Newbery Books discussion

So, what did you all think of the book? I'm curious to know your thoughts.

As for me, I know this book is supposed to be a children's classic and all that. I remember vaguely enjoying it as a child. But, it seemed less fantasy and too sci-fi for my taste. I quickly became bored with the plot. I appreciate that there is a strong female protagonist, though.

Maybe everyone is on vacation. Last month the discussion went on for weeks so I didn't hurry to report this month. I read it about 10 years ago when I actually started collecting Newberys. I'm reading it again trying to get deeper meaning out of it.

I really enjoyed this book. Sci-fi/spiritualistic philosophy is exactly what I like to read. Charles Wallace was my favorite character. A child genius who turns into a possessed demon... I just loved how he was written. I really enjoyed the imagery. My favorite scene to picture was when Meg, Calvin, and Charles Wallace entered the town to find all those kids playing synchronously. For some reason this struck me as a black and white picture with a bit of colour for the bouncing balls and jump ropes. My very favorite scene was the final showdown between Meg and Charles Wallace; it had me in tears.

What I was curious about was what age group was this intended for? My husband recalls reading this book in the third grade, and not liking it because he couldn't understand it. It reads at a child's level, but there were a few concepts, like the physicality of an atom for example, that I know I had never been taught until high school. I know I could have understood a basic explanation in elementary school (and perhaps they do teach this things to the younger set now), but I don't think I would have enjoyed this book as a child simply because no one ever bothered to explain those things to me back then.

Madeleine L'Engle always said that she didn't write for any specific age; the books came out however they came out. (I think that's probably more simplistic than the truth, especially when she wrote sequels, but I understand what she was getting at.)

One reason this book had such a hard time finding a publisher was because no one was sure whether it should be published for adults or children, so there you go.

I probably read this first in second grade, I'm guessing, and I'm sure I didn't understand a lot of it, but that's okay with me--I enjoyed it again a few years later, when I "got" a little more of it, and again later, and so on.

Ah... now it all makes sense. Thanks for answering my question! :)

Charles wallace is my favorite character, too.

Also, Trisha, I really like the whole idea of the black and white picture with the splashes of color. I almost feel like reading it again with this in mind.

I read this in 8th grade and just reread it for the Newbery Book Club.

I liked this book but the one thing that held me back from really liking the book is Meg, the main character. I understand why the author had her being so horrible after she came through "the dark thing" -- but put that aside and she was kinda just awful throughout the whole thing. Her personality was fingernails on chalkboard to me. I seemed like the first 3/4 of the book was wandering and whining . . . and then when she's on the planet with Aunt Beast a switch is just flipped during her tantrum - all of a sudden she's not as bad. I don't buy it. Not believable character development for me. Then she goes to get her brother and two paragraphs later the book is over. Hmm. I like books in a series to feel complete on their own, yet have you waiting to read the next one.

The reason why I still like this book a lot is the religious symbolism. I think I'd like to take a quick reread just to dig and delve deeper into some of the things that I probably missed. I was surprised that Anna Quindlen, of all people, wrote the foreword. She said little about religious symbolism, but said that L'Engle was inspired by society's fear of tyrannical communist regimes. I guess people can interpret a piece of writing in any way they please (and I can see how Mrs. Quindlen's applies) but really it just spoke to me more spiritually about the gift of free agency we have been given and less politically about democracy/communism

I also really liked this book. And me too for the religious symbolism. After I read it, I felt compelled to read it to my older two kids ages 9 and 7. I feel that it might be a little confusing for them to read it on their own but with me reading it out loud and talking about it along the way I think it would be great and very interesting.

Okay, I posted yesterday about having loved the book as a kid and teen, (read it first in 5th grade), and I decided to re-read it last night to see what I thought after not having read it for some years. I found I still liked the story, but I found there were many things I disliked about it. The religious overtones bothered me in a way they'd never done before. I felt that L'Engle depended on plot to the exclusion of character development. Meg was a singularly unappealing character; L'Engle's reasons for her attitude and behavior were made bluntly clear, but in this re-reading, they seemed overly facile, and Meg seemed extremely immature for her age. The other thing that was noticeably appalling was the sexism.

What was her age? The twins were 10 and she was older than them, but they were supposed to take care of her in a fight. All I could remember about her age was that she was in the "lowest section of her grade" and younger than Calvin who was in "Regional", whatever that is.

i agree with nancy about plot and character dev . . . thinking back on it the story wasn't smooth, it was clunky. Is that a word?

I think she was 15, possibly 14. The book may not have said.

I agree, about 14--ninth grade, I think--though I don't remember this book saying so. I can't really understand what the problem is with Meg being immature for her age, and annoying, as that's really one of the main points of the book, and I think she carries it off well; but maybe those of you who mention this just don't want to read a book with a character that is unlikeable to some? I think Meg is a character who--back when this was published--was hard to find in young adult literature. My mother grew up roughly in that time, and has mentioned that Meg is one of the few girls in books she really identified with--gawky and awkward and always doing the wrong thing.

It's funny about the religious overtones... sometimes religious parents take issue with this book, saying it promotes witchcraft etc; some religious parents embrace this book, saying it promotes their values. At the time it was written, Madeleine L'Engle was not religious at all. (She was not raised to be religious, and only became a devout, fairly liberal Christian later in life.) So it might be more accurate to think of them as "moral" overtones. Which still could be annoying to some, but this book was not written to promote a religion.

I will have to reread it soon and think about what Nancy says about sexism.

I just finished this book this morning so I am sorry for jumping into this discussion a little late.

I love the book! I love the religious overtones and the religious symbolism ,I do consider them religious because the book does quote scripture and God and Jesus are both mentioned in a favorable light. I love the Dad, I was thrilled to see a Dad who is humble yet wise. On page 190 he says, "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to his purpose." Meg was really distraught and he chose those profound yet simple words to comfort her. That's so much better than the fathers in On My Honor and Bridge to Terabithia. Those dads seemed to be at a complete loss when it came to comforting their children and easing their grief.
Meg was very lucky to be surrounded by wise people who love her, the three Ws, her parents, her brothers, Aunt Beast, Calvin. Each one of them took turns giving her words of wisdom and reassurance at different points throughout the book. What parent wouldn't want their child to be surrounded by wise and loving people like that?
Also, I love how "love" was the only thing that could conquer IT. So simple and beautiful. Perhaps this is why even though a lot of children don't understand it they still love it and return to it as adults.
I didn't notice any sexism, Nancy could you please expound on that?

Yeay, I'm finally finding time to post on Wrinkle! I've loved this book and the rest of the series since I was a child. I've read it several times, and I don't ever remember not "getting it." But I'm sure my depth of appreciation grew as I grew. My son Benjamin also read the book when he was 8 or 9 and liked it.

Several people mention disliking Meg's character. But I agree with Wendy's comments. To me Meg is just having a tough time being a teenager which is made even harder by her dad's absence. I certainly remember some miserable teenage times, so I can relate to her.

Madeleine L'Engle is one of my favorite authors and I've read many of her books, including autobiographical ones. Of course she did not write this book to promote a particular religion, but yes, she is deeply and joyfully religious! I really love that about her writing, how her values come through in the story. (L'Engle happens to be Anglican and has been religious at least since her children were fairly young.) I love the way she blends science, fantasy, and spirituality. This is my kind of book!

I suppose I could see an anti-communist message, Kristine. But I agree with you that the book's theme is much larger, more about the war between good and evil in this universe. As L'Engle shows, family, love, faith, hope, integrity, hard work and choosing not to give up are so important. "And the greatest of these is Love." It is encouraging to know that so many good people (and L'Engle's stars, angels, and other beings) are fighting for the right and fulfilling the measure of their creation in all the ways they can!

As Wendy mentioned, it did take years for L'Engle to get this story published. She wrote it and then got so many rejections. Yet when the book was finally published, it became a Newbery! I love that. This book is a five on my list. I'd encourage anyone who liked it to read the rest of the series.

I actually find the anti-communist message harder and harder as I get older. I've read this book at least every couple of years since I was ten or so. It's still pretty amazing, though. And Meg's character is utterly idenifiable, especially as her mother keeps reminding her how similar they are.

I read this book fairly recently, and I loved it. I've struggled for a long time with Science Fiction. Sometimes I really like it, and other times I flat out hate it. I read A Ring of Endless Light before this one, and put this one off for a long time because of how much I disliked ARoEL. However, I am so glad I finally read this book, and need to read the others in the Time Quartet soon. L'Engle also helped me realize why I sometimes like SciFi, and why I sometimes hate it. I don't like being 'tricked'. When I read a book (or watch a movie) I want to know what I'm in for. I rarely end up liking a book or movie if halfway through the rules change. If I'm going to like a SciFi book, I need to know in the beginning that it is going to be Science Fiction, I don't like having it sprung on me halfway through the story (like ARoEL did).
Anyway, I thought the writing was wonderful, and the characters were very believable because of all their flaws. They weren't perfect, and sometimes they were annoying and other times you just wanted to wrap them up and hug them. This to me is what makes a character believable and relateable. I have never met someone who was perfect all the time, or whose every character trait and personal quirk was always loveable and endearing. Maybe it's awful, but I don't know that I have ever been around someone who didn't bother me at least once. So, when I read a story with a character who is always perfect, always nice, always always always... it gets really old pretty fast, because I can't believe they could be a real person.
I thought the imagery within this story was breathtaking, the situations brilliant, and the relationships among family members to be glorious and ultimately uplifting.
I was very impressed with this story, and will definitely pick up the others in the series soon.