Scan barcode
remecide's review against another edition
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Toxic relationship, Toxic friendship, Murder, and Injury/Injury detail
Minor: Incest, Sexism, Racial slurs, Misogyny, and Homophobia
it's a lot about bad people doing bad things. you are not supposed to love the characters. it's messy but it's fun to read, however it is 100% a hit or missedwardian_girl_next_door's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
I think most of the problems I have with this book have been voiced by other non-fans, but for the sake of my own record keeping, I'm going to say them anyway. (I tend to dislike things and forget the reasons why, so then I can't back up my argument when talking to other people! "Uh... it was bad... because, uh, I didn't like it...") My rating is definitely influenced by seeing the hype about it literally EVERYWHERE and then not enjoying it. Also the fact that I read this directly after Jane Eyre, so the bar was pretty high.
1) Overall: This book had a bit of The Great Gastby and Brideshead Revisited in it(I might go as far as saying it ripped them off), plus a dash of Dickens with the plethora of ridiculous Corcoran family members. It also reminded me of Columbo, where the audience knows who the perpetrator is the whole time. Honestly, the whole book was a parody of itself -- a hoity-toity, remote college; a mysterious mentor; people walking around in suits and sunglasses, cosplaying as the Secret Service to go to their language classes; everyone having sex with each other; drinking and drugs 24/7... but maybe that's the vibe Tartt was going for. Knowing the whole plot through, it sounds like a good read, but it just fell a little flat. The actual execution and circumstances were just too unbelievable for me to get invested.
2) The characters are all the same. Honestly, this book was a Henry/Bunny-fest, because they were the only characters which Tartt took the time to delve into. Charles, Francis, and Richard are all the same stock character, and Camilla's only distinguishing feature is that ✨she's a girl✨ and therefore fuckable. Henry soaked up any actually interesting characteristics that might have been given to other characters. If Tartt had given everyone distinct personalities, it would have been much more interesting to see how they interacted with each other to cause the plot points, rather than sticking them into a plot and forcing them to go along with it. My feeling is that she decided on the plot first and then shoved the characters in, rather than coming up with an event and seeing how it developed based on the characters' personalities.
3) Wtf was Julian for? I felt cheated in this respect, because Julian basically never appears. I was all for seeing how this man managed to single-handedly run a department where he decides who is let in, teaches students "all" their classes, and all for no salary? Plus in a remote, disused building? Sounds like a predator to me. But no, he barely makes an appearance, and is not the evil influence touted in the reviews. Lame.
4) Richard was less involved than me, the reader. Some other non-fans have lamented that Tartt could have gotten Richard more involved in the crime(s), rather than having him on the outside for the whole book. He has barely any skin in the game, and merely hears about all of these things after they happen. I think Tartt was going for the same structure that Gatsby has, with a shadowy narrator who becomes involved a world separate from their own -- but I don't think she lived up to it.
5) A Bacchanal? Really? You want me to believe that they ripped that man open because they were sprinting around barefoot, high off their tits and having sex with each other? As someone that is interested in true crime, this sounds exactly like the excuse murderers give when they're confronted by the police. "He hit his head" or "I blacked out and when I came to they were dead." Uh huh. Okay. And given that this is set in the Satanic Panic, a cult is a perfect excuse for criminals. I thought maybe they had committed the crime for some other reason, and then used the bacchanal as a cover-up, but no. They really did have an old-time incestuous drug party in the woods, and it's as implausible and uninteresting as that.
6) Henry seemed much older than he was, with how he managed the murder, the fallout, and literally everything else. Maybe I'm just incompetent (which is entirely plausible) but I can't even make a doctor's appointment. Meanwhile he's travelling, renting hotel rooms and apartments, driving around, moving Camilla from place to place, and whatever else he manages to do. He seems like he's about 25 or 26, not 21. He is also, I should note, the only person with any agency in this book, in terms of getting things done. He is the sole mover of everything, besides maybe Bunny, and that makes things really boring. I also don't get why everyone is madly in love with him -- not only is he dangerous, but he's a little pathetic as well. I'm all for problematic book boyfriends, but him? Girlypops, is he really worth all your time?
7) The buildup to Bunny's murder was irritatingly slow. Get on with it, stop dropping inane little hints. I get some suspense, but it was hell to get through 200 pages, and all for so little payoff.
8)The incest was an overdone and cheap shock factor. Again, it might have been interesting had Charles and Camilla had actual personalities, but even then I think it's a lazy way to spice up the plot. As with the bacchanal, if you have to use sex to make your book more interesting, you've got a boring book. (This is not to say I'm against sex in books, only that it shouldn't be propping up the reader's interest in your story.)
9) The ending was SUCH A LET DOWN.I don't understand why Henry shot himself. Was he afraid of getting arrested for shooting Richard, since he had the gun in his hand? Did he decide death was preferable to a life lived without feeling, or lived looking over his shoulder for the random dude & Bunny murders? He should have shot Charles, logically -- it might have done Charles some good. And the fact that Richard is shot and no one cares. Oo0o00o, it's the symbolism that no one has cared about him all along 😱 /sarcastic. The epilogue was just anticlimactic. Everyone disperses and leads vapid existences, clinging to the memory of Henry and running their lives into the ground. That's probably the whole point, but as someone who doesn't see the allure of Henry at all, it seemed like a lazy way to end things. I suffered through 500+ pages for that!
All that aside, there were some things I eked enjoyment out of. I think Tartt could set a mood well (albeit one saturated in drugs and alcohol); and I enjoyed the first 2/3 of part II. The absolute wildness of Bunny's family was entertaining to read -- again, it had a hint of that Dickens whimsy. The creeping dread of discovery and arrest that plagues the characters was delicious. Also, special shout-out to the scene where Richard and Francis try to communicate in Greek! As someone who takes a foreign language, I laughed so hard, because it's so true. Using cobbled-together textbook-speak to communicate is just a universal experience for people who learned languages through academia.
1) Overall: This book had a bit of The Great Gastby and Brideshead Revisited in it
2) The characters are all the same. Honestly, this book was a Henry/Bunny-fest, because they were the only characters which Tartt took the time to delve into. Charles, Francis, and Richard are all the same stock character, and Camilla's only distinguishing feature is that ✨she's a girl✨ and therefore fuckable. Henry soaked up any actually interesting characteristics that might have been given to other characters. If Tartt had given everyone distinct personalities, it would have been much more interesting to see how they interacted with each other to cause the plot points, rather than sticking them into a plot and forcing them to go along with it. My feeling is that she decided on the plot first and then shoved the characters in, rather than coming up with an event and seeing how it developed based on the characters' personalities.
3) Wtf was Julian for? I felt cheated in this respect, because Julian basically never appears. I was all for seeing how this man managed to single-handedly run a department where he decides who is let in, teaches students "all" their classes, and all for no salary? Plus in a remote, disused building? Sounds like a predator to me. But no, he barely makes an appearance, and is not the evil influence touted in the reviews. Lame.
4) Richard was less involved than me, the reader. Some other non-fans have lamented that Tartt could have gotten Richard more involved in the crime(s), rather than having him on the outside for the whole book. He has barely any skin in the game, and merely hears about all of these things after they happen. I think Tartt was going for the same structure that Gatsby has, with a shadowy narrator who becomes involved a world separate from their own -- but I don't think she lived up to it.
5)
6) Henry seemed much older than he was, with how he managed the murder, the fallout, and literally everything else. Maybe I'm just incompetent (which is entirely plausible) but I can't even make a doctor's appointment. Meanwhile he's travelling, renting hotel rooms and apartments, driving around, moving Camilla from place to place, and whatever else he manages to do. He seems like he's about 25 or 26, not 21. He is also, I should note, the only person with any agency in this book, in terms of getting things done. He is the sole mover of everything, besides maybe Bunny, and that makes things really boring. I also don't get why everyone is madly in love with him -- not only is he dangerous, but he's a little pathetic as well. I'm all for problematic book boyfriends, but him? Girlypops, is he really worth all your time?
7) The buildup to Bunny's murder was irritatingly slow. Get on with it, stop dropping inane little hints. I get some suspense, but it was hell to get through 200 pages, and all for so little payoff.
8)
9) The ending was SUCH A LET DOWN.
All that aside, there were some things I eked enjoyment out of. I think Tartt could set a mood well (albeit one saturated in drugs and alcohol); and I enjoyed the first 2/3 of part II. The absolute wildness of Bunny's family was entertaining to read -- again, it had a hint of that Dickens whimsy. The creeping dread of discovery and arrest that plagues the characters was delicious. Also, special shout-out to the scene where Richard and Francis try to communicate in Greek! As someone who takes a foreign language, I laughed so hard, because it's so true. Using cobbled-together textbook-speak to communicate is just a universal experience for people who learned languages through academia.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Drug abuse, Drug use, Suicide, Suicide attempt, Toxic friendship, Antisemitism, Blood, Death, Gun violence, Addiction, Alcohol, Alcoholism, Suicidal thoughts, and Murder
Moderate: Homophobia, Grief, Domestic abuse, Incest, Misogyny, Panic attacks/disorders, Racial slurs, Classism, Cursing, and Racism
dianam1206's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicide, Racial slurs, Animal cruelty, and Homophobia
selfdeprikate's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Domestic abuse, Injury/Injury detail, Murder, Homophobia, Toxic relationship, Addiction, Suicidal thoughts, Racism, Sexism, Gaslighting, Medical trauma, Violence, Incest, Infidelity, Self harm, Racial slurs, Alcoholism, Misogyny, Cursing, Death, Eating disorder, Panic attacks/disorders, Toxic friendship, Drug abuse, Gun violence, Suicide, Blood, Classism, Alcohol, Animal cruelty, Animal death, Drug use, Medical content, Mental illness, Car accident, and Suicide attempt
starryfruits's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
these bozos had to the be absolute fucking wierdos on campus due to juliens little social experimenting, i couldnt enjoy anything bc everyone made me too mad and i couldnt flow with what was happeneing bc richard was kept out of the loop in an exausting way
Despite the rating im giving it these characters haunt me and i have an infinite amount of questions and i like the book, just not reading it
Despite the rating im giving it these characters haunt me and i have an infinite amount of questions and i like the book, just not reading it
Content Warnings
Graphic: Alcohol, Suicide, and Drug use
Moderate: Racial slurs, Racism, Alcoholism, Drug abuse, Homophobia, and Murder
Minor: Sexual content, Emotional abuse, Religious bigotry, Incest, Physical abuse, and Suicide attempt
pmejia's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal death, Racial slurs, Incest, Drug use, Alcoholism, Death, Murder, and Suicide
Moderate: Panic attacks/disorders, Alcohol, Mental illness, Misogyny, Sexual content, Addiction, Racism, Blood, Car accident, Religious bigotry, Classism, Domestic abuse, and Infidelity
Minor: Rape and Suicide attempt
yzer2468's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Homophobia, Alcohol, Drug use, Blood, Addiction, Racial slurs, Racism, Violence, Xenophobia, Alcoholism, Death, Classism, Drug abuse, Antisemitism, Gaslighting, Grief, Incest, Toxic friendship, Suicide, and Suicide attempt
Moderate: Bullying, Gun violence, Misogyny, Injury/Injury detail, Suicide, Mental illness, Violence, and Suicide attempt
Minor: Sexual violence, Sexual assault, and Sexism
frog4earth's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
100% worth my time, and will be more than worth a re-read (likely also necessary tbh) sometime in the future. I liked the moral greyness of the characters, and the development of them questioning their own character, motivations, etc. throughout the book. The atmosphere and setting was amazing but I’m also just very granola so Hampden sounds heavenly to me 😅 I love Tartt’s writing style and I feel that she writes with a lot of symbolism and overlaying motifs — all of which I tried my best to tab throughout my reading of this novel! The plot was interesting, but I very much wished they delved deeper into the Bacchanal in the forest. I know the point is for it to be this mysterious, divine Dionysian experience that they remember little-to-nothing about (and keep Richard VERY in the dark about), but that was probably one of the most interesting points in the plot line for me. Why did they all agree to do it? What did they do to get to that point? What did it feel like? Etc.
I definitely see how the fluidity of sexuality within the characters relates back to Greek sexuality (or really, lack thereof; they bedded with whoever they wanted 🤷🏻♀️), I just wish it was explored a littleeee more!!! Also, Camilla and Charles’ sexual relationship unfortunately felt a bit forced/irrelevant to me. I feel as though their incestual relationship in the book was just written for unnervingness and shock value.
I do appreciate, however, the nod to the way some women function in a male-dominated world. The way Camilla dresses herself and composes herself to be more “boyish” seems to be an intentional choice to make herself not stand out in a group of pretentious ass men (Lmao).
I also wish the ending didn’t feel so rushed — I thoroughly enjoyed the slow tension build up in the middle of the plot and it felt a little underwhelming the way it ended so quickly!Overall, I enjoyed this book thoroughly, stayed up the night finishing it! I will absolutely have to give it a re-read at some point to see what I may have missed, so I look forward to that in the future :)
Content Warnings
Moderate: Homophobia, Racial slurs, Racism, Sexual assault, and Domestic abuse
Minor: Animal cruelty and Animal death
globgr's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder and Alcoholism
Moderate: Suicide, Homophobia, Incest, Drug use, and Racial slurs
Minor: Islamophobia
morganaj18's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
5.0
this book is completely batshit insane. listened to the audiobook so it was a lot of me pausing and covering my eyes. it's fun and i don't think you'd regret trying it out.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicide and Racial slurs