Classics for Beginners discussion

This is the spoiler thread for our A Wrinkle in Time discussion. You may post comments about the book as you read it. You can but are not required to use spoiler tags. You can click on the "some html is ok" tag about the text box for information about posting spoiler tags.

If you would like to post discussion questions for the other participants, feel free.

Here are some discussion questions I found on the Multnomah County Library Page:

https://multcolib.org/wrinkle-time

1. A Wrinkle In Time is very much a novel about good vs. evil. Who in the book represents good? Who represents evil?
2. How does Meg feel about her father and his work?
3. Imagine living in a community that mistrusts and resents you. What is it like for the Murrys to live in a community that doesn't understand them?
4. How is Charles Wallace like Meg? How is he different?
5. How would you describe tesseracting? Would you want to do it?
6.What are Meg's faults? How do they help her in the end?
7.Meg experiences various types of love throughout her adventure. How does her understanding of love develop over the course of the novel?
8. Who is the most courageous character?
9. Would you define this story as fantasy or science fiction? What are the differences between these two genres?
10. If you had the opportunity to time travel, would you? If you could chose the time, what time period would you travel to? The past? The future?
11.Would you recommend this book to others?

Questions I added:

12. What are some other classic or new books you would recommend to readers who enjoyed this one.
13. How does this stand up as science fiction compared to newer stories?

Finished it Friday night. Been a long time since I first read this one. Did not remember it having such religious overtones.

Started it last night and just finished chapter 4. Some first thoughts.

Did anyone notice that the book is dedicated to two people, one being called Charles Wadsworth Cap, the other one Wallace Collin Franklin. This is Charles Walllace name. Who were these two men (boys?)?

I love the writing style. my favourite part so far: It was not as simple as darkness, or absence of light. Darkness has a tangible quality; it can be moved through and felt; in darkness you can bark your shins; the world of things still exists around you.
This could be a monologue in a theatre piece. I can't really explain why but it touched me.

Why are the three whatever they are called Mrs Whatsit, Mrs Who and Mrs Which? What does this refer to? I cannot believe that this is a random joke for a children's book (the whole book is quite heavy for a children's book, I find), I feel like there must be some reference to sth. I just haven't quite figured out what yet.

On p. 68 of my edition the following is quoted: When shall we three meet again / In thunder, lightning, or in rain
If I'm not mistaken, that's a quote from Macbeth, no? Why is it not referenced then? All the other quotes Mrs Who constantly uses are always quoted with the name of the original author. Why this not? And why is it used so specifically here? What does it refer to? Are the three ladies witches as well? But why the effort of giving a mysterious quote? Also, the Macbeth witched were part of the evil side, not the good. So, wouldn't it be an odd reference? And also, in Macbeth the witches say it indeed when they part (which makes sense given what they say) but here it is used when they 'reunite' after the time travel. So, it doesn't really make sense to me to say that when you _meet_. Or am I entirely on the wrong track and it's not Macbeth? But some of my questions remain.

Will continue reading now. I'm quite hooked.

Nina wrote: Who were these two men (boys?)?...

I was curious, so I did some searching and found an interesting interview with L'Engle in which she says:

Each character has its own name. Sometimes I know what the significance is and sometimes I don't. For instance, Charles is the name of my father and Wallace is my father-in-law.

The interview has some other interesting tidbits in it -- here's the link:

https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/a...

Nina wrote: "On p. 68 of my edition the following is quoted: When shall we three meet again / In thunder, lightning, or in rain .."

it is from Macbeth, but I haven't read any Shakespeare in decades so I can't speculate on the questions you raise, unfortunately.

Mary Lou wrote: "Nina wrote: Who were these two men (boys?)?...

I was curious, so I did some searching and found an interesting interview with L'Engle in which she says:

Each character has its own name. Sometimes..."

Thanks for this link! Interesting dedication, it is rather unusual to dedicate a book to one's father-in-law, I think, no?

Mary Lou wrote: "Nina wrote: "On p. 68 of my edition the following is quoted: When shall we three meet again / In thunder, lightning, or in rain .."

it is from Macbeth, but I haven't read any Shakespeare in decade..."

I tried to find something about this and the best I could find was an explanation that both - the witches in Macbeth and the three Mrs W - are guardian angels. To me, that makes sense for this book, but for Macbeth? It is said that they warned Macbeth of what would happen but he didn't listen to them. It might be true, I remember them as evil but then again it's been since my high school time that I read Macbeth.

Finished chapter 9, some more thoughts.

I like the book less than in the beginning. The pace has slowed down a lot. There was a lot happening in chapters 3 - 6 but now it's moving forward very slowly. Also those chapters were a lot more interesting in terms of newly introduced concepts. Somehow not much is done anymore with this. A lot of the pages is about how to resist either the man with the red eyes or IT. And tension remains quite stable where I would expect it to rise as we should be heading towards the peak. Also, there's only about 50 pages left.

I find the names of chapters oddly placed sometimes. Several chapters have names which, in my opinion, would fit a lot better to the chapter before or after. For example: Chapter 6 is called The Happy Medium. But actually they meet the Happy Medium in chapter 5. And the most important happening in chapter 6 is that they get to Camazotz and their first experience of it. It somehow confuses me.

(view spoiler)[
Life on Camazotz reminds me in many aspects of the We that we read earlier this year. The uniformity of it all, be it people, houses, way of walking, etc etc. I guess it makes sense as the ideas are quite similar on some aspects, people giving up what makes them being individual, being led in any possible meaning of the word by one leader and that makes them carefree beings though also unhuman and if not unhappy then at least not happy. This is a common concept in dystopian literature and I guess Camazotz is a dystopian place. Andven if it's not a new idea I still find it an interesting point that if we want to be both individuals and free and independent being that means that we do have to have not only a free will but also the responsibility for our decision and actions. And that in turn might make us unhappy at times, take wrong decisions and even cause unhappiness, damage and whatever else. So, if sometimes we wish we would not have to take all these decisions and should all this responsibility this is a good reminder, that we certainly don't want the opposite either.
(hide spoiler)]

Favourite quote so far: Like and equal are two entirely different things.

I don't read a lot of scifi, so I'm wondering how typical it is that there are so many Christian themes in this book. I also wonder if this book is assigned in schools these days, as is was when I was a kid. It's very good for illustrating different literary devices, but I'm afraid the Bible references will prevent schools these days from using it, which is a pity.

Finished reading it today. For me it's a 3.5 star book.

I do like the general idea and concept of it, the classic fight between good and evil, light and dark. I also liked the attempt to twist in scientific concepts as well as humanities and bring all this into balance. And it definitely got me want to read on though I never doubted the happy ending. Also, as a children's book in my opinion it offers many very valuable concepts and ideas such as the brain vs heart concept, the universality of every human being that we should embrace, the concept of love for other and of others that can save us, the fact that freedom of will and decision must go hand in hand with responsibility for our decisions and acts, that our gifts are only well used if we use them for others, our faults can also be strengths and being too proud or arrogant for our strengths can be very dangerous. And many more.

On the downside:
The execution of all these ideas was in my opinion a lot less well achieved. The characters are flat, I didn't really like Meg. There are some holes in the story. (Example: Charles Wallace was warned not to be too proud. He was and IT got him. So far, so good. He didn't respect the warning. But what if he had respected it? Didn't the children need him to become a puppet of IT, so he would lead them to Meg's father, make them understand how to enter the cells etc etc? So, in other words, how otherwise could they have found Meg's father in the first place? Basically, his mistake contributes to them being able to save the father. I'm not saying there was no alternative but all I'm saying it: His becoming a puppet of IT enabled Meg and Calvin to find and free Meg's father.) I wasn't a big fan of the pace of the book, it jumps and rests but it's not moving smoothly. And finally also, I heard before that a great aspect about this book that it had a girl as protagonist. Well, ok, it does. And for the 60s when it was published that might have been an achievement in itself. But when I look at Meg, she's not the kind of girl-protagonist I wish for in a children's book. She is weak, scared, whining, needs to hold someone's hand all the time. Yes, she does save her brother in the end alone and yes, she does have brains and additionally is a math- and science-genius. But still. I want girls like Anne of Green Gables and Pippi Longstocking to inspire the next generation. (I do admit that I might judge the book from a 2017-perspective here.)

Yes - Meg has the teen angst down to an art form. It's authentic, but annoying. A little goes a long way!

Like you, Nina, I liked that AWIT taught that our faults are sometimes our strengths. That's not really a concept I can remember hearing much in other stories, but L'Engle illustrated it well.

Another thing I liked was that this coming-of-age story had less to do with hormones (although they were present), and more to do with personal growth, and - importantly - coming to the realization that one's parents are flawed humans and while they always love us, they can't always protect us. Meg, and her readers, must learn self-reliance.

The dark/light, good/evil stuff was pretty heavy-handed, and I thought L'Engle could have been a bit more subtle.

Finally, I liked the Charles Wallace character, but thought he was particularly unbelievable as a five year old . It's been awhile since I was around five year olds, but I don't think one this precocious is realistic, even in a fantasy book, and that was a distraction for me. I would have bought it much more had he been 8-9 years old, I think.

It looks like people are reading and discussing. I downloaded the audiobook file, so I will dive in and post my thoughts when I start listening. This would be a reread for me.

It's actually one of my favorites as a child.

Since I'm horrible at coming up with discussion questions, I borrowed some from the Multnomah County Library Page:
https://multcolib.org/wrinkle-time

1. A Wrinkle In Time is very much a novel about good vs. evil. Who in the book represents good? Who represents evil?
2. How does Meg feel about her father and his work?
3. Imagine living in a community that mistrusts and resents you. What is it like for the Murrys to live in a community that doesn't understand them?
4. How is Charles Wallace like Meg? How is he different?
5. How would you describe tesseracting? Would you want to do it?
6.What are Meg's faults? How do they help her in the end?
7.Meg experiences various types of love throughout her adventure. How does her understanding of love develop over the course of the novel?
8. Who is the most courageous character?
9. Would you define this story as fantasy or science fiction? What are the differences between these two genres?
10. If you had the opportunity to time travel, would you? If you could chose the time, what time period would you travel to? The past? The future?
11.Would you recommend this book to others?

Questions I added:

12. What are some other classic or new books you would recommend to readers who enjoyed this one.
13. How does this stand up as science fiction compared to newer stories?

Mary Lou wrote: "I don't read a lot of scifi, so I'm wondering how typical it is that there are so many Christian themes in this book. I also wonder if this book is assigned in schools these days, as is was when I ..."


Mary Lou, you are correct that not many would appreciate the Christian themes of this book, and it is frequently challenged. I found this info online:

* Challenged at the Polk City, Fla. Elementary School under allegations that the story promotes witchcraft, crystal balls, and demons. (1985)
* Challenged in the Anniston Ala. schools under objection to the book’s use of the name of Jesus Christ in relations to other artists, philosophers, scientists, and religious leaders (1990)
*Frequently challenged for “undermining religious beliefs.”
* Ranked no. 22 in the ALA’s 100 most banned books for 1990-2000.


I read this book as a kid and, as mentioned in my first post (#2), I did not remember it being so religious in tone.

Heather L wrote: "Mary Lou, you are correct that not many would appreciate the Christian themes of this book, and it is frequently challenged."

A few thoughts on this:

*I have seen other threads on GR in which the religious overtones went entirely over the heads of literate adults. They seem obvious to me, but apparently not to everybody.

*I do not assign this book to my students because of the religious symbolism. I do put it on the suggested reading list, however.

*Madeleine L'Engle is a liberal Episcopalian. This book has been challenged both by people who thought it was too Christian and by people who thought it was just the wrong kind of Christian.

We read this in school as well I'm 27 and was born in 1990 so this was probably in the early 2000's when we read it. In public schools, it seems as long as they don't discuss things surrounding biblical references they can still use it. As a kid, my brain ignored or couldn't draw the references together about Christianity.

Phil wrote: "Heather L wrote: "Mary Lou, you are correct that not many would appreciate the Christian themes of this book, and it is frequently challenged."

A few thoughts on this:

*I have seen other threads ..."

yep reread it in my early 20's and also the Christian references flew right over my head among other things.

I'm at a loss as to how this book can be studied without a discussion of the biblical allusions. Of course, the same could be said of almost any Western literature. We do our students a disservice to ignore this aspect of the book.

I started this a couple of days ago. I'm listening to the audiobook narrated by Hope Davis. I am enjoying this even more as an adult.

I definitely see some Christian themes, but I can also see that it would not fit into a narrow view of Christianity.

I found this article online, which I thought was quite interesting:
https://cathysmith001.wordpress.com/p...

The writer is a school teacher at a Christian school who is in favour of teaching A Wrinkle in Time. However, her school removed the book from the curriculum because of, as she puts it herself, 'concerns expressed by parents over its alleged New Age content'. In this article she takes the main arguments being raised by parents and explains why she disagrees and why she believes that the book actually fits a Christian curriculum very well.

Now, you can think about all these arguments what you want, as well as about her counter-arguments and I do not necessarily see all the references that she cites, be it Christian or New Age. Some of them seem a bit far-fetched to me, e.g. Aunt Beastie and her companions to be a reference to church, I would never have interpreted it that way and I wonder whether a child would see it this way. But anyways, it was definitely interesting to read more about this apparently quite heated discussion about the book. I was very surprised to hear that the book is on the list of the most forbidden books, so I was interested in understanding better why that is.

The comments below the article are also interesting. The use of witches in the novel appears to be the main stumbling block to those who are Christians.