Great Middle Grade Reads discussion

This topic is about
A Wrinkle in Time
ARCHIVES: BOTM discussions
>
BOTM for December - A WRINKLE IN TIME
Beth, that would surely be worthwhile! I have it easy for this one--I have pretty much the complete works of L'Engle on my shelf.


I would love to hear Madeleine L'engle read this! Will have to see if our library has the audio version.
Beth Sniffs Books wrote: "Lucky you, I don't have all of my original childhood books, I have a small amount, but I miss so many of them. I have vague memories of boxing them up and donating them..... maybe even passing som..."
I didn't own most of them in childhood (and in fact didn't discover L'Engle until I was in college). But I've been working on collecting a lot of them ever since!
I didn't own most of them in childhood (and in fact didn't discover L'Engle until I was in college). But I've been working on collecting a lot of them ever since!


Beth, I MUST have audio books on an MP3 player (I suppose a smart phone would do too) so I can do stuff while listening! I use audio to encourage me to exercise and to do housework, two things that occupy my body but not my mind. My Mom likes to listen to books while doing handwork.

I agree about books while driving Catheriine. Too much like being on the phone...
Back to the book, I finished yesterday. I had forgotten how much theology was in there...some of which I disagree with. But the story is good, and I like Meg's character. She's very real.
Back to the book, I finished yesterday. I had forgotten how much theology was in there...some of which I disagree with. But the story is good, and I like Meg's character. She's very real.
Beth, yeah, I'm one of those multi-readers. A book for every mood, and a couple for duty. So it doesn't bother me at all to be listening to one (or two) and reading several more. Used to be I didn't do this, but somewhere in the last decade or two I developed the habit, and it keeps getting worse!

I've not read it recently, but I have read it more than once in the past and I have very clear memories. (If the memories aren't precisely accurate, please do correct me.)
I found the imagery incredibly vivid. I definitely knew exactly what the 'witches' looked like. And traveling by tesseract made perfect sense to me.
And I was horrified by the neighborhood where all the children were bouncing their balls in rhythm. And that just was a prelude to the horror of the great heart.
Of course, I also loved the themes. From the beginning, when we learned that mom was a scientist who cooked in the lab... awesome. Not to mention Charles Wallace and and all the others... and of course I identified with Meg and had a crush on Calvin... In some regards the family here reminds me of the Weasleys in Harry Potter.
Even the first time I read this I was agnostic, now I'm staunch atheist - but the theology doesn't bother me. I did, however, not like the sequels enough to finish the series, in part because of the theology. In any case, I think the, call it spirituality, gives the book a certain depth, or resonance.
Cheryl--the only detail I'd call you on is that it's a brain, not a heart. I think that's pretty important, because to L'Engle (and I don't think I'd disagree there!) the horror is exactly a brain without a heart (or anything else). And that idea, a world where there is only one brain, one mind...oy.

But also, Madeleine L'Engle is just a great writer. I can still imagine being pressed into the void of the tesseract. And who can't help but love Mrs. Who, Mrs. Whatsit and Mrs. Which? And thirty years later, every time I make soup I think of Mrs. Murry hovered over her bunsen burner and wish that I could be THAT kind of mom who nurtures her children physically, emotionally, and intellectually.
It's the perfect combination of intellect and heart, and I'm wondering now why I've never read the rest of the series.


As a child, I could identify with Meg, being smart in some subjects and not so smart in others. I have always wondered what it would be like to have a little brother like Charles Wallace and really intelligent parents.
Every time I hear the line "It was a dark and stormy night..", it reminds me of this book (and also Snoopy). Madeleine L'Engle uses great imagery and all the characters are pretty much down to earth people, including Charles Wallace. They all have their faults and none are perfect as when the medium showed Calvin's mother.
I did collect the rest of the quartet and read them all as well as the Austin series, and some others. I do like the way she writes.

Good point, Justine. It's a nice message, but I sometimes think that one has more to do with what we Moms WISH we could do than with reality. In truth, there's a world of hurt from which our love can't (and arguable shouldn't) protect our kids. But that's a different discussion!

OK, what did I think – if I haven’t already given that away? From the moment I began to read I knew I was in the presence of a master storyteller. It’s beautifully told and cleverly written. The characters, ideas, plot and presentation, all draw you in. I’m certain younger readers will be hooked by the crazy, harrowing adventure the children in the story find themselves on. I’m just as certain, they’ll find some of the ideas and language – particularly the extracts and translations – puzzling, difficult, and almost impossible. Of course, this is all part of the mystery... they are meant to! For the very same reason, ‘grown-up’ readers will find lots to love (and explore) in this book. And, of course, the ending is sublime. (Not a word I often use: usually reserved for Wordsworth...)
Anyway... is it a classic? Unreservedly, yes! Why? Well, for all the reasons I’ve already given, but if I must choose just one... It has the mark of many of the great classics: it’s a book with truly universal appeal, far beyond its genre or classification as a children’s book.



M.G. wrote: "I just finished reading A Wind in the Door, the sequel, and loved it just as much as A Wrinkle in Time. ... why are we here, why do we matter? And she gives the very comforting answer: "You are Named. Your contribution makes a difference. Size does not matter."
Ah. Sounds like I should have read that when I was the right age. I never did learn size doesnt matter.
I read Wrinkle in Time last year as part of my education in classic children's books that weren't classics when I was a kid. Now I'm nearly a kid again (I'm paraphrasing something I saw about being old enough to believe in Santa again), so I can read it.
I loved the book, and remember it mainly as being in the class of amazing scifi, which was then in its infancy. I particularly liked the discussion of use of senses - in the world where everyone was blind. They thought sight must be limiting - and I tend to agree, now. It made me think deeply about whether I should make one of my characters deaf. Can I adequately represent his thought processes? I decided I couldnt, despite having played, worked with and known deaf and blind people all my life. (the real Dougall is deaf, in case my friends wonder).
I thought Wrinkle in Time is definitely a classic, and I must get around to the rest of the series.
Ah. Sounds like I should have read that when I was the right age. I never did learn size doesnt matter.
I read Wrinkle in Time last year as part of my education in classic children's books that weren't classics when I was a kid. Now I'm nearly a kid again (I'm paraphrasing something I saw about being old enough to believe in Santa again), so I can read it.
I loved the book, and remember it mainly as being in the class of amazing scifi, which was then in its infancy. I particularly liked the discussion of use of senses - in the world where everyone was blind. They thought sight must be limiting - and I tend to agree, now. It made me think deeply about whether I should make one of my characters deaf. Can I adequately represent his thought processes? I decided I couldnt, despite having played, worked with and known deaf and blind people all my life. (the real Dougall is deaf, in case my friends wonder).
I thought Wrinkle in Time is definitely a classic, and I must get around to the rest of the series.
Dang Jemima, if you lived next door I could lend them all to you :D
L'Engle also wrote some decidedly adult novels, but one thing I think is true in all, or almost all, is a sense of positivity--that good can be found or made nearly anywhere. I'm not getting that quite right, but I can remember only one of her novels that left me wondering. Her non-fiction is truly inspirational (though a little less helpful for non-believers), and her book on writing (Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art has a lot of good to say about writing for people of any, or no, faith, as well as maybe some help for those who wonder if they can write speculative fiction from a Christian stance (or read it, though I don't suppose those who scream about Harry Potter would read or agree with L'Engle).
L'Engle also wrote some decidedly adult novels, but one thing I think is true in all, or almost all, is a sense of positivity--that good can be found or made nearly anywhere. I'm not getting that quite right, but I can remember only one of her novels that left me wondering. Her non-fiction is truly inspirational (though a little less helpful for non-believers), and her book on writing (Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art has a lot of good to say about writing for people of any, or no, faith, as well as maybe some help for those who wonder if they can write speculative fiction from a Christian stance (or read it, though I don't suppose those who scream about Harry Potter would read or agree with L'Engle).



My go-to online source for cheap books is half.com. ;)

This sounds as good as the first book. I'll have to look it up. Great message... particularly in this celebrity driven age we appear to be stuck in.

So wonderful that it's enjoyable, and that the main theme of the power of love is understandable, for children as young as 8... and yet a 52 yo on her 4th or 5th reread is still moved, still feeling enlightened. I believe this book to be *highly* influential on the way I live, because I do focus on love, courage, and science, rather than on success or the material.
I have never been disturbed by the Christian references. After all, Jesus is listed in the same breath as Buddha, Confucius, Euclid, etc... the Seekers of Truth. I have always loved Mrs. Who's quotations. I have always wanted an Aunt Beast of my own. I have always been terrified of having my heart and mind controlled by a dominant power. I have always worn glasses and been thrilled to think that they could wield power. This is such a timeless story.
This is *not* Time Travel. And it's SF in the same way The Martian Chronicles is. Neither concerns itself with the real plausibility of all the science, and yet neither is fantasy, as there's no magic. And still, it depends on the 'what if' and the exotic. In fact, these both exemplify for me the reason SF should, imo, stand for Speculative (not Science) Fiction.
If you liked The Martian Chronicles, or The Golden Compass trilogy, you must read this. I'm confident that Pullman did. It did, after all, win a Newbery Award, even though that honor usually goes to historical, rather than speculative, fiction.


Interesting - I hadn't forgotten, but the first copy of A Wrinkle in Time that I read, and the one sitting on my bookshelf, was published in the year I was born, and it begins, 'It was a dark and stormy night in a small village in the United States.'. hmmm... I always thought this was rather clumsy as a first line... and first lines are a bit of a thing of mine.
However, when I decided to reread the book, I left my rather fragile version on the shelf and borrowed a newer version, which began with, 'it was a dark and stormy night.'. I'm guessing a helpful editor decided to make the change in my somewhat older copy, for a different market (England, Australia and New Zealand) to make sure we 'got' the setting, but it does seem a shame, because we lose the irony/nudge of the opening somewhat!

I think Megan's right--it must have been done for the "foreign" market. Sort of like they changed the title of Rowling's first book and made all the torches into flashlights for the poor American kids who couldn't figure it out. That always annoys me. I learned a lot about language by reading unmodified British children's books. Kids aren't really that dumb.


However, I now vote this Wrinkle the worst of the lot, as it completely destroys a beautifully balanced piece of irony.


I just wanted to agree with you entirely... Oh, and Happy New Year :-)
Gretchen wrote: "Interesting. I remember seeing the word village just a little later in the book and wondering if Wrinkle was set in the UK or the US. Decided it didn't really matter."
It's New England, and taken especially as far back as L'Engle runs (I believe she was born in the 1920s?) it's more like England than it is like California.
It's New England, and taken especially as far back as L'Engle runs (I believe she was born in the 1920s?) it's more like England than it is like California.

I also remember liking A Wind in the Door even better than the first book...

I admit that when I was younger, I didn't get some of the references in A Wrinkle in Time--they were over my head (like Bulwer Lytton and Shakespeare)--but it actually made the book much richer on a re-read as an adult.

From the GoodReads description:
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?