Wow that explains why donna tartt used this quote on the start of the book "I enquire now as to the genesis of a philologist and assert the following: 1. A young man cannot possibly know what greeks and Romans are. 2. He does not know whether he is suited for finding out about them." - Friedrich nietzsche
They discovered that they weren’t suitable! Yes! The joy of rereading this book was also immense for me. I hadn’t read Nietzsche, was only newly a Classics student, and missed the clues about Julian.
The background and history of the bacchanal/bacchanalia has definitely shed a light on themes in The Secret History for me. I'm looking forward to taking this information into a reread of the book. Thank you for creating this video and sharing all this brilliant knowledge.
as a greek student who just read this book because according to my mom "It's about classics! You'll love it!" I have to say that a) I have held a bacchanal (Yes, it was a bad idea.) and b) My final assignment for one of my classics classes was to go out to the middle of the woods without any technology and drink in the pureness of nature. (Though the aim of that was expressly the opposite of the bacchanal; we were supposed to mediate on the nature of our own futility as mortals.) I think its just like that to be at a weird college with a mini cult around your greek professor.
really interesting video! i absolutely love the secret history, since i feel like i discover something new every time i reread it, and this gave me some things to think about on my next reread!
Personally, I like the time it was written, it’s not like today’s writing where we workshop, cull and re-edit, there is A LOT of descriptive words in this book, but it’s such a reflection of the times late 80’s early 90’s of writing
thank you for the video! after finishing the book i was looking for something like that because i don’t know any person with whom i can discuss this book. thank you for the job done
I read this book about a year or two ago and remember enjoying it. I started rereading it recently, but I have to say I don't seem to enjoy her writing style anymore. Everything seems a little too long winded for my taste and I'm not one to hate on long books (I enjoyed War and Peace f.e.). I'm stuck on page ~100 and don't really want't to go on, especially since my reading list is just crammed right now. Anyway I bookmarked this video in case I ever decide to pick it up again (and finish it). I will also send it to my girlfriend who actually did finish a reread recently. Have a good day.
Thank you!! Tartt does have really long chapters - I like to consume them by breaking them up along with the scenes to really enjoy everything that's being fed to us. Have a nice day
In my opinion her long descriptions and slow pace perfectly mimc the events in the book, which is incredible and makes you feel like a part of the story. For example the 'winter section' with richard almost dying feels like 100 pages, it was so long and slow and made me feel like I'm about to freeze to death with him. Later I came back to this part to count the pages and it was only about 15 pages long ??? This is crazy, to me it only proves Donna's talent :)
i recommend the audiobook narrated by tartt if you wanted to "re read"! she's a really engaging reader and you get to hear how she wanted the book to be read! plus the long winded hyper descriptive prose passes by pretty easily when you're able to putter around the house/go on walks/etc.! it's on youtube if you search!
Super interesting video! A great insight into the deeper layers of this grand piece! PS: Vienna does not speak Dutch but German ;) (Capital City of Austria)
oh my god you made it click for me! richard literally just mentioned that the group all gets annoyed when bunny makes fun of catholic which is literally modern rome!
I love your take on this video! But I don't think Henry was 100% heterosexual. Throughout the first book, I always felt like the relationship between Henry and Bunny was more than just friendship. It is mentioned that they used to live together- but then, for some reason, Henry decided to move out. Although Henry had little care for anyone other than himself, he kept spoiling bunny for years- buying him all the expensive stuff he wants, and never refusing him. Also, after their trip to Rome, when they have an argument, Bunny falls asleep in Henry's bed afterwards and Richard mentiones hearing cries during the argument. I also believe that there was an affair between Julian and Henry- it is mentioned several times Henry is Julian's favorite and their relationship seemingly extends over the student-teacher/mentor dynamic. It is possible that Julian was grooming Henry the whole time and implementing his ideas onto him simultaneously. Maybe, at that time, Henry was having an on-and-off thing with Bunny and also in an intimate relationship with Julian and maybe Bunny found out about it, and threathened to tell on them out of jealousy which would result in Julian getting fired and Henry losing the person he lovss the most. I always felt like, even if Bunny ratted on them about the farmer, there was no evidence that would get them arrested and even if there was, Henry was perfectly capable of getting himself out of it. Which brings me to my theory that Henry had another reason to kill Bunny which we were not aware of, and he is likely to have plotted the first murder just to have a reason to kill Bunny.
and, about Henry offing himself- I never felt like he did something heroic to protect his 'friends'. If you think about it, he had all the money in the world, and all the power that it brought to him. He also had no interest in any matter other than Latin, Ancient Greek and Roman, and he seemingly didn't take pleasure in anything in his life other than reading. He also approached death in a different way- for him, his life was just a journey to something greater and he was not, by any means, scared of death. By Julian's departure, Henry lost the person who he cared about the most, making his life even more meaningless and dull that he probably did not see any reason to keep on living as he had no aim, no motive and no interest in anything. I feel like they could have gotten away with it even if Henry only harmed himself. Lol, even if he didn't do anything and somehow someone figured out about the murders, he still could have got away with it. I doubt he sacrificed himself for he shed Bunny's blood, but because Julian finding out about it changed his feelings for Henry, and Henry couldn't stand that. Maybe this was his way of trying to undo the bad he has done just for Julian but not because he actually felt bad for Bunny
Idk I think its pretty clear that julian was a father figure for henry. If bunny had found out about them after all, why would he have sent julian the typewritten message? Richard also describes bunny as one of the homophobic people who genuinely hates gay people and not one of the homophobes being homophobic to cover up their insecurity about their own sexuality and I tend to agree. Julian was definitely grooming henry to a degree, but not in a sexual way I think.
@@leblondefox9256Those are lies we know of, because Richard tells us they’re lies. There are also A LOT of things in de book that could be lies, even though they seem like the truth through Richard’s narrative, because he is an unreliable narrator. For instance, I believe Camilla didn’t really kiss him once!
When Bunny is being a pest to Richard near his end, mocking his clothing, it's because Richard is lying. Bunny might not have been as wealthy as Henry or the others but he DID know his fancy brand names. He was taking shots at Richard near the end by asking him if his clothes were brand names such as Gucci, and Richard would always say yes because a) he didn't know and b) still feels compelled to lie to fit in, and then Bunny would call him out for his lies as his belt wasn't Hermes, or his sweater wasn't Gucci or whatever. There's also the whole lie about the car, that he doesn't even own, needing repairs to get an advance from the Prof he was working for just so he could buy clothes to try to fit in. There're also some incidents that Richard lies about to over romanticize incidents. Camilla's foot cut being a severed artery. About the call of "mallards" on the lake (West Coast kid didn't know that he meant loons), trying to create a more evocative scene. The three ravens on the tree (not real raven behavior). Those stood out to me (living around the squawking mallard ducks and actual ravens), and the anatomy of arteries in the feet as well as how serious it would be for Camilla if something did get deep enough into her foot to actually sever an artery. Given how precise Tartt's writing and research seems to be it felt like these things are deliberately wrong to show Richard's romanticization and love of the aesthetic rather than just an author not being knowledgeable about birds or anatomy.
@@dimman77 Ah yes the professor, that’s a great point. Also yes, it gives us that feeling and insight to Richard. However, I think one major thing is that there’s so many decorative wording in this book it leaves nothing to the imagination
Can we please stop hyping this book up, it is not real literature. It is gimmicky and tacky. Please, people. Be crtitical and judgemental! It's ok to not be trendy! Read the classics, you will realize what real literature is truly about!!!
@@koaps The Secret History is not good/real literature. Let me give you an analogy: It's like comparing fast food to fresh food. Are they both food? Yes! Can you consume both? Yes! Is one better for you? Yes! Can you read bad/not real literature for fun to take your mind off things and have a good time? Yes!!! At the very least young adult western readers should admit that it is not real literature, that this book is not ground breaking and that classics are and will always be better literature. People nowadays barely have any critical thinking of their own and find themselves thinking in collective of groups to feel safer.
@@Greenwood13 it really isn’t that deep, I like many others enjoyed ‘the secret history’. I would argue it’s a good modern classic. However book taste is extremely subjective, what I like you may not like, and vice versa. And that is okay, you shouldn’t however say that people “barely have critical thinking”. Allow people to enjoy what they enjoy, instead of hating. You are entitled to your own opinion like I am.
@@koaps You are too focused on being right you are having a miopic black and white argument or discussion with me about this. I couldn't give 2 sh*ts about other peoples personal taste in literature. I happen to be an English philologist by profession so I think my opinion is not "too subjective". I've actually had to do a lot of research backing up what I'm saying. I'm not discrediting people reading 'The Secret History' just like people read Dan Brown or eat cheeseburgers and do many other things...but if you want me to eat your shit and call it caviar, I don't think so.
this is so fascinating. i read and loved the secret history but this made me realize i didn’t actually, truly understand it.
to be fair I've read it twice and I was extra cautious the second time to find any hints. Donna is an amazing writer
Wow that explains why donna tartt used this quote on the start of the book
"I enquire now as to the genesis of a philologist and assert the following:
1. A young man cannot possibly know what greeks and Romans are.
2. He does not know whether he is suited for finding out about them."
- Friedrich nietzsche
exactly! she's very on the nose about it
When I went back to this quote after Henry offed himself and all of them messed up their lives I kind of chuckled. Btw "young man" is also Julian.
They discovered that they weren’t suitable! Yes! The joy of rereading this book was also immense for me. I hadn’t read Nietzsche, was only newly a Classics student, and missed the clues about Julian.
My algorithm truly blessed me today
The background and history of the bacchanal/bacchanalia has definitely shed a light on themes in The Secret History for me. I'm looking forward to taking this information into a reread of the book. Thank you for creating this video and sharing all this brilliant knowledge.
as a greek student who just read this book because according to my mom "It's about classics! You'll love it!" I have to say that a) I have held a bacchanal (Yes, it was a bad idea.) and b) My final assignment for one of my classics classes was to go out to the middle of the woods without any technology and drink in the pureness of nature. (Though the aim of that was expressly the opposite of the bacchanal; we were supposed to mediate on the nature of our own futility as mortals.) I think its just like that to be at a weird college with a mini cult around your greek professor.
I want to know more about you so bad
This is a masterpiece of explication. Better than most profs I had, plus entertaining af.
omg that's so nice, thank you
just started the video but your bookshelves are sooo cute!!!
Yay! Thank you!
really interesting video! i absolutely love the secret history, since i feel like i discover something new every time i reread it, and this gave me some things to think about on my next reread!
oh i have BEEN looking for something like this
WOOOOO!! I hope you enjoy it :)
Personally, I like the time it was written, it’s not like today’s writing where we workshop, cull and re-edit, there is A LOT of descriptive words in this book, but it’s such a reflection of the times late 80’s early 90’s of writing
2 hours omg, she is the moment!
hahaha thank you! she very much is
Wow, that was one hell of a research based analysis. Really appreciated!
thank you for the video! after finishing the book i was looking for something like that because i don’t know any person with whom i can discuss this book. thank you for the job done
Love this video so much
AHHH thank you so much
I am so blessed to find this ❤❤❤❤❤
I'm blessed you found it!
I read this book about a year or two ago and remember enjoying it. I started rereading it recently, but I have to say I don't seem to enjoy her writing style anymore. Everything seems a little too long winded for my taste and I'm not one to hate on long books (I enjoyed War and Peace f.e.). I'm stuck on page ~100 and don't really want't to go on, especially since my reading list is just crammed right now.
Anyway I bookmarked this video in case I ever decide to pick it up again (and finish it).
I will also send it to my girlfriend who actually did finish a reread recently.
Have a good day.
Thank you!! Tartt does have really long chapters - I like to consume them by breaking them up along with the scenes to really enjoy everything that's being fed to us. Have a nice day
In my opinion her long descriptions and slow pace perfectly mimc the events in the book, which is incredible and makes you feel like a part of the story. For example the 'winter section' with richard almost dying feels like 100 pages, it was so long and slow and made me feel like I'm about to freeze to death with him. Later I came back to this part to count the pages and it was only about 15 pages long ??? This is crazy, to me it only proves Donna's talent :)
i recommend the audiobook narrated by tartt if you wanted to "re read"! she's a really engaging reader and you get to hear how she wanted the book to be read! plus the long winded hyper descriptive prose passes by pretty easily when you're able to putter around the house/go on walks/etc.! it's on youtube if you search!
@@s.e.a.b.Thanks, I'll check it out.
Just found this video and channel. Instantly subscribed.
Unhinged deep dives are the best! Yaaas!
Henry isnt a psychopath guys. He just has a superiority complex and sentimentality towards intellect (and some moral principles) over people.
He’s a stereotypical nerd. Not even that deep. And it’s sad.
A loving description.
Omg this is what I've been waiting for let's gooo🧚♀️👭
Yes.... the Algorithm works in mysterious ways 👍😊💯
..
Super interesting video! A great insight into the deeper layers of this grand piece!
PS: Vienna does not speak Dutch but German ;) (Capital City of Austria)
Ah!! My brain always gets confused with it! Thank you 😊
quando eu finalmente ler the secret history (e descobrir o que é um bacchanal) juro que volto a este vídeo 🤞🤞
ahah vais gostar!
oh my god you made it click for me! richard literally just mentioned that the group all gets annoyed when bunny makes fun of catholic which is literally modern rome!
Thanks for the video, it was very interesting!
I wish this was seperated into chapters 😭
I know our supreme leader Brittany would love this
PLEASE I would scream if our leader watched this
Why is every damb book about a murder?
I love your take on this video! But I don't think Henry was 100% heterosexual. Throughout the first book, I always felt like the relationship between Henry and Bunny was more than just friendship. It is mentioned that they used to live together- but then, for some reason, Henry decided to move out. Although Henry had little care for anyone other than himself, he kept spoiling bunny for years- buying him all the expensive stuff he wants, and never refusing him. Also, after their trip to Rome, when they have an argument, Bunny falls asleep in Henry's bed afterwards and Richard mentiones hearing cries during the argument. I also believe that there was an affair between Julian and Henry- it is mentioned several times Henry is Julian's favorite and their relationship seemingly extends over the student-teacher/mentor dynamic. It is possible that Julian was grooming Henry the whole time and implementing his ideas onto him simultaneously. Maybe, at that time, Henry was having an on-and-off thing with Bunny and also in an intimate relationship with Julian and maybe Bunny found out about it, and threathened to tell on them out of jealousy which would result in Julian getting fired and Henry losing the person he lovss the most. I always felt like, even if Bunny ratted on them about the farmer, there was no evidence that would get them arrested and even if there was, Henry was perfectly capable of getting himself out of it. Which brings me to my theory that Henry had another reason to kill Bunny which we were not aware of, and he is likely to have plotted the first murder just to have a reason to kill Bunny.
and, about Henry offing himself- I never felt like he did something heroic to protect his 'friends'. If you think about it, he had all the money in the world, and all the power that it brought to him. He also had no interest in any matter other than Latin, Ancient Greek and Roman, and he seemingly didn't take pleasure in anything in his life other than reading. He also approached death in a different way- for him, his life was just a journey to something greater and he was not, by any means, scared of death. By Julian's departure, Henry lost the person who he cared about the most, making his life even more meaningless and dull that he probably did not see any reason to keep on living as he had no aim, no motive and no interest in anything. I feel like they could have gotten away with it even if Henry only harmed himself. Lol, even if he didn't do anything and somehow someone figured out about the murders, he still could have got away with it. I doubt he sacrificed himself for he shed Bunny's blood, but because Julian finding out about it changed his feelings for Henry, and Henry couldn't stand that. Maybe this was his way of trying to undo the bad he has done just for Julian but not because he actually felt bad for Bunny
Idk I think its pretty clear that julian was a father figure for henry. If bunny had found out about them after all, why would he have sent julian the typewritten message? Richard also describes bunny as one of the homophobic people who genuinely hates gay people and not one of the homophobes being homophobic to cover up their insecurity about their own sexuality and I tend to agree. Julian was definitely grooming henry to a degree, but not in a sexual way I think.
Are you completely delusional? There is zero evidence for any of this in the book.
I need this analysis for bunny by mona awad 😭
Can you give some examples of where Richard lies?? I’m having a tough time spotting the small details
Lies in the beginning, where he talks about his home life with Bunny when they go to lunch
@@leblondefox9256Those are lies we know of, because Richard tells us they’re lies. There are also A LOT of things in de book that could be lies, even though they seem like the truth through Richard’s narrative, because he is an unreliable narrator. For instance, I believe Camilla didn’t really kiss him once!
When Bunny is being a pest to Richard near his end, mocking his clothing, it's because Richard is lying. Bunny might not have been as wealthy as Henry or the others but he DID know his fancy brand names. He was taking shots at Richard near the end by asking him if his clothes were brand names such as Gucci, and Richard would always say yes because a) he didn't know and b) still feels compelled to lie to fit in, and then Bunny would call him out for his lies as his belt wasn't Hermes, or his sweater wasn't Gucci or whatever.
There's also the whole lie about the car, that he doesn't even own, needing repairs to get an advance from the Prof he was working for just so he could buy clothes to try to fit in.
There're also some incidents that Richard lies about to over romanticize incidents. Camilla's foot cut being a severed artery. About the call of "mallards" on the lake (West Coast kid didn't know that he meant loons), trying to create a more evocative scene. The three ravens on the tree (not real raven behavior). Those stood out to me (living around the squawking mallard ducks and actual ravens), and the anatomy of arteries in the feet as well as how serious it would be for Camilla if something did get deep enough into her foot to actually sever an artery.
Given how precise Tartt's writing and research seems to be it felt like these things are deliberately wrong to show Richard's romanticization and love of the aesthetic rather than just an author not being knowledgeable about birds or anatomy.
@@dimman77 Ah yes the professor, that’s a great point. Also yes, it gives us that feeling and insight to Richard. However, I think one major thing is that there’s so many decorative wording in this book it leaves nothing to the imagination
Richard is Jenny Humphrey
had to look up what bacchanal meant for this one 😞(definition is " a wild, drunken celebration" in case somebody also doesn´t know)
Die-oh-nye-sis
english is not the only language jesus
This video plus @moeblackx 's recap of the whole book are so good. So happy it got recommended to me
I'm so glad you enjoyed it!! :)
I don't like this book, but I like your video 🚬
hahaha thank you!
omds és portuguesa i wanna be friends with u
Can we please stop hyping this book up, it is not real literature. It is gimmicky and tacky. Please, people. Be crtitical and judgemental! It's ok to not be trendy! Read the classics, you will realize what real literature is truly about!!!
Let people enjoy what they like
@@koaps The Secret History is not good/real literature. Let me give you an analogy: It's like comparing fast food to fresh food. Are they both food? Yes! Can you consume both? Yes! Is one better for you? Yes! Can you read bad/not real literature for fun to take your mind off things and have a good time? Yes!!!
At the very least young adult western readers should admit that it is not real literature, that this book is not ground breaking and that classics are and will always be better literature. People nowadays barely have any critical thinking of their own and find themselves thinking in collective of groups to feel safer.
And what exactly classic literature is about ?
@@Greenwood13 it really isn’t that deep, I like many others enjoyed ‘the secret history’. I would argue it’s a good modern classic. However book taste is extremely subjective, what I like you may not like, and vice versa. And that is okay, you shouldn’t however say that people “barely have critical thinking”. Allow people to enjoy what they enjoy, instead of hating. You are entitled to your own opinion like I am.
@@koaps You are too focused on being right you are having a miopic black and white argument or discussion with me about this. I couldn't give 2 sh*ts about other peoples personal taste in literature. I happen to be an English philologist by profession so I think my opinion is not "too subjective". I've actually had to do a lot of research backing up what I'm saying. I'm not discrediting people reading 'The Secret History' just like people read Dan Brown or eat cheeseburgers and do many other things...but if you want me to eat your shit and call it caviar, I don't think so.