RVZB3RR13

it's hard to make my point without writing an entire essay about trauma responses but there's two main instances i'm referring to in the book, and one of them is a lot more obvious than the other. the first is theo's relationship with julie, the twenty-seven year old he meets when he's sixteen:

it's a quintessential depiction of this particular kind of abuse: a vulnerable almost-adult plied with substances and the exchange of sexual favors. it's also important to note that theo knows what statutory rape is because it comes up earlier in the novel:

we're given enough context to understand that theo understands that his relationship with julie is disturbing and wrong and that he is being victimized on some level. but he has been able to process it as something transactional, something illicit but otherwise insignificant to the broader challenges he's facing in adulthood. is that really the case? certainly not, but it's where theo is at emotionally during his recollection (i also have a theory that theo was subconsciously trying to re-create boris' first sexual experience but that's irrelevant here).

but with theo, analyzing what he DOESN'T talk about in detail is just as valuable as what he does talk about. he's an unreliable narrator, and in his narration he will gesture toward a giant sinkhole in his psyche and then neatly direct the reader around it (see also: btw boris and i have been having sex for two years). that's why this line hit me like a brick on my most recent re-read:

so theo was raped in the school locker room. for me, this re-contextualizes everything about his sexuality. he doesn't elaborate on it because he can't. he neither name nor process it. this sinkhole will remain a sinkhole.

he was quite literally attacked by other boys with a crude representation for gay sex, which:

affected Theo personally, even if it was just a stick of deodorant it would've been an incredibly traumatic experience to go through, and you can't say it didn't impact him or wasn't a big deal because he remembered it over 10 years later and mentioned it.

from a more literary point of view, also serves as a form of symbolism for Theo's fear and internalized homophobia

and you can see how this plays out in the rest of the novel, from the running on the street scene (where, may i add, he was again faced with attempted SA) you can SEE very tangibly that Theo views gay people as predators. which yes, this is a common stereotype (sadly), but Theo himself isn't too much of a person who just believes what anyone says and molds his personal beliefs on fitting in, especially in his childhood. he thinks this BECAUSE of his personal experiences, which causes him to be terrified of HIMSELF. because to him, accepting that he's gay isn't just about being a man who likes men. to him, because of his trauma and how it's shaped his understanding of queer people, it means he is a predator. even though he is not, so of course he is scared of the reality that he's gay and of course he refuses to accept it or share it, though it is a part of his identity that he cannot repress

also, one thing i like to think about is the particular context of the shower SA. for some reason, it seems canon compliant to me, given themes in The Goldfinch and other kids' treatment surrounding Theo Decker, that they would've said things around the lines of “he’s gay, he’ll probably like it!” or other disgusting things because they automatically labeled him as gay for not fitting in, for dressing differently, etc. and this would just further make it even more of a horrific memory for Theo, though he wouldn’t mention it because of the risk of being perceived in such a way. One way or another I’m DEFINITELY going to find a way to bring up his trauma and this situation in general, and make a fic abt it or include it in a more general fic.

as for the Julie thing, I was so thoroughly disgusted my first time reading this part of the book because it just. caught me so off guard. And I felt bad for poor Theo who’s life was already such a hell already

I was kind of shocked at how little all Theo’s sexual trauma was addressed in the book, though obviously it can all be chalked up to the fact that

Plot relevance - abundant numbers of small things that didn’t have to do with Audrey’s death or the painting were mentioned to flesh out the characters and the story, but didn’t come up again for lack of pertinence to the overall plot of The Goldfinch

Theo, as every TGF fan knows, is an INCREDIBLY unreliable narrator who both purposefully (usually for personal reasons of thoughts he avoids) and unintentionally (such as when he’s blackout drunk) omits details from his narrative, even ones as essential to the story as showing Boris the painting. Knowing this, it’s very safe to assume that since the topics of SA are sensitive, Theo pushes them to the back of his mind to force himself to not deal with him. Additionally, I even think it wouldn’t be far out there to believe that Theo himself feels GUILTY when he focuses on his traumas besides that of the museum and his mother’s death, as if he’s prioritizing himself and his struggles over her and his greatest struggle, and feels a need to always have his mom on the forefront of his mind to prove his love for her to himself, to make sure she’s not forgotten. He’d see thinking about his own SA enough to reflect on it deeply as selfish

He probably dismisses his SA as “not real rape”, because in the showers, could be dismissed as a “joke” (even though it is both bullying and sexual abuse combined), and because it happened when he was so young. Theo doesn’t talk too much about the bullying he and Andy faced in school over the general course of the book, though of course it had a lasting impact on Theo as a person, so it makes perfect sense that he would do the same when it came to this event. As for when returning to New York, he doesn’t think of it as “real rape” because nothing happened, even if he was being chased by predators, so of course he can’t let himself think of it as true abuse and a valid cause of trauma. Lastly, for the Julie part, he doesn’t see it as “real rape” because it was “consensual” (though obviously an adult and a minor with a 12-year age gap having sex is NEVER consensual). He thinks, it’s not SA because he didn’t fight it, because he gave in.

While I’m going on a tangent, one thing that strikes me in Theo’s complicated narrative that I’m always seeking to understand better is how Theo paints every single character in the book (including himself) who is canonically queer, implied to be queer, or associated with homosexuality in any way in a very bad light, except for one, which is strange because this character is actually the one who's sexuality and queerness, whether directly addressed or vaguely shown, is most prevalent and reoccurring in the text. You guessed it, Boris.

Theo obviously sees his abusers as predators/abusers because THEY WERE, and this mentality extends in his perception of queer people his entire life. Whether it's other guys flirting with him, which is a nightmarish occurence to Theo (that honestly the way Theo described it psychologically reminded me of Pennywise getting into Richie's head with "i know your dirty little secret", but we won't get into that today), or even Hobie, a caretaker and father figure to Theo of many years and maybe The Goldfinch's most morally good character, who Theo becomes uncomfortable with and even avoids at Boris' suggestion of Hobie being gay, Theo is SCARED of gay people and does not want to be involved with or associated with them. So it's honestly CRAZY to me that Theo doesn't ever paint Boris in this light. Yes, it would be completely incorrect for him to do so since Boris never sexually abused Theo and took care of him, loved him, cared for him, and was a great source of comfort and happiness to Theo, but that wouldn't seem to stop Theo, as from what we've seen with Hobie. And this is Boris, the guy who KISSED THEO ON THE LIPS, their bond always transcended friendship and went into something along the lines of romance both as teenagers and adults (fight me on this), oh yeah and THEY HAD SEX MORE THAN ONCE. So it's so narratively interesting that Boris instance of Theo not associating queerness with bad. But this isn't a Boreo post, so i won't go into any more depth as to why because honestly the only explanation i have is that they were in love.

ANYWAYS. i LOVE all the analyses of Theo Decker because he is an endlessly interesting character to psychoanalyze, obsess over, and try to dissect everything about who he is and why and how he tells his story. But it strongly irks me that his sexual trauma is addressed so little by the fandom. It's especially disappointing because a large amount of the Goldfinch community that I interact with is multi-fandom and shares fandoms with me, particularly Stranger Things. So it's kind of annoying to me that the same people who've reblogged a million posts about Will's sexual trauma (which I'm not overlooking, by the way, it is also a crucial part of understanding his character) haven't even had a second thought about Theo's trauma and what that means for his character other than aww. poor guy.

Hot take (that shouldn't be), but it is impossible to fully understand Theo Decker's character or even COME CLOSE to that without doing a deep-dive into his sexual trauma.

Because yes, though the traits the fandom focuses on the most (internalized homophobia, repression, and projection) are crucial parts of Theo's character that he wouldn't be Theo without, the main origin for these, at least in my opinion, or at least a large part of the origin for these and what keeps them alive for so long, what prevents him from just accepting the fact that he's a gay man and in love with Boris, that also prevents them from properly communicating about their relationship even as adults, is Theo's sexual trauma and its effects on his understanding of his own sexuality and person.

Is this a new byler variant??