The Secret History

I heard a lot of breathless enthusiasm about this book, so my expectations were high. This is a 3.5 star upgraded to 4 because it was a good read and, theoretically, I would give this a re-read in later life. Unfortunately I have little to no knowledge of the classics which I think prevented me from enjoying the story as much as I might‰ЫЄve – I mean enjoying more than just a layer or two – but regardless the story and the writing drew me along. I kept expecting to get bored in the second half – I kept thinking, what more could happen? There can‰ЫЄt be much more to this story, right? But it kept moving and I stayed interested, almost in spite of myself. I‰ЫЄm not sure if that had to do with the writing itself or with the narrator‰ЫЄs voice or with the backwards-murder-mystery aspect.

I enjoyed Richard‰ЫЄs voice and, as always in first-person narratives, the tension between what he thought about what he and his friends were doing versus what I thought about what they were doing. He comes across as likeable for the most part but there is the eternally nagging sense that he‰ЫЄs a bit of a monster. Although Richard‰ЫЄs characterization was strong– in so much as he remained in the background, as an invisible observer – the characterization of his male friends was a bit thin. I had a hard time telling the difference between Henry, Charles, and Francis, aside from their most obvious features – but that may have been because I paid less attention at the beginning of the story. My favourite part of the story was Richard‰ЫЄs winter alone in Hampden, my least favourite the visit to Bunny‰ЫЄs parent‰ЫЄs house for the funeral. It would be a fun book to reread (after getting some small grasp of the classics of course) and see what I missed and how the characters seem different after seeing them through to the end.