What do you think?
Rate this book
Time Quintet #1
A Wrinkle in Time
It was a dark and stormy night; Meg Murry, her small brother Charles Wallace, and her mother had come down to the kitchen for a midnight snack when they were upset by the arrival of a most disturbing stranger.
"Wild nights are my glory," the unearthly stranger told them. "I just got caught in a downdraft and blown off course. Let me sit down for a moment, and then I'll be on my way. Speaking of ways, by the way, there is such a thing as a tesseract."
A tesseract (in case the reader doesn't know) is a wrinkle in time. To tell more would rob the reader of the enjoyment of Miss L'Engle's unusual book. A Wrinkle in Time, winner of the Newbery Medal in 1963, is the story of the adventures in space and time of Meg, Charles Wallace, and Calvin O'Keefe (athlete, student, and one of the most popular boys in high school). They are in search of Meg's father, a scientist who disappeared while engaged in secret work for the government on the tesseract problem.
255 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1962
23869 people are currently reading
683988 people want to read
About the author
Madeleine L'Engle
169 books9,182 followersMadeleine L'Engle was an American writer of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, and young adult fiction, including A Wrinkle in Time and its sequels: A Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters, and An Acceptable Time. Her works reflect both her Christian faith and her strong interest in modern science.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43,050 reviews
August 9, 2012
First, understand that I am editing this review after several outraged responses. I knew that "Wrinkle" was considered to be a classic, but I was unaware that it was considered a Beloved Classic Beyond Criticism. I read this in grade school and just REread it aloud, to my daughter. I didn't have a clear memory of it, though I remember that I loved the way it started. Now I realize why I forgot so much of it. I STILL love the first 3 chapters, and dislike the rest. But since some of you found (and WILL find, I'm sure) my review to be judgmental, harsh and undiplomatic (a review IS a critique, right?) to the point of insulting, I thought I'd do a little research, look over the book again, think about it some more. So I've edited this review. But I find I just can't retract my statements. They are my opinion, that's all, and I haven't changed my mind. I can only try to be open minded, be honest, and try to explain my thoughts & feelings more clearly. Otherwise, I'd be a simpering fake.
Like C.S. Lewis books (especially the last of his Chronicles of Narnia, The Last Battle), A Wrinkle In Time has strong, (heavy-handed, I think), overtones of Christian doctrine. I'm not anti-spiritual, but I have a personal discomfort with this kind of religious doctrine. (You many not, and that's fine.) But more than that issue, the book is an odd combination of intelligent hard science, interesting quantum science that is brushed over, and quotes from the bible. At least there are a few respectful mentions of other spiritual leaders from other cultures, and moral messages from classic literature and philosophers. I understand this combination garnered criticism from both religious fundamentalists as well as atheists and secular society. L'Engle has earned my respect for taking on the difficult and controversial marriage of science and religion. She has also earned my criticism for raising this issue and then failing to really grapple with it. It's treated lightly, as though it's a natural thing that should be easy to accept, in spite of the many holes and inconsistencies in her story. I wouldn't even mind, except that this book takes itself SO seriously! It's easy to imagine that a school teacher might use this book to demonstrate that Evolutionist Theory and Creationism can be combined, but I find science and religion to have a disjointed and uneasy coexistence in this book. One is always dropped abruptly for the other. Or at least, it seems so to me.
Ok. Now that I have tackled that big one, let's move on. I found the characters rather flat, (the genius child, the misfit girl, the beautiful, genius, scientist mother who nonetheless stays home and cooks stew in bunsen burners while her husband has adventures). The story itself is made up of vague scenarios of conflict of the psyche and spirit, with the entire Universe at stake. L'Engle's metaphors are obvious and their manifestations flat. [SPOILER ALERT] There is a quest to fight a "Darkness" (oooh!) that wants to rid us all of individuality & free will. There are 3 beings who used to be stars before they died in the fight with the "Darkness" and became something beyond our comprehension. They can appear in any form to us, so that we have some way of processing their existence. They are, in fact, so beyond anything knowable that I can't feel much for them or say much about them, except that they make a convenient plot device for transporting the characters throughout the Universe and the story. Anyway, the "Darkness" takes over a planet which turns into a kind of sci-fi beehive, with brainwashed automatons. I found the planet to be delightfully creepy and would have liked to know more about it, (even if it seems suspiciously like a thinly veiled anti-communist warning message.) So guess what's doing the brainwashing? - a giant, evil, disembodied brain, called IT, who is personally responsible for spreading the Darkness across the Universe. Really? A brain? Doesn't anyone else find this simplistic and cliche? The main character defeats this brain by gushing love. I am quite sure that many, many readers were moved to tears by Meg's gushing, but I do not happen to be that kind of person. Before Meg realizes that she has the power to gush love, the crusaders tesser through time and space (no explanation of how the father can do this) to a fascinating planet with very interesting aliens who can't see, but have other senses. I'd have loved to know more about their society and these mysterious other senses, but again, these ideas aren't very developed.
These are the things in this book, and in L'Engle's writing that I love: As I mentioned, I love her courage in at least attempting a controversial issue like mixing science and spirituality. I love that this book has the heart to recognize love as the greatest power, and that it has the wisdom to recognize fear as one of the biggest weapons. I love that individuality prevails, and the romantic in me approves of the loving, whole family. I love that she has enough respect for children that she included difficult vocabulary and a few difficult concepts. Many children are far more capable of handling complex ideas than we give them credit for, especially if we expose them to these things early on. I love that L'Engle doesn't underestimate them in this way, at least initially, on the surface. Since my biggest problems with this book all involve my finding it simplistic, naive, and certain parts of it cliche & obvious, I wonder if I need to remind myself that it's meant for children. Perhaps children should be idealistic, or even naive, in the way that this book is. But then I wonder if that is another way of underestimating them. ESPECIALLY since I felt exactly the same way when I read this book as a child!
Wind In The Willows makes me feel closer to God, or a creative power (though there's some gushing in there too, at the end.) The Jungle Book explores social constructs and morals, more deeply and naturally, for me. A Sound Of Thunder blew my mind, in grade school, with its "butterfly effect" theory of the power and responsibility of each individual. All of these are childrens' books, though they span generations, and time and space, more gracefully than tessering did for me. I could name so many more.
But, if A Wrinkle In Time opened your mind to new ideas, (instead of making you feel frustrated by light treatment of them), made you question some latent prejudice, (instead of feeling bored by obvious metaphors), lifted your spirits & made you cheer for bookish outcasts, (instead of feeling that no one is that one-dimensional) or cry for the love of a big sister & little brother, (instead of cringing when a version of "I love you Charles Wallace" appears 19 times in 2 pages), then it is a wonderful book. For you.
Like C.S. Lewis books (especially the last of his Chronicles of Narnia, The Last Battle), A Wrinkle In Time has strong, (heavy-handed, I think), overtones of Christian doctrine. I'm not anti-spiritual, but I have a personal discomfort with this kind of religious doctrine. (You many not, and that's fine.) But more than that issue, the book is an odd combination of intelligent hard science, interesting quantum science that is brushed over, and quotes from the bible. At least there are a few respectful mentions of other spiritual leaders from other cultures, and moral messages from classic literature and philosophers. I understand this combination garnered criticism from both religious fundamentalists as well as atheists and secular society. L'Engle has earned my respect for taking on the difficult and controversial marriage of science and religion. She has also earned my criticism for raising this issue and then failing to really grapple with it. It's treated lightly, as though it's a natural thing that should be easy to accept, in spite of the many holes and inconsistencies in her story. I wouldn't even mind, except that this book takes itself SO seriously! It's easy to imagine that a school teacher might use this book to demonstrate that Evolutionist Theory and Creationism can be combined, but I find science and religion to have a disjointed and uneasy coexistence in this book. One is always dropped abruptly for the other. Or at least, it seems so to me.
Ok. Now that I have tackled that big one, let's move on. I found the characters rather flat, (the genius child, the misfit girl, the beautiful, genius, scientist mother who nonetheless stays home and cooks stew in bunsen burners while her husband has adventures). The story itself is made up of vague scenarios of conflict of the psyche and spirit, with the entire Universe at stake. L'Engle's metaphors are obvious and their manifestations flat. [SPOILER ALERT] There is a quest to fight a "Darkness" (oooh!) that wants to rid us all of individuality & free will. There are 3 beings who used to be stars before they died in the fight with the "Darkness" and became something beyond our comprehension. They can appear in any form to us, so that we have some way of processing their existence. They are, in fact, so beyond anything knowable that I can't feel much for them or say much about them, except that they make a convenient plot device for transporting the characters throughout the Universe and the story. Anyway, the "Darkness" takes over a planet which turns into a kind of sci-fi beehive, with brainwashed automatons. I found the planet to be delightfully creepy and would have liked to know more about it, (even if it seems suspiciously like a thinly veiled anti-communist warning message.) So guess what's doing the brainwashing? - a giant, evil, disembodied brain, called IT, who is personally responsible for spreading the Darkness across the Universe. Really? A brain? Doesn't anyone else find this simplistic and cliche? The main character defeats this brain by gushing love. I am quite sure that many, many readers were moved to tears by Meg's gushing, but I do not happen to be that kind of person. Before Meg realizes that she has the power to gush love, the crusaders tesser through time and space (no explanation of how the father can do this) to a fascinating planet with very interesting aliens who can't see, but have other senses. I'd have loved to know more about their society and these mysterious other senses, but again, these ideas aren't very developed.
These are the things in this book, and in L'Engle's writing that I love: As I mentioned, I love her courage in at least attempting a controversial issue like mixing science and spirituality. I love that this book has the heart to recognize love as the greatest power, and that it has the wisdom to recognize fear as one of the biggest weapons. I love that individuality prevails, and the romantic in me approves of the loving, whole family. I love that she has enough respect for children that she included difficult vocabulary and a few difficult concepts. Many children are far more capable of handling complex ideas than we give them credit for, especially if we expose them to these things early on. I love that L'Engle doesn't underestimate them in this way, at least initially, on the surface. Since my biggest problems with this book all involve my finding it simplistic, naive, and certain parts of it cliche & obvious, I wonder if I need to remind myself that it's meant for children. Perhaps children should be idealistic, or even naive, in the way that this book is. But then I wonder if that is another way of underestimating them. ESPECIALLY since I felt exactly the same way when I read this book as a child!
Wind In The Willows makes me feel closer to God, or a creative power (though there's some gushing in there too, at the end.) The Jungle Book explores social constructs and morals, more deeply and naturally, for me. A Sound Of Thunder blew my mind, in grade school, with its "butterfly effect" theory of the power and responsibility of each individual. All of these are childrens' books, though they span generations, and time and space, more gracefully than tessering did for me. I could name so many more.
But, if A Wrinkle In Time opened your mind to new ideas, (instead of making you feel frustrated by light treatment of them), made you question some latent prejudice, (instead of feeling bored by obvious metaphors), lifted your spirits & made you cheer for bookish outcasts, (instead of feeling that no one is that one-dimensional) or cry for the love of a big sister & little brother, (instead of cringing when a version of "I love you Charles Wallace" appears 19 times in 2 pages), then it is a wonderful book. For you.
December 4, 2013
So 41 of my goodreads friends have read A Wrinkle in Time, but I never picked up the book until these past few weeks. I’m not sure how this novel and I slipped past each other in my youth. I’m guessing that since the main character was a girl I wasn’t that interested in middle school and when I grew older the science fiction elements didn’t appear strong enough to snag my interest. Oh well. Last weekend I bought A Wrinkle in Time at a Borders near the Seattle airport. I wanted the novel to get me through the grueling twelve hour journey (whoo, flight delays and pre-dawn connecting flights!) home, and I thank Ms. L’Engle for the perfect story for early hour near-hallucinatory reading in the middle of the Minneapolis International promenade.
What makes this book so good? First off, A Wrinkle in Time works under the assumption that kids are smart enough either to grasp the nuances of some fairly deep physics or, if they don’t get every detail, they’ll flow with the storyline anyway. One woman I know said, “I didn’t understand all the science when I was a kid but I still loved it.” That makes sense to me. Hell, I didn’t understand all the science now, and I’m (supposedly) a grown-up. L’Engle doesn’t just say, “And then they traveled time.” She tries to explain how time travel might work. I wonder if so many kids, especially girls, liked this novel because they felt L’Engle respected them as intelligent readers.
Second, A Wrinkle in Time frames Meg’s personality as multi-faceted and more complex than just about any I’ve encountered in YA literature. In fact, reading this novel I couldn’t help but consider her a template on which some more modern coming-of-age characters (think Harry Potter) were modeled. She’s brave but doubts her own strength in an tangible, authentic manner. And her relationship with Calvin is sweet without getting all High School Musical.
Third, the evil in this novel is damn scary and the darkness pure and substantial. We’re talking elemental, unadulterated evil that manifests itself in the fear and conformity of those who break down in its presence. And the characters’ encounters with this evil feel real. The climatic scenes are perhaps slightly too swift but the nuances of the battle fit well with a remarkably philosophical (and Christian, but in a positive way) resolution of good and evil’s conflict.
If my friends’ reviews are any indication a lot of smart girls who turned into strong, intelligent women grew up under the spell of A Wrinkle in Time. I feel like I know them a little better after reading this novel, and I can see them all, around age ten, turning the book’s pages in their rooms, feeling their own strength and potential. And that’s damn cool, really, don’t you think, a whole generation of girls reading A Wrinkle in Time? Maybe little girls across America are googling “tesseract” as we speak…
What makes this book so good? First off, A Wrinkle in Time works under the assumption that kids are smart enough either to grasp the nuances of some fairly deep physics or, if they don’t get every detail, they’ll flow with the storyline anyway. One woman I know said, “I didn’t understand all the science when I was a kid but I still loved it.” That makes sense to me. Hell, I didn’t understand all the science now, and I’m (supposedly) a grown-up. L’Engle doesn’t just say, “And then they traveled time.” She tries to explain how time travel might work. I wonder if so many kids, especially girls, liked this novel because they felt L’Engle respected them as intelligent readers.
Second, A Wrinkle in Time frames Meg’s personality as multi-faceted and more complex than just about any I’ve encountered in YA literature. In fact, reading this novel I couldn’t help but consider her a template on which some more modern coming-of-age characters (think Harry Potter) were modeled. She’s brave but doubts her own strength in an tangible, authentic manner. And her relationship with Calvin is sweet without getting all High School Musical.
Third, the evil in this novel is damn scary and the darkness pure and substantial. We’re talking elemental, unadulterated evil that manifests itself in the fear and conformity of those who break down in its presence. And the characters’ encounters with this evil feel real. The climatic scenes are perhaps slightly too swift but the nuances of the battle fit well with a remarkably philosophical (and Christian, but in a positive way) resolution of good and evil’s conflict.
If my friends’ reviews are any indication a lot of smart girls who turned into strong, intelligent women grew up under the spell of A Wrinkle in Time. I feel like I know them a little better after reading this novel, and I can see them all, around age ten, turning the book’s pages in their rooms, feeling their own strength and potential. And that’s damn cool, really, don’t you think, a whole generation of girls reading A Wrinkle in Time? Maybe little girls across America are googling “tesseract” as we speak…
November 9, 2020
the book that first inspired me to tentatively pick up my pencil and my marbled black-and-white composition notebook (remember those?) and write (in 4th grade). the influence l'engle herself and her work have had on my life cannot be overstated. i met her many many years later, during college, when she was well into her 80s, but she was exactly as i pictured her-- spirited, engaging, challenging. when i (very nervously and shyly) told her that she gave me my first inspiration to write, she looked me in the eyes and, with a genuineness in her tone i can't describe, thanked me. i gave her my book to be autographed. she signed in it an handed it back to me. as i walked away, i read her inscription, which said, with love and a flourish, "ananda!" i admit it-- i had to look it up to find out what it meant and when i did, my respect for her grew even deeper (i won't get into the entire background of the word/name here, you can google it yourself). "ananda" means bliss or joy. it was so perfect, i nearly cried.
an amazing book and an amazing woman.
an amazing book and an amazing woman.
January 21, 2011
The story takes about 100 pages of tedious, banal dialogue, to get to the point where you are told that this is a battle against Evil, and all you need is love. But everything is so oversimplified, so sketchy--everything is reduced to big words, like IT, and evil. This IT, also called the Dark Thing, is striving to create a communist-type society where everyone conforms, down to the little children who bounce their balls in uniform rhythms and who live in cutter-box houses.
I liked Meg in the beginning, she was a believable character, filled with her own problems, and I really wanted for things to work out for her. But when she went on her journey, and especially since she got to that dreadful communist planet, she got hysterical. She did not “say” anything for half of the book--she yelled, gasped, screamed, cried, etc. She got ticked off at everyone for everything.
Then there might have been an indication that Charles Wallace was going to be a player, but he fizzled. There are constant references to him being special, but we never find out what was so special about him, besides putting a 30 year old into a 4 year old body and calling it “genius”. There was all this build-up for the confrontation between him and IT, but nothing happened. He looked at the guy, let him in, and became filled with ideas from Lenin himself.
Then there are worlds. These characters traveled to a planet that was described in three lines with beautiful flowers and a tall mountain. Then another planet is not described at all except to say that it was a winter wonderland type of a place. The residence of the Happy Medium was another planet where they were conveniently in a cave, and final stop was in a planet that was probably like Earth, except all we know about it is that it had rows of houses and tall buildings. There you have it--traveled all through the known Universe and have nothing to show for it. No imagination to describe and develop a world.
Then there are bizarre references to god/s that come out of nowhere, or in the oddest places, and disappear into nowhere. Characters are underdeveloped; scenes are not finished; worlds are left to themselves; theme is the fear of religious right of the communist left.
It's a caricature of evil, done perhaps in the belief that kids won't get it otherwise. There's not much in terms of a plot, the worlds described are paper-thin, and it shows no historical understanding, no outside knowledge.
More of Purplycookie’s Reviews @: http://www.goodreads.com/purplycookie
Book Details:
Title A Wrinkle in Time (Time #1)
Author Madeleine L'Engle
Reviewed By Purplycookie
I liked Meg in the beginning, she was a believable character, filled with her own problems, and I really wanted for things to work out for her. But when she went on her journey, and especially since she got to that dreadful communist planet, she got hysterical. She did not “say” anything for half of the book--she yelled, gasped, screamed, cried, etc. She got ticked off at everyone for everything.
Then there might have been an indication that Charles Wallace was going to be a player, but he fizzled. There are constant references to him being special, but we never find out what was so special about him, besides putting a 30 year old into a 4 year old body and calling it “genius”. There was all this build-up for the confrontation between him and IT, but nothing happened. He looked at the guy, let him in, and became filled with ideas from Lenin himself.
Then there are worlds. These characters traveled to a planet that was described in three lines with beautiful flowers and a tall mountain. Then another planet is not described at all except to say that it was a winter wonderland type of a place. The residence of the Happy Medium was another planet where they were conveniently in a cave, and final stop was in a planet that was probably like Earth, except all we know about it is that it had rows of houses and tall buildings. There you have it--traveled all through the known Universe and have nothing to show for it. No imagination to describe and develop a world.
Then there are bizarre references to god/s that come out of nowhere, or in the oddest places, and disappear into nowhere. Characters are underdeveloped; scenes are not finished; worlds are left to themselves; theme is the fear of religious right of the communist left.
It's a caricature of evil, done perhaps in the belief that kids won't get it otherwise. There's not much in terms of a plot, the worlds described are paper-thin, and it shows no historical understanding, no outside knowledge.
More of Purplycookie’s Reviews @: http://www.goodreads.com/purplycookie
Book Details:
Title A Wrinkle in Time (Time #1)
Author Madeleine L'Engle
Reviewed By Purplycookie
December 5, 2024
Anybody else read it with this cover?
I did. 1986, I was in 6th grade, and it was assigned to us by our teacher.
This book changed my world. Or at least, my reading world.
Welcome to sci-fi, kid!
I have no idea how many times I've read this story, but as a child, I read it so much that this awesome cover eventually fell off. Just so many great memories of these characters make it is easily my favorite childhood novel.
After doing a re-read of it this year, I have to say it holds up pretty well for a book that was written in 1962. One of the things that help it age so decently is that L'Engle didn't have much in it that could age it. No brand names, no popular trends, no references to any politics of the day. The only stuff that really let you know you were reading a book written in the '60s was Calvin saying things like Golly! unironically or Charles Wallace being disrespectful by calling his father Pops.
It's a very simple story that I read in just under 2 hours, but I remember it being complex enough when I was younger. I think it hits all the right points for a kid who feels out of place and weird, and didn't we all feel out of place and weird at that age?
Yes. Yes, we did.
The only thing I was less excited about this time around were all the religious references, but the book is what it is, and you just kind of have to accept that God is a big theme in this and move on if you want to enjoy it. It's not too preachy, so there's that.
Will kids today like it? I'm trying to get mine to read it now, so ask me again in 6 months.
But I'd been putting off re-reading this thing for 20 plus years and was pleasantly surprised that it was still such a charming story.
Highly Recommended...for nostalgia.
I did. 1986, I was in 6th grade, and it was assigned to us by our teacher.
This book changed my world. Or at least, my reading world.
Welcome to sci-fi, kid!
I have no idea how many times I've read this story, but as a child, I read it so much that this awesome cover eventually fell off. Just so many great memories of these characters make it is easily my favorite childhood novel.
After doing a re-read of it this year, I have to say it holds up pretty well for a book that was written in 1962. One of the things that help it age so decently is that L'Engle didn't have much in it that could age it. No brand names, no popular trends, no references to any politics of the day. The only stuff that really let you know you were reading a book written in the '60s was Calvin saying things like Golly! unironically or Charles Wallace being disrespectful by calling his father Pops.
It's a very simple story that I read in just under 2 hours, but I remember it being complex enough when I was younger. I think it hits all the right points for a kid who feels out of place and weird, and didn't we all feel out of place and weird at that age?
Yes. Yes, we did.
The only thing I was less excited about this time around were all the religious references, but the book is what it is, and you just kind of have to accept that God is a big theme in this and move on if you want to enjoy it. It's not too preachy, so there's that.
Will kids today like it? I'm trying to get mine to read it now, so ask me again in 6 months.
But I'd been putting off re-reading this thing for 20 plus years and was pleasantly surprised that it was still such a charming story.
Highly Recommended...for nostalgia.
February 6, 2018
3.5*
What a fun weird little story!
What a fun weird little story!
August 13, 2024
Have you ever read a book and felt that you were missing something?
Yep, that’s me with A Wrinkle in Time.
Confession time: there were many parts of this book that made me giggle. Starting with the first line: It was a dark and stormy night. Then, the mention of stew. One member of my family thinks that stew is ew, and “stew” was mentioned six times in this relatively short book. Finally, the mention of IT. Trust me. I hate going to IT.
I was able to follow the plot—it seems relatively straightforward. However, the symbolism was lost on me (other than I know that there was some religious symbolism). A Wrinkle in Time makes me want to locate someone smarter than myself and ask them to explain it to me.
At the beginning of A Wrinkle in Time, the author said that children get this book and adults do not. Maybe I am overthinking it?
A Wrinkle in Time is a fast-paced fantasy novel. In my opinion, it was a little too fast-paced especially in the beginning where we are introduced to a deluge of characters. It was also a bit too focused on world building instead of on plot.
2025 Reading Schedule
Jan A Town Like Alice
Feb Birdsong
Mar Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Berniere
Apr War and Peace
May The Woman in White
Jun Atonement
Jul The Shadow of the Wind
Aug Jude the Obscure
Sep Ulysses
Oct Vanity Fair
Nov A Fine Balance
Dec Germinal
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Facebook Insta My Bookstore at Pango
Yep, that’s me with A Wrinkle in Time.
Confession time: there were many parts of this book that made me giggle. Starting with the first line: It was a dark and stormy night. Then, the mention of stew. One member of my family thinks that stew is ew, and “stew” was mentioned six times in this relatively short book. Finally, the mention of IT. Trust me. I hate going to IT.
I was able to follow the plot—it seems relatively straightforward. However, the symbolism was lost on me (other than I know that there was some religious symbolism). A Wrinkle in Time makes me want to locate someone smarter than myself and ask them to explain it to me.
At the beginning of A Wrinkle in Time, the author said that children get this book and adults do not. Maybe I am overthinking it?
A Wrinkle in Time is a fast-paced fantasy novel. In my opinion, it was a little too fast-paced especially in the beginning where we are introduced to a deluge of characters. It was also a bit too focused on world building instead of on plot.
2025 Reading Schedule
Jan A Town Like Alice
Feb Birdsong
Mar Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Berniere
Apr War and Peace
May The Woman in White
Jun Atonement
Jul The Shadow of the Wind
Aug Jude the Obscure
Sep Ulysses
Oct Vanity Fair
Nov A Fine Balance
Dec Germinal
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Facebook Insta My Bookstore at Pango
March 11, 2017
Am I the first living 64 year old who had never read this book- until now - March, 2017.
that is?
Random Thoughts ....
.....I was surprised to discover this story was about a little GIRL --not a WIZARD.
.....I was more surprised that Meg, 13 years old, had three other siblings... two twin brothers, Sandy and Dennys, and a younger brother, Charles Wallace Murray, who is a child prodigy.....with parents who were scientist. THERE IS A REAL FAMILY -WITH REAL PEOPLE in this book! NOT SURE WHY THIS SURPRISED ME!
.....I'm thinking "HOT DAMN, I might like this story".... and my daughters might have.... but as far as I know .... they missed reading this one too.
Heck, the first page was 'great' - the first sentence was 'classic-great': "It was a dark and stormy night".
What child doesn't perk up to hear a story with those first words?
So....I continue reading 'remembering' that not long ago 'ELLIE' praised this book SO HIGHLY ....as her FAVORITE children's book ( she and I both have passion for the Velveteen Rabbit)....that I KNEW I HAD TO FINALLY READ IT. I bought a used copy at my recycle bookstore for a dollar. THANK YOU ELLIE!!!!! :) whew...I'm glad I didn't miss this gem!!! I loved the characteristics of the kids and adults....each unique in their own ways.
.....What creative names for characters: Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, and Mrs. Witch.... 'charming supernatural neighbors'. .....as well as the lovely Aunt Beast.
The three *W* women escort Meg, Charles, and another boy, Calvin O'Keefe. from Meg's school --through the universe by means of SCI FI UNIVERSE TRANSPORTATION-- "tesseract" - A fifth dimensional phenomenon-- ET hasn't phoned home yet.....on a mission to rescue Meg and Charles father. Meg, and the Mrs. W's all agree that the mysterious disappearance of the father is very strange and has something to do with the term "tesseract". After all he is a scientist and was working on a project before his disappearance.
The Trio W-women and children travel through the universe and visit different planets - a utopian world- with creatures disguised as humans. First they bump into evil... then they are taken to a woman to look through a crystal ball. The children are learning that there is both evil and good in the world. They see much darkness through that crystal ball down here on planet earth. They also see that artist's, and philosophers, and religious folks are fighting against the evil.
AT THIS POINT IF I WERE A CHILD - I WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS --
THE CHILD ME WOULD ASK: "well, my daddy died--[I was 4]. I'd want to know if he left me because he got tired of all the fighting on earth--and since I've always wondered since the day he died -- not knowing what the hell that meant -- if he was coming back soon --- and could I go on the mission with Meg and bring my daddy back home too?" This book might have scared me as a child -- I would have needed a tender adult reading it with me.
ON WITH THIS STORY:
They soon travel to a planet called Camazotz.... where they find Meg's father: trapped!
The planet is being controlled by an evil brain and with powerful telepathic abilities- called "IT".
This story begins to gets MORE SCARY..... I would have been on the edge of my seat. Note: I don't read much science fiction - but the children are threatened by the possibility of their minds being controlled through a telepathic takeover.
Whew..... laughing ....I was exhausted by the end.....OF COURSE IT HAS A HAPPY ENDING....
I HATE that felt like crying in this children's book! I hate all you people who told me it's a must read .....because for this girl it WAS!!!!!! I LOVED IT!!! - you mean people!!!
I love believing there is GOOD in the world .. so why am I sad?
A special appreciation to the Goodreads community-- I might never have read this book without all the the LOVE & EXPRESSION for this children's classic! Thank you!
that is?
Random Thoughts ....
.....I was surprised to discover this story was about a little GIRL --not a WIZARD.
.....I was more surprised that Meg, 13 years old, had three other siblings... two twin brothers, Sandy and Dennys, and a younger brother, Charles Wallace Murray, who is a child prodigy.....with parents who were scientist. THERE IS A REAL FAMILY -WITH REAL PEOPLE in this book! NOT SURE WHY THIS SURPRISED ME!
.....I'm thinking "HOT DAMN, I might like this story".... and my daughters might have.... but as far as I know .... they missed reading this one too.
Heck, the first page was 'great' - the first sentence was 'classic-great': "It was a dark and stormy night".
What child doesn't perk up to hear a story with those first words?
So....I continue reading 'remembering' that not long ago 'ELLIE' praised this book SO HIGHLY ....as her FAVORITE children's book ( she and I both have passion for the Velveteen Rabbit)....that I KNEW I HAD TO FINALLY READ IT. I bought a used copy at my recycle bookstore for a dollar. THANK YOU ELLIE!!!!! :) whew...I'm glad I didn't miss this gem!!! I loved the characteristics of the kids and adults....each unique in their own ways.
.....What creative names for characters: Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, and Mrs. Witch.... 'charming supernatural neighbors'. .....as well as the lovely Aunt Beast.
The three *W* women escort Meg, Charles, and another boy, Calvin O'Keefe. from Meg's school --through the universe by means of SCI FI UNIVERSE TRANSPORTATION-- "tesseract" - A fifth dimensional phenomenon-- ET hasn't phoned home yet.....on a mission to rescue Meg and Charles father. Meg, and the Mrs. W's all agree that the mysterious disappearance of the father is very strange and has something to do with the term "tesseract". After all he is a scientist and was working on a project before his disappearance.
The Trio W-women and children travel through the universe and visit different planets - a utopian world- with creatures disguised as humans. First they bump into evil... then they are taken to a woman to look through a crystal ball. The children are learning that there is both evil and good in the world. They see much darkness through that crystal ball down here on planet earth. They also see that artist's, and philosophers, and religious folks are fighting against the evil.
AT THIS POINT IF I WERE A CHILD - I WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS --
THE CHILD ME WOULD ASK: "well, my daddy died--[I was 4]. I'd want to know if he left me because he got tired of all the fighting on earth--and since I've always wondered since the day he died -- not knowing what the hell that meant -- if he was coming back soon --- and could I go on the mission with Meg and bring my daddy back home too?" This book might have scared me as a child -- I would have needed a tender adult reading it with me.
ON WITH THIS STORY:
They soon travel to a planet called Camazotz.... where they find Meg's father: trapped!
The planet is being controlled by an evil brain and with powerful telepathic abilities- called "IT".
This story begins to gets MORE SCARY..... I would have been on the edge of my seat. Note: I don't read much science fiction - but the children are threatened by the possibility of their minds being controlled through a telepathic takeover.
Whew..... laughing ....I was exhausted by the end.....OF COURSE IT HAS A HAPPY ENDING....
I HATE that felt like crying in this children's book! I hate all you people who told me it's a must read .....because for this girl it WAS!!!!!! I LOVED IT!!! - you mean people!!!
I love believing there is GOOD in the world .. so why am I sad?
A special appreciation to the Goodreads community-- I might never have read this book without all the the LOVE & EXPRESSION for this children's classic! Thank you!
August 12, 2017
3.5/5
September 11, 2023
An evil darkness consuming the universe, and three little children determined to stop it.
In a little cozy home, in the midst of a lovely gardened area, lives the Murry family. A scientist mother, a distant father on a secret mission, two overprotective twins, the little and enigmatic Charles Wallace, and the ever troublesome Meg.
A storm presages the dangers to come. The Darkness, the evil Black Thing threatens to swallow the Earth and everyone in it, among other worlds and universes already corrupted by its malevolent presence. Meg, Charles Wallace, and Calvin, a fellow schoolmate, embark on a desperate mission through several worlds to try to find their lost father, and, maybe, just maybe, save a small part of the universe.
An enjoyable read, simple, endearing, and weird! Not exactly recommendable, but good enough to hold interest. The first of five moderately short books.
-----------------------------------------------
PERSONAL NOTE :
[1962] [218p] [Fantasy] [Not Recommendable]
-----------------------------------------------
★★★★☆ 1. A Wrinkle in Time
★★★☆☆ 2. A Wind in the Door
-----------------------------------------------
Una malévola oscuridad que consume universos, y tres pequeñs niños determinados a detenerla.
En una pequeña y acogedora casa, en el medio de una area hermsamente cultivada, vive la familia Murry. Una madre científica, un padre distante en una misión secreta, dos mellizos sobreprotectores, el pequeño y enigmático Charles Wallace, y la siempre problemática Meg.
Una tormenta es el presagio de peligros por venir. La Oscuridad, la Maldad Negra, amenaza con tragarse la Tierra y a todos en ella, entre otros mundos y universos ya corrompidos por su malévola presencia. Meg, Charles Wallace y Calvin, un compañero de la escuela, se embarcan en una misión desesperada a través de diversos mundos para tratar de encontrar a su padre perdido y, tal vez, sólo tal vez, salvar una pequeña parte del universo.
Una lectura pasable, simple, tierna, y extraña! No exactamente recomendable, pero lo suficientemente buena como para mantener el interés. El primero de cinco libros medianamente cortos.
-----------------------------------------------
NOTA PERSONAL :
[1962] [218p] [Fantasía] [No Recomendable]
-----------------------------------------------
In a little cozy home, in the midst of a lovely gardened area, lives the Murry family. A scientist mother, a distant father on a secret mission, two overprotective twins, the little and enigmatic Charles Wallace, and the ever troublesome Meg.
A storm presages the dangers to come. The Darkness, the evil Black Thing threatens to swallow the Earth and everyone in it, among other worlds and universes already corrupted by its malevolent presence. Meg, Charles Wallace, and Calvin, a fellow schoolmate, embark on a desperate mission through several worlds to try to find their lost father, and, maybe, just maybe, save a small part of the universe.
An enjoyable read, simple, endearing, and weird! Not exactly recommendable, but good enough to hold interest. The first of five moderately short books.
-----------------------------------------------
PERSONAL NOTE :
[1962] [218p] [Fantasy] [Not Recommendable]
-----------------------------------------------
★★★★☆ 1. A Wrinkle in Time
★★★☆☆ 2. A Wind in the Door
-----------------------------------------------
Una malévola oscuridad que consume universos, y tres pequeñs niños determinados a detenerla.
En una pequeña y acogedora casa, en el medio de una area hermsamente cultivada, vive la familia Murry. Una madre científica, un padre distante en una misión secreta, dos mellizos sobreprotectores, el pequeño y enigmático Charles Wallace, y la siempre problemática Meg.
Una tormenta es el presagio de peligros por venir. La Oscuridad, la Maldad Negra, amenaza con tragarse la Tierra y a todos en ella, entre otros mundos y universos ya corrompidos por su malévola presencia. Meg, Charles Wallace y Calvin, un compañero de la escuela, se embarcan en una misión desesperada a través de diversos mundos para tratar de encontrar a su padre perdido y, tal vez, sólo tal vez, salvar una pequeña parte del universo.
Una lectura pasable, simple, tierna, y extraña! No exactamente recomendable, pero lo suficientemente buena como para mantener el interés. El primero de cinco libros medianamente cortos.
-----------------------------------------------
NOTA PERSONAL :
[1962] [218p] [Fantasía] [No Recomendable]
-----------------------------------------------
May 29, 2007
[Later note: Had discussion with author about this book and why it means so much to so many people—specifically women. Also read excellent NYTimes piece about the fiftieth anniversary.
Some books are powerful for their readers because of their context; in this case, the utter lack in popular kid's literature of 1962 of characters like Meg—real girls, who cared about atypical subjects like math, who were unashamed to be other than pink-wearing cheerleaders. To find a powerful role model in a novel must be a wonderful thing, especially for bookish girls. And maybe it makes sense that as a boy in the seventies, I missed that entirely.
Still, rereading as an adult, I found it unbearably heavy-handed. Hence the two star rating: It was okay.]
One of those overrated books the response to which defies explanation. Clunky, heavy-handed, and as obvious in its way as The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I was only ever able to force myself through this as an adult (having been turned off of it by a filmstrip I saw in school), and no doubt this is the sort of novel--like the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs--that must be first loved as a younger reader. Ugh.
Some books are powerful for their readers because of their context; in this case, the utter lack in popular kid's literature of 1962 of characters like Meg—real girls, who cared about atypical subjects like math, who were unashamed to be other than pink-wearing cheerleaders. To find a powerful role model in a novel must be a wonderful thing, especially for bookish girls. And maybe it makes sense that as a boy in the seventies, I missed that entirely.
Still, rereading as an adult, I found it unbearably heavy-handed. Hence the two star rating: It was okay.]
One of those overrated books the response to which defies explanation. Clunky, heavy-handed, and as obvious in its way as The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I was only ever able to force myself through this as an adult (having been turned off of it by a filmstrip I saw in school), and no doubt this is the sort of novel--like the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs--that must be first loved as a younger reader. Ugh.
December 4, 2013
I have one general, self-imposed rule about reviewing on this site: I write about the books I've read in the order I've finished them. By that logic, I should be cobbling together my reaction to Hunger right now but I am so taken by this childhood staple that there's no room in my brain for anything other than uncontrollable glee over this book that another Madeleine has given to the world.
I never read this book as a kid. I didn't read it as a teenager or a college student. I read it for the first time with 30 coming at me like a crazed stalker who won't let a pesky thing like a restraining order stand in the way. And that did concern me, especially after half-heartedly slogging through the first four books comprising the Narnia Chronicles a few years ago before taking an indefinite break from tackling what should have been another enthusiastically remembered staple of a young reader's diet. I was afraid that I'd completely missed out on enjoying A Wrinkle in Time, a novel that I have heard praised up and down by so many people as the prime example of how good children's literature can be.
So I read it like I read as a wee lass who didn't realize that she was poised at the very beginning of what would become a lifelong pursuit of books fueled by an insatiable need to keep reading. I read well past my bedtime with one tiny light illuminating the path to somewhere magically transportive, knowing full well that the bookworm gratification far outweighed the inevitability of being a zombie all morning. I read it when I should have been doing something else as dictated by responsibility. I read to be told a story and to consider ideas I'd never come across in the world beyond two covers, sure, but mostly I read to give myself up to a writer's lush landscape, to lose myself in someone else's words. I read it to let my imagination run free through a universe I fervently and fruitlessly wished to be a part of.
And my adult self was just as enchanted as my inner child was. Sure, A Wrinkle in Time has its faults but I honestly couldn't tell you what they are because I was so thoroughly entertained, so taken with these characters I couldn't believe I could relate to in a way that was far less remote and removed than I expected (which is to say, at all) that all the things my nitpicky, pretentious post-English-major self would usually hone in on paled in comparison to the sheer enjoyment of the rush of letting a book completely suck me into its world to the point where the real world could have collapsed around me and I wouldn't've either cared or noticed because I was so wrapped up in this story.
On one hand, yeah, I do feel a little cheated that so much of what I needed to hear as a kid has lived within these pages all this time and I could have had such imperatives by my side to ease the pains of childhood's harsh but necessary learning experiences had I just shown even a fraction of some interest in this book. Among them: One's parents are not infallible. Weaknesses can become strengths -- nay, tools integral to besting some truly harrowing obstacles -- in the right circumstances. That sometimes you have to face down scary or unpleasant truths, and you're not excused from looking away or backing down just because the task ahead is either scary or unpleasant. It's better to embrace your individuality and not compromise yourself, no matter how uncomfortable you are in your own skin, than to mindlessly submit to the herd mentality and easy conformity. Just because something appears strange doesn't make it bad -- or all that strange at its core, after all. What things are is infinitely more important than what they look like.
But conversely? This book drenched my ordinary existence with fantasy's magic for a few days, and I'm sure it'll stick with me in the days to come. My first encounter with this book wasn't a foggily but fondly recalled childhood memory that's destined to be tarnished by the darkening cynicism of the years upon revisits from my older self. I got to experience the breathless wonder of a kid discovering an instant favorite for that very first time as an oasis of sheer escapist rapture in the face of a few intense work days and the humdrum nature of routine adulthood. And it proved to me that I don't always have to be such a goddamn snob about kid lit because when it's good, it is extraordinary. (And, really, let's be honest: Younger Me wasn't exactly the sharpest crayon in the tool shed, so who's to say I would have picked up on the more subtle elements that made this such a delightful read, anyway?)
Despite my natural inclination toward hyperbole, I am not exaggerating when I say I'm a little better for having read this book, one that I initially arrived at out of dubious curiosity and left in a state of giddy, childlike awe. And maybe a few tears.
I never read this book as a kid. I didn't read it as a teenager or a college student. I read it for the first time with 30 coming at me like a crazed stalker who won't let a pesky thing like a restraining order stand in the way. And that did concern me, especially after half-heartedly slogging through the first four books comprising the Narnia Chronicles a few years ago before taking an indefinite break from tackling what should have been another enthusiastically remembered staple of a young reader's diet. I was afraid that I'd completely missed out on enjoying A Wrinkle in Time, a novel that I have heard praised up and down by so many people as the prime example of how good children's literature can be.
So I read it like I read as a wee lass who didn't realize that she was poised at the very beginning of what would become a lifelong pursuit of books fueled by an insatiable need to keep reading. I read well past my bedtime with one tiny light illuminating the path to somewhere magically transportive, knowing full well that the bookworm gratification far outweighed the inevitability of being a zombie all morning. I read it when I should have been doing something else as dictated by responsibility. I read to be told a story and to consider ideas I'd never come across in the world beyond two covers, sure, but mostly I read to give myself up to a writer's lush landscape, to lose myself in someone else's words. I read it to let my imagination run free through a universe I fervently and fruitlessly wished to be a part of.
And my adult self was just as enchanted as my inner child was. Sure, A Wrinkle in Time has its faults but I honestly couldn't tell you what they are because I was so thoroughly entertained, so taken with these characters I couldn't believe I could relate to in a way that was far less remote and removed than I expected (which is to say, at all) that all the things my nitpicky, pretentious post-English-major self would usually hone in on paled in comparison to the sheer enjoyment of the rush of letting a book completely suck me into its world to the point where the real world could have collapsed around me and I wouldn't've either cared or noticed because I was so wrapped up in this story.
On one hand, yeah, I do feel a little cheated that so much of what I needed to hear as a kid has lived within these pages all this time and I could have had such imperatives by my side to ease the pains of childhood's harsh but necessary learning experiences had I just shown even a fraction of some interest in this book. Among them: One's parents are not infallible. Weaknesses can become strengths -- nay, tools integral to besting some truly harrowing obstacles -- in the right circumstances. That sometimes you have to face down scary or unpleasant truths, and you're not excused from looking away or backing down just because the task ahead is either scary or unpleasant. It's better to embrace your individuality and not compromise yourself, no matter how uncomfortable you are in your own skin, than to mindlessly submit to the herd mentality and easy conformity. Just because something appears strange doesn't make it bad -- or all that strange at its core, after all. What things are is infinitely more important than what they look like.
But conversely? This book drenched my ordinary existence with fantasy's magic for a few days, and I'm sure it'll stick with me in the days to come. My first encounter with this book wasn't a foggily but fondly recalled childhood memory that's destined to be tarnished by the darkening cynicism of the years upon revisits from my older self. I got to experience the breathless wonder of a kid discovering an instant favorite for that very first time as an oasis of sheer escapist rapture in the face of a few intense work days and the humdrum nature of routine adulthood. And it proved to me that I don't always have to be such a goddamn snob about kid lit because when it's good, it is extraordinary. (And, really, let's be honest: Younger Me wasn't exactly the sharpest crayon in the tool shed, so who's to say I would have picked up on the more subtle elements that made this such a delightful read, anyway?)
Despite my natural inclination toward hyperbole, I am not exaggerating when I say I'm a little better for having read this book, one that I initially arrived at out of dubious curiosity and left in a state of giddy, childlike awe. And maybe a few tears.
February 17, 2018
“It was a dark and stormy night...”
Okay, I haven’t read A Wrinkle in Time since fifth grade, so I was kind of nervous going into this. Yet, I was very pleasantly surprised, and I’m even more excited to see the new movie adaptation in March! I mean, this reads a little “old” and “simple” but it was still such a delight to read. I will say that I didn’t remember any of the religious/spiritual aspects that were woven in, so apparently fifth grade Melanie, who went to a Catholic school and everything, just pushed those out of her mind throughout the years.
The basic premise of A Wrinkle in Time, that I’m sure you all know, stars a young girl named Meg is one of four siblings in her family, and both of her parents are scientists. Meg and Charles are very intelligent, therefore outcasts, but where their twin siblings, who are of normal IQ, fit in just fine. One day, her father goes missing and Meg, Charles, and their new friend, Calvin, meet a very peculiar trio, who take them on an intergalactic adventure that they will never forget. They essentially travel by folding or “wrinkling” time.
Overall, this was a super enjoyable read, that totally did give me a swift kick in the nostalgia feels. Yet, I’m not sure how well it would hold up if this was your first time experiencing the story. I do feel like there is a little something here for everyone, and even though this is considered a middle grade book, I do think it holds up pretty well for most ages. And honestly? Even reading this in 2018, this is still a very unique book.
“There will no longer be so many pleasant things to look at if responsible people do not do something about the unpleasant ones.”
This is a story about love, and family, and faith, and being able to think for yourself. I can totally understand why this is a literary classic, and I’m so happy I reread it! And now I’m totally pumped for the movie!
Blog | Twitter | Tumblr | Instagram | Youtube | Twitch
Valentine's Day buddy (re)read with the beautiful Wren! ❤
February 6, 2018
What can I say about a book that is hailed as one of the greatest pieces of fiction of all time? Nothing. I really can't. I will not disrespect this book by saying anything negative about it. I think my opinions about this book may have changed over the years, but that by no means makes this a poor read. Instead of being critical about the book, I am going to celebrate it with some of my favorite quotes from this book:
“Like and equal are not the same thing at all.”
(No wonder this book is considered to be allegorical! Definitely some political innuendo there..)
“Have you ever tried to get to your feet with a sprained dignity?”
“A book, too, can be a star, “explosive material, capable of stirring up fresh life endlessly,” a living fire to lighten the darkness, leading out into the expanding universe.
“If we knew ahead of time what was going to happen we’d be—we’d be like the people on Camazotz, with no lives of our own, with everything all planned and done for us.”
And for my absolute favorite quote:
“Life, with its rules, its obligations, and its freedoms, is like a sonnet: You're given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. - Mrs. Whatsit”
This book is a masterpiece. However, it simply didn't resonate with my older self as it had with my younger self. With that said, I can still recognize this for what it was: A book ahead of its time that was extremely controversial. It has seen much success and has been exulted by fans everywhere.
“Like and equal are not the same thing at all.”
(No wonder this book is considered to be allegorical! Definitely some political innuendo there..)
“Have you ever tried to get to your feet with a sprained dignity?”
“A book, too, can be a star, “explosive material, capable of stirring up fresh life endlessly,” a living fire to lighten the darkness, leading out into the expanding universe.
“If we knew ahead of time what was going to happen we’d be—we’d be like the people on Camazotz, with no lives of our own, with everything all planned and done for us.”
And for my absolute favorite quote:
“Life, with its rules, its obligations, and its freedoms, is like a sonnet: You're given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. - Mrs. Whatsit”
This book is a masterpiece. However, it simply didn't resonate with my older self as it had with my younger self. With that said, I can still recognize this for what it was: A book ahead of its time that was extremely controversial. It has seen much success and has been exulted by fans everywhere.
March 15, 2022
Wow! I never imagine to read this book for the first time when I’m in my 40s. For years I let the book get lost in my chubby TBR that keeps growing at each day. Probably it stuck with piles of books and I wouldn’t remember to read it if Ted Lasso wouldn’t give this book to Roy Kent! If a book can heal one of the grumpiest fictional characters’ soul, it may surely help me, too. At least that’s what I thought before I started.
Overall: I loved the classic theme: three children’s teaming up for fighting against evil darkness threatening the universe.
I liked how 13 years old Meg portrayed and little, enigmatic brother Charles. As their fellow schoolmate Calvin joins them with the guidance of their weird neighbors with weirder names Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, Mrs. Witch, two children’s search for missing father turns into a visit to fifth dimension to confront with the universal threat!
Yeap, I enjoyed it a lot and I’m so happy to skip the movie adaptations! I wish I read it sooner but better late than never!
Here are my favorite quotes:
“Life, with its rules, its obligations, and its freedoms, is like a sonnet: You're given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. - Mrs. Whatsit”
“We can't take any credit for our talents. It's how we use them that counts.”
“The only way to cope with something deadly serious is to try to treat it a little lightly “
“A book, too, can be a star, “explosive material, capable of stirring up fresh life endlessly,” a living fire to lighten the darkness, leading out into the expanding universe.”
Overall: I loved the classic theme: three children’s teaming up for fighting against evil darkness threatening the universe.
I liked how 13 years old Meg portrayed and little, enigmatic brother Charles. As their fellow schoolmate Calvin joins them with the guidance of their weird neighbors with weirder names Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, Mrs. Witch, two children’s search for missing father turns into a visit to fifth dimension to confront with the universal threat!
Yeap, I enjoyed it a lot and I’m so happy to skip the movie adaptations! I wish I read it sooner but better late than never!
Here are my favorite quotes:
“Life, with its rules, its obligations, and its freedoms, is like a sonnet: You're given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. - Mrs. Whatsit”
“We can't take any credit for our talents. It's how we use them that counts.”
“The only way to cope with something deadly serious is to try to treat it a little lightly “
“A book, too, can be a star, “explosive material, capable of stirring up fresh life endlessly,” a living fire to lighten the darkness, leading out into the expanding universe.”
October 15, 2017
5+++++ Stars!!!!
“A Wrinkle in Time”. How can I never have read this before??! Have I been living under a rock my entire life?
This was utterly DELIGHTFUL, Amazing, Funny, Scary, Brilliant & Crazy Bold. In short, I loved it. Ok, and I admit, I didn’t read it. I listened to the audiobook, narrated by Hope Davis - and she was amazing. That being said, thank you Madeiline L’Engle, - “A Wrinkle in TIme” was mystical, magical and nothing short of fantastical.
Thirteen year-old Meg Murry and her little brother, Charles Wallace end up going on a little trip.. (without their Mum or their siblings), to the 5th dimension. Mind you, they don’t go alone. They go with Mrs. What-Its, Mrs. Who and Mrs. Witch and a young man named Calvin. Yes, the 5th dimension exists my friends and the trip takes a mere second or two (see, I knew it!). It’s a terrifying trip, yet they go nonetheless. Why do they go you ask? To find and save Meg’s father, a scientist, who has been trapped on Camazotz for years. With help of Calvin, Mrs. What’s Its, Mrs. Who and Mrs. Witch and a friend she encounters named Aunt Beast, Meg is sent off to do the impossible.
Camazotz is an evil planet however, and Camazotz is being controlled by “IT” (not Stephen King’s “IT” mind you), and IT controls everyone and everything and if IT gets control of you, there is no getting free. Finding the strength to fight IT takes something special. It takes something that is inside of everyone who is human. Meg just has to find it.
“A Wrinkle in Time” surprised me. I didn’t have any idea how much I would love it. It was amusing, frightening, intense, intelligent, oh so magical. I simply adored it. I wanted to get to it before the movie came out in a few months and I am so glad I did. If for some reason, you are like me and have never read it, I highly recommend you either read or listen to the audiobook. You will not be sorry. A Wrinkle in Time will leave you breathless. One minute a huge smile will break out on your face, and you will be grinning from ear to ear and then next you will be clenching your teeth, scared for Meg, Charles Wallace and Calvin, hoping against hope that all will turn out ok.
Published on Goodreads, Amazon and Twitter on 10.15.17.
“A Wrinkle in Time”. How can I never have read this before??! Have I been living under a rock my entire life?
This was utterly DELIGHTFUL, Amazing, Funny, Scary, Brilliant & Crazy Bold. In short, I loved it. Ok, and I admit, I didn’t read it. I listened to the audiobook, narrated by Hope Davis - and she was amazing. That being said, thank you Madeiline L’Engle, - “A Wrinkle in TIme” was mystical, magical and nothing short of fantastical.
Thirteen year-old Meg Murry and her little brother, Charles Wallace end up going on a little trip.. (without their Mum or their siblings), to the 5th dimension. Mind you, they don’t go alone. They go with Mrs. What-Its, Mrs. Who and Mrs. Witch and a young man named Calvin. Yes, the 5th dimension exists my friends and the trip takes a mere second or two (see, I knew it!). It’s a terrifying trip, yet they go nonetheless. Why do they go you ask? To find and save Meg’s father, a scientist, who has been trapped on Camazotz for years. With help of Calvin, Mrs. What’s Its, Mrs. Who and Mrs. Witch and a friend she encounters named Aunt Beast, Meg is sent off to do the impossible.
Camazotz is an evil planet however, and Camazotz is being controlled by “IT” (not Stephen King’s “IT” mind you), and IT controls everyone and everything and if IT gets control of you, there is no getting free. Finding the strength to fight IT takes something special. It takes something that is inside of everyone who is human. Meg just has to find it.
“A Wrinkle in Time” surprised me. I didn’t have any idea how much I would love it. It was amusing, frightening, intense, intelligent, oh so magical. I simply adored it. I wanted to get to it before the movie came out in a few months and I am so glad I did. If for some reason, you are like me and have never read it, I highly recommend you either read or listen to the audiobook. You will not be sorry. A Wrinkle in Time will leave you breathless. One minute a huge smile will break out on your face, and you will be grinning from ear to ear and then next you will be clenching your teeth, scared for Meg, Charles Wallace and Calvin, hoping against hope that all will turn out ok.
Published on Goodreads, Amazon and Twitter on 10.15.17.
March 21, 2008
I started reading "A Wrinkle In Time" when I was 8 or 10. I say started because I never finished it. I can't remember exactly why, but I think it kind of scared the crap out of me. Now, 15 or 17 years later, I've read it again (this time the whole thing) and there's really nothing scary at all about it. It's possible that, as a kid, I was somehow relating this book to the terribly scary Disney movie "Something Wicked This Way Comes". Again, I don't know why.
Whatever the reason for my fears, the book is not spectacular. Maybe I can't see it now being older and not reading through the eyes of a child, but I can't understand how it won the John Newberry Medal. The witches were plastic and seemed to serve little purpose; the bad guy, a concept embodied in a shadow, had no motivation (if you want to read about true darkness for the sake of darkness/nothing for the sake of nothing, pick up Michael Ende's "The Neverending Story"); and the father, who seems to have no backbone and no sense of decency when it comes to saving his son. It has been said that the father character is an excellent tool in showing children that parents do not always have the answers, that they are, in fact, fallible and (God forbid) imperfect. But it's so much more than that. He comes across as weak, helpless, foolish, and even heartless at times. If you want to write a story where a child finds out that his/her parents aren't perfect, you don't have to make the parental figure a cold, bumbling idiot. Unless that's what you're going for. And I certainly don't think that L'Engle was. But all that aside, why would you even want to tell that story? Part of the beauty of being a child is you get to hold onto the illusion that mom and dad are Superman. Why ruin that? Granted, some kids live in terrible families, but there are better ways to write about those scenarios. This is not it.
I wanted to give this book 2 stars but decided that, because of my jaded, critical age I cannot judge too harshly. Plus, I did like the savant character of Charles Wallace. He was cute. As was the love that Meg and him shared. Calvin, on the other hand, was a complete throwaway character.
If I had kids, would I push this book on them? No. If they picked it off my bookshelf and started reading it, I wouldn't stop them. But I'm not about to recommend it to anyone young or old. Unless it's too ask that person to help me understand what the big deal is.
Whatever the reason for my fears, the book is not spectacular. Maybe I can't see it now being older and not reading through the eyes of a child, but I can't understand how it won the John Newberry Medal. The witches were plastic and seemed to serve little purpose; the bad guy, a concept embodied in a shadow, had no motivation (if you want to read about true darkness for the sake of darkness/nothing for the sake of nothing, pick up Michael Ende's "The Neverending Story"); and the father, who seems to have no backbone and no sense of decency when it comes to saving his son. It has been said that the father character is an excellent tool in showing children that parents do not always have the answers, that they are, in fact, fallible and (God forbid) imperfect. But it's so much more than that. He comes across as weak, helpless, foolish, and even heartless at times. If you want to write a story where a child finds out that his/her parents aren't perfect, you don't have to make the parental figure a cold, bumbling idiot. Unless that's what you're going for. And I certainly don't think that L'Engle was. But all that aside, why would you even want to tell that story? Part of the beauty of being a child is you get to hold onto the illusion that mom and dad are Superman. Why ruin that? Granted, some kids live in terrible families, but there are better ways to write about those scenarios. This is not it.
I wanted to give this book 2 stars but decided that, because of my jaded, critical age I cannot judge too harshly. Plus, I did like the savant character of Charles Wallace. He was cute. As was the love that Meg and him shared. Calvin, on the other hand, was a complete throwaway character.
If I had kids, would I push this book on them? No. If they picked it off my bookshelf and started reading it, I wouldn't stop them. But I'm not about to recommend it to anyone young or old. Unless it's too ask that person to help me understand what the big deal is.
August 16, 2007
Madeleine L'Engle is a Christian writer, more so even than C. S. Lewis in my opinion. However, while the influence of Christian Theology (and in later books, biblical history) is woven throughly through out all the books in this series, it is not offensive to non-Christian readers. I am one of those.
To be completely honest, when my mother first read me this when I was about 7 years old, I was totally oblivious to the influence L'Engle's faith has on her writing. It wasn't until I was twelve or thirteen, when I read the entire series several times over, that it became obvious to me.
But I digress. What really makes this book (and others in the series) has nothing directly to do with the writer's faith. It has to do with the different types of non-sexual love found between family, friends, society, and the individual. I know, big thing for a Children's novel, but it generally is shown rather then told thereby allowing young children to learn by example.
Going back to the faith thing for half a second, it's like a large parable for how the New Testament (Protestant Christian, any how) advises people to form relationships and maintain them. We are to love and respect our parents, even when the world doesn't. Meg believes in and loves her father, even though he has some odd theories and has been missing for years. We are to care after our siblings regardless of personal quibbles, again like Meg and her brothers. WE are to show compassion for our neighbors despite what other members of our society think (See Calvin's friendship with Meg and Charles) and To care for them even though it might mean personal risk, as in some of the later scenes. Over all, it demonstrates a non-sexual love as one of the most powerful forces in the Universe. And this is a moral lesson that every faith can embrace.
To be completely honest, when my mother first read me this when I was about 7 years old, I was totally oblivious to the influence L'Engle's faith has on her writing. It wasn't until I was twelve or thirteen, when I read the entire series several times over, that it became obvious to me.
But I digress. What really makes this book (and others in the series) has nothing directly to do with the writer's faith. It has to do with the different types of non-sexual love found between family, friends, society, and the individual. I know, big thing for a Children's novel, but it generally is shown rather then told thereby allowing young children to learn by example.
Going back to the faith thing for half a second, it's like a large parable for how the New Testament (Protestant Christian, any how) advises people to form relationships and maintain them. We are to love and respect our parents, even when the world doesn't. Meg believes in and loves her father, even though he has some odd theories and has been missing for years. We are to care after our siblings regardless of personal quibbles, again like Meg and her brothers. WE are to show compassion for our neighbors despite what other members of our society think (See Calvin's friendship with Meg and Charles) and To care for them even though it might mean personal risk, as in some of the later scenes. Over all, it demonstrates a non-sexual love as one of the most powerful forces in the Universe. And this is a moral lesson that every faith can embrace.
January 12, 2018
I just finished reading this for the first time since, maybe college? Twelve year old Meg Murry, her precocious five year old brother Charles Wallace, and their new friend Calvin meet some highly odd beings who call themselves Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who and Mrs. Which. This strange, quirky trio sweeps the children away on an interstellar quest to find and rescue Meg and Charles Wallace's missing father. They fold space and time through tesseracts (the "wrinkle" in time and space) and battle the darkness that has taken over other planets and shadows ours.
This 1962 book is noticeably old-fashioned and a little simplistic in several ways. The symbolism and the links to religion and scriptures aren't subtle, and Meg's anger and stubbornness gets old, though it's interesting to see how those character traits can in some situations stand her in good stead. Also, in fairness it is a middle grade book, though a lot of older readers love it. There's something really lovely about the book's ultimate message and themes. I enjoyed revisiting it again after all these years.
I'm going to stick with my original 4 star rating, though I'm pretty sure that the nostalgia factor is playing into this rating. Full review to come!
January 2018 buddy read with the Pantaloonless group.
Original post: I read this book at least two or three times when I was a teen/young adult (actually, I own and have read the entire series), but it's been a long while since I last read this. I'm interested to see how it holds up!
This 1962 book is noticeably old-fashioned and a little simplistic in several ways. The symbolism and the links to religion and scriptures aren't subtle, and Meg's anger and stubbornness gets old, though it's interesting to see how those character traits can in some situations stand her in good stead. Also, in fairness it is a middle grade book, though a lot of older readers love it. There's something really lovely about the book's ultimate message and themes. I enjoyed revisiting it again after all these years.
I'm going to stick with my original 4 star rating, though I'm pretty sure that the nostalgia factor is playing into this rating. Full review to come!
January 2018 buddy read with the Pantaloonless group.
Original post: I read this book at least two or three times when I was a teen/young adult (actually, I own and have read the entire series), but it's been a long while since I last read this. I'm interested to see how it holds up!
March 18, 2018
About: A Wrinkle in Time is a children’s science fiction written by Madeleine L’Engle. It was published on 3/15/1973 by Yearling Books, paperback, 211 pages. The genres are children’s, science fiction, and fantasy. This book is intended for readers ages 10 to 14. This book belongs to a series of 5 books.
My Experience: I started reading A Wrinkle in Time on 3/13/18 and finished it on 3/16/18. This book is fantastic! I love the characters! They all have unique personalities. I like the twin’s good sense of humor. I like their easy going intelligent parents and the oddities of Meg and Charles Wallace. I like that despite the characters being super smart, that they seem to have a disability in others. Charles Wallace is a genius but he didn’t speak until he was 4 years old. Meg is excellent at math but she is a trouble student at school. It’s a good reminder that even geniuses are still not perfect. I read this book to watch the remake of A Wrinkle in Time. I have seen the old version of the movie years ago and some events came back to me as I read this book.
This book is told in the third person point of view following Margaret (Meg) Murry as she experiences one of the lowest days of her life. Her grades are suffering, the mean girls at school are saying she’s acting like a baby, and she has gotten herself into a fight to protect her youngest brother, Charles Wallace though her middle twin brothers, Sandy and Dennys weren’t appreciative of her efforts. Now the storm is scaring her. The storm brought in one of their new strange neighbors, Mrs. Whatsit. To Meg and her mom’s surprise, Charles Wallace already gotten acquainted with the new neighbor. Mrs. Whatsit said a tesseract is real and it brought on a whole new adventure for Meg and Charles Wallace. This adventure involves rescuing their father, a renowned physicist. With the help of Mrs. Whatsit and her two friends Mrs.Which and Mrs. Who and Meg’s classmate, Calvin, they were able to travel by tesser to far away planets.
A well written story, this book is full of adventures and wholesome characters for readers. I love the illustrations in this book that explains how traveling through tesser works. I like the mathematical references and the mentioning of Einstein. I like how Meg’s dad spent time to teach Meg math shortcuts and the periodic table of elements. I like Charles Wallace and his interest in higher learning at such a young age. I like the glimpse of Camazotz’s citizens, how everyone doing the same thing in a rhythmic motion. This book has a good family dynamic and the curiosity of the mind and I highly recommend everyone to read this book!
Pro: fast paced, page turner, easy to read, family oriented, other planets,
Con: none
I rate it 5 stars!
***Disclaimer: I borrowed this book from my local public library and my opinions are honest.
xoxo,
Jasmine at www.howusefulitis.wordpress.com for more details
My Experience: I started reading A Wrinkle in Time on 3/13/18 and finished it on 3/16/18. This book is fantastic! I love the characters! They all have unique personalities. I like the twin’s good sense of humor. I like their easy going intelligent parents and the oddities of Meg and Charles Wallace. I like that despite the characters being super smart, that they seem to have a disability in others. Charles Wallace is a genius but he didn’t speak until he was 4 years old. Meg is excellent at math but she is a trouble student at school. It’s a good reminder that even geniuses are still not perfect. I read this book to watch the remake of A Wrinkle in Time. I have seen the old version of the movie years ago and some events came back to me as I read this book.
This book is told in the third person point of view following Margaret (Meg) Murry as she experiences one of the lowest days of her life. Her grades are suffering, the mean girls at school are saying she’s acting like a baby, and she has gotten herself into a fight to protect her youngest brother, Charles Wallace though her middle twin brothers, Sandy and Dennys weren’t appreciative of her efforts. Now the storm is scaring her. The storm brought in one of their new strange neighbors, Mrs. Whatsit. To Meg and her mom’s surprise, Charles Wallace already gotten acquainted with the new neighbor. Mrs. Whatsit said a tesseract is real and it brought on a whole new adventure for Meg and Charles Wallace. This adventure involves rescuing their father, a renowned physicist. With the help of Mrs. Whatsit and her two friends Mrs.Which and Mrs. Who and Meg’s classmate, Calvin, they were able to travel by tesser to far away planets.
A well written story, this book is full of adventures and wholesome characters for readers. I love the illustrations in this book that explains how traveling through tesser works. I like the mathematical references and the mentioning of Einstein. I like how Meg’s dad spent time to teach Meg math shortcuts and the periodic table of elements. I like Charles Wallace and his interest in higher learning at such a young age. I like the glimpse of Camazotz’s citizens, how everyone doing the same thing in a rhythmic motion. This book has a good family dynamic and the curiosity of the mind and I highly recommend everyone to read this book!
Pro: fast paced, page turner, easy to read, family oriented, other planets,
Con: none
I rate it 5 stars!
***Disclaimer: I borrowed this book from my local public library and my opinions are honest.
xoxo,
Jasmine at www.howusefulitis.wordpress.com for more details
January 19, 2018
"But why me?" asked Madeleine. "Do I have to do it?"
"You must," said Mrs Whatsit. "Your world is in grave danger. Very, very grave danger. You have to warn them."
"But I don't know how!" exclaimed Madeleine angrily. "What is this danger? How am I going to explain it? It's impossible!"
"Certum est quia impossibile est," said Mrs Who. "It is certain, because it is impossible. Latin. Tertullian."
"Wwe wwill hhelp yyou," interrupted Mrs Which. "Iff onlyy yyou ddidn't iinsist on uusing wwords..."
"You see!" said Madeleine. "You tell me I have to write a book, and you don't even know what words are! You're horrible! I hate you!" Tears filled her eyes.
"Now, now," murmured Mrs Whatsit. "It's much better than you think. The words are all there inside you already, you just have to find them. If you don't mind, my dear, I will just take a little look through your memory."
Suddenly, Madeleine had the strangest feeling. All the books she had ever read were lined up inside her mind like a huge library. And there was Mrs Whatsit, moving through the shelves with her, pulling down a book here and a book there...
"You see?" asked Mrs Whatsit after a time. "That was quite easy, wasn't it? I'm sure Out of the Silent Planet will be useful, and of course That Hideous Strength. Good old C.S. Lewis! And Olaf Stapledon's Star Maker. We want that lovely dance of the stars, don't we? Then we'll take Charles Wallace out of Odd John, and I think some Robert Heinlein and just a little bit of Plato, and now all you have to do is put them together!"
A moment later, Madeleine found herself sitting in front of her typewriter. The words poured out of her, as she covered sheet after sheet. More quickly than she would have believed possible, she found there was a thick manuscript on the desk. Dazed and astonished, she picked it up and began to read through what she had written.
"But it's terrible!" she said, in bitter disappointment. "So sloppily constructed! Such a lack of feeling for the English language! And it doesn't even make sense! None of it sticks together!"
"Goddag, yxskaft," agreed Mrs Who. "Hello, ax-handle. Swedish. Saying indicating lack of coherence."
"You must have faith," said Mrs Whatsit serenely. "You may think it's terrible, but millions of children will love this book. They won't worry about the words. They will see the truth behind them."
"On ne voit bien qu’avec le cœur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux," said Mrs Who. "You only see truly with the heart. What is important is invisible to the eyes. French. Saint-Exupéry."
"It won't work," muttered Madeleine. "I'll send it to the publisher if you like, but they'll just reject it. They'll say it's silly."
"Then send it to another publisher," said Mrs Whatsit. "And another, and another, until you succeed. Listen, Madeleine. The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called, but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. Now do you understand?"
"No," said Madeleine uncertainly; but she found that her fingers, all by themselves, had taken an envelope, put the manuscript into it, and addressed it to a publishing house in the city.
"Ggood ggirl," said Mrs Which. "Nnow wwe hhave tto ggo. BBut wwe'll bbe bback."
"You must," said Mrs Whatsit. "Your world is in grave danger. Very, very grave danger. You have to warn them."
"But I don't know how!" exclaimed Madeleine angrily. "What is this danger? How am I going to explain it? It's impossible!"
"Certum est quia impossibile est," said Mrs Who. "It is certain, because it is impossible. Latin. Tertullian."
"Wwe wwill hhelp yyou," interrupted Mrs Which. "Iff onlyy yyou ddidn't iinsist on uusing wwords..."
"You see!" said Madeleine. "You tell me I have to write a book, and you don't even know what words are! You're horrible! I hate you!" Tears filled her eyes.
"Now, now," murmured Mrs Whatsit. "It's much better than you think. The words are all there inside you already, you just have to find them. If you don't mind, my dear, I will just take a little look through your memory."
Suddenly, Madeleine had the strangest feeling. All the books she had ever read were lined up inside her mind like a huge library. And there was Mrs Whatsit, moving through the shelves with her, pulling down a book here and a book there...
"You see?" asked Mrs Whatsit after a time. "That was quite easy, wasn't it? I'm sure Out of the Silent Planet will be useful, and of course That Hideous Strength. Good old C.S. Lewis! And Olaf Stapledon's Star Maker. We want that lovely dance of the stars, don't we? Then we'll take Charles Wallace out of Odd John, and I think some Robert Heinlein and just a little bit of Plato, and now all you have to do is put them together!"
A moment later, Madeleine found herself sitting in front of her typewriter. The words poured out of her, as she covered sheet after sheet. More quickly than she would have believed possible, she found there was a thick manuscript on the desk. Dazed and astonished, she picked it up and began to read through what she had written.
"But it's terrible!" she said, in bitter disappointment. "So sloppily constructed! Such a lack of feeling for the English language! And it doesn't even make sense! None of it sticks together!"
"Goddag, yxskaft," agreed Mrs Who. "Hello, ax-handle. Swedish. Saying indicating lack of coherence."
"You must have faith," said Mrs Whatsit serenely. "You may think it's terrible, but millions of children will love this book. They won't worry about the words. They will see the truth behind them."
"On ne voit bien qu’avec le cœur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux," said Mrs Who. "You only see truly with the heart. What is important is invisible to the eyes. French. Saint-Exupéry."
"It won't work," muttered Madeleine. "I'll send it to the publisher if you like, but they'll just reject it. They'll say it's silly."
"Then send it to another publisher," said Mrs Whatsit. "And another, and another, until you succeed. Listen, Madeleine. The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called, but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. Now do you understand?"
"No," said Madeleine uncertainly; but she found that her fingers, all by themselves, had taken an envelope, put the manuscript into it, and addressed it to a publishing house in the city.
"Ggood ggirl," said Mrs Which. "Nnow wwe hhave tto ggo. BBut wwe'll bbe bback."
November 5, 2018
Okay, the film's an *April 2018* release but principal photography is over at least.
2018 UPDATE What is wrong with people? I do not comprehend the downer delivered by everyone and her little dog on this film. Can't be misogyny, the character was always a girl; so that leaves...mm hmm...racism. A black woman behind the camera, a lovely and talented young one as Meg. Must have fits and fall in 'em! "It's not like the book!" Umm...it's a movie...and guess what? It's a lot closer than y'all let on. It's a decent film and it wouldn't have been *possible* to get this close in a live-action film until this century. I've now watched it twice and from my very informed perspective as a reader and a filmgoer, lots and lots of information and criticism absorbed and debated, this is a fine film and more faithful to the book than anyone had any reason to expect.
Rating: 4* of five
The Publisher Says: It was a dark and stormy night; Meg Murry, her small brother Charles Wallace, and her mother had come down to the kitchen for a midnight snack when they were upset by the arrival of a most disturbing stranger.
"Wild nights are my glory," the unearthly stranger told them. "I just got caught in a downdraft and blown off course. Let me be on my way. Speaking of way, by the way, there is such a thing as a tesseract."
Meg's father had been experimenting with this fifth dimension of time travel when he mysteriously disappeared. Now the time has come for Meg, her friend Calvin, and Charles Wallace to rescue him. But can they outwit the forces of evil they will encounter on their heart-stopping journey through space?
My Review: Meg Murry's daddy left home unexpectedly and without saying goodbye. The adored parent left behind an adolescent daughter, three sons, and a beautiful and smart wife. Meg cannot make herself get used to his absence and can't even pretend that she's not hurt by the town's opinion that he ran off leaving her mother. This, plus braces, wildly curly hair, an intelligence far greater than her contemporaries', and glasses, isolate the girl with her even weirder little brother Charles Wallace against their normal brothers and the rest of the world.
In time-honored tradition, these misfits are actually being prepared to fight the ultimate battle of Good Versus Evil, no pressure on the children no no no, and save their Daddy, not like it's gettin' piled even higher oh no! One fine day, Meg and Charles Wallace are called to their destiny by Mrs Which, Mrs Who, and Mrs Whatsit, the eccentric old ladies who prove to be avatars of interdimensional good beings with the agenda of making the Universe safe for goodness and happiness again.
The children are joined by fellow misfit Calvin, a popular boy athlete in their town whose hidden depths have tormented him all his life, in the quest to make the evil entity, a disembodied brain called "IT," that slowly takes over planets and compels all life thereon to submit to being in a group mind, erasing individuality and leaching away happiness.
This is a YA novel, so all turns out well, with Mr. Murry coming home and the children being brought home all safe and sound. But how they get home is very interesting: They travel via tesseract, a geometric figure that extends into a fifth dimension beyond spacetime. Mr. and Mrs. Murry have been researching this in their roles as scientists, and Mr. Murry has used the tesseract to get to the planet from which he's rescued. The Mrs Who/Which/Whatsit interdimensional beings use the tesseract to "tesser" or wrinkle the fabric of spacetime to get the children there as well.
Fascinating stuff for a Christian housewife to be writing about in 1960-1961! And make no mistake, the book is a very Christianity-infested Message about the perils of brains without hearts leading to Communistic group-think. Mrs. Murry, a capable scientist, stays home with the kiddos and makes dinner over Bunsen burners so she can keep working while she stays home to be a wife and mom. Ew.
And Meg, poor lamb, worries that she's not pretty enough because she needs braces and glasses and she's not all gorgeous like her mom is. Then Calvin, a popular boy and an athlete, shows hidden depths and falls for little Meg. So bells ring, doves coo, and hands are held, so all is well. Ew.
But it ain't Twilight, so I'm good with it. In fact, because I first read it before I was ten, I'm good with all of it. The stiff, unrealistic dialogue, the socially regressive and reprehensible messages, the religiosity...all get a benign half-smile and an indulgent wink.
Because sometimes you just need to know that someone out there believes that good CAN triumph over evil.
2018 UPDATE What is wrong with people? I do not comprehend the downer delivered by everyone and her little dog on this film. Can't be misogyny, the character was always a girl; so that leaves...mm hmm...racism. A black woman behind the camera, a lovely and talented young one as Meg. Must have fits and fall in 'em! "It's not like the book!" Umm...it's a movie...and guess what? It's a lot closer than y'all let on. It's a decent film and it wouldn't have been *possible* to get this close in a live-action film until this century. I've now watched it twice and from my very informed perspective as a reader and a filmgoer, lots and lots of information and criticism absorbed and debated, this is a fine film and more faithful to the book than anyone had any reason to expect.
Rating: 4* of five
The Publisher Says: It was a dark and stormy night; Meg Murry, her small brother Charles Wallace, and her mother had come down to the kitchen for a midnight snack when they were upset by the arrival of a most disturbing stranger.
"Wild nights are my glory," the unearthly stranger told them. "I just got caught in a downdraft and blown off course. Let me be on my way. Speaking of way, by the way, there is such a thing as a tesseract."
Meg's father had been experimenting with this fifth dimension of time travel when he mysteriously disappeared. Now the time has come for Meg, her friend Calvin, and Charles Wallace to rescue him. But can they outwit the forces of evil they will encounter on their heart-stopping journey through space?
My Review: Meg Murry's daddy left home unexpectedly and without saying goodbye. The adored parent left behind an adolescent daughter, three sons, and a beautiful and smart wife. Meg cannot make herself get used to his absence and can't even pretend that she's not hurt by the town's opinion that he ran off leaving her mother. This, plus braces, wildly curly hair, an intelligence far greater than her contemporaries', and glasses, isolate the girl with her even weirder little brother Charles Wallace against their normal brothers and the rest of the world.
In time-honored tradition, these misfits are actually being prepared to fight the ultimate battle of Good Versus Evil, no pressure on the children no no no, and save their Daddy, not like it's gettin' piled even higher oh no! One fine day, Meg and Charles Wallace are called to their destiny by Mrs Which, Mrs Who, and Mrs Whatsit, the eccentric old ladies who prove to be avatars of interdimensional good beings with the agenda of making the Universe safe for goodness and happiness again.
The children are joined by fellow misfit Calvin, a popular boy athlete in their town whose hidden depths have tormented him all his life, in the quest to make the evil entity, a disembodied brain called "IT," that slowly takes over planets and compels all life thereon to submit to being in a group mind, erasing individuality and leaching away happiness.
This is a YA novel, so all turns out well, with Mr. Murry coming home and the children being brought home all safe and sound. But how they get home is very interesting: They travel via tesseract, a geometric figure that extends into a fifth dimension beyond spacetime. Mr. and Mrs. Murry have been researching this in their roles as scientists, and Mr. Murry has used the tesseract to get to the planet from which he's rescued. The Mrs Who/Which/Whatsit interdimensional beings use the tesseract to "tesser" or wrinkle the fabric of spacetime to get the children there as well.
Fascinating stuff for a Christian housewife to be writing about in 1960-1961! And make no mistake, the book is a very Christianity-infested Message about the perils of brains without hearts leading to Communistic group-think. Mrs. Murry, a capable scientist, stays home with the kiddos and makes dinner over Bunsen burners so she can keep working while she stays home to be a wife and mom. Ew.
And Meg, poor lamb, worries that she's not pretty enough because she needs braces and glasses and she's not all gorgeous like her mom is. Then Calvin, a popular boy and an athlete, shows hidden depths and falls for little Meg. So bells ring, doves coo, and hands are held, so all is well. Ew.
But it ain't Twilight, so I'm good with it. In fact, because I first read it before I was ten, I'm good with all of it. The stiff, unrealistic dialogue, the socially regressive and reprehensible messages, the religiosity...all get a benign half-smile and an indulgent wink.
Because sometimes you just need to know that someone out there believes that good CAN triumph over evil.
September 19, 2014
That's what I felt I was seeing as I read this, a blank slate, a void, an empty room.
A Wrinkle in Time is a very nice tale, but I just wish L'Engle spent more time developing the settings. The decently rounded characters seemed to be floating in spartan landscapes like portraits hung in limbo.
Lackluster description is one thing, but perhaps more than anything, I think my tepid-3 star, ho-hum reaction to A Wrinkle in Time is due to my reading it as a middle-aged curmudgeon. It's made for kids and I haven't been one of them in a while.
My wife loved this book as a child and kept hinting I should read it, hinting so much that the hints became ultimatums. Could've sworn I heard her in my head shouting, "Read this or you do not love me!" So I read it and well...meh. I missed the age-appropriate boat on that one, I guess. But hey, at least I was smart enough not to give her my scathing review (yes, this would've been seen as a scathing review in her eyes). I just said, "It was nice," and that's the story of how I managed to stay married.
The End
Read
July 23, 2019"Sweet dreams are made of this
Who am I to disagree?
I travel the world
And the seven seas,
Everybody's looking for something."
Eurythmics
You have plenty of time to put this book in your reading queue before the movie release in March of 2018 starring Chris Pine and Reese Witherspoon. Create some synergy by reading the book and then watching the movie.
Check out the trailer.
A Wrinkle in Time 2018 Movie Trailer
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at:https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
May 2, 2018
I was scared to reread this book, I hadn't read it since I was in seventh grade and that was a loooong time ago. A Wrinkle in Time was the book I would read as a kid when I was in a bad mood or bored or just because I wanted to get wrapped up in the magic of another world. I read A Wrinkle in Time for the first time in second grade and it made me fall in love with reading. Of course I liked to read before then but this book turned me into the voracious reader I am today. So as I said before I was scared to reread this book after all these years given how much it meant to my childhood. I worried I wouldn't like it and I didn't want to destroy the memory of this book.
So how do I feel after rereading it?
I didn't love it as much as I did when I was a child but that was an impossible bar to reach. I have to admit I was very confused for the majority of the book. I don't know how I understood this book as a 8 year old when I could barely keep up as a 32 year old. I'm glad I reread it and I'm glad I didn't hate it. My childhood memories remain intact. Had this been my first time reading my rating would have been lower(2.5-3 stars) but since I probably wouldn't be the reader I am today or the woman I am today without this book 4 stars seems a fitting rating.
The Bookbum Bookclub
2018 Bookriot Read Harder Challenge: A Children's Classic Published Before 1980
Around the year in 52 books: A book from Amazon's 100 books to read in a lifetime
2018 Popsugar Reading Challenge: a book with an ugly cover.
So how do I feel after rereading it?
I didn't love it as much as I did when I was a child but that was an impossible bar to reach. I have to admit I was very confused for the majority of the book. I don't know how I understood this book as a 8 year old when I could barely keep up as a 32 year old. I'm glad I reread it and I'm glad I didn't hate it. My childhood memories remain intact. Had this been my first time reading my rating would have been lower(2.5-3 stars) but since I probably wouldn't be the reader I am today or the woman I am today without this book 4 stars seems a fitting rating.
The Bookbum Bookclub
2018 Bookriot Read Harder Challenge: A Children's Classic Published Before 1980
Around the year in 52 books: A book from Amazon's 100 books to read in a lifetime
2018 Popsugar Reading Challenge: a book with an ugly cover.
September 18, 2018
We all want to fit in somehow. We also want to be ourselves and thus stand out a little bit, but basically we don't want to deviate too much from "the norm" because it's usually considered bad by others (funny, considering that we're pretty much all feeling the same way so we should just let the others be) and especially children often have a hard time when not fitting in with their peers. Thus, being different can be risky.
Meg is a girl that doesn't fit in. Her parents are multiple PhDs and have taught her and her siblings a thing or two (about maths mostly) with the result that Meg can often not understand why she is supposed to solve a (mathematical) problem in school this way instead of that. The problem is that neither her teachers nor the other kids in school are thrilled with what her parents have already taught her and she is therefore subject to verbal bullying from both groups.
Meg has three brothers: twins (Sandy and Dennys) and Charles Wallace. The former two know how to play the game and usually don't let anything get to them. The latter is 5 years old and usually doesn't speak at all because he knows full well that his correct and adult way of speaking - to say nothing of knowing peoples' minds - would freak others out. He prefers letting them think he cannot speak and is "dumb". He's also Meg's confidant and (thanks to his ability) always knows what she and their mother need.
The children live in a house with their mother who conducts experiments in a room off the kitchen. Sadly, the childrens' father has been missing for over a year, leaving the family emotionally desperate. He worked with the government and there isn't any information the family is given by way of explanation. The cruel people of town speak about him having left for another woman, which doesn't make Meg feel any better, of course. In fact, Meg hates people for being so unfair and ignorant and she frequently grows impatient with the way things are (leading to her getting into trouble).
Thanks to her gifted brother Charles Wallace, the family encounters a peculiar old woman called Mrs. Whatsit. The following day, Meg and Charles Wallace not only meet Mrs. Whatsit's sister (Mrs. Who) but also a boy from school - a popular boy, Calvin, who nevertheless seems to have enough troubles of his own and reveals to only be popular because he is what everyone expects of him without it really being him.
To go into such detail about the children is important to me because they are the central characters. Sure, Mrs. Which, Mrs. Whatsit and Mrs. Who are important as well and the kids meet other creatures besides them, but the author managed to truly write a story for and about children.
Anyway, at one point, the three ladies reveal to Meg, Charles Wallace and Calvin that they want to help getting back Meg's and Charles Wallace's father because he is in great peril. Thus, they take them on a fantastic journey through several galaxies.
It's a tale of all your faults being necessary at the right time if you can apply them properly, of perseverance, love, and self-sacrifice. It's about the darkness in the world and that we can't simply do nothing, even if that might seem seductively easier. It's also about celebrating who you are instead of homogenizing the entire world.
Camazotz, a world the children travel to while trying to find their father, is the perfect example of what happens when everyone has to be like everybody else. Not only does it make the world grey and dull, it also does not make the people in it happy.
This is definitely a tale I'd read to my children if I had any, because it teaches so much about people, the world, perception, and looking beyond the surface. It's also about compassion and intelligence and hard lessons that all people need to learn at one point in their lives or another and the author had a wonderful way of not only delighting me when I travelled to distant planets with the children, but of also breaking my heart once or twice.
I loved the prose, I loved the author's imagination, I loved the children and everyone they encountered for the colourful worlds they inhabited and their strangeness. I loved how the interaction of light and dark was portrayed, how our way of seeing the world was challenged, and the fact that the book was filled with scientific topics, explained so children could understand them. In the introduction to my edition, the author said that the book had been rejected many times, usually because nobody could tell what it was (it was as different as its main characters) and the publishers said that children would never "get it" - to which the author commented that children usually perceive much more than adults, and her own children (demanding more writing from her) were proof enough for her to persevere. I therefore love her self-imposed high standard to make this a tale for children, about children, that nevertheless equally thrills thanks to the adventure and educates through the imbedded facts. It is rather fascinating even though there are plenty of religious themes embedded as well (though much more subtly than C.S. Lewis did in most of his books).
I have the audiobook that was read by Hope Davis and was delighted about her narration. I've listened to a number of audiobooks lately but she must be one of the top 3 narrators I've heard so far and I hope she's narrated the rest of the series as well.
Because this is a quintet and while you could technically regard this as a standalone, it literally ends in the middle of a sentence from Mrs. Whatsit which caught me by complete surprise and left me wanting more (nice touch). *lol*
Meg is a girl that doesn't fit in. Her parents are multiple PhDs and have taught her and her siblings a thing or two (about maths mostly) with the result that Meg can often not understand why she is supposed to solve a (mathematical) problem in school this way instead of that. The problem is that neither her teachers nor the other kids in school are thrilled with what her parents have already taught her and she is therefore subject to verbal bullying from both groups.
Meg has three brothers: twins (Sandy and Dennys) and Charles Wallace. The former two know how to play the game and usually don't let anything get to them. The latter is 5 years old and usually doesn't speak at all because he knows full well that his correct and adult way of speaking - to say nothing of knowing peoples' minds - would freak others out. He prefers letting them think he cannot speak and is "dumb". He's also Meg's confidant and (thanks to his ability) always knows what she and their mother need.
The children live in a house with their mother who conducts experiments in a room off the kitchen. Sadly, the childrens' father has been missing for over a year, leaving the family emotionally desperate. He worked with the government and there isn't any information the family is given by way of explanation. The cruel people of town speak about him having left for another woman, which doesn't make Meg feel any better, of course. In fact, Meg hates people for being so unfair and ignorant and she frequently grows impatient with the way things are (leading to her getting into trouble).
Thanks to her gifted brother Charles Wallace, the family encounters a peculiar old woman called Mrs. Whatsit. The following day, Meg and Charles Wallace not only meet Mrs. Whatsit's sister (Mrs. Who) but also a boy from school - a popular boy, Calvin, who nevertheless seems to have enough troubles of his own and reveals to only be popular because he is what everyone expects of him without it really being him.
To go into such detail about the children is important to me because they are the central characters. Sure, Mrs. Which, Mrs. Whatsit and Mrs. Who are important as well and the kids meet other creatures besides them, but the author managed to truly write a story for and about children.
Anyway, at one point, the three ladies reveal to Meg, Charles Wallace and Calvin that they want to help getting back Meg's and Charles Wallace's father because he is in great peril. Thus, they take them on a fantastic journey through several galaxies.
It's a tale of all your faults being necessary at the right time if you can apply them properly, of perseverance, love, and self-sacrifice. It's about the darkness in the world and that we can't simply do nothing, even if that might seem seductively easier. It's also about celebrating who you are instead of homogenizing the entire world.
Camazotz, a world the children travel to while trying to find their father, is the perfect example of what happens when everyone has to be like everybody else. Not only does it make the world grey and dull, it also does not make the people in it happy.
This is definitely a tale I'd read to my children if I had any, because it teaches so much about people, the world, perception, and looking beyond the surface. It's also about compassion and intelligence and hard lessons that all people need to learn at one point in their lives or another and the author had a wonderful way of not only delighting me when I travelled to distant planets with the children, but of also breaking my heart once or twice.
I loved the prose, I loved the author's imagination, I loved the children and everyone they encountered for the colourful worlds they inhabited and their strangeness. I loved how the interaction of light and dark was portrayed, how our way of seeing the world was challenged, and the fact that the book was filled with scientific topics, explained so children could understand them. In the introduction to my edition, the author said that the book had been rejected many times, usually because nobody could tell what it was (it was as different as its main characters) and the publishers said that children would never "get it" - to which the author commented that children usually perceive much more than adults, and her own children (demanding more writing from her) were proof enough for her to persevere. I therefore love her self-imposed high standard to make this a tale for children, about children, that nevertheless equally thrills thanks to the adventure and educates through the imbedded facts. It is rather fascinating even though there are plenty of religious themes embedded as well (though much more subtly than C.S. Lewis did in most of his books).
I have the audiobook that was read by Hope Davis and was delighted about her narration. I've listened to a number of audiobooks lately but she must be one of the top 3 narrators I've heard so far and I hope she's narrated the rest of the series as well.
Because this is a quintet and while you could technically regard this as a standalone, it literally ends in the middle of a sentence from Mrs. Whatsit which caught me by complete surprise and left me wanting more (nice touch). *lol*
November 26, 2025
A strange book and that is both its strength and its weakness.
On the one hand, it’s a classic children’s fantasy in the spirit of "Percy Jackson" and "Narnia", with clear archetypal roles, an adventurous rhythm, and unambiguous messages. On the other hand, the novel tries to be something more, a science-fiction parable about space, time, the fifth dimension, and eternal oppositions like good versus evil, faith versus doubt. This is exactly where the dissonance appears: the book wants to be both simple and profound, but it often falls into the gap between these two ambitions.
One of the most obvious weaknesses is the way the sci-fi elements are presented. Although the novel uses terms like "tesseract", five-dimensional geometry, and the deformation of spacetime, these are more decorative words than actual scientific ideas. The science functions like magic, a catalyst for the plot rather than a logical engine. For today’s reader, used to sci-fi where theory stands behind the narrative, this approach can be disappointing. But we should also consider the era in which the novel was written, when science fiction freely blended metaphysics and physics. Even so, the contrast between what is promised and what is delivered remains noticeable.
The characters also bear the imprint of their time. They are strongly stereotypical, the quiet genius child, the stormy and insecure teenage girl, the noble and supportive friend. In the context of children’s literature this isn’t unexpected, but it does make the story predictable. The paradox is that the book sometimes seems to strive for real psychological depth, only to immediately return to the simplest, smoothest solutions typical of children’s novels.
What’s interesting is that the novel’s messages are a mix of very good and overly literal. For example, the idea that “equality” does not mean “sameness” is presented in a way even an adult reader would find meaningful and important. But right after that, the book suddenly shifts to simplified moral dilemmas in which characters are either completely helpless or absolutely unbeatable, like a chess game with no moves between “check” and “checkmate.” This leaves no room for real choice, and therefore no room for real growth.
The theme of faith that L’Engle explores also feels somewhat artificial. She attempts to present spirituality as a support in a world where science is incomplete. But since the scientific aspect is superficial, the “faith versus reason” conflict lacks real tension. The book needs conflict, but often resolves it through predetermined moral truths rather than through character development.
In the end, "A Wrinkle in Time" is a novel that tries to be both a children’s book and something that transcends children’s literature, but this ambition doesn’t always work in its favor. For some readers this will be charming; for others, disappointing. The feeling that the book moves up and down between lofty ideas and childlike simplifications is completely justified. And although it contains moments with truly good messages, the novel did not leave me wanting to continue with the other books in the series.
Pre_read:
A kids’ sci-fi book I know nothing about. I don’t think I could ask for more.
On the one hand, it’s a classic children’s fantasy in the spirit of "Percy Jackson" and "Narnia", with clear archetypal roles, an adventurous rhythm, and unambiguous messages. On the other hand, the novel tries to be something more, a science-fiction parable about space, time, the fifth dimension, and eternal oppositions like good versus evil, faith versus doubt. This is exactly where the dissonance appears: the book wants to be both simple and profound, but it often falls into the gap between these two ambitions.
One of the most obvious weaknesses is the way the sci-fi elements are presented. Although the novel uses terms like "tesseract", five-dimensional geometry, and the deformation of spacetime, these are more decorative words than actual scientific ideas. The science functions like magic, a catalyst for the plot rather than a logical engine. For today’s reader, used to sci-fi where theory stands behind the narrative, this approach can be disappointing. But we should also consider the era in which the novel was written, when science fiction freely blended metaphysics and physics. Even so, the contrast between what is promised and what is delivered remains noticeable.
The characters also bear the imprint of their time. They are strongly stereotypical, the quiet genius child, the stormy and insecure teenage girl, the noble and supportive friend. In the context of children’s literature this isn’t unexpected, but it does make the story predictable. The paradox is that the book sometimes seems to strive for real psychological depth, only to immediately return to the simplest, smoothest solutions typical of children’s novels.
What’s interesting is that the novel’s messages are a mix of very good and overly literal. For example, the idea that “equality” does not mean “sameness” is presented in a way even an adult reader would find meaningful and important. But right after that, the book suddenly shifts to simplified moral dilemmas in which characters are either completely helpless or absolutely unbeatable, like a chess game with no moves between “check” and “checkmate.” This leaves no room for real choice, and therefore no room for real growth.
The theme of faith that L’Engle explores also feels somewhat artificial. She attempts to present spirituality as a support in a world where science is incomplete. But since the scientific aspect is superficial, the “faith versus reason” conflict lacks real tension. The book needs conflict, but often resolves it through predetermined moral truths rather than through character development.
In the end, "A Wrinkle in Time" is a novel that tries to be both a children’s book and something that transcends children’s literature, but this ambition doesn’t always work in its favor. For some readers this will be charming; for others, disappointing. The feeling that the book moves up and down between lofty ideas and childlike simplifications is completely justified. And although it contains moments with truly good messages, the novel did not leave me wanting to continue with the other books in the series.
Pre_read:
A kids’ sci-fi book I know nothing about. I don’t think I could ask for more.
April 29, 2012
I expected to really like this book. Its won several awards, and over the years I've always heard generally good things about it.
So what happened?
Truthfully, it's hard to pinpoint exactly. To explain in broad strokes, I just never connected with the story. There seemed to be little, if any, internal logic to the events that happen. There is no reason why the children are burdened with such a delicate "life or death" task that they could easily screw up. There's no reason why they are "helped" until the very end, where they are suddenly supposed to be able to solve some hokey battle of wits to survive and rescue someone.
The characters are almost as unlikable as the thin plot. Meg, the oldest child, complains incessantly and is scared the whole time. Her little brother, Charles Wallace, is interesting because of his strange ability to feel what someone's thinking, but it's never explained why he is like this. He seems way too precocious for his age, even for someone with his ability. Calvin, the random kid thrown into the story for seemingly no reason at all, has zero personality and exists solely to hold Meg's hand every time she's scared (which is all the time) and to boost her fragile ego with a few compliments.
Like a lot of young adult fiction, A Wrinkle in Time falls into the trap of pitting an absolute "good" versus an absolute "evil." However, even this cosmic battle of good and evil is poorly defined. Examples of people who are fighting the "good" fight, according to the story, are Jesus, Buddah, and Gandhi. The "bad" is represented by a dark cloud and an extra-dimensional being called "It" who controls an entire planet of people like some 1950's cartoon version of a brainwashing socialistic dictatorship. I found it strange that the most evil thing that entire galaxies are fighting against does not desire chaos, power, or bloodshed, but a passive mind control through which its victims sacrifice individuality for equality. Wow, that's...so...evil? It's like reading Red Scare propaganda from the 1950's.
L'Engle kills the tone of this story by peppering the narrative with strange, out-of-place declarations of Christian belief. For a story that seems largely secular, the odd Bible quotes and religious one-sidedness felt out of place. In a world where an unseen God can murder all of humanity with a flood and wind up on the "good" list, while an egalitarian dictator who asserts its will without killing anyone is on the "evil" list, sign me up for the latter.
I could never get into this story. There were okay bits here and there, but nothing cohesive enough to matter. At least it was refreshing to read a YA book where the parents aren't dead. Most of the time it seems a kid can't have any fun in literature unless their parents have kicked the bucket.
Maybe I would have enjoyed this book more as a child, but as an adult who has read a lot of fiction, this felt like it was slapped together without and real meaning or direction.
So what happened?
Truthfully, it's hard to pinpoint exactly. To explain in broad strokes, I just never connected with the story. There seemed to be little, if any, internal logic to the events that happen. There is no reason why the children are burdened with such a delicate "life or death" task that they could easily screw up. There's no reason why they are "helped" until the very end, where they are suddenly supposed to be able to solve some hokey battle of wits to survive and rescue someone.
The characters are almost as unlikable as the thin plot. Meg, the oldest child, complains incessantly and is scared the whole time. Her little brother, Charles Wallace, is interesting because of his strange ability to feel what someone's thinking, but it's never explained why he is like this. He seems way too precocious for his age, even for someone with his ability. Calvin, the random kid thrown into the story for seemingly no reason at all, has zero personality and exists solely to hold Meg's hand every time she's scared (which is all the time) and to boost her fragile ego with a few compliments.
Like a lot of young adult fiction, A Wrinkle in Time falls into the trap of pitting an absolute "good" versus an absolute "evil." However, even this cosmic battle of good and evil is poorly defined. Examples of people who are fighting the "good" fight, according to the story, are Jesus, Buddah, and Gandhi. The "bad" is represented by a dark cloud and an extra-dimensional being called "It" who controls an entire planet of people like some 1950's cartoon version of a brainwashing socialistic dictatorship. I found it strange that the most evil thing that entire galaxies are fighting against does not desire chaos, power, or bloodshed, but a passive mind control through which its victims sacrifice individuality for equality. Wow, that's...so...evil? It's like reading Red Scare propaganda from the 1950's.
L'Engle kills the tone of this story by peppering the narrative with strange, out-of-place declarations of Christian belief. For a story that seems largely secular, the odd Bible quotes and religious one-sidedness felt out of place. In a world where an unseen God can murder all of humanity with a flood and wind up on the "good" list, while an egalitarian dictator who asserts its will without killing anyone is on the "evil" list, sign me up for the latter.
I could never get into this story. There were okay bits here and there, but nothing cohesive enough to matter. At least it was refreshing to read a YA book where the parents aren't dead. Most of the time it seems a kid can't have any fun in literature unless their parents have kicked the bucket.
Maybe I would have enjoyed this book more as a child, but as an adult who has read a lot of fiction, this felt like it was slapped together without and real meaning or direction.
June 30, 2020
I read this one a few years ago and just realized I never gave it a star review. I did read it when I wasn't always writing reviews, so here is a brief take on what I remember . . .
I had high hopes for this one because it is considered a classic. Many people read this one when they are in elementary/middle school and I remember back when I was that age hearing my fellow students singing its praises. A bit odd that I never tried it back then! When I finally got to it as an adult, those hopes I had built up were not lived up to.
Maybe if I had read it as a kid I would have felt different. But, to adult me it was just a bizarre and haphazard series of events - and not in a good way. I struggled to stay interested or even be able to tell what was going on. I do remember that since it is highly revered I fought my hardest to find something that I enjoyed about it.
You shouldn't have to fight to enjoy something if it is truly meant for you.
So, it is not one that I can recommend, but I am glad many love it and have fond memories of it.
I had high hopes for this one because it is considered a classic. Many people read this one when they are in elementary/middle school and I remember back when I was that age hearing my fellow students singing its praises. A bit odd that I never tried it back then! When I finally got to it as an adult, those hopes I had built up were not lived up to.
Maybe if I had read it as a kid I would have felt different. But, to adult me it was just a bizarre and haphazard series of events - and not in a good way. I struggled to stay interested or even be able to tell what was going on. I do remember that since it is highly revered I fought my hardest to find something that I enjoyed about it.
You shouldn't have to fight to enjoy something if it is truly meant for you.
So, it is not one that I can recommend, but I am glad many love it and have fond memories of it.
April 1, 2022
I reread a childhood favorite in one night. Who can forget the cozy Murry kitchen, the way science and religion are valued equally, tesseracts and planet adventures. If a book can be a warm blanket, this is mine.
When I as young, I loved Meg because I felt as awkward as her, and also as unable to grasp a boy ever liking me the way Calvin just does. But I also had those weird insights in ways not quite as dramatic as Charles Wallace, so I was all of those kids. And my Dad worked all the time, maybe not on another planet, but far enough away for my Mom to run the household, minus the science experiments and liverwurst-and-cream cheese sandwiches.
When I as young, I loved Meg because I felt as awkward as her, and also as unable to grasp a boy ever liking me the way Calvin just does. But I also had those weird insights in ways not quite as dramatic as Charles Wallace, so I was all of those kids. And my Dad worked all the time, maybe not on another planet, but far enough away for my Mom to run the household, minus the science experiments and liverwurst-and-cream cheese sandwiches.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43,050 reviews