Reviews

The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger

goodem9199's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

I know I'm gonna be put through the ringer for this one (sorry, Kell), but I just "wasn't feelin' it." Maybe it doesn't translate as well on audio, but I found the (May 20, 1989...Claire is 17 and whatshisface is 43) really tedious.

abbymarx's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous emotional mysterious sad slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5

rhondac123's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

(Some novels fall into a category that I like to call, "The book is better than the movie" category. This would be such a book. Don't watch the movie at all, just read the book please.)

A man with a genetic disorder that causes him to travel through time spontaneously and without warning is the catalyst for his problems and solutions, and its also what draws him into meeting the love of his life. Themes of fate, synchronicity, and true love all interweave in this tale and I like to say those are my most favorite themes. What better reason for one to dive head first into this story, but before you do, remember: the events occur un-chronologically, so if the idea of tying loose ends together and understanding the links between who, what and most importantly WHEN events took place and how they tie in together seems...daunting to you then I would consider not giving this book a second thought. I will say that while the idea might seem annoying or head turning, while reading this book I was actually impressed with how smoothly it all came together. I only gave this book four stars instead of five because I didn't like the way it ended. Other than that, good book.

hconnellyal's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional hopeful reflective medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.5

earthtokate's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging emotional hopeful inspiring mysterious reflective sad tense fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

You will either love or hate this book. No in between.

saruka1101's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.5

I loved reading this book, it took me a couple chapters to get my head around the time travelling but overall it was so creative! I'd give it a higher score, but the earlier chapters did feel a bit creepy with their age difference (she was basically groomed 😭).

eddaros's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

I love the idea behind the story. I'm a sucker for time-travelling.
For the most I liked the story, I had a bit of a trouble relating to the main characters because they were so co-dependent on each other, to the point of it being really bad and felt worried about the save-being of their daughter.
I also thought the book should have ended a bit earlier, the last 10% of the book were too much. And the saddest part of all was the ending. It was probably supposed to be romantic but the woman had obviously spent about half her life waiting for a man. How sad.

Another thing is that the time traveller was an adult, but Clare was a child when they met the first time. It felt a bit like "grooming". This old man had this kid under some kind of spell, raising her to become his wife. icky.

edshara's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

I read reviews by others and I saw the problems that they saw. However, I still enjoyed this book. Maybe I'm bias because I saw and liked the movie long before picking this up. Maybe one day after thinking about it, I'll change my opinion or I'll re-read it and think, "What was I thinking?" For right now though I'll just say that I thought this was a good story and a decent way to look at time travel.

brandinikkale's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

I enjoyed this book. It was not the most amazing thing I've ever read, but it was beautiful and imperfect to me. A little slow at times, but worth reading.

manic_bibliophile's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

The summary and taglines for this book are incredibly false. This is not a love story. Sure, there's a love story in it, but from the very beginning it makes it clear that that's not what this is. At best, it's a tragedy of love that's doomed to take place at the wrong time over and over again.

I despise this book in it's entirety. Why do I rate it so highly? Because it was a good story. Because the writing was beautiful. Because at the end of the day Clare and Henry did love each other, or at least, the idea of each other as soulmates. But these good qualities aside, there was so much that sucked complete ass; the constant unfair treatment that Henry endured even when he was supposed to be happy up until the very end, the completely depressing quality to the second half of the book where everything that could possibly go wrong goes wrong, the lack of any kind of hope to be found that left the ending feeling empty, and the omission of details that would have made the story more concrete versus the cut and paste style of Niffenegger's writing. It seemed like, in an effort to create a time-is-meaningless air to the story, Niffenegger decided to not go into too much depth at any point in time that wasn't the present....and even then, she sure did skip on a lot that I would have loved to see play out.

I loved the potential of this story, I loved immersing myself in it, but I sure am disappointed in how it ended. I was expecting hope, the feeling of love transcending time, triumph in Henry and Clare's struggles not having been simply a means to an end, closure. But the exact opposite is what I got.