It was a dark and stormy night.

And so begins one of the best stories ever with one of the most improbably wonderful first lines. I read this first in fourth grade, under the pressure of my mother. She insisted I would love it despite the fact that I was in a phase of "anything not based on history or about living in the woods/island/frozen tundra alone sucks!!" So it took me a while to pick it up. Then I simply couldn't put it down. I have probably read this book upwards of fifty times, and it never seems to get old. Perhaps because I so related to Meg (except for being good at math), perhaps because I somehow understood the Christian theology on a level I wouldn't fully get until much later. But honestly, I think it was the sincere horror of "IT" and that planet.

The messages this book sends are remarkable. It's layered and complex and still able to be enjoyed by a ten-year-old. I'm so glad it's never been turned into a movie. I find it highly ironic that it took so long for L'Engle to find a publisher for this. A Severed Wasp was sold first, I think, and then she shopped this around and couldn't find any takers.

I have about three copies - all different editions. I give this away as a present all the time, though I've done it so often now, I'm going to have to find a new fall-back book. This is the book I tend to reread when I'm feeling particularly down. It's still innocent L'Engle, it's still the safe world of the Murrays. She develops into a harder person, I think, with the Austins and even the O'Keefes (at least, through Polly). This book reminds me of simpler times, and how things tend to always come back to your roots, to the beginning.

I give this book three stars.

During the time when A Wrinkle in Time was published, there were few female protagonists in fiction. The idea of a young girl going on an adventure to save her brother and father challenges the stereotype that women are only passive.

However, I didn't connect with much in this book. The plot seemed disorganized and difficult to follow. The characters felt one-dimensional. The religious allusions simplified the complexity of other themes in the story, such as good vs. evil.

I really wanted to like this book more than I did. But I'm glad that girls and women have gained inspiration and felt empowered from reading A Wrinkle in Time.

But why me? Madeleine asked in confusion.

Do I have to do it? she pleaded.

You must, Mrs Whatsit insisted. Your world is in grave danger. Very, very grave danger. You have to warn them.

But I don't know how! Madeleine exclaimed angrily. What is this danger? How am I going to explain it? It's impossible!

Certum est quia impossibile est, Mrs Who said. It is certain, because it is impossible. Latin. Tertullian.

Wwe wwill hhelp yyou, Mrs Which interrupted. Iff onlyy yyou ddidn't iinsist on uusing wwords...

You see! Madeleine said. 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, Mrs Whatsit murmured. 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? Mrs Whatsit asked 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, Mrs Who agreed. Hello, ax-handle. Swedish. Saying indicating lack of coherence.

You must have faith, Mrs Whatsit said 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, Mrs Who said. You only see truly with the heart. What is important is invisible to the eyes. French. Saint-Exupéry.

It won't work, Madeleine muttered. 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, Mrs Whatsit said. 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, Madeleine said 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, Mrs Which said. Nnow wwe hhave tto ggo. BBut wwe'll bbe bback.

As a child, I must have read this book countless times. Recently, after reading an adaption in the form of a graphic novel and feeling like Charles Wallace eating the food of Camazotz, I was drawn to reread the original. I hoped to replace that sawdust taste with the original wonder, and it worked. It also showed me a few places where the graphic novel took shortcuts and didn't make sense if you didn't already know the story.

Thinking about the film adaptions, I realize now that I've never thought of this book as science fiction or fantasy. As a kid, I wouldn't have known what that was anyway, and it didn't lead me to read more of those genres. It scared me, thrilled me, and made my heart pound. I found it odd, yet also matter-of-fact. I loved it for all those reasons. I related to Meg's insecurity and fear, if not her anger. I wouldn't have fully understood references like to The Tempest, but they were likely planted in my brain, waiting for later recognition. No graphic novel or filmed version will ever match the (simple yet effective) images in my head.

P.S. On page 186 of my childhood copy of the book, I wrote my name in script at the bottom, but added an extra's' to it. This was a highly unusual act for me. I puzzled over it until I thought maybe I was trying to write myself into the story by comparing my name to the word tesseract.

P.P.S. It's fitting that I finished this adult reread on my mom's birthday. She, always trying to keep up with my reading addiction, enrolled me in a mail-order book club for children that sent me this book, as well as others that became favorites.

Last reread: April 22, 2018

Beloved by many, A Wrinkle in Time is supposed to be a charming and whimsical tale of three children's extraordinary adventure through the vast reaches of time and space.

However, for some reason, it only managed to evoke in me a feeling as if I was experiencing a really intense and unpleasant anxiety attack.

Reading this book reminded me vividly of the time when my grade 7 music teacher compelled us to watch that extremely creepy, animated Beatles movie, Yellow Submarine.

A Wrinkle in Time has a quality that makes it read like a Dr. Seuss story, but with a darker and weirder undertone. I'm not entirely sure how to put it into words, but there's just something truly unsettling about it.

Beyond that, it's simply really dull. The characters are extremely one-dimensional and lack any real depth or complexity. The dialogue comes across as shrill and artificial, lacking the authenticity that would make it engaging.

I really wanted to persevere and see it through to the end since it's such a short book, but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I am completely baffled by this rather tedious and somewhat sinister story.

It's a mystery to me how it has managed to gain such a following when it fails to capture my interest and instead leaves me with a sense of unease and boredom.

Perhaps I'm just not the right audience for this particular type of book, but I can't help but feel disappointed by the overall experience.

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. The lack of detailed descriptions made it difficult for me to fully immerse myself in the story.

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. As an adult, I may have different expectations and perspectives compared to when I was younger.

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

Madeleine L'Engle is a remarkable Christian writer. In my view, she is even more so than C. S. Lewis. The influence of Christian Theology, and in later books, biblical history, is intricately woven throughout all the books in this series. However, it is presented in a way that is not offensive to non-Christian readers like myself.

To be entirely honest, when my mother first read this to me at around 7 years old, I was completely unaware of the impact L'Engle's faith had on her writing. It was not until I was twelve or thirteen and had read the entire series multiple times that it became evident to me.

But let me digress for a moment. What truly makes this book (and others in the series) special has nothing directly to do with the writer's faith. It lies in the different types of non-sexual love found between family, friends, society, and the individual. I understand that this is a significant aspect for a children's novel, but it is generally shown rather than told, allowing young children to learn by example.

Going back to the faith aspect for a moment, it is like a large parable demonstrating how the New Testament (Protestant Christian, at least) advises people to form and maintain relationships. We are to love and respect our parents, even when the world may not. Meg believes in and loves her father, despite his odd theories and years of absence. We are to care for our siblings regardless of personal disputes, just like Meg and her brothers. We are to show compassion for our neighbors despite what others in society may think (as seen in Calvin's friendship with Meg and Charles), and to care for them even if it means personal risk, as in some of the later scenes. Overall, it showcases non-sexual love as one of the most powerful forces in the universe, a moral lesson that every faith can embrace.

So, before I delve into my thoughts on this book, it's crucial to remind you all that the star ratings are based on *whether I personally would recommend the book*. I'm not commenting on the actual quality of the book unless I specifically mention quality as an issue in my review.

I feel the need to reestablish this because, obviously, when reviewing a modern classic like A Wrinkle In Time, the writing is likely to be good. That's not the basis of my stars. If I were basing the star rating solely on writing and enjoyability, I might give this book a 4. However, it gets 1.5 stars because I was concerned about other aspects of the book.

Let's begin by defining dualism, shall we?

Dualism, as per the dictionary, is “a religious doctrine that the universe contains opposed powers of good and evil, especially seen as balanced equals”. As Christians, we don't believe in dualism. God is sovereign and all-powerful. “Satan” or “Evil” is not equally powerful with God. There's no “eternal battle of good and evil” - God completely wins, Satan is thrown into the lake of fire, and that's the end of it.

Unfortunately, I can't support A Wrinkle In Time as it's firmly rooted in the concept of dualism. There's a “Dark Thing” in the universe that aims to claim different planets, and there's a constant power struggle between “light” and “darkness” with some planets succumbing, some triumphing, and some “fighting” against it.

Also, apparently, the worst thing this “Dark Thing” can do is take away our decision-making and individuality? I found that strange.

This wouldn't have bothered me as much if the book were set in a separate, entirely imaginary world - then I could classify it as pure fantasy. But I couldn't do that because L’Engle situates the whole thing in our universe and specifically seems to be trying to say something about God in the process. In this book, God is not all-powerful, planets are “fighting” against “The Dark Thing” (mainly with love), and this whole thing isn't presented as an allegory since Jesus is actually mentioned as one of Earth’s “fighters” against “The Dark Thing”. Jesus is mentioned as being just as important as people like Rembrandt and Shakespeare. What a compliment (sarcasm intended). Since the author even inserts Bible verses into the story, I felt like she was trying to fit Christianity into this imaginary narrative of the history of the universe. Creative? Sure. Biblically sound? No, not at all.

Jesus is not a “fighter” against Evil; He is God Himself, who became a man (while remaining God) to save us from our own sin when we trust in Him. God is not in an eternal struggle with “The Dark Thing”; He is infinitely sovereign and powerful over everything.

Maybe you think I'm being overly critical of what's supposed to be a fantasy story, but I firmly believe we shouldn't accept any book at face value but should examine the worldview being communicated through the story. And I'm sorry to burst any bubbles, but the worldview here is definitely not in line with God’s Word.

I'm particularly worried that this book is being read by children due to a few references to occult practices and symbols presented by the “good” characters. We have a “Happy Medium” who observes things in her crystal ball, abilities that seem like “psychic” abilities to me, and a god-like character that wears the classic witch’s attire - pointy hat, black cloak, and a broom. I'm especially concerned about the author mixing Christian references and Bible verses with occult symbols and practices. For Christian parents, I'm afraid that giving this book to our children could inadvertently convey the message that these things are okay and can coexist with Christianity, unless parents carefully discuss the problem of mixing the two.

Personally, I won't be giving this book to my children at all, at least not until they're able to read it with a critical eye and protect their minds. Maybe not even then. To me, the way Christianity was combined with these competing views about God and the world is quite insidious, and I'd recommend approaching this book with extreme caution.

I had high expectations for this book. It has won several awards, and over the years, I've always heard generally good things about it.

So, what exactly happened?

Truth be told, it's difficult to precisely pinpoint. In broad terms, I simply never connected with the story. The events that occur seem to have little, if any, internal logic. There is no rhyme or reason as to why the children are burdened with such a delicate "life or death" task that they could easily botch. Nor is there a reason why they are "helped" only until the very end, when they are suddenly expected to be able to solve some cheesy battle of wits to survive and rescue someone.

The characters are almost as unlikable as the flimsy plot. Meg, the eldest child, complains non-stop and is scared throughout. Her younger brother, Charles Wallace, is interesting due to his strange ability to sense what someone is thinking, but it's never explained why he is like this. He seems far 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 whenever 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" against an absolute "evil." However, even this cosmic battle of good and evil is poorly defined. According to the story, examples of those fighting the "good" fight are Jesus, Buddha, and Gandhi. The "bad" is represented by a dark cloud and an extra-dimensional being called "It" that controls an entire planet of people like some 1950s cartoon version of a brainwashing socialist dictatorship. I found it odd that the most evil thing that entire galaxies are fighting against does not desire chaos, power, or bloodshed, but rather 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 1950s.

L'Engle spoils 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 kill all of humanity with a flood and still be on the "good" list, while an egalitarian dictator who asserts its will without killing anyone is on the "evil" list, count me in for the latter.

I could never get into this story. There were okay parts 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 passed away.

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 thrown together without any real meaning or direction.

I just finished reading this for the first time since, perhaps, college?

Twelve-year-old Meg Murry, her precocious five-year-old brother Charles Wallace, and their new friend Calvin encounter some highly peculiar beings who identify themselves as Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, and Mrs. Which. This strange and quirky trio whisks the children away on an interstellar adventure to locate and rescue Meg and Charles Wallace's missing father. They traverse space and time through tesseracts (the "wrinkle" in the fabric of reality) and engage in a battle against the darkness that has usurped other planets and looms over ours.

This 1962 publication is noticeably old-fashioned and somewhat simplistic in several respects. The symbolism and its connections to religion and scriptures lack subtlety, and Meg's anger and stubbornness can become tiresome. However, it is interesting to observe how these character traits can serve her well in certain situations. Additionally, it must be noted that this is a middle grade book, yet many older readers cherish it. There is truly something wonderful about the book's ultimate message and themes. I thoroughly enjoyed revisiting it after all these years.

I am going to adhere to my original 4-star rating, although I am quite certain that the nostalgia factor is influencing this assessment. A full review will follow shortly!

January 2018 buddy read with the Pantaloonless group.

Original post: I read this book at least two or three times during my teen or young adult years (in fact, I own and have read the entire series), but it has been a considerable time since I last perused this particular volume. I am intrigued to see how it fares upon re-reading!

One of these days, I will finally come to the realization that I am indeed an adult, and will cease my longing to relive an alternate childhood.

Even though Hollywood persists in creating flashy (re)adaptations of every existing children's book. Damn you!

The easiest and most instinctive thing to do when confronted with failure is to identify a culprit. Preferably someone other than oneself, so I single out my country's school system. Judging by its compulsory reading list, it's evident that a severely depressed child or teenager is what it takes to excel in Literature class.

The reading list features such charming stories as: baby is eaten by eagles, magic sheep witnesses the last will of a suicidal shepherd, a mythical star has its heart broken by an uncaring princess, a materialistic peasant climbs over everyone and everything to obtain a piece of land, or my personal favorite: a French boy breaks an innocent Indian girl's heart - if only because of the absence of any tragic deaths.

So believe me when I say that I'm positively green with envy when others get a freaking space-fairy-tale to analyze. Not only does it have an interesting title (A Wrinkle in Time), but its author also has an absolutely fabulous (pen?)name (Madeleine L'Engle). Additionally, the story manages to get by with minimal religious references. Meaning... if no one explicitly mentions God or Jesus, I can convince myself that it has nothing to do with them.

What I'm trying to convey is that I should have positively adored this book! So feeling nothing but boredom and irritation understandably put me in a rather foul mood.

It began well enough with the heroine being bullied for being different, but before I could fully comprehend the extent of Meg's troubles, she is bombarded with a huge dose of insta-love, space-travel, a villain whose endgame is never explained... all wrapped up in a series of utterly confusing events, filled with as many strange characters as 200 pages can accommodate.

Score: 1/5 stars

I was initially hoping that some beautiful visuals would at least make me like the movie, but I lasted less than 10 minutes. To be fair, I was on a plane, where my attention span is even shorter than usual.

I re-read this children's book in advance of seeing the new movie version starring Oprah Winfrey and Reese Witherspoon.

It has been approximately 30 years since I last read "A Wrinkle in Time", and it was truly a delight to revisit it. I was astonished by the number of scenes and snippets of dialogue that I could recall from my childhood! This is a remarkable and highly imaginative story that I would highly recommend.

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." This quote beautifully captures the essence of life, where we are given a framework but have the freedom to create our own unique experiences.

"We can't take any credit for our talents. It's how we use them that counts." It emphasizes the importance of using our abilities and gifts to make a positive impact.

"If you aren't unhappy sometimes you don't know how to be happy." This thought-provoking statement reminds us that experiencing both joy and sorrow is an essential part of life.

"Only a fool is not afraid." It acknowledges that fear is a natural emotion, but it's how we face it that defines us.

"There will no longer be so many pleasant things to look at if responsible people do not do something about the unpleasant ones." This quote calls upon us to take responsibility and make a difference in the world.