Character analysis - Who is the real villain in Donna Tartt's "The Secret History"? *SPOILERS*

Donna Tartt’s The Secret History is a suspenseful, I would even say satirical at times, work that criticizes academia. I wonder now, if Donna Tartt knows that her novel today has consequently created a new generation of dark academia obsessed people who romanticize the book's aesthetic and its characters. Tartt criticizes academia for the behaviors of elitism and superiority that is created due to things like secret societies that are common in colleges and higher education. 

What happens in The Secret History is explained early on in the book. Bunny is dead, and a group of adults along with the narrator who we find to be named Richard Pappen is responsible for Bunny’s murder; the story, told from Richard’s narration is reiterated to us and we learn what events lead to Bunny’s murder, how, and who the group of people were that killed Bunny. 

The answer to who the real villain of The Secret History is is murky. I assume that most who read this blog post have already read it, are currently reading it, or have heard about the book. Although we can analyze the characters to try to determine who the true mastermind behind this downward spiral of events is, our story is told to us by an evidently unreliable narrator. In this blog post I’ll cover an analysis of, who I believe to be, the four main contenders of the true villain in the story. I recommend that you read the book before reading this as there will be spoilers.

Richard Pappen 

Beginning with Richard in our character analysis seemed most fitting, I mean, he’s the first character we are introduced to and who the whole story will be narrated by (Duh!) Right off the bat we figure that Richard is as unreliable of a narrator as we could possibly get. He says himself that he believes his “fatal flaw” to be his “morbid longing for the picturesque at all costs.” (Tartt 7) Like, really Richard? You’re about to tell us a whole story on how you and a group of your friends murdered another one of your friends and you tell us we can’t even trust you? Additionally, Richard lies to others in this story like crazy! He even admits that “if there’s one thing [he’s] good at, it’s lying on [his] feet” (Tartt 26). We learn early that Richard arrives at Hampden College in Hampden Vermont from the West Coast, specifically Plano California. He lives an average life, with parents who seemingly don’t care about him (assuming we can trust what he tells us) with a father who owns a gas station and a stay at home mom. Despite being urged to become a Doctor, Richard decides to major in classics and attempts to join the elusive Greek class at Hampden. The teacher is picky with who he allows to be his pupils, creating a secret society-like class with only five students who are equally as mysterious and quirky as the teacher Julian is. Before even entering the classroom after displaying his proficient knowledge in ancient Greek, Richard idolizes his classmates beyond normalcy. Despite the rest of the student body believing these five students to be somewhat odd and out of place, Richard sees them as nearly god-like and untouchable. Praising Camilla Macaulay as one of the most beautiful girls he’s ever seen, telling us Henry Winter is one of the most intelligent people he’s ever met, but these ideas (besides Camilla’s beauty) are quickly disproven, later on in the book it’s revealed Henry wasn’t even aware of the moon landing and many find Camilla to be too boyish and lacking feminine style (again, Camilla is probably very pretty, beauty is subjective. Yet, do I think Richard was idolizing her along with the four other boys in the Greek class, yes.) Overall Richard is incredibly unreliable, he idolizes his classmates far too much and throughout the events in the story, constantly places himself out of the narrative, he shows no responsibility in Bunny’s murder despite being there, but, how guilty really is Richard? 

Charles Macaulay

Charles, when I catch you Charles it’s OVER! Charles Macaulay, initially being presented as a good guy and honestly one of the more favorable characters in the book, made it even more shocking when his true character was revealed later in the story. Charles’ character is one that is so complex due to Richard’s narration and the situation at hand. It is an integral part of Charles’ identity that he is a twin to Camilla Macaulay, while their relationship is seemingly normal at the beginning of the book, and only slightly weird due to their odd nature in general (but this was sort of expected as everyone in the Greek class is sort of a freak.) It’s later on in the book where we are slowly pointed to the true nature between Charles and Camilla’s relationship, I find that the first telling sign of their incestual relationship was when Charles had come home, unknowing of Richard’s presence in the apartment he shared with Camilla, he calls for Camilla, calling her honey; let’s be honest who is calling their twin sibling honey? The red flags were up immediately. Charles as a character begins to truly decline after Bunny’s death along with the others in the class, however, Charles seems to be hit the hardest; his alcoholism, which was mentioned throughout the book, becomes a main focus, and problem for the group. When Charles and Camilla’s incestual relationship is revealed to Richard, in an awkward moment of Charles kissing Camilla quite passionately in front of him, we can infer that their relationship isn’t exactly consensual. After kissing Camilla passionately, “she didn’t flinch, didn’t move…she pulled her chair in close to the table and reached for the sugar bowl as if nothing had happened…She brought the cup up and took a sip and it was only then I remembered: Camilla didn’t like sugar in her coffee.” (Tartt 454) It’s such a small detail but SO INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT, this moment displays that Camilla is evidently shaken up, although pretending not to be and it speaks volumes on who Charles is as a character. Not to mention, as Charles begins to descend mentally, we find from Camilla that he has been abusing her resulting in her moving out from their shared apartment being essentially guarded by the group’s leader, Henry Winter, causing Charles to spiral even more. While Charles is a total jerk, I find that I wouldn’t consider him the true villain of the story. Without defending him, he is a character that mentally declined the most prominently after the murder of Bunny, and while he was apart of the murder don’t think he is as guilty as the two next characters we will discuss. 

Henry Winter

Henry, a character who I find to be wildly romanticized online, is a character that I deem to be one of the most villainous within the story. Henry, through Richard’s eyes, is the pinnacle of intelligence and wealth, he comes from a wealthy family allowing him to study the classics and language daily without the worry of his future or getting a job. While Richard believes he is the smartest of the group, and one of the smartest people he’s met in general, there are slight slip-ups within Richard’s narration that point to the idea that he may not be as smart as we are made to believe. In fact, nearly no one in the group seemed down to earth in the slightest “none of them were the least bit interested in anything that went on in the world, and their ignorance of current events and even recent history was rather astounding” (Tartt 85) later on Richard mentions the moon landing to which Henry is in disbelief that that even occurred. Although, we can assume Henry really isn’t as smart as depicted, he does seem to be incredibly cold and manipulative of the people around him. Throughout the book it is rare that Henry smiles or laughs, he even admits to not feeling much emotion when conversing with Richard, asking him “You don’t feel a great deal of emotion for other people, do you?” (Tartt 493) Richard is in shock by this question to which Henry responds “I don’t think [you do.] It doesn’t matter… I don’t either” (Tartt 493) Henry plays a large role in Bunny’s murder, making the plan and even the event that started it all, he constructed the bacchanal. Every decision made by Henry appears to be calculated, when he reveals to Richard the truth of what happened and how the group murdered the farmer accidentally, it’s only after he finds Richard freezing in an unairconditioned home, after spending winter break there due to him lying about where he was going. He asks Richard “Why have you been covering up for us?... You knew it all the time and you didn’t tell a soul. Why is that?” (Tartt 162) I believe that Henry at that moment had realized Richard's commitment to being seen as equal to his peers, he wanted to be a part of their group, to be them so bad that he’d do anything. I believe that Henry recognized Richard’s “fatal flaw,” his want for the picturesque and realized that he could manipulate him to his wants. I believe that Henry saw that within everyone in the group but he couldn’t see that with Bunny and because of that he worried and decided on murdering him. 

Julian Morrow

For a character that’s not directly included in the book as much as other characters, I believe that Julian, along with Henry or even more so than Henry had the greatest influence on the events at hand. Isolating the students from the rest of the student body should’ve been a red flag at the beginning, but if our protagonist wasn’t so obsessed with being the protagonist then none of this would’ve happened! While Richard idolizes everyone in the story, there is one character that idolizes Julian more so than anyone else, and that is Henry Winter. Now, that’s not to say that Julian didn’t reciprocate this same energy, because he very much did, with lunches and dinners together, to getting to class early to discuss, Julian’s relationship with Henry surpassed teacher student boundaries and neared being friends, which I don’t exactly think should occur for college students who are additionally isolated from everyone else of their peers. It is Henry who turns to Julian for confirmation if the bacchanal is a good idea, to which Julian approves! While Julian is a classics professor, he urges his class that it is “dangerous to ignore the existence of the irrational. The more cultivated a person is, the more intelligent, the more repressed, then the more he needs some method of channeling the primitive impulses he’s worked so hard to subdue” (Tartt 41) a dangerous idea to promote to a group of students who all equally believe they are the most intelligent people on the college campus. While he encourages the bacchanal where the accidental murder occurs, he is seemingly left in the dark for the rest of the story, continuing with his lessons and being almost comically unaware of everything that occurs despite the incredible amount of evidence before him. It is only up until the fool proof evidence shows up in front of Julian that he decides he cannot teach any longer, when Bunny’s final note is opened, of him pleading for help, that he is afraid he will be murdered and Julian notices that the headline is from the hotel where Bunny and Henry previously stayed Julian essentially shuts down. He picks up his bags and leaves Hampden college, the evidence is too clear yet he does not turn in the class. Although he appears to be unaware up until he finds this note by Bunny, I believe it to be the opposite. I think that Julian had at the very least an understanding that something wrong had occurred at the bacchanal, Camilla didn’t speak for days out of shock and presumably fear. While he encouraged all these things when he was faced with the evidence of the consequences that occurred due to the actions he encouraged he fled. I believe that because Henry looked up to Julian so much, along with Julian’s eccentric and unethical teachings, he acted as a catalyst for the events that took place with Henry being the main culprit for the events. 

Overall, I think that of everyone within the story a combination of Julian and Henry is the main cause for the events that took place within the story. While I believe that Julian was aware of what was going, I think that due to Julian’s teachings and Henry’s personality