book discussion

Am I the only one who was annoyed by:

1) The claim that Henry is the next step in evolution.
a. Well, okay, let's just say that he's an example of a genetic mutation, but then:
b. His daughter is a more refined time traveler. But there has been no natural selection, and no genetic reinforcement (unless Claire is also shares the genetic mutation, which was never mentioned).

This is the classic, incorrect understanding of evolution that leads to logic like, "if a man lifts weights and become bulky, his child will come out heavily muscled as well."

2) The art show near the end features computer virii painted onto canvases. Idiotically, it's explained that she's painting the "HTML source code" for the virus. Uhhhm... There is no such thing as an HTML virus. Period. This was so intolerably stupid, yet easily caught by an editor, that it frustrated me enormously that this could have been left in.

All in all, it was an enjoyable read, but really, is it so hard to find a technical editor?

This book requires supension of disbelief as it is, in part, fantasy. Aren't we allowed to let authors create worlds and ideas of their own even if they aren't factually accurate?

It took me a long time to pick this up, even after many recommendations, because a friend, whose opinion I value, had a similar view to you. She found the practicalites of the time travelling to be confusing. She didn't think that it made correct time sense. I, on the other hand, feel that the technicalities of the time travel are of less importance than the story and the affect that the time travel has on it. If I were to try to validate the inconsistencies I would look to the reference that Henry doesn't have control over his time traveling. His daughter is perhaps a refined version of a time-traveler, which is possible. I guess I am not sure how weight lifting applies, since it isn't a genetic mutation, but an applied action. So it can't be passed on, whereas an established gene, even if mutated, may be passed on. I don't think it would matter if Claire shared a time travel gene either, but I am not a geneticist.

I found the story unique and heartrending even with its potential inaccuracies.

**SPOILERS** I don't think you're correct about the evolution part at all. First of all, it was a comment made by someone in the story, therefore it was a thought that anyone could have said (even if it was flawed), not a statement made by the author. Characters in books are allowed to have opinions and thoughts that are wrong... in fact that makes them more believable as living breathing human beings. :)

That was such a tiny part of the book too. In fact, during most of the book Henry's genetic mutation is considered a *curse*, one that ultimately leads to Henry's demise (which he was always worried about cause the time traveling was *dangerous*) and he even sees a doctor to try to cure it.

But as far as your question goes, there are many different kinds of evolution in Science. There are those by natural selection and those by genetic mutation, which don't necessarily happen at the same time. If Henry's genetic mutation gave him any advantage over non-time traveling humans, that could be considered an evolutionary advantage. If there were 100 people born with Henry's condition and he died at his first time traveling experience when he was a little boy, "chrono displacement disorder" still could have been considered evolution if the 99 other people ended up having a strong advantage over other people.

BUT, I still think this is a completely unimportant part of the book. The part that matters is how beautifully the stories of Henry and Claire's pasts and futures are interwoven and how their love grows and they learn about each other in a completely different way/time/chronology than people normally do.

I agree with Bart. The technical aspects of the story require a suspension of disbelief; in that sense it is science fiction. I focused more on the relationship of henry & Claire.