I was so nervous to reread this one due to all of the negative reviews.

I was worried I would have to relegate it to the shelf of "problematic childhood favourites" I've made for authors who use their platform to spew hate against the LGBTQ+ community. I went into A House Like A Lotus on high alert for any homophobic content because homophobic content in literature is not okay. Literature is how we learn how to emphasize with others and homophobia has no place on my shelves.

And I wonder what book those other reviewers read because:

"Of course lesbianism exists, and has since the beginning of history, and we have not always been compaionate. I thought it was now agreed that consenting adults were not to be persecuted [...]. We human beings are all in the enterprise of life together, and the journey isn’t easy for any of us."

Calvin says this in response to a homophobic comment Xan and Katie make. I find that A House Like A Lotus is like all other L'Engle books, simply about love. The largest theme of this book is about acceptance and "To deny friendship is unlove."

No, this book isn't perfect when it comes to LGBTQ+ allyship, but it was published in 1984. In 1984, it was still illegal to be a member of the LGBTQ+ community in the US, nevermind same-sex marriage (and sodomoy laws are still enforced in several US states). From books published in 2020 I expect a different portrayal of adults in same sex relationships and I get that from Rick Riordan and E.K. Johnston.

A House Like A Lotus was a teenage favourite, I connected with Max. I loved Max's self-portrait with "A shaft of light touched the skull, and the shape of bone was clean and pure."
Max's self-portrait no longer speaks to me in the same way, and I am glad because I have grown since I first read (and reread) A House Like A Lotus. Now Max speaks to me through “Sometimes our freedom comes in the way we accept things over which we have no control, things which may cause us great pain and even death.”

Some reviewers have commented on Zachary Gray's presence and I think he's needed as juxtaposition. I think we all need to be honest here as well, I would say yes to a young hot guy who wanted to come sightseeing with me in Greece. I also think he may be more accurate to pin at 18-20 (due to where he describes himself in his college journey - he isn't yet in law school), which isn't as terrible when compared to Polly's 16.

Also, this book really sells the setting of Greece. I really want to go after reading this book.

I still find A House Like a Lotus a beautiful story about love and acceptance. L'Engle's books always make me hopeful and open and forgiving and loving. I need to schedule a reread of all of her works.

The series ended poorly.

I was initially surprised by a very very relatively positive portrayal of a lesbian couple in a novel published in 1984. I kept telling myself that the don't-worry-Polly-you're-straight narrative was a product of the time. But then Max, dying and drunk, turns predatory and it felt like something written in 1954.

The book explored the question: What is love? I was upset by the sex scene and I wished to not have been exposed to Polly’s sexual experience. He was a much older man who later confessed to lusting after her. I understand that it was probably in the book to show that Polly also lusted back and how sexual behavior ruins a friendship.

I found the rest of the book an interesting exploration of the love question and what it is in friendships and family.

Third in the 'O'Keefe' series narrated by the teenage Polly. In this book she is almost seventeen, and beginning to explore adult life and feelings. She is alone in Athens when we meet her, clearly upset about something which is not revealed until about half way through the book.

There are a lot of flashbacks as Polly's thoughts and daydreams re-live some of her experiences in the past few years. Could be confusing, but it's very well written and I found it almost impossible to put down once I'd started, as more and more of the 'past' storyline is unfolded at just the right pace.

Some controversial and 'adult' issues are explored, with a sensitivity and awareness that would have been unusual in the 1980s when the book was written. I wouldn't recommend this for anyone below the age of about fifteen; it's far more thoughtful with less tension than the earlier two books in the series.

Four and a half stars would be fairer.

The least fantastical of the Polly books thus far, and also the most mature in theme and content. I thought L'Engle did well with it, on the whole, for her time and considering her audience (conservative Christians of the 1980s). She argues for accepting and loving people who believe and behave differently from you about important things, and she also argues for cross-cultural respect and friendship, and she also argues for the deep importance of learning to forgive people as you grow up. The way she handles the first two of these three things is now dated, I would say, in some important ways, and I still felt the emotional impact of the story from Polly's perspective.

BUT, ALL the spoilers ahead:  Why on earth do all three of the men Polly is not related to in this story have such TERRIBLE boundaries with this girl? Zachary Gray, we know why he has terrible boundaries, so I let him off the least harshly. He has never had a healthy relationship in his life and thinks sex will do instead. He embodies The Patriarchy and its results.

But YOU, Renny, should have know better than to keep hanging around, alone, with a 16-year-old you find extremely attractive, and what are we to make of the ''he is basically my big brother who talks exclusively about his medical research and also kisses me every time we hang out'' situation? You USED each other, my friends, not just when you had sex that one time, and you are responsible by virtue of age and experience, you Renny.

And YOU, Oumi, a married man ALSO in his mid-twenties, holding hands with and kissing a sixteen-year-old girl you just met? Polly, my dear girl, you had every right to misread those signs, but the novel paints it like this situation is her problem.

The fact that I have such strong feelings about this one speaks to its relative weight, I think; I also think that some of this the reader is supposed to grapple with, and some of it may be Convenient Plot Device (esp Oumi) and some may be unintentional patriarchy hangover on L'Engle's part. Goodness knows we've all got a bit of that going on.

Anyway. The verdict: flawed but not without power.

Three and a half stars. This book wanders around quite a bit more, with an obvious track and obvious conclusion. I'm fine with it; the characters you are supposed to like, you do, and the ones you are supposed to dislike, you do. Polly is someone whose personal choices demand a bit of eye-rolling, but I think we take into account her upbringing, her position in the family structure, her parents' upbringing, and the motivations of those around her, and it does seem to make sense.

I've seen readers tearing the book apart because of the perception of homophobia - I don't see it; I see youngsters (a cousin and younger brother) using schoolyard phrases and adopting schoolyard attitudes toward homosexuality; I see small-town attitudes from small-town minds offering little more than what one would expect from an age or two ago. We've all evolved since the writing of this book, but there are still those (a shrinking minority) who adopt these attitudes, but the attitudes and dialogue of an author's characters should hardly be license to assign them to the author herself.

Even with its strong message, this is not exactly the strongest book in the series, and most likely not one I'll be re-reading anytime soon. Still, good enough to read through to the end.

Sofia Coppola, I have a suggestion.

A YA novel about forgiveness; about growing up and learning how to forgive, even when it's our heroes who need to be forgiven. I didn't love it unreservedly - there are some very 80s tropes - but there were points that were beautiful, and I think it was the book I needed right now.

I have loved re-reading L'engle's work as an adult. It's largely due to the rate I devoured the Wrinkle in Time novels that I managed to escape the cult of creationism as a child. Due to her lacing science with fantasy and philosophy with fiction, I would return a book of hers to the library, and check out the next, and often with a book on a subject that a previous L'engle novel had addressed. With that said, I can't remember reading this one. And I'm a little sad I read it now. It's very engaging, although having a flashback be more interesting than the main story is always chancy, and you want to know more about the characters, but the homophobia is off the charts. I appreciate that this was written in the early 80s but to assume that a lesbian who is drunk is preying on you simply because they are a lesbian who is drunk is very homophobic. Additionally, the MC then runs into the arms of one mid-20s straight male, who, despite the MC being sixteen, takes her virginity. But he is somehow polite and heroic? Sorry, but what? Basically 3 starring for the storytelling and nostalgia. But also, I kind of want to visit Cyprus now.

This is by far the heaviest of the Wrinkle in Time and O'Keefe Family novels. While they are all coming of age stories and depict believable processing for the main characters, this one is set when Polly is 16 and has her wrestling some really big questions and trauma. It's still a good book (as long as you aren't bothered by the clear timestamps of late 20th century perspectives/prejudices). But I definitely enjoyed the other books more because they're a little lighter in tone.

It is probably not a fair assessment, but I kept thinking of this book with the alternate title Are you there Patricia Highsmith, It's me Polyhymnia.

The book is basically a coming of age book for our narrator Polly. Half comes in progressively traumatic flashback and half develops in the current time. The book vacillates between being open and progressive and then turning into troubling, regressive sections. The story explores Polly's complicated, troubled relationships with several characters, but I am most turned off by her relationship with Renny--who is set to look like the good guy. We get another visit from Zachary Gray...maybe he'll get his act together one of these days.

Perhaps another part of the book's melancholy is knowing what happened to our heroine from A Wrinkle in Time. Meg has a good family but cast away a lot of her personal ambition. She is happy with her family and happy to support her husband's work, but also clearly realizes what she gave up along the way.

I love what Madeleine L'Engle can bring to the table: scientific and faith-based exploration by awkward characters in the midst of a chaotic world. I've been reading deeper and deeper into her catalogue and unfortunately, it hasn't really paid off in this book.

Pros: Polly is a character who has generally different experiences and relationships than most mainstream American kids, so that's kind of food for thought. With Zachary, she is able to be in romantic situations without following them to sexland--cool. Her parents/uncles are approachable and even-keeled about pretty much every issue that most parents go into hysterics over--it's not that they endorse those issues but they'd rather talk through it. The title holds a great concept--how arrangements of people can unfold and create intensely significant environments for growth and development.

Cons: Zachary Gray. Everything he does or says falls flat and is predictable about 1,000,000 miles away. I didn't appreciate the ominous overtones about the terrible betrayal--it was poorly integrated and brought back awful memories of THE LOVE LETTERS. I felt that in A WRINKLE IN TIME series, you encountered weird characters that were actually pretty relate-able. Here, there's all these seemingly normal characters who ends up totally not connecting to the audience. By the time the big forgiveness theme is unrolled, I was disgusted and conflicted about it.