The Secret History

I’ve had The Secret History in my TBR pile for…well, a long time now. But in the last two weeks, three separate students – with no connection between them – all brought up the book to me. And while I’m assuming that it has to do with BookTok (a thing that I know exists but which my age exempts me from having to learn about it), the fact that three different high schoolers all independently came up to me to talk about a thirty-year old book…well, it moved the book up to the top of my stack. So, having read it, I can certainly imagine a lot of why it’s appealing to a high school and/or college audience (beyond it being part of the “dark academia” trend right now)…but honestly, I have been thinking since I finished it about how I feel about the book, and I think I’ve yet to entirely decide.In its broadest strokes, The Secret History is about a young man named Richard Papen, who wants little more than to get out of his small town and away from his humble, working-class background. That’s how he ends up at Hampden College, a small liberal arts college in Vermont, where he finds himself drawn to an elite, exclusive, and small group of classics students – an invitation-only class focused on Greek translation but also a wider appreciation of classic literature and studies. Of course, that all seems fine, but it’s all colored a bit by the prologue, which informs us about the search for the body of one of the class’s members – killed by his classmates.To some degree, that’s really the whole plot of The Secret History, which spends about half of its length building up to that murder, and the rest of the book watching as the aftermath unfolds. There are some other key events here and there, but the major one takes place off-stage entirely and the other effectively serves as the book’s climax. Instead, this is a coming-of-age book of sorts, about a young man who finds an odd batch of kindred spirits and a chance to reinvent himself, and finds himself swept up in a group without connections to the larger community and with a deep sense of superiority about themselves, their knowledge, and their connections.Because make no mistake, these are upper-class students – well, apart from Richard, who is taking this chance to hide his working-class background and pretend that he’s part of their group. And the snobbery, the disdain, the self-righteousness and superiority of these characters…it’s a lot, and that’s before they commit a murder which often seems to be viewed almost entirely as an inconvenience for them as anything – a nuisance, rather than an act of evil.And this is where I struggle with the book. My initial reaction, as I read the book, was to view it much as I do the book The Great Gatsby – that it is a book about awful people, written from the point of view of one who’s almost as awful as the rest, but blissfully unaware of it. But as The Secret History goes on (and on – this is not a short book, and its prose and discussions can be longwinded at times), I struggled with that interpretation. Oh, there’s definitely at least one class member who we’re supposed to feel uneasy about…but more than anything, this book seems to pity these students, and never really pushes back against their ignorance or egos or snobbery. Then again, my English teacher brain chimes in, Nick Carraway doesn’t either, and you like that book just fine.It probably complicates my feelings on The Secret History to see it through the eyes of my students, too, because I know younger me would feel differently about these students, and I know some of them can see the great side of this – the sense of being better than the idiots you’re so often surrounded by, the sense of finding your peers and being able to have “real” conversations about things that matter, the desire to get to find yourself and to become something “intellectual.” And I can see it all being appealing, to where the book can be described as “incredibly sad” but not for the murder itself.But to see all of that and to not see the self-deceptions at the heart of The Secret History, I think, is to misread the book, because I think Tartt has to be viewing them through a lens of narcissism and self-involvement…because only that could justify how thinly drawn some of these characters are, and how ultimately thin the whole book is. For all of the length of The Secret History, I’m not sure it wears that weight well; by the time Tartt got to The Goldfinch, she was much better about her pacing and her story. (I do think that some – not all, but definitely some – of my issues with The Secret History come from it being a first novel.) Here, there are about three beats to hit, and the rest is sort of living in this world with these characters, which would be fine, I suppose, if there was all that much to them. I can live with them being awful people (see Gatsby, above)…but to be so empty, apart from Bunny and Henry? That’s a more disappointing flaw, even if it’s one that took me a bit into the book to realize.For all of that, though, I can’t deny losing myself in The Secret History‘s pages for hours at a time. I can’t really argue the tragic air that hangs over the back half of the book, or the way the book can nail the way that isolation from the “normal” world can cloud your judgment, or how repression and guilt can eat away at you. I can’t push back against the way it captures the feel of finding your “thing” at college and feeling like you’re with your peers and the world is ahead of you. Is the book too long? Is it pretentious at times (fittingly, given its characters and milieu)? Are the characters less developed than they seem, ultimately feeling more like pencil sketches rather than fully developed portraits? Yes, yes, and yes. But for all those flaws, The Secret History still kind of worked on me, and I can understand all too well why it would hit perfectly for a high school/college audience – and how for me, all I can feel is the same amused irritation we all have when dealing with younger people who just don’t quite know better yet.

This was on my "too read" list for a while, sitting for years until I found the right time to do it. See the plan was, every year my husband I take a vacation without the kids, and I wanted to be able to read it in one sitting, so I had to wait for one of these vacations to happen. Unfortunately, between the last 3 years I had 2 kids so it's been a while. But I was planning, waiting, and finally last week I got it done in two days and I loved it.Thoughts that went through my mind "That pretty much sums up college" and "Why drive all the way to the Man of Kent?" (a real bar referenced in the book). I don't think it was meant to be obviously funny, but I found the book hilarious.I went to a liberal arts college full of well-off idiots and supremely disenfranchised people who were sold the idea that if they attended said institution and threw away hundreds of thousands of dollars on classes like "Space, time, and Einstein" they too might somehow transcend into the upper classes.So I really got this crowd. I also live near Bennington, so even though it was all veiled, I knew the topography being described well. It is the last week of March, for example, and it is indeed still snowing just after a 60 degree day where my kids and I got ice cream. Spring! What can you do! Happens all the time that bodies get lost in the snow and then found in May. Especially by our local lake. Just the way of life!Anyhow, I love how earnestly these kids all took themselves. I had a close friend who I used to love to get into long theoretical conversations with about very esoteric points of already far-reaching theories of all kinds, politics, psychology, you name it, we filled that balloon. That's how *I know I am an existentialist *! See!! And we also lived in the pursuit of beauty. Because we were wealthy and dumb and/or poor and aspiring...and it was all an excuse for some very unoriginal thoughts.And I love how firmly grounded in 20th century hetero-masculinity this book is set. I often find myself nostalgically reverting to thought processes from the 20th century, where I was born and where I generally grew up. In the 2020's that a male teacher could hold secret classes for all mostly male students, might seem preposterous and like obviously biased and a bad idea because it might be a breeding ground for so many issues...but....! It was totally the norm in my youth! So young readers don't get so hung up on how this possibly could be and why didn't we know better. Oh most of us knew better, but the patriarchy was really eloquent in the Liberal Arts, and if you wanted something else go to Smith, duh!So without any reference to plot, that's the whole book, and that was college. Half the kids dropped out, a bunch killed themselves/died/probably were killed. And the rest of us moved on.

Here's my review: the epilogue felt earnt. This was because the book felt so very bloody long.It's not a bad book - but it's pretty anemic fare when you look closely. You'd think that ancient Greek would provide a charming and interesting motif. You'd be wrong. Like most of the book, it's thin set dressing for a medium-interesting melodrama that doesn't really go anywhere.It's nicely written, but not so much as to ever make you stop and marvel.The characters are strangely thin. The plot seems poised to set them up as being profound, but then fumbles it. I did wonder if this was a thematic point, but I don't really think so, on reflection. The characterisation is also somewhat....bloodless. Again, I don't really this was deliberate *enough*. Meaning: I think it was deliberate, but serves no overarching purpose, like you'd hope.It's fine. I wouldn't go out of my way to recommend it.

I read this book on a recommendation, and have to admit that after reading a few pages I did not expect to enjoy it as much as I did. I do not generally like books that are overly descriptive and feature more 'pretentious' prose, in fact I detest classical literature, yet the description and classical language, is what gives The Secret History it's charm.This book was published in 1992, but harks back to a time more reminiscent of the early 1900's in style. The language used by some of the characters, namely Bunny, is reminiscent of The Great Gatsby. The characters are proper, intelligent, well-spoken,well-dressed, apparently wealthy young people, yet their lives are fueled by drink, drugs, and cigarettes. The drug abuse in this book is merely an undertone of the main story and therefore not as striking, especially considering the characters go about their addictions as though they are of no importance at all. This however, creates an air of mystery - building a world that few of us could ever know. A secret world of intoxication and prose. Of fine restaurants and best suits.***spoilers***The story is better described as a 'whydunnit' - opening with the death of a main character, with Book 1 of the story describing the events leading to the death, and Book 2 describing the events after the death. Our narrator, Richard, arrives at the fictional Hampden College with the intention of continuing his studies in Greek, and there has his first encounter with enigmatic tutor Julian, who eventually permits him to study in his small selective class of only six students. Previously fascinated with these students, Richard soon finds himself drawn into their world of bygone-time splendor. Richard struggles to open himself up to the group, especially as they are all of discernible wealth, and he has entered the school on Financial Aid to the horror of his Californian parents, but soon finds that they are keeping a far bigger secret from him.The relationships between the main characters throughout the book are extremely interesting. At times it seems like everyone is sleeping with everyone, everyone hates everyone, everyone loves everyone. These friends are as family members, and move only together. As events unfold and some characters begin to lose themselves to either love, alcohol, murderous intentions, or drugs, the plot moves fantastically, with barely a dull paragraph. As previously mentioned, the use of such ornate and graceful language builds both atmosphere and suspense. It was a pleasure to read and I have even noticed Donna Tartt's use of language sneaking into my day to day writing and speech.This book is a dark and classical masterpiece, the plot points of which you will never expect until they happen. I look forward to reading more of Tartt's work.

Wow. This is a heck of a book. Unlike any other I’ve ever read. It’s quite heavy going but I felt it was ultimately worth it although I felt it ran out of steam at the end (hence 4 stars not 5). I suppose it’s ultimately about peer pressure, about the masks we wear when young and about trying to impress. Mainly (simply put) it’s about an intellectual group of university students who feel that the normal rules of society don’t apply to them with horrendous consequences. Written from the point of view of Richard who is desperate to be included into their inner sanctum and has no idea about the darkness at its core. The book stayed with me for quite a while afterwards.

It is in truth impossible to realistically describe my feelings in respect of this book. I am 75 years old and suffering from cancer, this means that every book I read in my end of days needs to be enjoyable. I had never read any of Donna Tratts novels and was swayed by the reviews and the star ratings.I really enjoyed the first part of the book but about a third of the way in, I suspected, what turned out to be true, that the novel was a literary illusion. I suspect some reviewer had given the novel a great review and the rest followed like sheep. The book is absolutely boring, boring, boring. What was the Baccanalian episode about? It was never explained it really commented upon . Donna clearly is a good writer but the ridiculous amount of trivial rubbish, descriptions of what they had for every meal or snack, was never needed. I think she thought she was being paid by the word because this novel was just hundreds and hundreds of pages too long. I skimmed the pages of two thirds of the book and couldn't care less what happened to the most uninspiring group of people ever to inhabit the pages of a novel. There is so much more I could say but I have only so many days left and wasting it on this review when I could be reading a decent novel has to take priority. One last observation is that there must be more Donna Tartt novels on people's bookshelves, unfinished, than any living author. Do not bother to read.

At the time of its publication, the publishers opted for an initial print run of 75,000 copies. When we compare this to the usual amount of 10,000 for a debut, literary novel then it's apparent that the publishers knew they had something exciting on their hands. The novel has been described as an 'inverted detective story' as we start the novel aware of the death of a student, Bunny, at Hampden College. Our narrator is Richard Papen, who has started studying Ancient Greek at Hampden with an unusual group of people including Bunny. The group are taught by enigmatic professor Julian and include the unofficial leader Henry, the twins Charles and Camilla, Francis and Bunny. Aware of this group within a group, Richard can only sit and observe until one weekend tragedy occurs and Richard becomes entwined in their complicated, unhealthy web before the novel reaches its climax with the death of Bunny.I have so much I want to share with you about this novel. The first thing to say is that nothing much really happens despite the fantastic plot. Richard's narrative, at times, seems to be dry and a little dull. But there is true magic in this. He encompasses beautifully the drinking, drugging and debauchery that forms the basis of the novel, until it becomes almost passé.His words also highlight beautifully the isolation of the Ancient Greek group and their professor. Richard, himself, becomes remote from the rest of the University. His French tutor describes the group as unusual, Julian chooses not to socialise with the rest of the faculty and the group live, study and socialise exclusively away from the rest of the College. Richard manages to maintain some links, choosing to work for a psychology Professor and maintain his friendship with fellow Californian Judy Poovey. But Richard still appears at a halfway house - not quite ingratiated into Henry's group and never quite bothered enough to maintain new friendships. His role is that of observer. Aspects of his personality change as he strives to join Henry's group; he dresses in old-fashioned suit jackets, he smokes excessively. It is a fascinating transformation.The characters are a wonderful mix of light and day. Julian is a marvellous study, as delicate as glass; witty, charming and with the most wonderful life experiences as he befriends celebrity and ex-presidents. He is an inspiration for the group and it is only at the end we see how shallow he actually is. Henry is very interesting. Old-mannish, tall, rich, not particularly handsome and a genius. The group follow him slavishly. At first you wonder why, but then as Donna Tartt's narrative unfolds you understand and by the end no longer question this. The twins, Charles and Camilla are unusual. Charles is friendly but on a path of self-destruction and there is something other-worldly about Camilla. At one time or another, most of the group are in love with her. Francis is probably the one that Richard feels closest to; foppish, insanely rich, out of everyone he can see what Henry is doing and goes along with it.It's wonderful and brilliant. I loved the biting cold of Vermont, of the powerful writing, the self-destructive nature of the characters and the looming darkness. Each word is carefully and precisely chosen, it evokes emotion and feeling and truly a modern classic in every sense of the word. Do not be put off by the theorisations or perceived intellectual qualities - it is accessible. I love this book and in my opinion this should be a lot higher in the BBC Big Read list.