Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by incipientdreamer
The Secret History by Donna Tartt
3.0
3.5 stars
Jeez, this is such a difficult book to rate. For one thing, it was so bloody long, that parts of it felt like a fever dream. However, it did get me out of my reading slump despite being 630 pages long, so I liked it for that.
The Secret History has that oppressive fast-paced feel to it that is integral to thrillers, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was consistent throughout the novel. Never was there a moment that I felt bored or annoyed by dragging prose. The atmosphere is chilling and the writing is absolutely brilliant at keeping the reader engaged. I am a sucker for 1st person narration, and despite the protagonist being a despicable human being, I was drawn into the narration.
The plot while not shocking or very plot twist-y was still pretty engaging and I guess it was mainly because I was so drawn in by the writing and the atmosphere Tartt created beautifully.
The characters on the other hand were the most despicable human beings I've ever had the chance to read about. Everytime you think they can't get any worse: Henry ends up poisoning dogs as an experiment, Bunny starts using slurs, Charles starts abusing his sister, Richard starts having rape fantasies, and Franics tries to hook up with his drunk friends.
I'm pretty sure all this was on purpose, to set up a Dostyovesky-esque scenario; where, despite the protagonists faults, you can't help but understand them deciding to murder one of their own. Tartt does that exceptionally well and its attributed to her laudable writing skills that I was all for pushing Bunny off a cliff. I did notice the similarities Secret History had with Crime and Punishment, but I would say they are still entirely separate genres. For one, the characters are nearly not as guilt ridden as raskolnikov, rather they seem to be getting on pretty well after the murder. The only conflict that arises is due to a completely separate matter (which i don't think was really necessary, and would have been better if it had been more explicitly linked to the murder).
I am one of those people who read this after I read If We Were Villains by M. L. Rio, and the consensus seems to be that you'll like the book you read first. That seems to be true in my case as well, but I think for entirely different reasons. The dark academia setting is the only thing familiar between the two, Villains focuses more on the academia aspect of the story, and that plays a significant role in the plot. With Secret History we barely know the supposedly influential professor, the characters don't seem to have any deep passion for their subject nor are they very committed to excelling in it. The way Shakesperean themes interweave with the plot in Villains is sorely lacking in this book. Apart from the Dionysian Bacchaal the Greek themes don't play a part in the plot of the story, and I found that pretty disappointing.
Didn't mean to write such a long review, but I got rambly and it seems fitting with the chaotic mess this book was. Overall a fun and fast-paced thriller, though I would recommend fans of Dark Academia to try [b:If We Were Villains|30319086|If We Were Villains|M.L. Rio|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1480717682l/30319086._SY75_.jpg|45743348] or [b:A Lesson in Vengeance|50999821|A Lesson in Vengeance|Victoria Lee|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1605799295l/50999821._SY75_.jpg|75846872]. Both are chilling, short and delightfully queer with morally ambiguous college students.
Jeez, this is such a difficult book to rate. For one thing, it was so bloody long, that parts of it felt like a fever dream. However, it did get me out of my reading slump despite being 630 pages long, so I liked it for that.
The Secret History has that oppressive fast-paced feel to it that is integral to thrillers, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was consistent throughout the novel. Never was there a moment that I felt bored or annoyed by dragging prose. The atmosphere is chilling and the writing is absolutely brilliant at keeping the reader engaged. I am a sucker for 1st person narration, and despite the protagonist being a despicable human being, I was drawn into the narration.
The plot while not shocking or very plot twist-y was still pretty engaging and I guess it was mainly because I was so drawn in by the writing and the atmosphere Tartt created beautifully.
The characters on the other hand were the most despicable human beings I've ever had the chance to read about. Everytime you think they can't get any worse: Henry ends up poisoning dogs as an experiment, Bunny starts using slurs, Charles starts abusing his sister, Richard starts having rape fantasies, and Franics tries to hook up with his drunk friends.
I'm pretty sure all this was on purpose, to set up a Dostyovesky-esque scenario; where, despite the protagonists faults, you can't help but understand them deciding to murder one of their own. Tartt does that exceptionally well and its attributed to her laudable writing skills that I was all for pushing Bunny off a cliff. I did notice the similarities Secret History had with Crime and Punishment, but I would say they are still entirely separate genres. For one, the characters are nearly not as guilt ridden as raskolnikov, rather they seem to be getting on pretty well after the murder. The only conflict that arises is due to a completely separate matter (which i don't think was really necessary, and would have been better if it had been more explicitly linked to the murder).
I am one of those people who read this after I read If We Were Villains by M. L. Rio, and the consensus seems to be that you'll like the book you read first. That seems to be true in my case as well, but I think for entirely different reasons. The dark academia setting is the only thing familiar between the two, Villains focuses more on the academia aspect of the story, and that plays a significant role in the plot. With Secret History we barely know the supposedly influential professor, the characters don't seem to have any deep passion for their subject nor are they very committed to excelling in it. The way Shakesperean themes interweave with the plot in Villains is sorely lacking in this book. Apart from the Dionysian Bacchaal the Greek themes don't play a part in the plot of the story, and I found that pretty disappointing.
Didn't mean to write such a long review, but I got rambly and it seems fitting with the chaotic mess this book was. Overall a fun and fast-paced thriller, though I would recommend fans of Dark Academia to try [b:If We Were Villains|30319086|If We Were Villains|M.L. Rio|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1480717682l/30319086._SY75_.jpg|45743348] or [b:A Lesson in Vengeance|50999821|A Lesson in Vengeance|Victoria Lee|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1605799295l/50999821._SY75_.jpg|75846872]. Both are chilling, short and delightfully queer with morally ambiguous college students.