The Secret History – Review

Synopsis: Under the influence of their charismatic classics professor, a group of clever, eccentric misfits at an elite New England college discover a way of thinking and living that is a world away from the humdrum existence of their contemporaries. But when they go beyond the boundaries of normal morality they slip gradually from obsession to corruption and betrayal and at last – inexorably – into evil. ¹

Nothing short of a literary work of genius, Tartt takes the reader through the secret world of dark academia. Through character development and meticulous plot advancement, Tartt’s work will go down as a great contribution to literature. There is one theme I would like to explore that Tartt draws on from not only ancient times but modern times as well. The main characters in the book all study under one professor, Julian. This raises the question, is studying under one professor good or bad? ² Throughout the post I will explore the some historical and modern examples. Then I will discuss the possible consequences of studying under one person.

There are famous examples throughout history of the closeness between teachers and peers. One such example is that between Socrates and Plato. From Plato’s dialogues we can assume that Plato was a devote student of Socrates and would later go on to espouse a lot of his mentor’s views. Subsequently, Aristotle was a student of Plato. Later, Alexander the Great would become a student of Aristotle. In modern times this close relationship often takes place during one’s PhD. The institution you decide to attend is at least partly based on who you want to study under during your time. This is true across all fields. In The Secret History, Julian only accepts a limited number of pupils and requires that they take a majority (if not all) of their courses with him. For this, he receives great push back from other faculty and the college. But what are the advantages and disadvantages to this form of study?

One advantage might be the amount and quality of attention one receives. ³ When mentors keep their mentee circle small they are more able to give attention to said mentees. Furthermore, the quality of the attention can be improved. Another advantage is that the mentee can learn the complexities of a given topic under someone who is supposedly well versed in the subject matter. This aids in fostering the mentee’s own understanding and goal to pursue said subject matter. Lastly, a close mentor/mentee relationship can have a profound role in one’s present and future. I cannot underscore this point enough. Often times the mentor/mentee relationship lasts a lifetime. One finds themself questioning every piece of work through the eyes of their mentor. Throughout the book the main characters, especially Henry, revere Julian. Some even see him as a father figure.

This sort of relationship can have considerable disadvantages. ⁴ The first is over-specialization. By focusing too heavily on one particular subject one does not have the time to devote to learning other subjects. Thus, what one gains in specific knowledge of subject matter, they lack in others. The second is that studying under one person will expose one to only their mentor’s views. This is seen throughout the novel. Henry and the others hold Julian’s view on the subject matter as authoritative, thereby dismissing other potential equal interpretations. Such dismissal can lead to the disadvantage of forming one’s own opinion. Lastly, though not exhaustively, relying on the truth hood of the mentor’s knowledge. If objective truth is conceded, study would be pointless if affirmative claims of truth were made by the mentor but turn out to be false. Thus, one could have “wasted” time by learning the wrong information.

Ultimately, this notion of specialization and mentor/mentee relationships come with trade-offs. The parties must decide the nature of the relationship. I do want to mention that the relationship between Julian and his students is extreme. In other words, as this is a work of fiction, the reality of studying under someone does not often take this form. Rather, as in my experience, the mentor is there is guide you through the process while allowing you to arrive at your own conclusions. This is thought of as the ideal mentor/mentee relationship. But the above-stated criticisms still apply. Tartt did an excellent job at showing just how extreme a relationship can be taken between a mentor and mentee. Overall, this is an excellent read for anyone interested in dark academia and the problems that might arise.

— Yours Truly,

Michael A. Westbrook

Footnotes:

1. I do not believe that I could do a summary of the book justice. The plot and relationship between the characters is to intricate for a brief synopsis without revealing the plot. Thus, I utilized the synopsis provided on the book. Even such I believe does not capture even the essence of the excellence that Tartt captures in the book.
2. I use the words good/bad merely for writing variation. Here, there is to be no moral underpinning. The more apt words would be advantageous or disadvantageous. This is still requires the caveat of “by who’s standard.”
3. Here, as well as the disadvantages I speak in no absolute terms. Rather, these are the possible advantages and disadvantages which can come in various degrees, if at all.
4. See footnote 3