Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.46 AVERAGE
3.46 AVERAGE
I somehow really enjoyed, really disliked, and feel extremely neutral about this book all at once. Bear with me on this.
My primary feeling is bafflement. There was a point in the middle of this book when I thought I understood what this book was about, but despite the the 10-page physics tangent in a book about time, this was somehow NOT about actual time travel. I think it was there to draw attention to the analogy of time travel throughout the book, but it seemed a bit on the nose to serve that purpose.
At least 40% of this book seemed unnecessary. What was this book about? I'd love to say "I don't know," but at some point in the last 30 pages, as my bewilderment compounded, I also *did* come to understand what it was about. I think it is about childhood and time and age and the insolence of men. The political line seemed like a complete non-sequitur and seemed not to belong in the book, serving as a plot device to keep Stephen preoccupied; but it also provided a line of meta-analysis as a foil to the central plot that WORKED on a meta-analytical basis, so I think I'm impressed anyway.
I think what has me returning to McEwan's books is twofold: one is the immense emotion in the prose & the way experience is so holistically portrayed; the other is the thematic value of each of his works. McEwan's works are also precautionary: you might be an excellent prosaist and superior conceptually, but that does not mean the actual threads of your actual story will come together with cohesion. You often can't successfully backward engineer a book's plot, which I feel he may have attempted to do. But you can often backward engineer a theme, which I sense he may have successfully done.
Stephen is obsessed with time and age and childhood, as is his friend Charles, albeit on much different terms. Thelma is obsessed with time. Stephen's parents represent time and age, as well as Stephen's childhood in a sense. The Prime Minister, Lord help him, relays himself on the subject of age and time. The Prime Minister and Charles also have this element of obsession perhaps common to men who aren't leading the life they feel they are owed—an unattractive entitlement that betrays the intolerable nature of their characters. The theme of time, at the very least, does undeniably recur in the book.
But it is at cost to the story, to an ability to tie together the threads meaningfully in terms of creating a cohesive tale. Instead, events happen around the theme. But God, was it gorgeous in places. Certain passages so resonated with me. I had so many competing emotions. Don't read this book for a normal reading experience, but do read it for a varied one.
My primary feeling is bafflement. There was a point in the middle of this book when I thought I understood what this book was about, but despite the the 10-page physics tangent in a book about time, this was somehow NOT about actual time travel. I think it was there to draw attention to the analogy of time travel throughout the book, but it seemed a bit on the nose to serve that purpose.
At least 40% of this book seemed unnecessary. What was this book about? I'd love to say "I don't know," but at some point in the last 30 pages, as my bewilderment compounded, I also *did* come to understand what it was about. I think it is about childhood and time and age and the insolence of men. The political line seemed like a complete non-sequitur and seemed not to belong in the book, serving as a plot device to keep Stephen preoccupied; but it also provided a line of meta-analysis as a foil to the central plot that WORKED on a meta-analytical basis, so I think I'm impressed anyway.
I think what has me returning to McEwan's books is twofold: one is the immense emotion in the prose & the way experience is so holistically portrayed; the other is the thematic value of each of his works. McEwan's works are also precautionary: you might be an excellent prosaist and superior conceptually, but that does not mean the actual threads of your actual story will come together with cohesion. You often can't successfully backward engineer a book's plot, which I feel he may have attempted to do. But you can often backward engineer a theme, which I sense he may have successfully done.
Stephen is obsessed with time and age and childhood, as is his friend Charles, albeit on much different terms. Thelma is obsessed with time. Stephen's parents represent time and age, as well as Stephen's childhood in a sense. The Prime Minister, Lord help him, relays himself on the subject of age and time. The Prime Minister and Charles also have this element of obsession perhaps common to men who aren't leading the life they feel they are owed—an unattractive entitlement that betrays the intolerable nature of their characters. The theme of time, at the very least, does undeniably recur in the book.
But it is at cost to the story, to an ability to tie together the threads meaningfully in terms of creating a cohesive tale. Instead, events happen around the theme. But God, was it gorgeous in places. Certain passages so resonated with me. I had so many competing emotions. Don't read this book for a normal reading experience, but do read it for a varied one.
2.5 Stars
The Child in Time felt like it tried too hard. I think McEwan was going for literary, and if he got there, I didn't get it. The beginning is unbearably slow, but it does pick up towards the end. IDK, just not for me, and by the looks of reviews, not for most others either.
The Child in Time felt like it tried too hard. I think McEwan was going for literary, and if he got there, I didn't get it. The beginning is unbearably slow, but it does pick up towards the end. IDK, just not for me, and by the looks of reviews, not for most others either.
This was really hard for me to get into and for a short book it really took me a long time to finish, but it was worth it in the end.
within seconds of starting this book you KNOW what is going to happen and your heart is in your mouth. The rest of the book is less predictable an excellent read
I read this book pretty quickly but to be honest it just didn't grab me. The scene at the beginning when Kate is kidnapped seemed too matter-of-fact for me, and which is maybe why I then struggled to relate to the rest of the book. And as for the ending, really - pradictable to a degree and a bit sureal. Certainly not my favourite book by McEwan, but hey I guess you can't like them all.
I don't know. I think, his writing doesn't suit me or its the other way.
emotional
reflective
sad
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This is the second book I've read recently that I was made aware of from the movie adaptation. Though this book is a rare case where I like the movie better, I still enjoyed the book immensely.
There are a few plot lines that make up the book. First and foremost is the disappearance of Stephen's daughter years prior. He's haunted by her memory, certain that one day he will find her. With this comes the separation from his wife, Julie, who has moved into seclusion to grieve in her own way. Stephen misses her and wants to reconcile though finds it a lost cause. Meanwhile, he carries on in his professional life the best he can. On this end, he must deal with the mental decline of his friend and publisher, Charles.
As the title suggests, the book ponders the perceptions of childhood and time and how those two things intermingle. Ian McEwan writes solely from Stephen's POV allowing a deeply introspective narrative. To a modern audience, the prose may border on cliche or is an outdated style. I personally enjoyed this, especially because Stephen is blunt in his selfishness and observations. Above else, I enjoyed the psychology behind the characters and the emphasis on how people experience grief in different ways — even between people with a shared trauma.
There are a few plot lines that make up the book. First and foremost is the disappearance of Stephen's daughter years prior. He's haunted by her memory, certain that one day he will find her. With this comes the separation from his wife, Julie, who has moved into seclusion to grieve in her own way. Stephen misses her and wants to reconcile though finds it a lost cause. Meanwhile, he carries on in his professional life the best he can. On this end, he must deal with the mental decline of his friend and publisher, Charles.
As the title suggests, the book ponders the perceptions of childhood and time and how those two things intermingle. Ian McEwan writes solely from Stephen's POV allowing a deeply introspective narrative. To a modern audience, the prose may border on cliche or is an outdated style. I personally enjoyed this, especially because Stephen is blunt in his selfishness and observations. Above else, I enjoyed the psychology behind the characters and the emphasis on how people experience grief in different ways — even between people with a shared trauma.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Mental illness, Suicide, Kidnapping, Grief, Car accident
Moderate: Child death, Stalking
Minor: Abortion
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Good book. Share in a lot of senses and thoughts. On education, on politics, on humanity. A good book, but a book that I think I will soon forget.