Themes

One major theme that I recognized was the theme of how "Tragedy can change human beings for better or for worse."
The characters in this novel are so engulfed with their secrets that their mental state and they shed the old selves they used to be. Charles was already a half-drunk but after the death of Bunny he went berserk. He was constantly drunk or high, and the people around him didn't like that. He also had bad relations with Henry, and tried to kill him. Charles was affected in a bad way by the tragedy and the secret of it.
Though Richard was affected negatively, I feel like he was the only one who had good come out of it. He was the only one who graduated and made something of himself, and he didn't let the incident control him like others. He had dreams, and is still haunted when he thinks about certain things, but he didn't' jump off the high end like the others. However, Camilla is the same way too. Though she didn't' make anything of herself, she wasn't completely mental like the others.
Francis is obviously haunted by the occurrence in the woods by the ravine. He is not as openly haunted, but there are times when we get glimpses of it. For one, he called Henry because he was having panic/anxiety attacks, a direct result of the stress and fear that he had. Henry was also affected by the death of Bunny, or mainly the result of it. After Julian found out he left the school. This was a tragedy in its own for Henry. Henry become distant from everyone else and a bit depressed. The event was haunting him. In the end when he kills himself, I think a part of him was happy that Charles brought the gun and shot Richard. It gave him an opportunity to kill himself, while also saving a friend.
The tragedy witnessed in this novel changed Charles, Henry, and Francis for the worst, and they had the more negative affects. Camille and Richard are obviously hindered emotionally too, but I feel it changed them for the better. This theme deals with American society because we often face tragedies that can change us. They usually change us into good beings and bad beings. For example: September 11, 2001. This was a tragedy that struck the United States hard, and we were negatively affected. The entire country was mourning and continues to mourn for all of the people that lost their lives on that day. We also entered the war with Iraq, which is definitely not good to solve violence with violence. However, the good thing that came out of this was the feeling of patriotism and it united us as one again. This book directly shows how we have to make the choice of what we want to do with a negative situation we are handed.

Imagery

"What happend next took place in an instant. Charles raised his arm; and quick as a flash, Francis, who was standing closest to him, threw a glass of wine in his face. At the same time Henry sprang from his chair and rushed in. There were four pops in rapid succession, like a cap gun. With the second pop, I heard a windowpane shatter. And with the third I was conscious of a warm, stinging sensation in my abdomen, the left of my navel" (Tartt, 534).
Charles has finally lost it and this occurs right before Henry's death. All of the images have been about death, which is warped all around this novel. This is significant because the incident is caused because of Bunny's death, and leads to Henry's death. Henry's death ultimately leads to the group separating. This is an image right in the middle of cause-and-effect.

"The back doors of the hearse were opened and the coffin slid out. Silently, the party drifted after as it was borned alot into the open field, bobbing across the sea of grass like a little boat. yellow ribbons fluttered gaily from the lid. The sky was hostile and enormous. We passed one grave, a child's, from which grinned a faded plastic jack-o'-lantern" (Tartt, 418).

This is significant because Bunny's body is being carried to his burial site. I feel like the mention of the child's grave had an emotional appeal and it saddened This made me think that possibly Tartt feels that Bunny is innocent just like the child. Or, it could be ironic that such an evil person as Bunny has the opportunity be be laid to rest near the burial grounds of an innocent child.

"You see, then, how quick it was. And it is impossible to slow down this film to examine individual frame.s I see now what I saw then, flashing by with the swift, deceptive ease of an accident: shower of gravel, windmilling arms, a hang that claws at a branch and misses. A barrage of frightened crows explodes from the underbrush, cawing and dark against the sky. Cut to Henry, stepping back from the edge. Then the film slaps up in the projector and the screen goes black" (Tartt, 276.)

Bunny's death. It's sad, and everything seems to be going in slow motion for Richard. This image is significant because it's finally what we've been waiting for the entire novel. Bunny finally dies and we get to witness it. However, it's not as long as drawn out as expected. Even though it is moving in slow motion for Richard, it's not that slow. I feel this is significant because right after the death, they all act normal and keep on with their lives. Murder is nothing big anymore.

"Things started to come back. I looked down at my hand and saw it was covered with blood, and worse than blood. Then Charles stepped forward and knelt at something at my feet, and I bent down, too, and saw that it was a man. He was dead. He was about forty years old and had on a yellow plaid shirt-you know those woolen shirts they wear up here- and his neck was broken and unpleasant to say, his brains were all over his face. Really, I do not know how that happend. There was a dreadful mess. I was drenched in blood and there was even blood on my glasses" (Tartt, 169).

This image was one of the one's that stood out the most to me because Henry describes with great detail how the man died. This was the turning point for everyone, and it was what the entire book was leading to-well almost leading to. Because of this event, the friends are tied together by this secret, and Richard and Bunny are thrown into it also. Bunny is murdered because he can't keep his mouth shut about another murder, which is very significant. Also, after this dead body comes Bunny, and eventually Henry.

Greek Tragedy

When I was reading this book I instantly knew that it had Greek written all over it. Of course, the students are taking Greek and always have references and sayings in that language. However, towards the end of the book I realized that it had the elements of a Greek tragedy. There are so many conflicts that occur throughout the novel, and I assumed Tartt wanted it that way because they mirror each other very closely.

Greek tragedies often have parts to them, like normal plays, and begin and end with a Prologue and Epilogue. The Secret History does this perfectly because the prologue already tells us what's going to happen (Bunny's death), and the epilogue goes into what happens after his death. The novel is also divided into two parts, much like a play has one or two acts.

Greek tragedies have little ups and downs throughout to keep them interesting but there is always one major climax that stands out. Throughout the book, there are also little ups and downs. The first quasi-conflict is Richard trying to meet the Greek students and becoming accepted into the course. He accomplishes that, but then faces another conflict of being accepted into their group of friends. That conflict took a while to be solved because we were constantly misled to believe that they were all friends, but then they would do not include Richard in certain things.

I would say that Richard falling ill is a part of the rising action. Richard is sick and living in that horrible apartment, and his situation is described for many long pages, and the book focuses simply on him in that moment. He almost nears death, which I would say is very significant. The climax, would of course be Bunny's death, which later leads us into the second act/ part of the book.

The second half of the book tones down a little bit and focuses on how the students are affected by what has happened. The little conflicts are about the fight between Charles and Henry and the emotional turmoil each character has to go through. The falling action is Henry's death, and the epilogue goes into what resulted afterwards.

As I am looking at the novel as a Greek Tragedy, I came to a conclusion that Richard is most likely the Tragic Hero. He is the narrator, and he lets us in on everything that has happened. His tragic flaw would be his need to feel wanted and also his pride. He has good intentions on being a part of this elite Greek class, but has no idea that it's not everything it seems to be. The tragic flaw hurts Richard in the end. He has too much pride, which causes him to fall ill and be affected for the rest of his life. Also, after fulfilling his need to be a part of something, he is a part of the murder which also affects him for the rest of his life.

Personal Response

To say that I was reading this story for an AP Lang project, I rather enjoyed it a lot. The plot was wonderful and there were always new things that kept me wandering what could possibly occur next. The prologue of the story immediately had me hooked because I knew that sooner or later Bunny was to die. I didn't know why or how, so I was forced to read the book so that I could solve the mystery.
Strangely, I don't have a favorite character in the novel. I feel like all of the characters had something that made me really like them, but they also had a negative aspect that made me want to jump in the book and give them a good talk. If I were to pick a favorite character I would probably say Richard. I think I really like him because he is the narrator, so my entire perspective is his perspective. Despite some flaws in his personality-lying, too much interdependence- I felt like he was one of the most realistic characters. He seemed like a normal teenager who would suddenly get so enticed in this Greek world that he'd lose himself (which is exactly what happened.)
My least favorite character would probably be Henry. However, I don't like him simply because I wanted a chance to understand his character and delve into that mysterious mind of his. I enjoyed how Henry was very intelligent and the planner of the group. On the other hand, I didn't like how he treated Richard. This is mainly because I knew as much as Richard knew, so I was left in the dark also.
Tartt did a wonderful job at incorporating her audience into what she did. She created suspense at the perfect times, just when I'd be ready to put the book down for the day. I especially remember one instance where it was late and I was closing the book, then I happened to see that Richard was going to pass out in the snow. Naturally, I kept going and got very little rest that night. Even though the characters had negative aspects about them, I enjoyed reading about them. I loved how their personalities fit together and they because of that they seemed like they perfect group of friends. If Bunny were just a little bit more snobby or if Henry wasn't mysterious enough it wouldn't have created the effect that it had on me.
The only thing that I didn't enjoy about the novel was the non-reality that showed at times. That group of students drank and smoked and partied all of the time. I'm not in college, but I know that that stuff rarely happens in real life, especially the drinking. The fact that they were all drunk every single day and rarely had sober moments took away from the reality.
Despite these little doses of fantasy, I overall marveled the book. It saddened me when Henry died because he was held on such a pedestal; it was like seeing a king die. The fact that Francis tried to kill himself also made me sad because I didn't want him to suffer either. In a strange way, I didn't feel emotion when Bunny died. He was such a mean person, it really didn't matter to me.
I would definitely read other books by Tartt if they are as good as this one.

Character Analysis

The novel had many different characters, but it is solely based on the live of 6 characters: Richard Papen, Henry Winter, Francis Abernathy, Bunny Corcoran, and Camila and Charles Macauley. Richard is the narrator of the story, and to me has one of the most puzzling personalities in the book.



Richard Papen

Richard was born in Plano, California, which is a very small town with little to nothing. His need to feed the loneliness that lives inside of him derives from the fact that his parents don't like him and he has no siblings. His obsession with fitting in also derives from this. Richard is ashamed of where he comes from, and for this lies about his past and his family. On the very first page of the book as we are introduced to Richard he explains this:

"On leaving home I was able to fabricate a new and far more satisfying history,
full of striking, simplistic environmental influences; a colorful past, easily
accessible to strangers."

He enjoys creating an imaginary world since the one he lived in wasn't interesting enough.



Even though Richard can lie about his past so that he can fit in anywhere, he is still faced with the obstacle of not being lonely. Because of his lonely childhood, I believe he is trying to make up for the lack of love by fitting in with everyone. When he first encounters the Greek students, he is automatically infatuated with them. However, he isn't accepted into their group graciously and he still has moments where he is excluded from something.



Not unlike most people, Richard has two sides to his personality. His first side derives of a lonely, interdependent soul who craves attention. His other side is dependent and prideful, and accepts the fact that things can't always be. When Richard first arrives at Hampden, being alone is welcoming and he enjoys it. He tours the campus and it was one of the days that he's been the happiest (Tartt, 13.) Richard also has lots of pride and is ashamed to ask for things or to admit his situations to other people. When he lives in an apartment with no heat and a hole in the rough in the dead of winter, he doesn't want to tell anybody how he is living. Richard says:

"

I supposed I might've
asked Dr. Roland if I could stay in the apartment he shared with his girlfriend, but the
embarrassment of that was such that death, to me, seemed preferable" (Tartt, 120.)

Richard is a boy who is full of lies and the need for acceptance.



Henry Winter

Henry is one of the most mysterious characters. He wears glasses and has dark hair, pale skin, and a beautiful mind. Henry is the intelligent person that is also VERY laid back. He interacts with other characters but also keeps to himself. Throughout the novel, I learned parts of his personality and saw little things that showed the person within, but I still felt like I was missing something key to his person. Henry is one of those people that you have to be around to learn their persona, but even so there were still times of doubt within the characters. In one instance Richard is observing Henry and Bunny interact and remarks:

"Henry didn't say anything, and I'm sure that at that moment he would have
looked perfectly impassive to anyone who didn't' know him, but I could tell he was quite
agitated."

(Tartt, 130)

Henry comes off as very rude and cocky when he first meets a person. When Richard first met Henry, Henry did not acknowledge that he existed until Francis finally said something.



However rude Henry seems, he is also very truthful and loyal to his friends. Once Richard and Henry got closer, Henry revealed the truth about Bunny and his conniving ways , which was very nice of him to do. He also reveals to Richard that they murdered a person, which is something VERY serious. Henry is loyal because even when Bunny treats him horribly, he still is nice to him and still pays for lots of things. Also, in the end he kills himself so as to protect Charles from the downfall. (However, I also think that was selfish because he just wanted out of life and that was a perfect opportunity.)



Francis Abernathy

Francis is a Greek scholar who is very thin and has bright red hair. He has classy taste, because he is always dressed in fancy shirts or nice suits even when there is no occasion. It is later learned towards the middle of the book that he is gay, and he actually makes a move on Richard. Francis' grandfather does not accept his homosexuality, and makes him marry a woman. He is very respectable, yet also week. After Bunny's death, he begins having panic attacks and he becomes frail. After Henry's death, he is too depressed and overbore by it all and attempts to take his life by cutting his wrist. However, this attempt fails.



Bunny Corcoran

Bunny is very interesting. He's very cheery and easy going, and always cracking jokes. He is also similar to Richard in a way, because they both have the tendency to lie about things. Bunny also lied about the riches his family had, or once had, and often makes other people take care of him. Even though Bunny seems nice and hearty, there is an evil inside of him. He is VERY anti-homosexuality (situation with waiter, page 51). He is also conniving. After finding out that his friends killed a man, he holds them all under his will. He says things that he knows hits below the belt but he does it because he knows they won't do anything about it. When Bunny is around people are tense, but when he is gone they aren't. ("Everyone seemed unusually calm and at ease and I thought I knew why. It was because Bunny wasn't with us.")



Camilla and Charles Macaulay

Camilla and Charles are twins, and they both tend to have the same characteristics. Tartt doesn't really go into their personalities as much, however. The pair have dark blond hair and looked and wore pale items. Their parents died when they were younger, so they were raised by a variety of family members. Camilla has confidence, but that is sometimes confused with her selfishness. She is the only girl in the bunch, and all of the men seem to gravitate to her at times. Charles is very spontaneous and out-there. He doesn't really care what people say, and he does the wildest things (Alcoholic, Stoner, Brings gun to kill Henry.)

"And then there were a pair, boy and girl. I saw them together a great
deal, and at first I thought they were boyfriend and girlfriend, until one
day I saw them up close and realized they had to be siblings. Later I learned
they were twins. They looked very much alike, with heavy dark-blond hair and epicene faces as
clear, as cheerful and grave, as a couple of Flemish angels. And perhaps most
unusual in the context of Hampden--where pseudo-intellects and teenage
decadents abounded, and where black clothing was de regueur-- they liked to wear pale clothes,
particularly white. In this swarm of cigarettes and dark sophistication they
appeared here and there like figures from an allegory, or long-dead celebrants
from some forgotten garden party."

LIES

There are many important topics discussed within the novel, but the concept of telling the truth is continuously repeated throughout. Richard is a guy who comes from the other side of the country, and for that he can make up anything he wants about himself. He fibs about how much money he has, what type of Greek books he's read, and everything else. When Bunny notes that he admires Richard's jacket, he says that it was his grandfather's, when in reality he had just received it a few moments earlier by a random girl. He also lies about what his father does in the oil industry.

Bunny lies a lot in the story also. He attempted to scam Richard into paying for the $200 bill they racked up from buying drinks. Unfortunately it does not work, and Henry ends up having to pay for them. This is the first glimpse into the lying way of Bunny.

The rest of the students do not have individual lying qualities, but they do lie as a group-whether to themselves or to Richard. All 6 students lie to themselves whenever they have the dinner with Julian. They get so excited that he is coming, and they make a whole parade of buying luxurious food and dressing way too nicely. They are completely exhausted and often sit around half-heartily. But when Julian knocks on the door they instantly sit up straight and slap a smile on their faces. Even though they seem peppy, they all know that exhaustion is threatening to overcome them any second.

Lastly, the students lie to Richard. They do things secretly, and try to be very nonchalant about it, but he knows something is up. Richard expresses his view when he says "I knew, for instance, that the five of them sometimes did things-what exactly, I didn't know- without inviting me, and that if put on the spot they would all stick together and lie about it, in a casual and quite convincing fashion." Why the lies? I'm not exactly sure, but the entire relationship of these students is based on fiction. Even after they've become so close, Richard still doesn't tell them anything about himself. They can only go on what they've witnessed to help define his character. As with the other students, they have a real relationship with each other, but not one with Richard. He is accepted into their clique, but still has secrets kept from him. Their entire relationship being based on lies is not looking very good, and I hope it won't be the reason Bunny dies.

Personal Response to Select Passage

"I suppose there is a certain crucial interval in everyone's life when character is fixed forever; for me, it was that first fall term I spent at Hampden. So many things remain with me from that time, even now: those preferences in clothes and books and even food- acquired then, and largely, I must admit, in adolescent emulation of the rest of the Greek class- have stayed with me through the years. It is easy, even now, for me to remember what their daily routines, which subsequently became my own, were like. Regardless of circumstance they lived like clockwork, with surprisingly little of that chaos which to me had always seemed so inherent a part of college life- irregular diet and work habits, trips to the Laundromat at one a.m...Rather in the way that the Roman Empire continued in a certain fashion to run itself even when there was no one left to run it and the reason behind it was entirely gone, much of this routine remained intact even during the terrible days after Bunny's death. Up until very end there was always, always, a Sunday-night dinner at Charles and Camilla's, except on the evening of the murder itself, when no one felt much like eating and it was postponed until Monday." (Tartt, 84)

This particular passage disturbed me for some strange reason. Though it was true, I felt that Richard's talk about when a person builds character is all wrong. There comes a point when people do find themselves, and that is how they live for the rest of their lives. However, I didn't want it to be during this period of his life that Richard finds himself. These people are fixed on a schedule, but they lead lives that I wouldn't want to lead if I were him. They remind me of stuck-up people who distance themselves from the rest of the world. It is a pity that Richard became addicted to this living style too, and I feel sorrow to know that he was drawn into it.

Most people have a faint remembrance of their daily routines, but they have affected him so much that he follows them and remembers them profoundly. I know that it is a part of Richard's character to envy other people, but to know that they've influenced him so much is bothersome. If people can change the books you read and the clothes that you wear, they have a hold on you that needs to be released. However, instead of keeping his independence and his friends, Richard blends in with them.

I was also bothered by the fact that even after Bunny's death the group maintained their daily routines. I was unsure of the underlying reason for why they did this. Every possible suggestion for their actions was refuted with a logical answer. At first I believed they did this because they didn't want to seem suspicious. Even though they are anti-social, that makes them even more noticeable. For that reason, I thought it critical for them to continue their daily routines and be wary. However, once the body of Bunny was found, why didn't they stop? They wouldn't need to hide anymore and people would expect them to act strangely. If my best friend were murdered I wouldn't continue with my jolly routines because it would affect me. So I concluded that they couldn't possibly be doing it because they wanted to remain inconspicuous.

My second assumption was that they just wanted to pretend like none of that stuff had happend. I thought that they wanted to continue with their daily lives and look past it because it hurt too much. But none of the textual evidence states the sort. My third and final assumption was that they didn't care. DING DING DING. I don't feel like they care or show the slightest bit of remorse to their actions. It is possible that they do feel remorse, and I won't know until later in the novel. Regardless, the text says it all. Richard says that they postponed their Sunday night dinner to Monday only because it was the night of the murder and no one felt like eating. I sense sarcasm in his words, but also a dose of alarming reality. Their daily routines won't get interrupted, even by death? What kind of book am I reading?

Character Interaction

When I first read the Prologue to the story, it seemed pretty obvious that the characters were in on the murder together, and I expected some bond to be shared between them. However, their relationship constantly changes throughout the novel, and it bothers me how fast they go from close friends to mere acquaintances. The main change in relationship occurs between the narrator, Richard, and the other characters. I believe that since he is the newcomer, he is still classified as an outsider and only gets little glimpses of the society that they have created for themselves. These seemingly never-ending volt-faces are frustrating, yet keep the reader engaged as to what will happen next.

In the beginning of the novel, it is supposed that Richard will never be one of them, and that he will never be able to join the Greek class. He is immediately looked at as minuscule, just as the group of students view the rest of the school. Even though he is an outsider, he has natural curiosity for the group-"At close range, though, they were an arresting party- at least to me, who had never seen anything like them, and to whom they suggest a variety of picturesque and fictive qualities." (Tartt, 17) Following this passage, Richard listens in on their conversation in the library because he can't help but fulfill his desire to know them. Here lies the characters' first interaction. Will he play it safe and just simply watch them from afar? Or will he be brave enough to do what no human has done before- interact with the students studying Greek? I'm glad he was able to converse with them, and it made me think that they weren't actually as stuck up as they seemed.

I don't think that Richard ever expected the students to actually engage with him. He is so drawn back by their welcome that he couldn't believe he was connecting with them. Richard says that he was "confused by this sudden glare of attention; it was as if the characters in a favorite painting, absorbed in their own concerns, had looked up out of the canvas and spoken to me." I was happy that the characters started to interact with each other, and I predicted that their bond would be strong. However, Richard thinks so highly of them that this could possibly play out wrong later on in the novel. Knowing Richard's character, he might end up lying about his life story just to be accepted. But enough with my conjectures, back to the relationship between characters.

Right after Richard has his ''glorious moment," he is immediately thrown back into his world and out of the one the students immured themselves in. Henry is the main person to show no curiosity in Richard, and the others then follow his lead. On page 22 of the novel, Henry evaluates Richard, but then waves him away with disinterest. This interaction between the two is very awkward. Richard can feel that he is no longer needed, but for some reason unbeknownst to me, he doesn't leave. Henry takes the initiative of saying that they should leave, which I felt was a sign that he was the most uncomfortable with a new face. That entire scene in the book went very slowly, yet their perception of Richard changed promptly from recognition to exclusion.

After a few weeks Richard is put into their class, so it's awkward between him and the students. No one can forget that at first they didn't care for him at all, yet everyone attempts to be friendly. When Camilla and Charles invited him to their house, I was overcome with joy because I really really wanted him to be accepted. However, the very next day he is treated as if he is nothing. Richard realizes this and is bothered, but not as much as I would have imagined:

"I had certainly plenty to worry about besides the coldness which apparently had infected my classmates once again, their crisp air of solidarity, the cool way their eyes seemed to look right through me. There had been an opening in their ranks, but now it was closed; I was back, it seemed, exactly where I'd begun."

It's almost as if he is used to being mistreated. I think that he values them so much that it really doesn't matter whether or not he is actually accepted. I didn't take his character to be somebody who hangs around people who mistreat him, but obviously I'm wrong.

Even though the main characters have a very testy relationship, I feel that in the end they are all going to get along great for a very long time. This is first seen when Richard goes to the country with them for a weekend. He felt accepted and noticed that they were opening up to him:

" At any rate, this was the weekend that things started to change, that the dark gaps between the street lamps begin to grow smaller and smaller, and farther apart, the first sign that one's train is approaching familiar territory, and will soon be passing through the well-known, well-lighted streets of town. The house was their trump card, their fondest treasure, and that weekend they revealed it to me slyly, by degrees..."

Richard's use of metaphor really helps get the picture that the characters are actually bonding. By showing him their house, he is being invited back into their world. They are opening up to him, which is hopefully the relationship that the main characters will have for the rest of the novel.

To sum up the relationship between characters, they start out with noncommunication. Richard is new to Hampden, and he's not in their clique anyways. However, when he breached the invisible wall between them he opened up their world and increased his chances of getting to know them. Sadly, Henry is rude and disinterested, so Richard is shut back out. When Richard finally has the full access to the world of the Greek scholars, he is still treated as an outcast, but also welcomed at times. The characters are moody, but only towards him.

Julian Morrow: Who is He? What is he?

Today, I came across a passage that I knew I had to write about. Julian talks with the students about human nature but speaks so intimately I felt that the author was trying to talk to me instead of her character...

"He was a marvelous talker, a magical talker, and I wish I were able to give
a better idea what he said, but it is impossible for a mediocre intellect to
render the speech of a superior one-especially after so many years- without
losing a good deal in the translation. The discussion that day was about
loss of self, about Plato's four divine madnesses, about madness of all
sort; he began by talking about what he called the burden of the self, and
why people want to lose the self in the first place. 'Why does that obstinate little voice in our heads torment us so?' he said, looking round the table. 'Could it be because it reminds us that we are alive, of our mortality, of our individual
souls-which, after all, we are too afraid to surrender but yet make us feel
more miserable than any other thing? But isn't it also pain that often makes
us most aware of self? It is a terrible thing to learn as a child that one is a being separate from all the world, that no one and no thing hurts along with one's
burned tongues and skinned knees, that one's aches and pains are all one's own.
Even more terrible, as we grow older, to learn that no person, no matter how beloved, can ever truly understand us. Our own selves make us unhappy, and
that's why we're so anxious to lose them, don't you think?...And how can we lose
this maddening self, lose it entirely? Love? Yes, but as old Cephalus once heard
Sophocles say, the least of us know that love is a cruel and terrible master. One loses oneself for the sake of the other, but in doing so becomes enslaved and miserable to the most capricious of all the gods. War? One can lose oneself in the joy of battle, in fighting for a glorious cause, but there are not a great many glorious causes for which to fight these days.'" (Tartt,36)

After reading this passage I began to wonder immensely about human nature, and about Julian's role in the story. I first believed that he was playing the minor role of the students' teacher, but as the story progresses he is put higher and higher on his pedestal above the rest. In the very beginning of the passage he is characterized as being a "marvelous talker; a magical talker," which immediately made me want to know: What made him so great? Why is this Greek professor worshiped so much, even by the author? Does he play some important role later in the story? WHY? So many questions go unanswered at the moment so I can only speculate:

After reading his words, I realized his intellect and his profound knowledge made him all the greater. I found myself admiring his character just as the characters in the book did. He speculated but used logical examples to back up his reasoning. He is a man who makes a statement and has all of the evidence to prove that it is true. The funny thing about him is that the evidence is there for all of us to see, he is just the only character that helps us find it.

As to question number 2, I began to think that he is admired by the author so much because he expresses some of her own views. I actually don't know this but that level of passion was completely different from the rest of the novel. Even though a character is technically giving the narration, I saw the author come out in this particular passage. The tone wasn't strictly factual and telling the story, but it was with so much emotion and it focused on influencing our minds. This passage talks about human nature and it really made me think because I've never addressed this aspect of my character. It made me question who I was as a person...To go so far as to say that we as humans want to lose ourselves because we make ourselves the most unhappy is so far fetched but the reasoning feels so true. When we love, we give ourselves to that lucky person and put them before us, losing ourselves in the mist of teddy bears and flowers. And when we lose that love, are we depressed because we loved them so much? Or are we depressed because now there is nobody to help us escape from ourselves? But let's not forget about war. War is such a disastrous thing, but when it's done for a "glorious cause" it's not as bad as it seems. People become joyous and often lose themselves in fighting. It stops being about the war and morphs into the need to kill.

I've never in my life explored the depths of human qualities. I think that Donna Tartt created this character and wrote this part specifically to help her audience look into themselves and see what they could find. I found a lot. So why not worship this man who helps us delve into our inner souls?

My third question is based only on guess work, but I believe that he plays a huge role in the story. At this point it is very obvious that his students look to him as if he were God. I think that they will hover on his every word, maybe a little too seriously. I believe that he will tell them something about humans, and they will follow what he says. At this point I can't find any reason for the friends to murder Bunny, so I think that they murder him based on something that Julian says.

Only time will tell...

Donna Tartt Has a Style of Her Own**Rhetoric Study

" And after we stood whispering in the underbrush- one last look at the body and a last look round, no dropped keys, lost glasses, everybody got everything?- and then started single file through the woods, I took one glance back through the saplings that leapt to close the path behind me. Though I remember the walk back and the first lonely flakes of snow that came drifting down through the pines, remember piling gratefully into the car and starting down the road like a family on vacation, with Henry driving clench-jawed through the potholes and the rest of us leaning over the seats and talking like children, though I remember only too well the long terrible night that lay ahead and the long terrible days and nights that followed, I have only to glance over my shoulder for all those years to drop away and I see it behind me again, the ravine, rising all green and black through the saplings, a picture that will never leave me." (page 4)

WHOA. Here, we are first introduced to Donna Tartt's writing style. With a mixture of stylistic and rhetorical elements, she creates a compelling passage and passages just like this that are seen throughout the novel. This passage is a wonderful example of her style that is constantly mirrored within other pieces of her book, yet they aren't too overbearing and repetitive.

The very first sentence in the passage has a very mysterious tone. I instantly wanted to know what happened-Was this a planned murder or a prank gone wrong?-but there isn't enough given details. It is inferred that Bunny's death was sad for all of them, however. The students were "whispering in the underbrush" and left single file- something most non-remorseful people don't do. Even though the tone is mysterious, the actions of the students are ones connected with sadness yet also connected with corruptness. They make sure there is no evidence of them being there yet are also upset. This contrast between the tone and what's actually happening creates a mixture of emotions within because I don't exactly know what is going on, yet I have a general idea. Tartt's style of giving her readers just a little taste of the plot keeps them interested because they crave more.

Rhetoric devices help further add to Tartt's style throughout the passage. One huge simile that I thought important was where the students are being compared to a family on vacation; Henry as the father and the rest as children. It is significant because they just murdered their best friend, yet they are being compared to an innocent family riding down the road. Their appearance is nothing like it seems, and the use of simile/irony brings that out. It contributes to the overall style because it follows the pattern of things appearing one way but being a different way.

Climax is used in the passage that coincides with the tone. When describing how this disastrous experience has affected him, the narrator increases the level of severity. At first there is one terrible night that lies ahead. Then it is followed by long terrible days and nights proceeding, that ultimately lead to the narrator admitting that even years later he will often glance over his shoulder and the scene will appear in front of him. This climactic part in the passage adds emotional appeal to the situation, and the tone changes changes to sentimental. I was most affected by this part in the sentence because it is very sad, and I pitied him, even though he had done something evil. Using climax, the reader connects emotionally with the narrator, forging an unforeseen bond and liking for him.

This entire passage consisted of only 2 sentences. Tartt writes with very long sentences, that have many commas and dashes thrown into them. Though her sentences are long, they are complex and have many different ideas. The sentences are parallel in the sense that they have an independent clause put in the middle of them. The way the sentences were structured, I hardly noticed that they we just two long sentences. Commas add an effect of creating a sense of completeness because all of the ideas flow together. If put together wrong, these sentences could be drawn out and boring, but instead her syntax is clear and flowed.

One main aspect that I admire about her style is that Tartt has a habit of being choosy with which details she gives the reader. It frustrates me at times but also keeps me engaged in the book because I constantly want to know more. She gives select details that could be inferred in any way, and at times I was fearful of interpreting the text wrong, because I didn't want to become completely lost in the storyline. In the passage she gives details about the scenery, but not about the students. She tells of the first snow flakes falling from the sky and the green and black ravine, but we don't know everything about the character's reactions. She says that the students stood whispering in the underbrush, but we don't know what they were whispering about. We then learn lots of information about how they searched for lost items and filed through the snowy woods, but we don't' know how they feel. We know that Henry was clench-jawed, but we don't know if it was because of fear or anger or what. We know that they leaned over the seats and talked like children, but we don't know what words were exchanged. It reminds me of putting together a puzzle. When you put a puzzle together, you have to go piece by piece. In the novel, we only get to see the pieces Tartt throws at us. This impacts the story because throughout the entire novel, we're being detectives trying to piece together everything. It makes me want to keep reading, and I hate it when I have to put the book down.