED it would turn out that this big cat was the one who killed the farmer. Wouldn't that have been a twist? If shortly after they kill Bunny it turns out they aren't responsible for the first murder? That they just murdered their friend for nothing? I really thought that would happen, but sadly it did not.

2. I think it's so insane how pretty much the entire group is in some kind of big love triangle. Henry and Camilla, Camilla and Charles, Charles and Francis, Francis and Richard, Richard and Camilla. The only one uninvolved was Bunny and he would be SHOCKED if he ever found out about all this.

3. As much as I did not like Bunny, he had the only understandable reaction to murder. He found his best friends drenched in blood after having killed a man in their delirium. It makes sense that he cannot just move on.

4. I think we never got the full truth about what really happened during the Bacchanal. We only heard Henry's account of it and he clearly only told Richard what he wanted him to know. I wish we got different perspectives on it. I'm not sure I trust anything Henry is saying actually. The whole thing intruiges me but we never get any real answers.

I'm not sure if this is actually a review or just me rambling and venting my thoughts on this book but oh well. I had a couple of issue but all in all I understand why this book is seen as the classic example for Dark Acadmia. It's a bunch of rich, pretentious and educated people trying to rationalise murder. I don't even know what more to say. If you like Dark Academia you will probably like this.

Content Warnings

wooblatoober's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

WOW!! it was surely a difficult read for me (it took me 2 months) but it was so worth it & i’m so glad my friend made me read it. there are so few books (or authors!!) out there that are so good at leaving me with questions that DON’T MAKE ME ANGRY!! idk what her method is but tartt’s ability to make you wonder & theorize has landed this novel a cult following, because when you’re done reading, all you wanna do is TALK ABOUT IT!! you want to discuss theories with your friends, or what they thought of each character, or watch several 3-hour-long video essays while you clean your room, or follow the tsh reddit page. it gets in your head, partly because it SEEMS SO REAL! characters don’t make moral decisions, but it feels like you’re there and living this story, so not only do you understand why they’re making their decisions—sometimes they seem like the only option. details are included as literary devices, but they also just serve to make the story more realistic. & don’t get me started on the characters. judy poovey is quite possibly the only likeable character in all 628 pages (which is by design, as she seems to serve as a tether to reality in ways), & yet i REALLY LIKE most of the characters despite having flaws that would usually make you HATE someone. i’ve never liked (or enjoyed in any book, for that matter) unlikeable characters at all, let alone this much before. i said it was a difficult read, but i really appreciate its length—apparently, tartt cut out a good portion of tsh before publishing, & thinking about what she might have gotten rid of keeps me up at night. tartt’s literary tools are so well-used, i feel like i can truly analyze this book & its literary devices like im in school again, & it’s so much fun!!

i think i enjoyed reading each character so much because of their complexities, paired with richard’s very limited point of view—one that he (and the reader) doesn’t always realize is so limited. in fact, he doesn’t really every get to have all the information at any one time, illustrated by the hundreds of fan theories from people who have exactly the same amount of information that richard has. so you’re left to unravel characters’ motives and actions with the same amount of information richard has—again, not a lot—& left to understand only what he understands. tartt also doesn’t leave any loose ends—every detail it’s important, & serves to make the story seem more realistic. these things makes it more immersive—like the reader is living it, or hearing a story about a friend, someone they know, something that actually happened that the reader is helping to try to get to the bottom of. it involves the reader in a marvelous way. & this stupid fucking book has me saying prick ass words like ‘marvelous’

Content Warnings

cordelio's review against another edition

Go to review page

medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? N/A
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.75

Content Warnings

asrasher's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional mysterious reflective tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

Fantastic stuff. bit slow in the last third.

Content Warnings

uhhjeepers's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional mysterious reflective tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

5.0

This book is a gift to people who like literature and value pretentiousness in controlled environments, such as a novel.

I’ve had this book on my list since I entered college, and I graduated this May. There’s almost some magic to reading it once I’ve gotten my degree, as I’m not too close but not that far removed. It’s the perfect in-between that I think this book dabbles in itself, in its own ways.

Unreliable narrators are my bread and butter, and Richard feels like their forefather — the one who came before. The first person immediately introduces doubt but makes me so close to him that I always want to take his word as truth. But despite my inclination to trust him, I still feel doubt even as the covers are closed. And that is beautiful, that lingering.

The other characters are equally, if not more, captivating than our first-person guide through the world. I’m very partial to Henry and Francis, I was endeared to them early on and stuck with that feeling even when Richard implored me to feel otherwise, even against my own better judgment. None of them were trustworthy or even necessarily good, but I loved them all the same.

The plot in this book is just as lively as the characters. I loved it in the exciting and the mundane equally, and that comes from Donna Tartt’s expert navigation of the perspective. Richard’s purposeful omissions and emphases make the pacing feel alive, literally, like the ebb and flow of life. The rush and dawdle of day-to-day. I loved it.

I’m generally an emotional person, but I really had to fight back tears finishing this in public. I felt sad for events, for characters, and for the simple act of being done. And that is such a testament to the greatness of a book — an unwillingness to leave it. I’ll certainly return in due time.

Apologies for such a wordy and gushy review. I feel like I always talk more and have a greater appreciation for word play after I read something that hits me the way this did. This book is dark academia magic in its purest form, so if you’re looking for that, look at this. But beware that every other dark academia book experience will be informed by this one, past and present.

Content Warnings

ellagrady's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional mysterious sad tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

I found it slow to start and questionable in the way certain topics were handled in the first part, almost DNFing because of it, not sure if it was a product of its time or making a point. I’m glad I stuck it out as about halfway through I was gripped, flying through it, fascinated by the moral fights the characters were balancing as the story progressed and the greatness of the spaces they navigated. It’s a tough read, so definitely one to be careful about, but something I couldn’t put down was I was invested. This isn’t a trope I typically gravitate towards, but I felt like I had to know what the hype was the book, maybe I fell into a similar hive mind the book follows. I will say I found the characters fascinating, though they were all deeply unlikable, but I think that’s what makes them so fascinating, they seemed very human and real even if they were often terrible. It felt a little long at times, some of the chapters went on unnecessarily, but Tarty’s writing kept me hooked and enthralled, feeling like I was right there alongside the characters, so she clearly knew what she was doing.

I think the story did everything it was meant to, giving a satirical look at the wealthy academics at the liberal arts New England colleges, understanding the dynamics of the group, and turning the situation on its head to show how ridiculous these types of students can be. I wish it had more views than just Richard’s to get a better idea of what was really going on, but I do see the point of limiting it to just his rose-tinted, unreliable, and romanticized telling.

Content Warnings

theycallmerash's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark mysterious reflective slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

5.0

This book begins quite slow but has a very exciting second half and a bit of a twist at the end that made my jaw drop. I was super impressed with the writing style, and although it was slow, I never felt like it droned on and on. The themes of morality, isolation, appearance, and manipulation were super interesting! Would definitely recommend it, but not for everyone.

Content Warnings

erebus53's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional mysterious sad tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.25

For a story with attractive writing and the occasionally beautiful truth of phrase, I have never read a book with more characters that I loathed. It is set in a university clique where the students so devote themselves to their study of ancient Greek, and their sycophantic affection for their tutor, that they become quite disconnected from the rest of campus and the real world. It's like you take cliquey academia and then turn it up to 11½. Not quite as schizophrenic as Bunny by Mona Awad, though one of the characters shares the same name, there is a sense that the narrator is not quite reliable.

I didn't get a clear sense of when this was set but I'm guessing that because it references anti-Arab race hatred and Sadam Hussein, that it would have to be about 1991, though most of it feels a little earlier than that. Maybe my perception of it is warped by it having been written before computers and cellphones were ubiquitous.

I was completely culturally at is with a bunch of characters who range from sociopathic to just mildly self-involved, all with a heaping helping of sense of entitlement... all the characters have bad or absent parents which is probably deliberate. These kids are almost adults, similes, and frequently inebriated. They are perfectly ok with tolerating friends as they demonstrate casual disregard for others, drink driving, kleptomania, infidelity, fraud, Racism, Sexism, religious bigotry, and stiffing others for the bill at expensive restaurants. These antics are presented to the narrator as endearing.. again; reliable??

When a classmate goes missing, I as a reader have the ethical question, would I have killed the horrible kid myself?! If I did would that make me a bad person? This kid is demonstrably awful, to mind. Does it matter that he was raised awful, by awful parents, and had a learning disability? Given support could he have improved? Who would have the patience!!!

The book drags. If the scenery had been nice I wouldn't mind so much, but I just wanted to kick all of the characters to the curb. I've been off-the-rails, drunk, clueless, far from home, and made bad decisions. I really liked the part of the story where our narrator has to live in a horrible free room, with a hole in the ceiling, through the coldest winter in ages, and there descriptions of going to common spaces and hanging out at the University because.. it's heated. That I could relate to. But the rest of it...?

I'm not sure why I do this to myself.

Content Warnings

More...