classics student analyses THE SECRET HISTORY by DONNA TARTT
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 авг 2021
- salvete amici!
In this week's video I am diving deep into my new favourite book aka Donna Tartt's The Secret History (yes I am aware that I am becoming a walking stereotype), attempting to do a bit of literary analysis and breaking down for you guys some of the cool Classical elements infused throughout Tartt's writing! I cover the origins of the novel's name, its unusual Greek-Tragedy-esque structure, the ancient concept of pretty privilege, Richard's unreliability as a narrator, my disappointment in the Macauley twins and how my own experience as a Classics student at Oxford potentially relates to that of Richard's...
I really enjoyed filming this video and getting these ideas out of my system, especially as it means I can actually now focus on my summer work instead! Hopefully this video will find its way to other avid fans of The Secret History: I would love to see what other people think about the points I've raised and also for you to share your own thoughts on The Secret History in the comments section below, so we can make this more of a dialogue rather than a one-sided rant!
EURIPIDES' BACCHAE SUMMARIZED:
www.sparknotes.com/drama/bacc...
LINKS TO RECOMMENDED CLASSICS PODCASTS (all should be available on Spotify and Apple podcasts):
IN OUR TIME-www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006...
ANCIENT GREECE DECLASSIFIED-greecepodcast.com/
MYTHUNDERSTOOD-www.dragonwagonradio.com/myth...
KEEPING UP WITH THE CLASSICS-anchor.fm/keepingupwiththecla...
TOTALUS RANKIUM-totalusrankium.wordpress.com/
Hello everyone! My name is Sabrina, and I am starting my first year reading Classics at the University of Oxford in October.
Following in the giant footsteps of Ibz Mo, Viola Helen, Vee, Eve Bennett and Sam from the legendary Oxcentric channel, I aim to help demystify Oxbridge and its application process, broaden access for Classics/Ancient History/related subjects and have fun documenting my university experience!
Feel free to subscribe and join me on my university journey. :)
II SOCIALS II
Instagram: @sabrinatheclassicist
TikTok (check it out for some quality classics memes): @classicsabrina
Habete bonum diem! 
Развлечения
it’s also interesting how julian is to henry as henry is to richard (of being this sort of mentor that they believe can either do no wrong or that any wrongs committed should be forgiven or overlooked, and both end up losing that person in a sense of betrayal etc etc)
yes and also camilla is to richard as henry is to camilla
Woah
No. Those two relationships aren’t really comparable. Julian was held on a pedestal & when he finally “did wrong”, Henry didn’t excuse him, forgive him or overlook what happened. He was pissed and openly called Julian a coward. It also crushed him because he knew he was Julian’s favorite.
@@jo.k.4210not really, Henry was openly in love with Camilla, while Camilla didn't love Richard
@@chapa2282 yeah ok but I thought he loves Julian more
The scene when Henry is working in the back yard / garden speaking about the murder was, for me, the most stomach-turning moment in the book. I still don’t know what I think of it.
Could you tell the number of page? I wanna reread :))
@@dilarayazc9505 it starts around page 491.
In hindsight, I think the inherent eeriness of it comes from Henry fully revealing his lack of sincere remorse and how inhuman this makes him seem. Richard is seeing the version of Henry that Bunny saw, so he is taken off guard. It might have been at that moment. He realizes if he got in Henry’s way, his friend would have no qualms about killing him. Henry is akin to a god who gives and takes life as he pleases. I've seen an intriguing theory by another classics major that Henry's character is a reference to a play where Dionysus reincarnates throughout the ages. It's an obscure text but if it's true, it would make sense why Henry seems impossibly erudite and arrogant, why he draws in a cult of greek students, and why he seems so victorious in death. It might be a stretch, but this could even be why Julian fled. He may have realized that even if he knew more than Henry and was admired by his star pupil, Henry’s dedication to Greek mythology was so intense and intuitive that it was evil, inhuman, and could not be contained by modern laws and ethics. While Henry said he was amidst a deity and truly believed it, he slowly begins to feel like he is the one who is a god after the murder. Whether this is elitist delusion or an actual permutation defying secular reality isn't addressed by the text conclusively. And tartt being religious might even support Henry being less "human" which is why he's so damn creepy.
@@raisinbranturtle5364 wow. What religion does donna tartt practice?
@@ladonnakalala Catholicism
One part of the book that I found so chilling that I actually got chills up my spine when reading is when Julian finally sees the stamp of the Roman hotel henry and bunny stayed at over the break on the letter bunny wrote to him, how Tartt writes his reaction in his lack of surprise or shock but just a cool response of “well well well”. At that point my whole perspective and understanding of Julian as a person an character completely changed. He became someone else in those 3 repeated words and it saddened me how he obviously was like that all along
It all comes back especially when the search party is looking for bunny and Julian is surprised until we learn that he secretly enjoys the commotion and sees the aesthictic of it just like the other characters who feel barley any amount of empathy but romanticizes their surroundings. We always knew Julian wouldn’t really care about bunny’s murder on a sympathetic level.
The complexity of this novel is unreal, so many layers to unfold... Thank you for this video.
It's incredibly well thought out isn't it? Thank you so much I'm glad you enjoyed!
In the first half of the book I hated bunny, but by the second book i started to get why he acted the way he did and i started to feel so bad and i sort of liked him 😭
I was sooo sad when we found out what he wrote in that letter to Julian. He was terrified and he didn’t deserve to die
When you take a step back and realise that Bunny (despite being a terrible person) is still one of the more moral characters in this book...
@@sabrinatheclassicist true. Like he was a bigot who took advantage of people but he wasn’t a murderer lmao
I feel so sad that he was killed
@@ItsMeBarnaby OHHHH gosh of course!!!!!!! I hadn't thought of that but it's so obvious now you point it out!!!
I found the Secret History intoxicating to read. I have read it multiple times and it becomes more interesting each time. I really enjoyed your analysis. Quite insightful.
Glad you enjoyed and I agree- the writing is absolutely intoxicating!
I feel like no one came after Charles as hard as they should of. The moment I became genuinely afraid of, and repulsed by Charles is when Charles kisses Camilla in front of Richard, and she breaks the kiss to sweeten her coffee even though she doesn’t like coffee. Like? I feel like it’s so evident that Charles is one of the most warped in the entire novel.
I also have always wondered what the purpose was behind Francis’ and Richards brief moment of romance, or Richards continuous comments about Camilla looking “boyish”, like??? There’s definitely something going on there.
But what was the meaning behind Camilla sweetening her coffee even though she usually drinks it black? I‘m still confused about that
@@elenkafamibo it was an excuse to move away from him when he was trying to kiss her and touch her in front of Richard! He was abusive and she didn’t want to anger him, so she gently moved away to sweeten her coffee even though that was unusual for her.
Throwback to the scene when Richard goes back to Camilla’s place, and
Charles comes in drunk as a skunk with a pet name for “Milly” only to be disappointed by Dick’s presence…
@@kaydgaming YES! I’m reading it for the third time and I’m always just like? He’s so freaking awful
fr! i feel like every time richard went on his long winded descriptions of how beautiful camilla is he mentions her being boyish, having a masculine posture, at one point he even says 'she looked like a little boy' ??!?! what was up with that!! is it just that she has taken on those characteristics to fit in with the group? is it because the greeks were all hella gay and so she called upon homoeroticism and stuff??
really interesting how a lot of their evil and deceit is revealed not after the murder of bunny or the farmer but as Richard begins to realize the many instances and ways in which he has been lied to and manipulated. before things start to unravel for them after bunny's murder, it's easy to see the 4 as kids who made a mistake and then simple acted out of self-preservation. also I think it's worth noting that Richard is also ultimately unhappy because he is back in California, which he hates. it really stuck with me when he said that he resented how his relationship with sophie had ended with him stuck back in his home state, as much as he tried to escape it.
That was the part that got me the most. We start to see them unwind slowly and realize that these people are kind of crazy, they are not fully in control of their impulses which shows an interesting contrast with characters like Judy Poovy.
@emaleedahl7958 Judy was honestly one of the good ones, she is often narrated in a dismissive way by Richard, but she always supports him with the little acts of kindness, generosity and time your true friends at university do. I just finished the book yesterday and I feel that you're right, she contrasts the Greek students, at first appearing inferior intellectually and interestingly, but ultimately proving the better person morally and through simple values.
Also her comic relief always landed with me
Some people criticize the funeral section of the book to be very boring…but I have found it to be insightful on Richard’s lack of empathy or deep emotional connection-or maybe numbness. It fascinates me how he states surprise or even disgust when people are overly emotional.
I agree, I loved the funeral part.
i loved your take on this! for me, i felt really sympathetic towards Francis. imo, he always fancied Richard and the first thing that Francis said to Richard was "Cubitum Eamus?" which i think is "Shall we lie down together?" his yearning for love and fear of rejection is something i relate to, so i felt drawn to him. Henry is such an enigma, so cold and calculating but also oddly kind. One of my favourite parts of the book was when he "saved" Richard and took care of him in the hospital. you're living my dream btw, studying classics in Oxford! you're lovely :)
Was he really yearning for love though? There were no references to this. If anything, he just wanted sex & that’s the way he talks about sleeping with Richard & especially Charles. He never talks about the desire for true love.
@@bobnunyabiznz4917 oh good point. i haven’t read the book in a year so my memory is really fuzzy lol,,, but i have always felt that Francis always had this yearning to be deeply understood if not loved. What do you think? i hadn’t even thought about Francis just wanting seggs. Maybe i just overanalyze things. idk.
@@bobnunyabiznz4917 I think his fear for love comes from his family. He wanted to hide his sexuality in every way possible, so I figured that he didn't allow himself to fall in love to protect himself from his family.
@@user02406 I think he definitely yearns to be loved, otherwise I think he wouldn't have been so unstable at the end of the book once he found himself stuck in a marriage with a woman- who he obviously would never be capable of loving due to his sexuality. If he truly only longed for sex, I personally feel as though he wouldn't have been as affected by it, and he would have just chosen to secretly sleep around with men behind his wife's back.
There is a scene in the book that has stuck with me. Around the middle, when Camilla steps on a sharp piece of glass and Henry takes it out. I’ve always felt it has a deeper meaning, beyond giving hints about her and Henry’s relationship. Mainly, I think, because it is such a specify way of going about it… giving hints about two characters liking each other could have been done in much tamer ways. I don’t know, it is one of those things that don’t allow me to put the book to rest.
I think that scene perfectly showed Henry’s superiority over Charles, who was too afraid to hurt Camilla, and the rest of the group
i’m rereading tsh right now and i just got to that scene and a really big takeaway i got from it was the extent to which richard romanticized camilla. like she was in a lot of pain, she was bleeding, she could have been seriously hurt but he couldn’t stop talking about how beautiful she was. it really stood out to me because he truly didn’t care about her as her own person, like i don’t remember him expressing any concern for her well-being
@@allief3110 exactly💀 honestly richard annoyed me more than the depictions we get of bunny
This is definitely the most memorable scene for me. I can literally see it in my head- the sunlight covering them in a sheet of white light, Camilla's beauty and pain as she's carried in that same bright light. Like wow.
I read something that this scene highlights how dishonest Richard may have been. He’s supposedly the best medic of the group, but in this scene he doesn’t take action (in addition to when Charles was really sick and had to call the others to ask what to do). Kind of interesting as before hearing this theory I took everything Richard said as truth.
Great review, especially since it is your first reading of the novel!
It’s been my favorite book since I first read it as a teen in 1999 and reread it at least 20 times ever since.
I’m glad to see so many new fans of this book these last years.
I’d love to discuss with you many details of the book, but I’m French and my limited knowledge of the English language doesn’t allow me to express myself with nuance. I will try a little anyway.
I personally think Julian choose the students for the Greek class not only for their wealth or their wit but because he saw vulnerability in them. They were more likely to be easily manipulated by him : the twins, orphans with a dark secret. Francis, with an immature and deficient mother and internalised homophobia. Richard, secretive with borderline abusive parents and deeply ashamed of his origins.
About Henry it’s more difficult to know, he is surrounded by mystery, but I have this theory : I think his father is a violent man involved in illegal activities, and the “accident” described in the book was not an accident. I think it was Henry’s father who hurt him and since the event Henry is kept apart from his father by his mother to protect him. Just a theory...
If you want to understand more about the real life events and people Donna Tartt based her story on, I cannot recommend you enough to read an article published by The Esquire named “The secret oral history of Bennington : the 80’s most decadent college”.
Even if The Secret History is a fictional story, we learn for example that the real-life “Henry” and the real-life “Julian” were indeed lovers and not only student and professor/mentor. Donna Tartt herself and her boyfriend at the time would often wear the same clothes and looked similar so people would think they were sister and brother all the time, which gave her the idea for Charles and Camilla relationship, etc.
And finally, the Great Gatsby and the essay by Dodds “the Greeks and the Irrational” are must-read to understand The secret history.
Thank you again for the video.
Just finished reading this book - definitely one of my favourite reads for a while!
I really enjoyed how you, the reader, became Richard and was pulled into this group by their charm and charisma, that it made you loathe Bunny to the point that you also agreed that the only way to shut him up was to murder him. And then the guilt of feeling that Bunny deserved what he got when everything unraveled.
Such a clever way to make you look at yourself and question your own moral compass.
The Secret History really remains a seminal text, and it's unfortunate that nowadays so many mediocre ripoffs attempt to emulate its success without half the effort that Tartt put in. It's just "omg let's put in some kids at a private school and call it the next dark academia classic"
Also I wonder if the tonal shift of us realizing how they aren't the people we thought they were was how Richard felt and that's why he conveyed his thoughts that way
I found it so annoying how little Richard is involved in anything. i know it’s big part of plot and him being very unreliable is important to the book itself but i would Love to see what was actually going on. Most of the time Richard has no idea what’s happening around him ( therefore we don’t either). I want to know more about the rituals they performed, their thoughts after first murder, all the love drama between EVERYONE, Relationship between Henry and Julian. I need more
yeah, it was so much telling, not showing, and that's one of the main reasons i just didn't like the book.
i would love to have a book from henry or perhaps even julian’s perspective
I agree but I also think it is unique how the story was being told from his perspective even though he seemed more like a side character
I read this interesting comment the other day claiming that perhaps Bunny wasn’t actually as bad as Richard made him seem to be and Richard actually just made it look that way so he could somehow ease his own guilt or find some sort of weak justification or explanation, maybe even for himself. People do lie to themselves cause they’d like to confirm their belief that they’re good. Cause I remember Richard being super delusional about his own wrongdoings and also mention that Bunny was generally well-liked by most? Idk just a theory
Bunny was brought down by his own hubris and stupidity. What kind of plan is it to blackmail a group of murderers?
is it really a ‘huge shock’ when we find out Julians gang are fatally flawed? As you say- the whole book uses dramatic irony. I liked watching their true character unravel before Richards eyes, but idk i didn’t find anything in this book particularly shocking
Neither did I. Henry from the get go was obviously evil. The whole gang clearly had sinister backlog of secrets. Richard shocked me the most as he almost became Henry at the end of the book. So stale and cold
I was happy with everyones end because by the end of the novel I hated all of them. The only one I thought got off too easy was Henry, who I went from admiring the most to loathing the most.
No bc literally sameeee, like word for word
About the reference in the title "The Secret History", Donna Tartt confirmed that this was intentional in an interview!!
My favorite theory about this story is that the group didn’t actually kill the farmer during the bacchanal.
There is so much evidence, that he was killed by a mountain lion - the body was mutilated (stomach ripped open), the news reported that there were bite marks and it looked like an animal attack, and Richard and Charles even meet the animal while they’re driving to a restaurant. None of them even remember the murder.
This makes the whole story so much more tragic, because Bunny’s death would’ve never had to happen - which ultimately led to the downfall of every one in this group.
Interesting theory, considering they were drunk and high off of every drug in the world, and admitted to not remembering anything, it could work. They could have found his body while high, and in some unintentional trippy daze, gotten his blood all over themselves, then assumed they had done it. It’s bittersweet then, kind of means the only crime they did was kill their friend.
@chidzhustle3570 Adding to the blood, there is a section where Camila says the farmers blood smells like deer blood. Which kinda suggests they killed a deer (as they kind of remember in a warped way) and were covered in deer blood which they mistook for the farmers who they found afterwards
Really enjoyed your analysis and perspective on this book. I recently read it and while I enjoyed the book, I felt like I was missing something. After watching this, I realize my lack of background in the classics was the cause. It’s truly brilliant if you read this book with the perspective you just shared. Also, I agree that the “betrayal” by the twins was one of the most shocking and hard hitting parts of the book. We knew from the very beginning Bunny was going to die, so we’re preoccupied with analyzing things from this perspective, looking for foreshadowing of his death and what reasons led up to it. We did NOT expect the devolution of these characters, especially the sweet and seemingly perfect twins. Your analysis helped me put together my own feelings on the book, so thank you!
Thank you so much for this video. I read The Secret History years ago when it first came out and loved it then. Recently, I picked it up again and reread it and if anything, I loved it even more. Isn't it strange, this crazy world of writing, and how we become a part of a collective consciousness, thousands of minds reading the same words but experiencing totally different realities. I mean, some people couldn't get past the intense details Tartt has painted into the narrative, and yet to me, it pulled me into every scene and firmly entrenched me into Richard's vision and his skewed perception of what is happening around him. I couldn't help thinking, about halfway through the book, that he really ought to be watching his back, since Henry had no qualms about getting rid of anyone who might pose a problem to the sanctity of the clique. To me, this book is absolute perfection. I am a writer myself and if I could write even half as well as Donna Tartt, I would be overjoyed. I always wondered about the title, and you finally cleared that up. Also, with your explanations of mythology and symbolism, the book now has a deeper sense of trajectory and character development. This is truly art painted on the page. I'm looking forward to reading Tartt's other two books.
Wow, I'm not suprised you are a writer because you have worded that beautifully(maybe you could take a leaf out of Tartt's book and find a play/ include some Classical illusions in your own writing to give it that extra layer of depth and meaning?)! I am also planning on reading the Goldfinch next, because I really want to watch the film adaptation.
I'm really aching to read The secret history and i want to really understand it in depth and not have the literary references go over my head so what works /legends should i be familiar with before reading it?
I read The Secret History when it first came out and several time since, enjoying it more each time.
The Little Friend, I believe her second book, left me feeling deeply cheated. I starts with a dramatic crime Tartt never even attempts to explain and is ignored and irrelevant for the rest of the story.
i could never quite get behind camilla & henry. i thought it a shame she was shoehorned from one relationship right into another when we could’ve had a nice representation of a platonic relationship. it also felt out of the blue, but i guess that’s because richard was completely oblivious. anyway, just one example of how i think donna could’ve done more with her character
well... francis talks about it as a known thing (Henry having feelings for Camilla), Camilla had a "secret code" when calling Henry and Cloke also said to Richard that Camilla kept calling a bf at midnight. so, it was sudden but mostly because of richard's limited knowledge about things. the clues were out there for us to see.
im kinda torn by this since on one hand i agree that she could have had more agency and been explored in further detail, but then again this is a book written by a woman from the perspective of a male narrator... like if this was written by a man i would be more annoyed but since it's donna's book i feel like there's a degree of commentary involved in the limited way richard sees her. like obviously she's this great character and human being that probably has a very rich life going on but we just don't get to see much of that because richard, like most men his age, is only looking at camilla from the point of view of infatuation, always watching and describing a romanticised version of camilla, only seeing her existence as a potential extension of himself
There's two sentences in the beginning of the book where Richard mentions how affectionate Henry is to Camilla. Then, later on, Henry rescues Camilla in a picturesque way when her own brother is too stunned to do anything. Charles being overshadowed by Henry here is foreshadowing. But it is still scarce as foreshadowing goes, and my personal theory is this has to do with Richard's lack of interest in speculating about straight couples and his male gaze ways, lol. He spends an entire page debating whether or not Bunny and Henry are secretly dating yet ignores what was obvious to Francis. As the reader, you are shown a version of Henry who seems disinterested in normal relationships altogether. Richard's reaction is interesting because, on one hand, he is disillusioned with Henry and sees that this is tearing up the connection the twins have. But on the other hand, he is possessive of Camilla and possibly Henry as well, and realizes if they are together, he will be pushed even further to the periphery. A damning sign of his male gaze is how easily he sides with Charles before he realizes he is abusive. He is more inclined to believe in Charles because even his favorite girl on the planet isn't exempt from his judgment. In short I kinda blame Tartt for the lack of foreshadowing, but it fits in with Richard being an unreliable narrator who is also constantly being lied to.
I agree! Camilla seems to be anchored in a relationship of obligation / caretaking at every turn; the story closes with her looking after an elderly relative and refuses to consider her own happiness as an important part of her process.
It also seems unfair that nearly everyone but she pairs off with someone else: Henry and Bunnie in underworld/ afterlife, the professor and his elaborate social network, Charles and a lover, even Richard mentions the moment when he and Francis realize they will be life long friends - hurling insult and complaints at each other when the other winds up in a nursing home.
And Camilla caretaking a nameless character. By the close of the story, everyone seems broken and unfinished but she seems especially “short-changed.”
Why is this story so good??
Kurt Vonnegut once said something to the effect of: “did you ever notice that our best stories, the ones that endure, always point out how much of a bummer it is to be a human being?”
That’s the best answer I’ve come up with whenever I question why I come back to this story
@@michaelwoodsdale460 The truth of your second sentence is what makes Camillla seem more ancient Greek to me.
I thought the parallel between Richards favourite book being referenced as The Great Gatsby was very interesting. " I failed to see anything except what I construed as certain tragic similarities between Gatsby and myself." Its very clever to include since the overwhelming similarity between both books being such an unreliable narrative without drawing the parallel with Nick Carraway himself. Not to overlook the glaringly obvious overlap of the descent into ruin.
This is one of the most original and insightful analysises of this book I've ever seen. It's my favorite book of all time by four and overtime my opinion of it has changed over and over again. I don't know much about classics although I studied some in university it's a college not a university but your details and connections to the Greek and classicsI totally invaluable. I am doing this as a voice transcription so forgive grammatical and spelling errors. Thank you so much and I will look forward to more of your content. I was also a literature major in college and formally voracious reader although now I can't really read a newspaper article let alone A whole book. This is the most original and fascinating interpretation of my favorite book of all time that I've ever seen and I wish you the best of luck in your studies. Thank you thank you
Thank you for gracing youtube with an actual analysis of the book! Haha, I've read this book a couple times and wrote an extensive essay on it and I really like your take. Thank you for providing some knowledge of classics in your video to emphasize the depth of detail Tartt puts in her book. That was cool.
Thank you so much- I’m glad you enjoyed!!
I'm really aching to read The secret history and i want to really understand it in depth and not have the literary references go over my head so what works /legends should i be familiar with before reading it?
Is the essay accessible anywhere? I'm really interested in seeing further analysis of this book :)
As a student attending a Classic Lyceum in Italy, I absolutely loved the book, I haven’t been able to get over it. Your analysis was soooo good
the only complain i have is the horrible pacing. It started off great but later It’s seemed like absolutely nothing was happening for the longest time for everything to come crushing down on you in like 25 pages.
Especially in the second part. The funeral chapter was painfully boring and than in last 100 pages everything is happening all at once. We find out about police being so close to them, about everyone sleeping with everyone, Charles going crazy, Julian finding everything out and obviously Henry killing himself. All happed so quickly I barley had time to breath.
For me, I loved the timing. In the beginning all was this lucid, opulent, eyed-open dream, but then, after Bunny's death, especially at the funeral, I felt like I could not breath; it's claustrophobic: it's slow, slow and miserable and terrible, every damn page feels heavy, and that I believe it is all intentional 'cause Donna Tartt is, indeed, a genius. Bunny's funeral is boring because it must be boring, because life, and death, and grief, and having a family like the Corcoran crying over their son, is nothing like the beautiful and surreal beginning of the book, nothing like living all together in the country house of Francis's aunt.
It's a burden. Your burden, saw through Richard's eyes.
So it must be boring, it must be long, I think, because you, the reader, and Richard, for the first time are experiencing something real, facing the consequences and all.
And then everything starts to crumble, like domino's. Beautiful.
(sorry if there are mistakes guys, english is not my first language and I feel that trying to explain something like this would be hard also in italian, ops eheh)
I agree
@@paprikaveronika oh i didn't think about it like that 😯
@@paprikaveronikaI get what you're trying to say, but it was still painfully boring. The second half had lots of great elements but it should have been cut a bit shorter, that would've helped the pacing tremendously.
I loved the funeral part, it was so intense, everyone was having a breakdown, like richard was so paranoid, Charles drunken, Henry ill. I felt so sorry for bunny then, like when Richard looks at corcorans and pictures how bunny would have looked at different ages, and realises how he'll never see bunny and the implication of what they had done. Also the part when they arrive at corcorans home and bunny's father starts crying and Richard says, "God help me, I am sorry, and Francis kicks him. That part was so funny.
i felt that charles and camilla could be a reference to the royals since they both had affairs and forbidden love stories (except the secret history one is even worse).
Thank you for this analysis - it really opened my eyes to the *intentional* references to Greek myths / tragedies. Before watching this, I was pretty pessimistic tbh. I’ve noticed myself be pretty torn up reading not just classics but nonfiction (edit fiction!) in general because of how often the stories (at least what I’ve been picking up) seem to casually dip their toes into sexual deviancy. I had it predicted from the start that something perverse was going to be part of the story as I’ve now prepared myself haha. Most recently I tried reading 100 Years of Solitude, as it being hailed as one of the great achievements in literature and being recommended several times, but I couldn’t get past the first like 80 pages because of all the material to do with young girls.
Maybe it’s a hot take, but I’m recognizing the fact that what is considered “art” esp in classic literature was originally written by and for male groups. The group of people that are most commonly victims of these sexual crimes weren’t really part of the audience that conferred on whether a perverse scene could be interpreted as art. Not to say that I think that that kind of material is strictly incapable of being art, just that idk. I’m a little tired of encountering it in very nearly every book I’ve picked up lately, and not finding others that feel the same because I apparently “don’t get it”. Like, because I have a hard time seeing it objectively I am somehow less perceptive to art. Which plays into the intentional pretentiousness that you mentioned.
Anyway. Camilla really did it for me. I felt so bad for her and it totally consumed my experience reading this. Not only was her twin brother abusing her, but she was in love with this guy who was very clearly trying to kill him and didn’t mind the repercussions that would find her. I found it unfair that she was left dependent on another man that didn’t mind addressing her trauma in a way that didn’t benefit him. And then there’s Richard who just couldn’t leave her alone all the way until the end. I think you’re 100% right about Camilla being the most idealized out of all of them , despite her own shortcomings. I think there were a lot of feminist themes in this book to do with her that I had a hard time seeing as intentional because again, I do get a little tired of the material haha. One of the few times recently that I’ve been able to see reasoning behind it.
If there is something to be said about it , classic-knowledge wise. I’d be game to hear about it ! Idk if that is something that you’re interested in talking about so just ignore if so :)
You’re so well spoken! Loved listening to you
Classics student over in the US here, nice to meet a fellow classicist on RUclips! I didn’t find the experience of learning Greek in the book similar to mine (no one here is fluent enough in Ancient Greek to actually converse in it) but the book itself was very fun and exciting
I love your english and ability to express, in a straightforward way, your thoughts and perception of the novel! You are inspiring :D
Wow, thank you-that's really made my day!
Really charming analysis. Thank you! I will be checking your other videos :)
This is an amazing review, thanks! I read TSH many years ago and I still have it in the back of my mind, too.
this video just gave me a totally new perspective on one of my already favorite books. knowing classical contexts and references is gonna make my re-read so much more enjoyable
Brilliant review! My daughters put me onto the book after I put them onto the Goldfinch. I really appreciate the window into the classics, which seem foundational and another peel back of the onion. I also see existential themes of individual and collective guilt, scapegoating, addiction, and the C.S. Lewis notion of the inner circle as expounded in his essay “The Weight of Glory” as well as the making of a good thing (beauty, knowledge, desire for belonging, wealth, prestige) into an ultimate thing, and where that leads.
I can't believe this perfect channel exists omg i'm obsessed
thank you for this! I loved your thoughts and theories
I am an English literature major and I never heard of this book, till tiktok so I’ve decided to read it.
I am a hardcore “dark academia” type of aesthetic.
Reading this book was a very interesting experience, at the beginning it felt like a dream, I can say I felt as if I was floating. However, the more I dig in the more it started to feel like a nightmare especially when they started to plan the murder, and I applaud the author for making me feel so many feelings.
I have this tendency to want to relate to a character whenever I read a novel, but in the one I couldn’t decide which one I was, they were so realistic no one was prefect.
And the more I dig in the more I decided to be “the safe choice” and kept waiting for Julian to appear but him being such a “prefect” person bugged me so much, when he disappeared all sudden I realized that he was shallow, and a coward.
When Henry said “I loved him more than my father” it hit me hard.
Great review Sabrina, I appreciated your musings on the characters and broader meaning.
I loved the review, thanks for your analysis. However, something I'm still craving for is a look at bunny's evolution and image that richard paints for us leading our perception of him down a path where we also come to kind of agree that he's got to go. One thing that striked me as very significant is when he calls out on richard being a phony about his past, and then when he mentions the twins' (incest thingy) and everyone else's dark true facets. He's somehow like the figure of a joker, or the fool, who no one takes seriously but all along was the most genuine and sincere of them all, speaking the truth everyone else is so desperately trying to hide or ignore. What do you think?
Just finished the book! This was an absolutely fantastic analysis video.
I really enjoyed this video. V interesting. I love Donna Tartt. I'm always reading her books and listening to them. It cheered me up to see another fan talking enthusiastically about the Secret History. I've had a very bad few days but seeing this made my day. Thanks
You are so welcome- thank you so much for taking the time to watch! I'm glad some of my rambling was able to resonate with you!
this was so great! as someone who read Bacchae and The Secret History and had their brain chemistry changed by both, i loved you analysis of Bunny as Pentheus and Henry or Julian as Dionysus. it fits so well!
First after reading the book, i knew i read something important but all the concepts went waaaaaaaayyyy over my head, i had the impression that the story was done way before the book ended and i didn't understand why i was feeling betrayal and why seeing henry is a dream ment and all of this, i feel like i could reread this book a thousand times and get something different each time, thank you for your analysis, it helped me navigate mu thoughts for this book! :)
Excellent video. Your review is by far the best I have seen to date on RUclips. I purchased the book last week. Now I suppose I have to set about purchasing Procopius -"The Secret History"... Thank you.
I just finished the book and throughly enjoyed your comments. Greatly enhanced my reading experience.
I love this review you said everything I was thinking and more!
YES! I was so glad listening to this whole review.... I just found your channel and I'm subscribing right. away.
Also, I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion of Julian being sort of the "Dionysos" figure in the book - and I would love love to know if you agree that, to some extent, the relationship between Julian and Henry sort of echoes a relationship of pederasty. This because, being around Julian (and mind me, I haven't re read this book in years so I might not be remembering it right) was the only time we saw a certain... Change? Of character in Henry - or better said, an unseen layer of his persona. And it was all very vague through Richard's eyes but I always got that feeling that their relationship went a bit further than tutor and pupil only.
Anyway! Loved the review and off I go reread the book.... Again. Xx
I never even thought about the potential pederasty relationship between Julian and Henry, but now that you've pointed it out it makes so much sense!! I'm definitely buying into that theory...
I had the same idea
wtf Henry era mayor de edad, no hay pederastia ahí.
@@nicolebraiz393 puede que haya sido mayor de edad, pero de que era medio turbio lo era. O sea henry tenía que, 20¿ y Julián era un señor de mediana edad
@@paulaadelgado6488 Ah eso si puede ser, igual aca la relacion turbia es la de los gemelos :/
Hi, I just started reading this book and I loved hearing your perspective and some of the connections you made! I love how articulate you are when it comes to expressing some of your ideas and thoughts about the novel!
Thank you so much-I'm so glad you enjoyed it!
What an illuminating and contextualizing review!
I liked the audiobook.
What baffeled me the most is how Francis would rather marry a girl he hated that get an actual job.
finally a proper analysis of this book THANK YOU for giving me all the references !!! what do you think about all the homoerotic themes, the homophobia and racism?
Also, your own experience of making an effort to hold on to reality is reminiscent of the books original title "God of Illusion"
I LOOOVE "If we were villains", in an emotional way, but you gotta throw logic outta the window 😅😍
Will you make a video on it? Im so excited for this
This was a wonderful analysis :) thank u for posting this
Glad you enjoyed it!
Hi Sabrina! New subscriber. I heard on an interview with Donna Tartt that she intended to name her book “The God of Illusions” but the editors were the ones behind suggesting “The Secret History” as a book title, clearly aware of this analogy you mentioned.
Oh wow I didn't know that-thank you for enlightening me!!
In french the title is "le maître des illusions" which mean "the master of illusions". So they keep it quite the same as intended by the autor.
The french tittle of this book is "the master of illusion" so she kinda got her way haha
Here in Italy, the title is "Dio di Illusioni", which is literally "the God of Illusions" in english!
I enjoyed this video so much. I finished the books a couole days ago and immediately afterward i fell asleep and had werid dreams lol. I just wanted to say that its so easy to slip in with richard and fall for whatever illusions he creates. I am *that* person haha. also, you remind me of Anna Popplewell.
I'm glad someone else related to falling under Richard's narrative spell...really makes you take a step back and re-examine your moral compass haha. So glad you enjoyed-thank you for watching!
Amazing channel! And your voice is so calming, reminds me of Emma Watson's
you’re incredible, i love this
came across this amazing video after not being able to shake this book out of my mind!! subscribed so fast! this made me want to go back into reading the classics (haven’t done so in about a decade after taking Latin).. any suggestions to start out with?
Excellent. Many thanks!
Maybe this comment wouldn't be so valuable in case of interpreatation this masterpiece, however i would really like to attract attention into two scenes that are my favs (and not discused much). This first - when te group sees Richard for the first time and he describe it as a moment that he perceives as ,,it was just as if characters from the portrait look at me and speak''. (I haven't read this book in english so i just translated it, probably very badly) I find this description extremely relatable and beautiful, because life tends to oscylates around desire for being noticed by particular individuals.
Another scene that i find underrated and intriguing is when Henry invtied the local guy for a dinner. I loved how donna described this conncetion between person so deeply grounded into world and someone so detached from it, that even morality becomes a ethernal concept for him.
And when richard said that this conversation make him feel happy and reconciled with the reality i could, one more time, relate so much.
Wow, love this and agree with so much of what you've said :)
Thank you so much! :)
this is my favorite video now
This is the best analyses of T.S.H. I've ever watched
I also think that Henry is like Ajax because the suicide part of both of them is similar. Also, aside from mythology, the relationship Oscar Wilde had with Lord Alfred Douglas “Bosie” in “De Produndis” is the exact same relationship that Henry had with Bunny, maybe it’s a coincidence but Donna Tartt likes Oscar Wilde👀
Yay! This is the analysis I've been waiting for. Where can I find friends like this? 😅 Also, the whole constantly thinking about the book thing doesn't go away. I've had this problem for years now and it's ruined all subsequent books for me. I must have read TSH about 15 times.
Right?! The complexities and details in the book just keep giving... so glad you enjoyed the video! Who's your favourite character?
Yeah, a book or poem or piece of music or movie/series that really rocks you can do that!
If the steeped in history thing is what grabbed you maybe try The Name of the Rose. The writing is witty & the plot a murder mystery, but it’s not the beautiful Southern prose style of this amazing work.
The original title was "God of Illusions". Apparently her British publisher didn't like it and she changed it. They didn't like that either due to a previous similar title, but her agent put her foot down. The reference to Procopius is very deliberate but I don't think it's that deep. Tartt goes first to Eurypides' Bacchiae in terms of inspiration, which won't surprise you.
I’m studying classics and ancient history in my second year. What would you recommend to get a first when it comes to gobbets and essays? Thanks!
awesome video!!
Found the funeral section of this book so long and boring and finally glad the last hundred pages or so are gonna be back to the parts I enjoy in the novel.
same
First half of the book (leading up to Bunny's murder) is my favourite definitely.
@@sabrinatheclassicist I feel like it mostly lost me after that point. The first half was awesome though
I just finished reading the secret history like four days ago and up until now i still keep thinking about it. This i why i happened to watch this video because I probably just need someone to verbalize my thoughts and this video just did that. Im glad i watched this, for it is very insightful for someone like me who got a teeny tiny bit of knowledge about the classics. Lol.
Ps. I share the same sentiments towards the characters of the twins. The same with henry, i guess. Betrayal is freakin real yo😭
this was so good!!
Thank you so much!
I loved this! xo
I love this so much 😍 please also make one for If we were villains if you feel like it 😭
Thank you- I'll try to keep that in mind for the future...
can someone explain the coin on the cover of this edition? 0:35
I’d love to hear your thoughts about if we were villains.
I’m glad I watched this. Just finished listening to the abridged audiobook (I started listening to the unabridged version, got maybe 6 hours in, and tapped out) and was very confused about why this book is held in such high regard by many. As you have studied the classics (and hopefully have your degree by now 🤞🏿) I can see how this book would speak to you. Yours is an interesting perspective.
Unfortunately, I still don’t like the book- it read like The Great Gatsby with undertones of American Psycho and a twist of Greek lit thrown in (which went completely over my head), and the rottenness of the characters was no surprise (the story did start with a murder of a “friend” after all).
.Using this mockney accent .The book is such a great reflection of colleges.
I found the part when Richard nearly dies at the happy house because he didn't realise how dangerous a winter in vermont could be, and how the effects of that winter will stay with him for every, very interesting. Ironic that he is saved by Henry Winter, who Richard can't seem to see his dangerous nature either. Just interesting I thought!
Hippie *
Can you recommend me a book with characters that have the same morality (or a questionable one) like the ones in The secret history????
if we were villains may be considered someone similar and I also really enjoyed it, it has more odes to Shakespeare than anything greek and may not be as deep as the secret history but it's a good story about the consequences of murder and what happens when you immerse yourself so deep in fiction that you began to lose yourself and see your life as little more than a play. On top of that, and this book is quite different but good, is Vicious, it has some more fantasy aspects but talks about morality and how its linked to fear. Now if you want a classic a very obvious one is Crime and punishment where a man commits a murder to try and transcend moral law only to face his punishment through his guilty consience. You may not like any of those but I loved them and the secret history!
I really liked this book. I only part that I didn’t enjoy was the section between Bunny’s funeral and the ending. I felt it dragged a bit there
Ok, here’s my problem with the book. Love to hear your thoughts on it. In book one, the whole exciting build up to reaching the transcendental state and meeting Dionysus just seemed to vanish after the first murder. I mean, I get it that they were freaked out by what they had done, but I can’t wrap my head around the fact that this wasn’t a huge, looming thing going on in the background of conversations.
If you guys want to read something like tsh but still think about tsh every day, read The Goldfinch. It's also written by Donna Tartt and it even has francis in some scenes!
You're surprisingly very moral for someone into classics
Just one quick question: if they initially didn't want to include Richard in their experiments/ Bacchanalia, why did they invite him to the country house in the first place? What was the point of taking him there and hiding afterwards?
To my mind this novel is overestimated.
I am confused about that too. Maybes just to be friendly. I think they genuinely liked Richard and wanted to include him more however they very well understood that their plan was insane. Also maybe they found whole secrecy and sneaking around exciting, they obviously weren’t expecting to commit a murder
i personally think it’s because they wanted to see more of richard’s character and see if he could be trusted. in the book, someone (i think it’s francis or henry) is speaking to richard and mentions that they knew as much about him as he did them. i think they wanted to see what he would do or say (or if he would at all mention) anything about the suspicious activities that were happening :)
I think its another possible example of him lying about the true events. I imagine its likely he never went during the bacchanal and, like Bunny, was so desperate to be involved that he convinced himself and us that he was there but not enough to actually partake in the farmers death
Very very small correction, the greeks are haunted by Errinyen or Megären, the romans by furies. But that's just a small detail.
The title was suggested by someone in her UK publisher and Donna Tartt says she liked it better than the title she’d come up with.
I don't know I have a lot of opinions. A) why would you consider Richard unreliable? I'm curious B) There's something I noticed as a theme in dark academia with very attractive intelligent people falling into lives of debauchery and moral turpitude
I think Richard could be a bit unreliable because he is, like everyone else, drunk all of the time and, as he confirms by the end of the book, tends to idealize people who he admires. Many things were kept a secret from him, so he still might not have the right picture about everything. I personally find him a bit cold hearted, he doesn't seem to be very upset by bunny's or Henry's death
And he is doing drugs.
@@saraspasic793 very succinct answer thank you
I feel like Richard gets manipulated easily by people. he got easily fooled by Henry alot of times.
Honestly because he barely knows what’s going on. Other characters literally sit him down and tell him plot of the book.
He idolized these people, almost until the end he describes them with this admiration ( mind you these people are murderers ).
Not to mention he is drunk or high on sleeping peels half of the time
So, would you say there are spoilers in this video that viewers like me should beware of ahead of time? 😤 Maybe it's written in the description somewhere and i just missed it..
I think Tartts discription of how George Orwell saw Julien highlights who Julien was as a person. Julien is the “charismatic leader”
Which college are u studying at?
pls do more videos of classic books your voice is so flowy
Have you read Babel?
I wonder if my university will let me write my bachelor work about Donna Tartt
you sound so much like Emma Watson!!
thank you for this review! i really didn't like this book at all for many reasons, including that i felt like there were references throughout the story that i was just not picking up on because of my lack of knowledge about greek philosophy.
Try Donna Taratt's "My Little Friend," I thought it was an amazing book, but some people didn't like it- maybe as it's dealing with people who are from a different background. I generally find books where the main character is a child, tiresome, but I really got caught up in this one.
"The Secret History, " was extraordinary to me, but I had studied the classics.
Interesting review of a great first novel. Please read The Goldfinch - same author, bigger, better!
just finished reading this and felt alot of similarities to crime and punishment(i havent read the greek books mentioned here, which may be of closer influence). even more so because i didnt like richard either while reading. At times i cant help but wishing they had met the same fate as rashkolnikov 😅