Comments on: A Sister’s Review: The Time Traveler’s Wife

By: My Two Year Blogiversary!

My Two Year Blogiversary! — Mon, 10 May 2010 12:17:21 +0000

[...] out of our comfort zone. We did The Memory Keeper’s Daughter, The Truth About Forever, and The Time Traveler’s Wife and did a vlog (with a special guest, little brother Kevin)! I also read Infinite Jest. That was a [...]

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:02:08 +0000

Thanks for reviewing TTW.

My name is Matt from Regal Literary, Audrey’s literary agency.

Readers of this blog might be interested in knowing that Regal is giving away ten advanced reader’s copies and three first edition hardcovers of the new Audrey Niffenegger book, Her Fearful Symmetry, on October 1st in a lottery to anyone who joins the facebook page as a fan and sends an e-mail to hfs@regal-literary.com. Good luck!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Her-Fearful-Symmetry/68080996784

By: Jenny aka "Sister"

Jenny aka "Sister" — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:26:49 +0000

I am glad that I could challenge you to think harder about books… I really liked this book book, and I am glad that you made me read it.

By: Lu

Lu — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:24:06 +0000

I love love love love love these reviews! There some of my favorites in the blogosphere! So, I’m really glad that you’re going to continue them.

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:18:52 +0000

Yeah, I think this was one of our better posts — I thought a lot about literary as I was trying to ask her questions and she fired questions back at me.

I agree with you on the time travel — it’s more of a trait than a plot device which works for me (although I can see it not working for other people, especially sci fi fans as Jeanne pointed out).

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:17:36 +0000

I think those are totally valid things not to get passed in the book. I read some sci fi, but I get annoyed spending too much time thinking about time travel, in particular, because it’s almost entirely impossible to think about logically — it’s a total paradox. So the fact that the book didn’t dwell on it, just made it a piece of the puzzle, was sort of refreshing for me.

One of the reasons I asked Jenny about it was for the reasons you mention it annoying you — she seems more likely to wonder about that stuff than I am (since I was a big fantasy reader when I was younger so I’m used to suspending disbelief for things like magic, etc.).

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:14:47 +0000

You should, I think it’s a lovely book! I was really moved by it the first time I read it.

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:13:36 +0000

Yeah, that’s a good question. I guess for me the distinction works because there are some books where a lot of things happen — The DaVinci Code, for example — but there isn’t much time spent addressing characters (which speak to human concerns and the human condition in some way). It’s through characters, not plot, that books start to get at some of the big questions humans ask which would make the book more literary. Maybe that works?

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:11:21 +0000

Yes, literary can be sort of ephemeral. I can think of books I consider literary and books that I don’t, but a whole lot of them fall somewhere on a spectrum and where they fall on the spectrum is a matter of personal preference.

I hope you enjoy the book — it’s one of my favorites!

By: Tracie Yule

Tracie Yule — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:50:36 +0000

I love discussion for this post! It seems as if you two challenged each other to think a little more about the book and the characters.

My favorite part of this book was the ending. I thought it was so beautiful and sad all at the same time.

As for the time traveling, I’m glad that the author didn’t really go into it because I’m not really interested in the mechanics of it. My personal thought is that Henry’s time traveling was a vehicle to represent marriage and individuality in the book. Once I saw the time traveling as a symbol, then a lot of the book fell into place.