Unhinged Deep Dive Into The Secret History's Bacchanal
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Hi, class!
I had the time of my life researching for this video after spending a week on my thesis constantly being berated by mentions of the Bacchanalia. It was a sign from the universe to combine the two loves of my life and here they are!
Follow me on TikTok & Twitter: mialiterary
Primary Sources & Bibliography:
Livy, Ab Urbe Condita
Cicero, De Natura Deorum
Ovid, Metamorphoses
Donna Tartt, The Secret History
Ingo Gildenhard & Andrew Zissos, The Bacchanalia and Roman Culture, 65-67
Richard C. Miller, Neos Dionysos in Textual and Cultural Mimesis, 37-42
Michael Lipka, Concepts and Society, 167-185
Matthias Riedl, The Containment of Dionysos: Religion and Politics in the Bacchanalia Affair of 186 BCE, 113-134
Dwayne Meisner, Livy and the Bacchanalia, 1-40
Heather O’Leary McStay, “Viva Bacco e viva Amore”: Bacchic Imagery in the Renaissance
Leave a comment, like and subscribe! Share with your friends and tell me what you want to see next :)
this is so fascinating. i read and loved the secret history but this made me realize i didn’t actually, truly understand it.
to be fair I've read it twice and I was extra cautious the second time to find any hints. Donna is an amazing writer
Wow that explains why donna tartt used this quote on the start of the book
"I enquire now as to the genesis of a philologist and assert the following:
1. A young man cannot possibly know what greeks and Romans are.
2. He does not know whether he is suited for finding out about them."
- Friedrich nietzsche
exactly! she's very on the nose about it
When I went back to this quote after Henry offed himself and all of them messed up their lives I kind of chuckled. Btw "young man" is also Julian.
My algorithm truly blessed me today
The background and history of the bacchanal/bacchanalia has definitely shed a light on themes in The Secret History for me. I'm looking forward to taking this information into a reread of the book. Thank you for creating this video and sharing all this brilliant knowledge.
as a greek student who just read this book because according to my mom "It's about classics! You'll love it!" I have to say that a) I have held a bacchanal (Yes, it was a bad idea.) and b) My final assignment for one of my classics classes was to go out to the middle of the woods without any technology and drink in the pureness of nature. (Though the aim of that was expressly the opposite of the bacchanal; we were supposed to mediate on the nature of our own futility as mortals.) I think its just like that to be at a weird college with a mini cult around your greek professor.
This is a masterpiece of explication. Better than most profs I had, plus entertaining af.
omg that's so nice, thank you
really interesting video! i absolutely love the secret history, since i feel like i discover something new every time i reread it, and this gave me some things to think about on my next reread!
just started the video but your bookshelves are sooo cute!!!
Yay! Thank you!
oh i have BEEN looking for something like this
WOOOOO!! I hope you enjoy it :)
Wow, that was one hell of a research based analysis. Really appreciated!
2 hours omg, she is the moment!
hahaha thank you! she very much is
Personally, I like the time it was written, it’s not like today’s writing where we workshop, cull and re-edit, there is A LOT of descriptive words in this book, but it’s such a reflection of the times late 80’s early 90’s of writing
I read this book about a year or two ago and remember enjoying it. I started rereading it recently, but I have to say I don't seem to enjoy her writing style anymore. Everything seems a little too long winded for my taste and I'm not one to hate on long books (I enjoyed War and Peace f.e.). I'm stuck on page ~100 and don't really want't to go on, especially since my reading list is just crammed right now.
Anyway I bookmarked this video in case I ever decide to pick it up again (and finish it).
I will also send it to my girlfriend who actually did finish a reread recently.
Have a good day.
Thank you!! Tartt does have really long chapters - I like to consume them by breaking them up along with the scenes to really enjoy everything that's being fed to us. Have a nice day
In my opinion her long descriptions and slow pace perfectly mimc the events in the book, which is incredible and makes you feel like a part of the story. For example the 'winter section' with richard almost dying feels like 100 pages, it was so long and slow and made me feel like I'm about to freeze to death with him. Later I came back to this part to count the pages and it was only about 15 pages long ??? This is crazy, to me it only proves Donna's talent :)
i recommend the audiobook narrated by tartt if you wanted to "re read"! she's a really engaging reader and you get to hear how she wanted the book to be read! plus the long winded hyper descriptive prose passes by pretty easily when you're able to putter around the house/go on walks/etc.! it's on youtube if you search!
@@s.e.a.b.Thanks, I'll check it out.
Yes.... the Algorithm works in mysterious ways 👍😊💯
..
Unhinged deep dives are the best! Yaaas!
I am so blessed to find this ❤❤❤❤❤
I'm blessed you found it!
quando eu finalmente ler the secret history (e descobrir o que é um bacchanal) juro que volto a este vídeo 🤞🤞
ahah vais gostar!
Omg this is what I've been waiting for let's gooo🧚♀️👭
Super interesting video! A great insight into the deeper layers of this grand piece!
PS: Vienna does not speak Dutch but German ;) (Capital City of Austria)
Ah!! My brain always gets confused with it! Thank you 😊
Love this video so much
AHHH thank you so much
Just found this video and channel. Instantly subscribed.
I wish this was seperated into chapters 😭
Thanks for the video, it was very interesting!
Henry isnt a psychopath guys. He just has a superiority complex and sentimentality towards intellect (and some moral principles) over people.
I know our supreme leader Brittany would love this
PLEASE I would scream if our leader watched this
had to look up what bacchanal meant for this one 😞(definition is " a wild, drunken celebration" in case somebody also doesn´t know)
Why is every damb book about a murder?
This video plus @moeblackx 's recap of the whole book are so good. So happy it got recommended to me
I'm so glad you enjoyed it!! :)
Richard is Jenny Humphrey
Can you give some examples of where Richard lies?? I’m having a tough time spotting the small details
Lies in the beginning, where he talks about his home life with Bunny when they go to lunch
@@leblondefox9256Those are lies we know of, because Richard tells us they’re lies. There are also A LOT of things in de book that could be lies, even though they seem like the truth through Richard’s narrative, because he is an unreliable narrator. For instance, I believe Camilla didn’t really kiss him once!
When Bunny is being a pest to Richard near his end, mocking his clothing, it's because Richard is lying. Bunny might not have been as wealthy as Henry or the others but he DID know his fancy brand names. He was taking shots at Richard near the end by asking him if his clothes were brand names such as Gucci, and Richard would always say yes because a) he didn't know and b) still feels compelled to lie to fit in, and then Bunny would call him out for his lies as his belt wasn't Hermes, or his sweater wasn't Gucci or whatever.
There's also the whole lie about the car, that he doesn't even own, needing repairs to get an advance from the Prof he was working for just so he could buy clothes to try to fit in.
There're also some incidents that Richard lies about to over romanticize incidents. Camilla's foot cut being a severed artery. About the call of "mallards" on the lake (West Coast kid didn't know that he meant loons), trying to create a more evocative scene. The three ravens on the tree (not real raven behavior). Those stood out to me (living around the squawking mallard ducks and actual ravens), and the anatomy of arteries in the feet as well as how serious it would be for Camilla if something did get deep enough into her foot to actually sever an artery.
Given how precise Tartt's writing and research seems to be it felt like these things are deliberately wrong to show Richard's romanticization and love of the aesthetic rather than just an author not being knowledgeable about birds or anatomy.
@@dimman77 Ah yes the professor, that’s a great point. Also yes, it gives us that feeling and insight to Richard. However, I think one major thing is that there’s so many decorative wording in this book it leaves nothing to the imagination
I love your take on this video! But I don't think Henry was 100% heterosexual. Throughout the first book, I always felt like the relationship between Henry and Bunny was more than just friendship. It is mentioned that they used to live together- but then, for some reason, Henry decided to move out. Although Henry had little care for anyone other than himself, he kept spoiling bunny for years- buying him all the expensive stuff he wants, and never refusing him. Also, after their trip to Rome, when they have an argument, Bunny falls asleep in Henry's bed afterwards and Richard mentiones hearing cries during the argument. I also believe that there was an affair between Julian and Henry- it is mentioned several times Henry is Julian's favorite and their relationship seemingly extends over the student-teacher/mentor dynamic. It is possible that Julian was grooming Henry the whole time and implementing his ideas onto him simultaneously. Maybe, at that time, Henry was having an on-and-off thing with Bunny and also in an intimate relationship with Julian and maybe Bunny found out about it, and threathened to tell on them out of jealousy which would result in Julian getting fired and Henry losing the person he lovss the most. I always felt like, even if Bunny ratted on them about the farmer, there was no evidence that would get them arrested and even if there was, Henry was perfectly capable of getting himself out of it. Which brings me to my theory that Henry had another reason to kill Bunny which we were not aware of, and he is likely to have plotted the first murder just to have a reason to kill Bunny.
and, about Henry offing himself- I never felt like he did something heroic to protect his 'friends'. If you think about it, he had all the money in the world, and all the power that it brought to him. He also had no interest in any matter other than Latin, Ancient Greek and Roman, and he seemingly didn't take pleasure in anything in his life other than reading. He also approached death in a different way- for him, his life was just a journey to something greater and he was not, by any means, scared of death. By Julian's departure, Henry lost the person who he cared about the most, making his life even more meaningless and dull that he probably did not see any reason to keep on living as he had no aim, no motive and no interest in anything. I feel like they could have gotten away with it even if Henry only harmed himself. Lol, even if he didn't do anything and somehow someone figured out about the murders, he still could have got away with it. I doubt he sacrificed himself for he shed Bunny's blood, but because Julian finding out about it changed his feelings for Henry, and Henry couldn't stand that. Maybe this was his way of trying to undo the bad he has done just for Julian but not because he actually felt bad for Bunny
Idk I think its pretty clear that julian was a father figure for henry. If bunny had found out about them after all, why would he have sent julian the typewritten message? Richard also describes bunny as one of the homophobic people who genuinely hates gay people and not one of the homophobes being homophobic to cover up their insecurity about their own sexuality and I tend to agree. Julian was definitely grooming henry to a degree, but not in a sexual way I think.
Are you completely delusional? There is zero evidence for any of this in the book.
The book was compelling to read and I found the prose to be of a high quality. Nevertheless, it’s no different in my opinion to a Dan Brown novel. The references to high culture might create a veneer of profoundness, but the complexity of the themes are nowhere near as deep as ‘one flew over the cuckoos nest’, ‘brothers karmazov’, or ‘infinite jest’. I personally would give the book a 3.3/5. I love literature and appreciate your review, but it would be an insult to literature to suggest this has deep literary merit
I think the writing in this book is beautiful and def has literary merit! The complicated relationships of the characters, the development/unraveling/taking off their masks per se, etc. Just the way Tartt describes things in general deserves respect as well.
@@danica5235 I definitely agree that the relationship complexities were clever and engaging to unpack, but these things have been explored multiple times already by other writers like Jane Austin or Dostoevsky. When I finished reading this book I was left disappointed that there were no big mysteries or secrets. I hear about a ritual in which the wrongdoers engage in, yet the writer never dug deep into them. This is what Dan Brown does in ‘the lost symbol’. Lots of mentioning of secrets, mystery, power and elitism, but a poor job compared to a masterpiece like ‘The Picture Dorian Gray’ in creating that universe. In short, ‘the secret history’ is a good novel about a bunch of delusional yuppies trying to make themselves feel important and lack any decent values - bull shiters
I don't like this book, but I like your video 🚬
hahaha thank you!
Die-oh-nye-sis
Can we please stop hyping this book up, it is not real literature. It is gimmicky and tacky. Please, people. Be crtitical and judgemental! It's ok to not be trendy! Read the classics, you will realize what real literature is truly about!!!
Let people enjoy what they like
@@koaps The Secret History is not good/real literature. Let me give you an analogy: It's like comparing fast food to fresh food. Are they both food? Yes! Can you consume both? Yes! Is one better for you? Yes! Can you read bad/not real literature for fun to take your mind off things and have a good time? Yes!!!
At the very least young adult western readers should admit that it is not real literature, that this book is not ground breaking and that classics are and will always be better literature. People nowadays barely have any critical thinking of their own and find themselves thinking in collective of groups to feel safer.
And what exactly classic literature is about ?
@@Greenwood13 it really isn’t that deep, I like many others enjoyed ‘the secret history’. I would argue it’s a good modern classic. However book taste is extremely subjective, what I like you may not like, and vice versa. And that is okay, you shouldn’t however say that people “barely have critical thinking”. Allow people to enjoy what they enjoy, instead of hating. You are entitled to your own opinion like I am.
@@koaps You are too focused on being right you are having a miopic black and white argument or discussion with me about this. I couldn't give 2 sh*ts about other peoples personal taste in literature. I happen to be an English philologist by profession so I think my opinion is not "too subjective". I've actually had to do a lot of research backing up what I'm saying. I'm not discrediting people reading 'The Secret History' just like people read Dan Brown or eat cheeseburgers and do many other things...but if you want me to eat your shit and call it caviar, I don't think so.