julianslibrary

[julianslibrary]

The Secret History - Donna Tartt Review

Quotes: - It’s a very Greek idea, and a very profound one. Beauty is terror. Whatever we call beautiful, we quiver before it. [. . .] If we are strong enough in our souls we can rip away the veil and look that naked, terrible truth right in the face; let God consume us, devour us, unstring our bones. Then spit us out reborn. - She was a living reverie for me: the mere sight of her sparked an almost infinite range of fantasy, from Greek to Gothic, from vulgar to divine. - One likes to think there’s something in it, that old platitude amor vincit omnia. But if I’ve learned one thing in my short sad life, it is that that particular platitude is a lie. Love doesn’t conquer everything. And whoever thinks it does is a fool. - ‘But how,’ said Charles, who was close to tears, ‘how can you possibly justfy cold-blooded murder?’ Henry lit a cigarette. ‘I prefer to think of it [. . .] as a redistribution of matter.’ - It does not do to be frightened of things about which you know nothing.

Review: Donna Tartt is a master of subtext. Through the lens of unreliable narrator Richard Papen, Professor Julian Morrow and his group of Classics students are perfect - if a bit odd. Henry Winter is a young genius. Francis Abernathy is an attractive and masterful charmer, evident in his ‘Cubitum eamus?’ Twins Camilla and Charles Macaulay are curiously - almost morbidly - beautiful. Edmund “Bunny” Corcoran is the perfect American son, everything Richard wishes he was. Julian Morrow is their wise and philosophical mentor. However, all of them, under the surface, have issues, and Julian took advantage of these. He was the puppeteer behind Henry’s horrific acts - the murder of the farmer and, eventually, of Bunny. The Classical allusions serve to further Tartt’s point: Morrow is Aristotle, attempting to make Alexanders out of Henrys and Camillas. Tartt also deals with subjects such as poverty and homophobia in an important way - and Bunny clearly had it coming. My only complaint is with the gratuitous anachronisms. Despite being set in the 1980s, some of the characters still write with an ink and quill and speak as though they just arrived from the Victorian Era. Further, the female characters in this novel were severely underdeveloped when compared to their male counterparts, and are only considered anything more than objects for Richard’s amusement when he becomes closer to him. Perhaps this can be attributed to the male protagonist, but I believe it is indicative of some shortcomings in Tartt’s writing.  I give this work 5 out of 5 stars. It was not perfect - but what book is? This was about as close to it as you can get.