Veromika's Reviews > The Secret History

I wasn't disappointed when I finished this book, I was incensed. I was duped into believing without a shadow of doubt that I would have a great time reading this book. Never again am I reading a book recommended to me by a ‘famous books to read’ list, I vow.

Before I begin ranting about the absolute incredulity that is this book, I want to say something nice. Donna Tartt can write. Yes, her prose is great, she knows how to build suspense, how to draw readers in and I do not necessarily consider this a bad book. The Secret History has potential, so much potential, that once I finished the book I felt like I witnessed something grand in the making that never reaches the culmination point it deserves.

Now back to the ranting. Needless to say it has spoilers.

I wonder why GenZ is so obsessed with the book? Gee, it couldn't be because the book seems like a glorified story of an insensitive bigot getting cancelled on twitter and the drama that follows. Donna Tartt somehow manages to encapsulate the essence of the internet culture today in her book written 30 years back - the obsession with aesthetics. That is not to say that humans haven't always been fascinated with beautiful things throughout history. It's just that in the world we live today, time is fast, everything feels connected and validation is currency. So, I get why many GenZ readers would connect with a group of six students who seem to exist in an untouchable alien plane of reality.

And I was equally singing the praises of the book when I was reading the first half. The two stars that I have given are definitely for the brilliance of part 1, a reverse whodunit among a group of elitist classic students slowly unravelled through the eyes of the outsider. I loved it and was held captive until the book collapsed unto itself in the second half. The absurdity that is the second half, the mediocrity served on a pompous platter, the sheer unoriginality of it all made my brain shrink. I was so fed up by the time I finished the book I took a one week’s break before I reviewed it, just so I wouldn't sound like an angry crow.


First of all, Richard, the narrator, the underdog, the outsider.
He starts the story by stating his fatal flaw is 'a morbid longing for the picturesque at all costs'. And it took me almost 200 pages to realise what a load of bullshit that is.
WHO DOESN'T LONG FOR THE PICTURESQUE AT ALL COSTS RICHARD?? HUH?
'Look on the bright side' 'Focus on the silver lining' - It is simply a humane thing to long for the beautiful, to gloss over the bleak and to imagine yourself as a protagonist of some elaborate adventure story and consider all your perils as 'character development'.
And who is the one group of people who definitely do this? PEOPLE WHO READ BOOKS! Duh.
You really didn't do anything great there Richard. Stop using fancy words to say that your life is shit and you like to pretend it's Gucci, you dumbnut.
All he does is drink, pop pills, moon over Henry and use Camilla as a beard and somehow he's the victim? Well, screw that.

Henry was the star of the book without a doubt. The obscurity of his intentions and feelings by making Richard the narrator works. And it's all going great, you know. Henry has a depth of character, he has grey shades and his morality is wobbly. A brilliantly crafted character, for sure. So, where do you lead all this to? BY MAKING HIM SHOOT HIMSELF FOR CAMILLA? CAMILLA OF ALL PEOPLE? REALLY? You make a brilliant character end his life over something akin to a schoolboy crush and you expect what? Sympathy? Oh god, the sheer injustice. I will start a petition online called ‘Justice for Henry Winter’. He deserved better.

Do not get me started on Camilla. I’m not even sure if I am angry with Camilla or for Camilla. I understand that the study of classics is a male dominated field and Camilla being the only female in the class could be justified. But how will you justify turning Camilla into a sort of modern Helen of Troy, an object for half the group’s obsession? In the name of mystique, there is literally no character development for Camilla. She is beautiful, achingly so, that is all I know about her. What bullshit? Even Francis, the most eventless character in the group has more of a depth than Camilla, who supposedly drove HENRY TO SUICIDE? How do you manage to reduce the only prominent female character in your book into a token, an ornament for gazing but not touching? How dare you?
If you told me the book was written by a man I would believe you.

And Julian: the most useless character in literature ever. WHAT INFLUENCE DID HE REALLY HAVE OVER THE GROUP? I’m sorry, his capacity and involvement in the story is the same as that of Judy Poovey, who I definitely liked more. He’s so blah and meh and gah that it’s such a stretch that he is some sort of magic wizard teacher. Tartt commits the most basic literature flaw by telling and not showing. Stop telling us he’s god’s gift to earth and SHOW US HOW!

I don’t even feel like talking about Francis and Charlie. Charlie can throw himself off a cliff and Francis deserved better friends than these losers.
And Bunny, it really shouldn’t be a crime to deprive the world of yet another racist, homophobic, and misogynistic white man, thank you very much.

--------------------------------------

How is this book even famous? Like this must have been some sort of a snowball effect right? Who the hell got it rolling? I need to know. I want to confront them and gift them some good books. This is four days of my life I will never get back. I need restitution.

If this is one of your favourite books, just… diversify. Read more good books. Pick up Dickens maybe or Christie or bloody hell go back to Rick Riordan.
Do I sound like a snob? Maybe. But don't you dare hate me when you love a book full of snobs.
I could delete all of this review and just say 'This book is overhyped, avoid it at all costs' and it would be the truest statement I have ever uttered.