The Rory Gilmore Book Club discussion

240 views
Rory Book Discussions > Compare/Contrast Time Traveler's Wife/Time Machine

Comments Showing 1-49 of 49 (49 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:30PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) In reading The Time Machine, it really doesn't seem like there is a whole lot to compare. Time travel in both books seems to be just the setting in which both books take place, rather than the actual plot of the book. IMO, The Time Traveler's Wife was more about the relationship between Henry and Clare, and the love that had to overcome so much. The Time Machine (at least so far) is more of a commentary on socialism and communism.

But let's look for a moment at time travel itself as conveyed in the two books; there are some interesting differences:

In the Time Machine, when the traveller (the British spelling) moves through time, he does not move through space. That is to say, his time machine occupies the very same space in which it sits in his present, only it moves ahead through time at such a pace that people cannot see or touch it. When it arrives at its destination through time, it hasn't moved an inch through space. But in the Time Traveler's wife, Henry moves through both time and space. He leaves his present in Chicago at his house, and arrives in the past in Michigan in Clare's Meadow.

In TTTW, why is it that Henry can be "gone" for only ten minutes or so, but is reliving a week of the past? Is it because, when he travels back to his present, he actually doesn't travel all the way in real time?

An interesting point made in TTM was that although the traveller goes through time, he does not age while traveling. What do you think was the cause of Henry's (TTTW) rapid weight loss and aging? Was it the stress of constantly being on the run, or was it the stress on his body of merely moving through time and space?


message 2: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Meghan I agree in that there could have been a better classic chosen for comparison/contrast. However, there is still a lot we can discuss.

The thought that came to my mind first was how interesting it was in how both TTTW and TTM USED time travel. Considering how popular the tv shows are that use characters with "special" powers (such as Heros or The 4400 or throw backs like Quantum Leap or that show about the dude and the newspaper) or technology (Stargate anyone?)--the tv shows use these powers/technology to better humanity. While TTM could be used as a cautionary tale of what can go wrong with humanity, the Time Traveler's main objective was scientific investigation (or his personal interest). And TTTW, Henry pretty much decided that he couldn't change what already occurred so it was just used for his personal life.

So my question is how would you use time traveling? Would it be for personal gain or to help humanity? And what would you decide to do if you found you couldn't change history? Henry used some of his knowledge to help his family and friends financially, but pretty much tried to keep things unknown.


message 3: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Meghan But to answer Sarah's questions:

1. I think Henry to could travel through time and dimension because it was a genetic abnormality in his body. Therefore, his atoms (whatever) were the ones doing the breaking down and re-emerging (if that is what actually happened). The Time Traveler however had to use a machine. Therefore, I believe, the machine bent space around him, rather than him actually going through it.

Also, Henry traveled to his past or future, but he always returned to his departure point (that's why he wouldn't fly - he was petrified he'd miss the plane and plunge to his death). You also noticed that he never ended up in New Zealand or 50 leagues under the sea. So I wonder if it's like you are making a path in the snow. And you can go back or forth on that path and end up where you like, but you wouldn't end up in a different hill 50 yards off the path.

2. I think Henry's aging had to do more with his genetic difference than his time traveling (and the stress it caused). With Alba they were able to detect the genes and either help through gene therapy or because she was second generation, the defect itself was less "new" and therefore more stable. Alba could control her traveling to an extent so that showed some improvement over Henry.

Okay, it's late and I'm not sure if I'm making any sense. I hope people are enjoying this book (TTTW). I just loved it! But I'm struggling with TTM. I don't like the communist overtones (too much "Gomez" is too much for me--didn't like him in TTTW). I don't like the no names. I don't like the matter-of-factness of the story. And I don't really like the Time Traveler. I think he's like the original uber nerd with no social skills (apologies to the nerds out there. I am one so I feel like I can call them out on it.)


message 4: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) When I've fantasized about time travel, it's usually been more like going back and re-living a moment or a decision I wish I'd done differently. One thing I thought was interesting about Henry was that two or more Henrys could occupy the same space at the same time. His soul didn't just leap back into his younger body, or forward into his older body; there were actually two of the same person, different ages, present at once.

I also thought it was interesting how he couldn't change the past or affect the future. In Quantum Leap, Early Edition, Journeyman, and all those time travel TV shows, the whole purpose of their time travel and/or premonitions was for them to change things that went wrong in the past, to save people.


message 5: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) And I agree with your assessment of The Time Machine, Meghan. It's only 90 pages and I'm having trouble getting through it. I just flew through TTTW.


message 6: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
You may not want to read the following if you haven't read TTM yet...



I think I liked TTM better once I had finished it. I was surprised to find, too, that it was a thinly-veiled commentary/cautionary tale promoting socialism. I thought that H.G. Wells was supposed to be, like, the father of science fiction. But I found there was less science involved and more politics.

In writing my review, and thinking back over TTM, I did find it brilliant and it's no wonder to me that it spawned movies, television movies, comic books, and probably more. We have to keep in mind, that this was probably one of the first times that time travel was addressed in fiction. So...very original and imaginative.

I agree with Meghan above regarding..."I think Henry's aging had to do more with his genetic difference than his time traveling (and the stress it caused)". I viewed his time-traveling abilities as a genetic disease.

My husband is currently reading TTTW, and he, too had a problem with Henry and his time-traveling double to be in one place at the same time. He has referenced more than once the scene where Henry is "making out" with himself.

By the way, I reccommend "Primer" if anyone wants to top their reading off with a little time-travel movie. It is a fabulous indie flick about time travel, but, beware, it could make your brain explode. It delves VERY deeply into the "science" of time travel.


message 7: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:33PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) I think TTM was one of the first times time travel was addressed. I believe no one had thought of using a machine to travel through time, and Wells is believed to have coined the term "time machine" which is used now in so many time-travel stories.

My favorite time-travel movie is Back to the Future.


message 8: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Meghan TTM discussed (but no real spoilers)






I found it interesting to read the history and it said that back when Wells actually wrote the story it wasn't considered science fiction. It wasn't until Hollywood (surprise, surprise) got a hold of it and turned it to the stage and screen that it became more about the machine than about the social criticism. Wells was actually communist. But he felt that the Marxists had it all wrong. He felt that people had to work in order to stay strong, hence, the Eloi were depicted as weak and stupid because they no longer had to work.

I'm about half-way through. I'm hoping when I'm done I will go "wow, that really said something." Right now I just want to smack them all upside the head because I just find the time traveller that boring and too smug in all his intellectual superiority.


message 9: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Meghan Discussion question............
















I think I posted this before, but I find it interesting (and I believe Sarah and Allison referred to it as well).

What are the moral implications of time traveling? How much do Henry and the Time Traveler owe society? Compared to TV's "Heroes" (Hiro) and "Quantum Leap" (Dr. Sam Beckett), their time travelers are set to change history for the better. Compared to both the movie and tv's "Stargate" (which isn't really time traveling, but rather space traveling, but it has the same implications), how right is it for us to impose ourselves on other (future) societies with no knowledge of how they live? Is it right to take that knowledge and then return to our present time so that we may benefit from it? Where is the line of moral obligations and personal gain?


message 10: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Meghan Okay, last thought for this evening...did anyone else think it was ironic that Gomez was a socialist/communist and the Time Traveller was too? How weird is it that we picked two books that again had the very similar themes (other than the obvious, time travelling)?


message 11: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
Rory would be so proud of us.


message 12: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
"Is it right to take that knowledge and then return to our present time so that we may benefit from it? Where is the line of moral obligations and personal gain?"

I don't believe that it was meant for man to alter the future. To me, travelling forward, seeing the future with the implications of our mistakes, contrasted with the things we got right...changing our paths due to this foresight...it disrupts the natural flow of life. We're mortals and we're flawed. We aren't meant to get everything right, but to experience our mistakes as well as our victories. To be able to "right" everything...it upsets the balance of nature.


message 13: by Erica (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:34PM) (new)

Erica Poole | 199 comments When I was younger, I was bound and determined that one day I would time travel. Blame it on too many romance novels where the hero or heroine suddenly awakens to find themselves in the past or the future. I spent much of my time trying to decide where exactly I would go and if I had the choice, what would I change in my life if I could go back. I spent many pleasant hours trying to figure it out. I even learned how to make mayonnaise and some natural painkillers in case I got sent back too far. I mean, what on earth would I do if I had no mayonnaise (I was 9 years old, OK?). But I digress.

But the point here for me is, if I were given the opportunity, I do not know that I would be able to take the high ground and NOT affect change, in my life at least. I do believe in the Chaos Theory (that IS the idea that a butterfly's wings in the amazon could affect change in Ireland if done differently, or something like that, right?). But 1)There are just a couple major things that if I could change, I would have to, like the premature death of a loved one - aged 16, and so on and 2) who is to say that those changes affected might not be overall good? Who is to say that someone's going back in time and making a change wasn't part of the grand design? It is all too unclear! Ugh the dilemna! My 2 cents.


message 14: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:35PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
I see what you're saying about the death of a loved one, Erica. Not having experienced that, thankfully, that didn't jump to mind for me. But, that definetely sheds new light on the question.

This line of thinking also brings to mind other things that cross the line between man's capabilities and what is "meant to be"...for example cloning, choosing the sex of your baby, etc.


message 15: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:35PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) What do you think about Henry and Clare cheating with the lottery and the stock market? That's not exactly the same as saving a loved one from dying at 16. And if they could change little things like that, why couldn't they change the big things? I wish that Clare hadn't torn off the date of that picture she drew of Henry. It would have been interesting to see if they could affect change.


message 16: by Erica (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:35PM) (new)

Erica Poole | 199 comments Yeah, I would have played the lottery and done all that too. I guess I am morally bankrupt. Just kidding. But some might say so. I would try to do things that were good, not only for me but for others as well. I hope that noone ever realy does discover a way to go back into the past, because IF they did, I bet it would be the real creeps and evil folks that would be the ones that would be able to go back and make changes. Then I would be terrified for the world!

I wonder if she is considering writing a sequel, with Alba as the center character. I would love it, but it would be hard to make it live up to the standards of the first one.


message 17: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:35PM) (new)

Meghan Don't need to have read the book to comment on this!

This is my favorite reason for being in a book club. I love these philosophical debates.

I think this country (and maybe humans in general) have a hero-complex. We like to see ourselves as the savior (of one person or mankind). But in truth, it's a lot easier to watch it on tv or read it in a book than actually go be one. I think for myself, I would like to say I would try to help mankind and right the wrongs if I could but in truth, I'd probably try playing the stocks and win the lottery and help myself (and my family and friends). Maybe not so that we're all billionaires, but so that we're all pleasantly comfortable and have what we need and fulfill some wants.

But I'm a big believer that things happen for a reason and so to go back and change something in the past may have disasterous consequences in the future. For example, what if we saved Lincoln (or Kennedy) from being assignated? How would that effect our country if they had a chance to fulfil their term? Who would really have been elected after them (rather than being elected after the vice pres fill-in)?

Or what if you saved someone from dying and then learned that their death helped someone else find life?

I guess I'm with the group of leave life as it is and try to make your present the best you can. But man is it tempting to want to right a few wrongs and save a few lives.


message 18: by Tiffany (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Tiffany I always imagined using time travel as a way to go back in time and just observe what life was like in different time periods - Victorian London for example. It never occurred to me to go back in my own past (lack of imagination maybe).

But I'd be a little bit afraid of getting stuck like in Back to the Future.

I also wouldn't like to have Henry's condition at all; not being able to pick and choose when/where you go and when you can leave. In movies and books time travel seems to be something that a person pursues, so I thought it was an interesting approach to portray time travel as a genetic abnormality, something that couldn't be controlled or cured.


message 19: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) That's what reminded me of the TV show Journeyman. He can't control when he goes, either (although my guess is that someone else is controlling it, whether that someone is human or God, I don't know). So he doesn't drive, either, and he disappears at bad moments and during important events. Once he was on a plane when he disappeared and when he turned up he got arrested, because you cannot exit a plane once the doors have closed.


message 20: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Meghan Okay, just because you've mentioned Journeyman again. I love that guy! He was in HBO's Rome and was awesome with a capital Kick booty.

Okay, back to the story. I agree with all of you. I think not being able to control your stay would be awful, but not being able to control when you go would be worse. I would be like the Time Traveller (TTM) if my machine went missing. Hysteria would definitely set in.

But it would be cool to just go back and observe. Hey, speaking of that (and in the other thread, Christmas)...what if you could go back say a la Scrooge and witness your past mistakes? How do you think that differs from what Henry did?


message 21: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) Yeah, he was in Topsy Turvy as the wandering minstrel in the Mikado and he was funny, because he was complaining about not being able to wear a corset and having to wear a short robe which he thought was indecent. He's got a great voice, though. Everyone did their own singing in that movie.

It would be really hard to have to witness past mistakes and not be able to keep them from happening. I know Scrooge was able to redeem himself in the end, but think how awful it was to have to see how much everyone hated him and to relive some of his most painful moments.


message 22: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Meghan I secretly have a fear that at the end of your life, they show your life as a movie and all your friends and family and people who you want respect from get to watch. And they see every ugly and horrible thought and deed you ever did. I think that would be my hell. I wonder if that's how Henry felt when he would go back to witness his mom's accident over and over. But my fear kind of reminds me of that dream Lorelai had where she was at the theater watching her mistake and Luke was with her and she was shouting for her not to do what she was doing on screen.


message 23: by Erica (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:36PM) (new)

Erica Poole | 199 comments I guess it would be good in a way to see your past mistakes as an outside observer. After a bit you could become more neutral about it and see it as it actually happened, not as you perceived it at the time!

In regards to Journeyman, I was really wondering if it was somehow tied to the book. Very odd that they have such common themes! No control, only showing up during your lifetime (right?) and having other people who do the same. Weird.


message 24: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:48PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
For those who read TTTW this month and/or TTM, I have just finished Slaughterhouse Five (reading for the first time), and I have to HIGHLY recommend it as a brilliant novel that uses time travel as a means to tell a gripping story. Regardless of the time travel mechanism, everyone should read this novel if they haven't already. It is a MUST READ for everyone. (Did I just say that twice?) It's easy to read, captivating, and I read it in two sittings. The story is heart-wrenching and timely, but the story-TELLING, is funny, philosophical, and tragic at the same time, and just so brilliant.


message 25: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:49PM) (new)

Meghan I think that's on the Rory list actually.


message 26: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:49PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) I know that it's one I have had on my to-read list for a while. I saw the movie years ago.


message 27: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:50PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
It might be one we as a group choose soon, but, I wanted to read it sooner rather than later b/c of the time traveling aspect. Either way, it's a great pick.


message 28: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:50PM) (new)

Meghan Too bad we didn't know about that before we picked TM. I really am strugglign with that one.


message 29: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:50PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) Me too! I mean, it's only like 90 pages and it took me two weeks. Just not my thing, you know?


message 30: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:51PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
In retrospect, I think SF would have been better. I was actually kind of avoiding it, because I thought it was boring war/politics stuff. But I loved it.


message 31: by Shannon, the founder of fun (back from sabbatical) (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:52PM) (new)

Shannon | 254 comments Mod
I recently read Slaughterhouse Five and was thinking about that book as I read the Time Traveler's wife.
Also doesn't the time traveler's wife mention a wrinkle in time - somewhere in there. I still haven't got to the time machine yet. I have too many books in my to read pile!


message 32: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:52PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) I just bought SF today and plan to read it soon. Thanks for the recommendation!


message 33: by Arctic (last edited Dec 21, 2007 12:34AM) (new)

Arctic | 571 comments ok so twice now I've been told I should check out the TTTW threads. and I'm so glad I finally did! I'd been reluctant before because it's been three years since I read TTTW and five or six since TTM, so please bear with me.

I love that Journeyman was brought up because the first thing I thought when I saw the pilot of that show was that they were totally playing off of ideas in TTTW. Glad I'm not the only one with that impression.

Second, I thought it was so funny that Scrooge was mentioned in this thread and that someone also said here that it's morally wrong to attempt to change the future after travelling there. This is basicly what Scrooge does and yet few people ever describe A Christmas Carol as promoting misplaced values. heh. just thought that was interesting.

and regarding a statement Erika made - "I hope that noone ever realy does discover a way to go back into the past, because IF they did, I bet it would be the real creeps and evil folks that would be the ones that would be able to go back and make changes. Then I would be terrified for the world!" - that's a fear of mine as well.

I just watched Bender's Big Move on dvd recently and it dealt with a lot of these issues mentioned. I recommend it to anyone interested in these topics. all the more if you like Futurama.

And Alison, just have to say that I love that you loved SF so much. It's a fav of mine as well. Primer however...


message 34: by Alison, the guru of grace (last edited Dec 22, 2007 08:56PM) (new)

Alison | 1282 comments Mod
Haha. I had to read back & see what SF was. Yes, there were certain fantastic elements to Primer, and certain mind-boggling, throw-in-the-towel, this-is-too-much-for-one-woman-to-handle elements as well.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this Scrooge/Time Travel's Wife thing. It's a little different in that Scrooge is only able to alter the future, not actually go back and change the past. But, I see your point. I guess if we could exclusively change things for the better, it wouldn't be such a moral issue. Going back so you can play the market, or bet on horses or whatever would be quite different. Interesting.

Yes, Heather, I have noticed you are a Vonnegut fan. I've got to read more, when I get the chance. I read Cat's Cradle once and didn't get it, but I was younger then...


message 35: by Meghan (new)

Meghan Heather, I love you for mentioning Futurama. That was the best cartoon ever made. I think I read they are planning on making a couple of straight to dvd movies. I am so excited!

I also think it's funny that you pointed out the whole Scrooge/future thing. I think the difference for me is that we have no idea if he actually went into the future or this was "just a dream". But the irony is rather funny. Kudos for picking up on that.


message 36: by Arctic (new)

Arctic | 571 comments yeah I heard Bender's Big Move is the first of four straight to dvd Futurama movies. and there's also plans to chop the films up into 16 episodes to air on cartoon network in 2008. (yay!)

Alison, I think Cat's Cradle is one of his more bizarre novels, along with Breakfast of Champions, and this current one I'm reading Sirens of Titan. Mother Night, Player Piano, and God Bless you Mr. Rosewater are more along the lines of Slaughterhouse-Five. and Timequake shares the time travel theme to an extent, though it's not as well organized and reads more like a cultural commentary than a novel. Vonnegut always has interesting ideas in his books, that's what i like about him. at one point he's said he has so many ideas for his books that he has to give the ideas to his characters (often writers) to write about because he doesn't have time to write that many novels. but anyhow yeah I'm a big fan. I'll try not to gush about him too much. :)

Primer...I'm not even sure what my problem was with Primer. I was confused, there's definitely that and time certainly hasn't helped in that respect, but the pace of the film also seemed a bit slow if I recall correctly. I really should watch it again. it's no good to base an opinion mostly on confusion.

I think Meghan hit the nail on the head in that the morality issue goes back to the will be/may be question and the silent spirit with Scrooge. Now if the spirit had said yes or no, perhaps then we'd have grounds to judge Scrooge for his actions. But Dickens was a merciful writer it turns out, in more ways than one.


message 37: by Ihtisham (new)

Ihtisham Tamas | 2 comments Hallo...


message 38: by Leah-jayne (new)

Leah-jayne | 1 comments After reading both the time machine and the time travelers wife i can see the majo contrast in the way the too books are set out ... the time machine is written mainly in first person with the traveller speaking of his exeriences where as in the tim travellers wife the text is switched beween the voice of henry and the voice of clair even though both books have the same subject at the root of them the way they are tackled differs.
in the time machine the traveller remains the same age through out but in the time travelers wife, henry and claire's ages change through out the book whether that be into the future or the past.


message 39: by Moneyking (new)

Moneyking | 1 comments Hello, could anybody comment a better novel/film to compare to the time travelers wife?


message 40: by Minaan (new)

Minaan | 2 comments Hi


message 41: by Minaan (new)

Minaan | 2 comments What I liked about TTW, is the structure of the book allows the reader to understand Henry's confusion when he time travels.
In the time machine, the time traveller doesn't age and he travels through time differently from Henry in TTW.

The bad thing about TTW was the ending because I think the author spoilt Clare's character.


message 42: by MrP (new)

MrP P | 1 comments Which one presents a more accurate portrayal of time travel though? For me it's The Time Machine. The explanation of time travel at the start seems to be possible to me and that's enough for me to suspend my disbelief


message 43: by SeenBeen (new)

SeenBeen | 1 comments I don't believe we've met, Mr P. But I would like to add my tuppence worth. First off, did you know it was the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge who introduced the concept of suspension of disbelief in 1817? I have Mr Beach's homework to thank for that little nugget of information. Anyway.
Indeed, The Time Machine's explanation of time travel is explained well and can be considered believable however, his 'adventure' seems slightly too fantastical to me. The Time Traveller's Wife, though a LOT more confusing (to me, anyway) in terms of the time travel, has an air of believability about it due to the mix of time travel with human emotion. It's a very human story and I can identify with it in ways that I can't with The Time Machine. This is possibly because The Time Machine is written in a way that makes me believe it was intended for intellectuals like Einstein to read. Every sentence is bursting with grand words. Apart from the whole 'jumping in time and space' issue, The Time Traveller's Wife is a lot simpler and that makes it more human and more relatable.
Also, the Time Machine only allows the Time Traveller to move through time whereas in the Time Traveller's Wife, Henry moves through both space and time.
Ok, I think I've rambled on for longer than is necessary now. Apologies if what I've written makes no sense. I only had 5 hours sleep. :( Toodle pip!


message 44: by Faiza (new)

Faiza (FaizaFreddy) | 1 comments Hey beautiful people ;)

I have read both the Time Machine and The Time Travellers Wife and i have enjoyed them. They are both about time travel but they approach the concept of time in very different ways.

I agree with SeenBeen's comment above regarding The Time Machine. Although the Time Traveller's journey can be considered more believable, I don't completely agree with it. The only thing that makes it believable for me is the start of the novel where they all discuss the concept of Time at dinner. I think that The Time Traveller's Wife is more believable. Even though it was confusing because of Henry constantly disappearing, I found that I could relate to it and understand it more.

The Time Machine is mainly about the changes that happen to Mankind over time whereas the Time Traveller's Wife is about the love story of Henry and Clare. I prefer the love genre so i preferred The Time Travellers Wife.

In The Time Machine, the characters are not given any names(except Weena). This created a bit of distance between me and the characters, whereas in The Time Traveller's Wife, we are given names for each character. This makes it easier to relate to the characters especially Henry. I could feel the emotion whilst reading the book. I could understand how confused and frustrated Henry felt and how upset and lonely Clare felt every time Henry disappeared. There is a lot more intense emotion in the Time Traveller's Wife.

The Time Traveller can control where he wants to go in time, but Henry cannot. I found that it was good not to know where Henry was going because it created an element of surprise. The Time Traveller's Wife is written in a way that helps us understand Henry's confusion. It switches between the past, present and future.

I could go on forever about the books, but I don't have much time. If you want to know more then just ask. Bye for now :)


message 45: by Jabu (new)

Jabu Phiri | 1 comments Hello Mr Padmo's class and y'all. ;)
Saleena and Faiza I agree with both of you when you say The Time Traller is more relatable and believable than The Time Traveller's wife. This is purely due to the fact that The Time Traveller uses a time machine to get from one place to another (which one can argue is a similar concept to using transportation such as cars and airoplanes). However, although I can relate more to The Time Traveller, my interest is more inclined to TTTW. My reason is that similar to Faiza's...It is a fascinating novel which features mainly a theme of love and change. As a teenager, the relationship between Clare and Henry intrils me especially as it develops along a paralel line to Clare's physical, mental and emotinal development. These stages are clearly portrayed as her expectations from Henry changes also. In contrast to this is the novel 'TTM'. This novel uses more scientific and technical language as Saleena already hinted ,and so it's audience is more to the intellectuals as compaired to non-intellectuals as they are likely to understand it more -especially chapter one. Compaired to TTTW, it lacks romantisism except when Weena dies. Even then, the emotional intensity is very little and so emotionally the reader fails to connect with the incident.
I can go on babbling but TIME is against me. Leah-Jayne , Marvah, Minan and Aadam, I am sorry I cannot link my viws to yours due to lack of ti me:P


message 46: by Marvah (new)

Marvah | 1 comments Hello. For me, The Time Machine is more believable than The Time Traveller's Wife because if I was to imagine that time travel was possible in the future, then it would be through the creation of a time machine.


message 47: by Aadam (last edited Nov 29, 2012 05:14AM) (new)

Aadam Ali | 1 comments I believe that the time travel depicted in "the time travellers wife" seems more plausible when compared to that of "The Time Machine". This is due to the fact that is controlled time travel were possible, we would know by now. Uncontrolable and sporadic displacement in time, which is experienced by Henry, seems slightly more feasible. Whilst the linear fashion in which the Time Traveller passes through time is more relatable and eaiser to understand, as we all travel though a linear path in time. When this is compared to to the unstructured displacement of Henry through time and the way it is presented in the novel makes the reader feel as if they are hurtling through time as Henry does in the novel.


message 48: by Ihtisham (new)

Ihtisham Tamas | 2 comments The Time Travelers wife and the Time Machine both contain relationships between the time travelers of both stories and a female. the main difference is the impact which the respective female charcters have on the novel.
Clare's charcter in the time travelers wife is of great importance because she is the focus point of much of the emotional aspects of the story.
The role of weena is however is not so prominent as Clare's character because without her the audience would still have the same connection to the plight of the time traveler. Weena is portrayed like a child who is loved by the time traveler from the time machine whereas the character clare is loved like wife by Henry.


message 49: by Karalina (new)

Karalina Lovkina (twohundredandtwentyonebooks) I agree with the others that found little to compare between these two. It seems to me that time travel is more so the setting for each one and is interpreted so differently that any comparison would lessen my interest in the two. The Time Traveler's Wife, as much as I adore it, is a rom-com that uses time travel as a means to bring the two characters closer together and intertwine their lives. The Time Machine however uses it to get a physical representation of what the author believe our future to be. Essentially, neither book borrows qualities of time travel from the other so what is left to contrast?


back to top