I love this book. You heard me, I love The Secret History by Donna Tartt. (Spoilers ahead!)
I’d actually read this book a couple years ago when a dear friend lent it to me during the pandemic. Back then, when I asked what it was about, her only explanation was “You should read it. It’s weird. Good –like the writing is beautiful– but really weird.” That was it.
And I have to say, it was a really accurate description of the book. When reading it the first time, I do remember that most of my reactions were “what the fuck?” and “no fucking way.” Though through that, of course I was still able to see the writing was exceptionally good. This is not to say that the plot didn’t make any sense. If anything, the plot was very much present throughout the novel –though it was quite the slow burn. Donna Tartt weaves unease with so much skill throughout The Secret History.
Of course, I was really happy to read The Secret History a second time. Though, without any of the suspense, the pacing moved slower. There’s a huge amount of buildup that’s really juicy on the first read (what I wouldn’t give to be able to read this book for the first time again *sigh*.) Still, it was interesting to read it again, because I could pick up easier on the bread crumbs that Donna Tartt had left throughout the book. They were incredibly subtle that when the plot finally comes together, the reader can’t help slapping their foreheads and exclaiming “I should have seen it coming!” From a writing standpoint, I have to applaud her subtlety.
I can’t deny that I feel very personally attached to the book, especially the main character Richard Papen. Unfortunately, I feel that there are parts of me that run very similar to him. We’re from California, fell in love with an incredibly small school far away, having a deeply attached desire to be near things beautiful and artistic. Let’s not forget that The Secret History itself is basically the bible for dark academia, and I have a deep hunger for studious learning.
That being said, I feel personally attacked by the book. In a good way, of course. Always a good way. The book is a shotgun warning against the fake appearances, the delusions of being rich, as well as academia itself. That if we dive deep into a singular field or idea, this can make us dangerously narrow-minded.
Regarding the delusions of the rich, I find it really interesting that perhaps the richest of the friends, Henry, dies at his own hands. When he dies, he almost doesn’t really fear death or doesn’t quite understand the consequences of what death means. After his death, his remaining friends almost believe that he isn’t really gone. They believe that if anybody could out-cheat death, it would be Henry. In the same thought, Bunny, the true poorest of the friends, is the only one to be murdered by the hands of his friends.
I have a slight critique of the book, though I simultaneously see this flaw as an artistic choice. The one thing I find at fault with the book is the usage of Camilla as a character. She’s very seen as this bright, shining light. She’s definitely more so used as a prize, or just framed as ostensibily perfect and beautiful that she doesn’t feel like a real person to me. She’s wanted by all of the men in the story and is just sort of a plot point to walk through.
Though as the same time, I don’t know if I’d want it any other way in the book? I don’t know if we could have the same book if Camilla had more agency. I don’t know if I’m giving Donna Tartt more benefit of the doubt, because she’s a woman and I do think that she does do Camilla more justice as a female character than if Camilla was just a plot device. Or simply put, maybe that’s how Tartt accurately sees friend group dynamics where it’s mostly men and very few women. And nonetheless, Camilla still feels quite important as a character. If she was removed from the book, the end of the story wouldn’t have happened. Not at all.
As you can see, I feel very mixed by this and I don’t think I’ll arrive at a conclusion any point soon. Nonetheless, I did love this book. I have a feeling it will be one of those books that sticks with me throughout my life, to be studied and artistically imitated to understand the techniques better. One day, I hope to write emulate the same level of skill that Donna Tartt has. Her writing is so effortless. I can feel her flow from one sentence to the next without so much labor. In my own writing, I can feel myself struggling sometimes to link different sentences together. So I hope to be as masterful as Tartt is, at one point.