Scan barcode
A review by jrc2011
From Time to Time by Jack Finney
2.0
Twenty five years later - the author, now in his 80s - decides to write a sequel. Why? I confess, I am still curious about the mechanism that they use for time travel. And, of course, the protagonist did change history so what happened to "The Project?"
Without too much retelling of backstory - the author much more clearly articulates the mechanism for time travel this time:
"...find a place that exists in both times unchanged; “Gateways,” he called them. And live in that place which also exists in the time you want to reach—dressing, eating, and thinking the way they did—and presently the ties holding you to the present will relax. Then blank out even the knowledge of these ties through self-hypnosis. And let your knowledge of the time you want to reach come flooding up in your mind. And there—in a Gateway existing in both times—you may, you just may make the transition."
However, by this point the protagonist has figured out other potential gateway locations and is able to just think himself around to different points of time.
Meanwhile, back in the 1970s, there's a team of researchers trying to make sense of historical anomalies -- for example, a world where WWI never happened (and by extension, perhaps WWII but we don't go so far as to talk about killing Hitler).
I'm not quite sure HOW anyone could remember the parallel timelines -- or the possible outcomes -- when our protagonist's interference nullified the birth of the director of the Project. So, how is it that different participants in the Project are now starting to have memories? And how on earth does one of the other time travelers actually stop Simon from changing that event?
It seems like he is tracked down, beaten and then in his mind recalls that event and was too late to stop meeting of the director's parents. That part confused me. And, of course - once they met and history resumed the original course, we go back to Ruben et. al. in "present day" about 4-5 years after the first story. It made no sense to me after several re-readings.
While a bit lessened, it seems the author can't resist his innate sexism and racism. In describing the name of his dog, inserts random comment: "Big black dogs, I’m afraid, are often Nig." And there are an equal number of uses of "girl/s" as "women/woman" -- which is even justified in text, noting that "girl" is not equating women to children, "The English language is hardworking; the meaning of a word can vary by context. And to compare using “girl” for “young woman” with the Southern use of “boy” for a black man is thoughtless, and just plain dumb." Oh, good - we're not being racist just sexist, thanks for clearing that up.
The Bechdel Test failure is ongoing -- Julia and the Jotta Girl being the primary female characters. The protagonist can't even refer to Helen by her name just by "Jotta Girl" from a childhood memory of poorly pronounced song lyric. And then there's ongoing gratuitous objectification of women:
"a pair of more than usually nice-looking young women walked by, glancing over at us, then walking on with just a tiny bit of extra hip-sway, maybe three eighths of an inch. Rube said, “Those are called girls, I think. Or used to be."
Much of the book consists opportunities for the author to wander off and indulge in relatively unimportant period fantasies that are orthogonal to the plot -- like the hyper-fetishistic focus on clothing and "set pieces" around airplanes, vaudeville and the Titanic. I don't even live in New York and could tell you that a building that looked like the prow of a ship would likely be the triangular Flatiron building (you don't need to get in a "hydro plane" to see that).
Now that we don't need elaborate gateways -- I need to be reminded why the protagonist, or even "Jotta Girl" are able to travel in time. What makes them different or special? We certainly don't get a sense of "Jotta Girl" as a special person because she's barely one dimensional.
I recommend "Kindred" for a really good, short time travel story -- it provides rich depth of characters, motive and substantial period description without being a whitewashed homage to "good ole days."
Without too much retelling of backstory - the author much more clearly articulates the mechanism for time travel this time:
"...find a place that exists in both times unchanged; “Gateways,” he called them. And live in that place which also exists in the time you want to reach—dressing, eating, and thinking the way they did—and presently the ties holding you to the present will relax. Then blank out even the knowledge of these ties through self-hypnosis. And let your knowledge of the time you want to reach come flooding up in your mind. And there—in a Gateway existing in both times—you may, you just may make the transition."
However, by this point the protagonist has figured out other potential gateway locations and is able to just think himself around to different points of time.
Meanwhile, back in the 1970s, there's a team of researchers trying to make sense of historical anomalies -- for example, a world where WWI never happened (and by extension, perhaps WWII but we don't go so far as to talk about killing Hitler).
I'm not quite sure HOW anyone could remember the parallel timelines -- or the possible outcomes -- when our protagonist's interference nullified the birth of the director of the Project. So, how is it that different participants in the Project are now starting to have memories? And how on earth does one of the other time travelers actually stop Simon from changing that event?
It seems like he is tracked down, beaten and then in his mind recalls that event and was too late to stop meeting of the director's parents. That part confused me. And, of course - once they met and history resumed the original course, we go back to Ruben et. al. in "present day" about 4-5 years after the first story. It made no sense to me after several re-readings.
While a bit lessened, it seems the author can't resist his innate sexism and racism. In describing the name of his dog, inserts random comment: "Big black dogs, I’m afraid, are often Nig." And there are an equal number of uses of "girl/s" as "women/woman" -- which is even justified in text, noting that "girl" is not equating women to children, "The English language is hardworking; the meaning of a word can vary by context. And to compare using “girl” for “young woman” with the Southern use of “boy” for a black man is thoughtless, and just plain dumb." Oh, good - we're not being racist just sexist, thanks for clearing that up.
The Bechdel Test failure is ongoing -- Julia and the Jotta Girl being the primary female characters. The protagonist can't even refer to Helen by her name just by "Jotta Girl" from a childhood memory of poorly pronounced song lyric. And then there's ongoing gratuitous objectification of women:
"a pair of more than usually nice-looking young women walked by, glancing over at us, then walking on with just a tiny bit of extra hip-sway, maybe three eighths of an inch. Rube said, “Those are called girls, I think. Or used to be."
Much of the book consists opportunities for the author to wander off and indulge in relatively unimportant period fantasies that are orthogonal to the plot -- like the hyper-fetishistic focus on clothing and "set pieces" around airplanes, vaudeville and the Titanic. I don't even live in New York and could tell you that a building that looked like the prow of a ship would likely be the triangular Flatiron building (you don't need to get in a "hydro plane" to see that).
Now that we don't need elaborate gateways -- I need to be reminded why the protagonist, or even "Jotta Girl" are able to travel in time. What makes them different or special? We certainly don't get a sense of "Jotta Girl" as a special person because she's barely one dimensional.
I recommend "Kindred" for a really good, short time travel story -- it provides rich depth of characters, motive and substantial period description without being a whitewashed homage to "good ole days."