In Donna Tartt’s novel The Secret History, Richard Papen’s idealized view of the Greek Classics group keeps him isolated from the rest of his school and entirely dependent on himself, and blinds him to the true gravity of the violence the group commits, ultimately illustrating viewing the world through rose-tinted glasses may make life more interesting, but the consequences of a person’s actions will always come back for them.

First, Richard’s idealization isolates him from the rest of his school  and the behaviors of the other students. Richard portrays and views Hampden College as a beautiful place full of studying and deep thought, but, through characters like Judy Poovey, it becomes clear that the Classics group is actually the outlier on campus. The majority of students party and are little concerned with aesthetics, leaving Richard and his fellow classmates in the minority. Because Richard wants to fit in with the group he idealizes, he foregoes partying and socializing with other people on campus.. Consequently, his status as an outsider is cemented, and he has no other friends besides the 5 other students in the Classics group. This ultimately leaves Richard with no one else to turn to once the group splits up. Therefore, Richard’s idealism isolates him from the majority and leaves him with nobody when things go wrong, showing that idealism heightens consequence, even when it may feel cool to be niche. Further, as Richard idealizes the groups individuality and self-sufficiency, he falls into dangerous situations by trying to project this same image. For example, Richard refuses any help from his friends during their winter break. This leads him to nearly dying of hypothermia from living in a poorly-insulated warehouse with no heating. Because Richard envies and idealizes the other Classics students, he feels that, in order to fit in, he must play up his social and financial status and appear to have more money than he actually does. Consequently, he accepts none of the assistance they offer in order to keep up the illusion of wealth that he’s created, for fear that they’d shun him if they found out he wasn’t as well-off as they thought. Therefore, Richard’s idealization of the group and their wealth keeps him from revealing his own poverty, leaving him in an incredibly dangerous situation with no immediate way out.

However,the consequences of Richard’s idealization do not stop at isolation, but go further into excuse of and participation in one of the most unforgivable human acts of violence: murder.  Richard’s idealization leaves him open to manipulation and susceptible to the group’s calculated portrayals of murder. For example, Henry frames the story of the farmer’s murder in such a way where Richard is naturally inclined to be more fascinated than appalled. He tells Richard all of the joyous and interesting details he remembers from the bacchanal first, follows it with the strange discovery of the dead farmer, and concludes with the calm and collected way in which the group handled the aftermath. Because Richard already romanticized the Classics group, he was predisposed to Henry’s influence over how he wanted Richard to see the events. Consequently, the mystery and intrigue of that night is what remains at the forefront of Richard’s mind, rather than the fact that they killed someone. Therefore, Richard’s idealization of the group makes it easier for him to excuse what they did, and removes him from the specific act by a larger degree. Additionally, Richard becomes an active participant in murder because of his idealization. For example, when Henry proposes murdering Bunny to him, Richard is not very shocked, and ultimately believes that it’s the only option they have if they want to avoid anyone else finding out about the murder of the farmer. Richard only feels bad about what they’d done long after it was finished. Because Richard wanted to continue living in the fantasy he’d created of the Classics group as perfect, infallible beings, he believed that nothing they would do was wrong and that murder was the only option left. Consequently, he becomes an active participant in murder all for the sake of keeping his beloved classmates out of legal trouble for the farmer’s murder. Therefore, idealization keeps Richard from seeing the flaws with the group and from the gravity of such an act, for fear of losing them or the view he’s created of them.

Overall, Richard’s idealization of the Classics group puts him in dangerous situations, leaving him to deal with the consequences of isolation and murder long after the fun and enjoyment of being part of the group has passed. Richard becomes isolated from everyone else on campus because he’s hyper-focused on being part of a niche group that projects a strong image of wealth, class, and intelligence. He’s drawn in by the group’s aesthetics, and wants so badly to imitate them that he nearly dies. He views his classmates as infallible, which makes him susceptible to their manipulation and makes him believe that murder is the best option in a situation most people would view as abnormal. Although Richard loves being a part of the Classics group, and enjoys the time spent reveling in their collective intelligence, he’s ultimately left to live alone with the knowledge of an awful act he helped commit haunting him forever, showing that idealism has irreversible negative consequences.

In Donna Tartt’s novel The Goldfinch, the painting Theo Decker receives, Fabritius’ The Goldfinch, acts as both a blessing, giving him connection to his mother and value as a one-of-a-kind painting belonging only to him, and a curse, making him responsible for crime and gluing him to his past, ultimately illustrating high-value products often come to represent both a person’s joyous and sorrowful memories.

Theo’s retaining of the painting helps him stay connected to his deceased mother, demonstrating the deeper value of objects. For example, The Goldfinch painting is the last painting Theo views with his mother while at the museum before the accident that killed her occurs. As he escapes the rubble from the museum bombing, he takes the painting with him. Because the painting was the last he ever saw with his mother, as well as being a favorite of hers, he comes to associate it with the time he spent with her, causing him to hold on to it throughout his life. Consequently, the painting acts as a symbol of love and joy that, when out of sight, causes Theo to feel lost and hopeless, reflecting his true feelings towards losing his mother at such a young age. Therefore, the association developed between the painting and Theo’s mother helps demonstrate how gifts can act as symbols for joyous experiences, with the tradeoff that they may leave the person feeling lost when the gift is no longer theirs to hold. Additionally, the painting’s position as a one-of-a-kind object represents feelings of novelty and control. For example, Theo, after escaping with the painting, keeps it hidden, partly due to the fact that having such a precious painting is illegal, but also because he feels that the little bird depicted was created especially for him, and therefore shouldn’t be shared. Because the painting’s image resonates with Theo so deeply, seeing it helps him remain calm and in control of whatever wild situation he finds himself in. Consequently, the painting reflects Theo’s desire for autonomy; the bird in the painting is chained, but, by owning this painting and, by extension, the bird, Theo can control his own destiny. Therefore, the novelty and uniqueness of the painting helps Theo feel like he’s in control throughout his childhood and adult life, showing how valuable objects can come to symbolize much more than they do on the surface.

While factors such as association and novelty give the painting a connection to blessings, various other factors, such as illegality and connection to the past, depict the painting as a representation of sorrow and guilt. Theo’s possession of the painting unintentionally leads him into the world of crime, representing how gifts can be a curse. For example, after Theo learns that his childhood friend, Boris, stole the painting when they were kids and has since lost it due to irresponsible pawning, Theo becomes involved in a complex and highly illegal plan to get the painting back. The two fly to Amsterdam, get the painting back through threats, but later get it stolen again, with Theo shooting and killing one of the men who assisted in the theft. Because the painting had come to represent so much to Theo, he becomes willing to do nearly anything to get it back, even killing for the prospect of having back a painting that he wasn’t supposed to have in the first place. Consequently, it’s shown that the painting is truly acting as a key into a world of crime and illegality, represented by the ferociousness of others in their attempts at owning it. Theo finds himself akin to common thugs, even after believing that what he had been doing was right. Therefore, Theo’s loss of the painting and subsequent criminal activity suggests that gifts are often curses, leading people to do things they never thought they’d do in order to retain them, and finding themselves identical to the common criminals who would do the same. Additionally, the painting acts as a dangerous tie to Theo’s rocky past, leading him to addiction. For example, in his adulthood, Theo continues to use drugs and alcohol as a means of comforting himself, just like he did as a teenager in Nevada with Boris. He finds himself unable to let go of the addiction, just as he’s unable to let go of the painting. Because of this obsession with the painting as a means to unlock the past and be with his mother, Theo is unable to let go of past habits, since seeing and owning the painting means that he’ll forever be the little boy unable to properly mourn his mother’s death. Consequently, the painting acts as a symbol of obsession and addiction, turning into a burden that Theo cannot find in himself to let go of. Therefore, the painting’s inherent connection to past behaviors leads to the continuation of such behaviors, illustrating how objects can easily become tied to sorrowful memories, dredging up desire to repeat behaviors and routines of the past to hold on to a different, more joyous, time.

Overall, The Goldfinch painting acts as both a blessing and a curse in Theo Decker’s life through its unique position in his life, connecting him to his mother and forging a deep personal feeling of responsibility, as well as connecting him to crime, equating him to criminals, and keeping him in the routines of a sorrowful past. The painting’s connection to Theo’s mom allows him to stay with her memory, offering him a chance at security and remembrance of joyous experiences with her long after she’s gone, but causing feelings of hopelessness when that painting is out of his reach. Theo’s sense of responsibility for the painting gives him greater self-control due to his relation to the symbolism within the painting itself, and the symbolism that he’s subconsciously connected to the painting. However, it also leads him into a world of crime, as he feels he’s more responsible for the painting then anyone else, when there’s actually no reason why he should have held on to it in the first place. It’s connection to the past also acts as a threat to Theo’s well-being, as its association with teenage mistakes keeps Theo in the same cycle of drug abuse and sorrow that he found himself in when he was younger. Objects are powerful, and memories can become attached to them very easily. If a joyful memory becomes attached to an object, then the person in possession of it can use it as a means of comfort, control, and self-confidence. But, if a more complex or sorrowful emotion is connected, then keeping hold of that object can leave a person stuck in a cycle of regretful decisions and unable to grow past the moment that gave them such pain in the first place.