A Swiftly Tilting Planet (Time Quintet, #3)
Wind, unicorn, and boy merged into a single swiftness.When fifteen-year-old Charles Wallace Murry shouts out an ancient rune meant to ward off the dark in desperation, a radiant creature appears. It is Gaudior, unicorn and time traveler. Charles Wallace and Gaudior must travel into the past on the winds of time to try to find a Might-Have-Been - a moment in the past when the entire course of events leading to the present can be changed, and the future of Earth - this small, swiftly tilting planet - saved.

A Swiftly Tilting Planet (Time Quintet, #3) Details

TitleA Swiftly Tilting Planet (Time Quintet, #3)
Author
LanguageEnglish
ReleaseJan 1st, 1981
PublisherDell Publishing Co., Inc.
ISBN-139780440401582
Rating
GenreFantasy, Young Adult, Fiction, Science Fiction, Science Fiction Fantasy, Childrens

A Swiftly Tilting Planet (Time Quintet, #3) Review

  • Cait
    January 1, 1970
    This is where this series entirely fell off the rails for me. (If you enjoyed this book, feel free to skip my rant! You are totally entitled to your own opinions!) I expected to enjoy this! It is a dear favorite of several of my friends. But no. I did not enjoy it. I loathed this book. Loathed. Let us begin with the intro! The gang is assembled again! Dad is advising the president! Mom is science-ing! Sandy is in medical school! Denys is in law school! Charles Wallace is doing a lot better in sc This is where this series entirely fell off the rails for me. (If you enjoyed this book, feel free to skip my rant! You are totally entitled to your own opinions!) I expected to enjoy this! It is a dear favorite of several of my friends. But no. I did not enjoy it. I loathed this book. Loathed. Let us begin with the intro! The gang is assembled again! Dad is advising the president! Mom is science-ing! Sandy is in medical school! Denys is in law school! Charles Wallace is doing a lot better in school and having exciting intellectual pursuits outside school! Calvin is presenting an important paper in England! Meg is pregnant. Seriously. This is the only thing we hear about her. I really appreciated, in the earlier books, that Meg is an intellectual equal in her family. She likes math! She's stubborn and has a tempter but she saves the day with her multiplication tables! In this book, the only mentions of what she is doing are that she is a) married to Calvin, and b) pregnant. AAAAAAAGH. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH. Then, we get in to predestination bullshit, wherein we first learn that the native population of presumed!America was perfect and peaceful and wise-like-yoda before the white man came and spoiled all that. Thankfully we had TWO white dudes, and they have helpfully color coded eyes, so we can tell who is good and who is bad for the rest of the book. (Blue is good, guys!) Also, for all the bizarre fantasy native population in the first bit, as soon as the white guys arrive, we move right back to white only characters for the rest of the book. (White characters who have a hint of exotic ancestry!) The plot hinges on which white guy is the ancestor of a crazy Latin American dictator- if it's the blue eyed guy, we're cool! If it's the brown eyed guy, nuclear holocaust! Events must be manipulated to ensure the correct lineage, so there is some time travel, some jumping thru space, a unicorn, etc. Charles Wallace lives in the heads of generations of men who: write some books, see some visions, fall down some stairs, go to Patagonia.Alongside these generations of men, there are some women! The women are pregnant. (Some see visions AND are pregnant! Some are stupid and pregnant! Some care for infirm male relatives AND are pregnant! Some marry abusive dudes and GET pregnant!) No female character is not explicitly a mother/pregnant as a plot point. (Mmm. Maybe Zillah- maybe she was only explicitly a fiancee/longed for, and her fertility didn't enter into it.) Ugh. Also: we once again have a book where the fate of all of humanity rests on a single family tree. Good things about the book: The idea of kything is pretty cool.
    more
  • Keith Mukai
    January 1, 1970
    Though L'Engle's storytelling improves after the dull previous outing of "A Wind in the Door", "Swiftly" fails in other more serious ways.The biggest problem is her somewhat silly reliance on hereditary family names from generation to generation--names that endure for hundreds of years and somehow continue to intersect.Madoc, Madog, Maddux, and Mad Dog; Gwydder, Gedder, and Gwen; Zyllie, Zyllah, Zylle; two Branwens and a Charles and a Chuck round out the cast. I think.Something like four differe Though L'Engle's storytelling improves after the dull previous outing of "A Wind in the Door", "Swiftly" fails in other more serious ways.The biggest problem is her somewhat silly reliance on hereditary family names from generation to generation--names that endure for hundreds of years and somehow continue to intersect.Madoc, Madog, Maddux, and Mad Dog; Gwydder, Gedder, and Gwen; Zyllie, Zyllah, Zylle; two Branwens and a Charles and a Chuck round out the cast. I think.Something like four different generations are followed and each generation has its own version of each namesake. But it's not just one namesake per generation--the 1865 generation has a Zyllie in America and a Zyllah in South America. Or is it the other way around? Gedder wants a Maddux to get with his sister Zyllah and wants Gwen for himself, but that Maddux is engaged to the Zyllie in America. Confusing? Yes. Does this sound silly? Yes.The first generation's usages of the names is fine. The second generation is interesting but gets a little confusing (like if the families married in the first generation, why are Maddocs still courting Zyllahs?). And by the third generation it's just absolutely ridiculous that L'Engle is still trying to play this name game.All this nuttiness aside, our hero, Charles Wallace doesn't seem to really do much in the story. He travels within a particular person in each generation and kind of becomes them. But only in the first generation is it clear that Charles himself steps forward and directs his host to act in a certain way. After that, Charles' influence on his host--and therefore on the novel--is less distinct.One can infer a few instances where his presence may have made a difference, but overall the effect is to make him seem more like a passive observer than active participant in saving civilization. And passivity is a serious flaw in any story.
    more
  • Trish
    January 1, 1970
    This is the third book in the Time Quintet series that started out with Meg, her brother Charles Wallace and their friend Calvin.The third book starts with a massive time jump that almost disoriented me: the events here start 10 years after those of the last volume with Meg being married to Calvin and pregnant with their first child, Calvin being a scientist (and currently away in England), and the family has come together for a Thanksgiving dinner. Even Calvin's mother is there and when somethi This is the third book in the Time Quintet series that started out with Meg, her brother Charles Wallace and their friend Calvin.The third book starts with a massive time jump that almost disoriented me: the events here start 10 years after those of the last volume with Meg being married to Calvin and pregnant with their first child, Calvin being a scientist (and currently away in England), and the family has come together for a Thanksgiving dinner. Even Calvin's mother is there and when something peculiar happens and the family is informed that nuclear war has become a real possibility, it's Calvin's mother who tasks Charles Wallace with saving the future by giving him an old Irish rune (she doesn't actively know it).In order to do that, he recites the rune, thereby conjuring a winged unicorn called Gaudior.Together, they travel through time to certain moments the wind takes them to where Charles Walles merges with certain characters and experiences the moments in time through their eyes. It's about changing the past to ensure a peaceful future.At first, I thought this book would be even more heavy-handed than in the previous volumes. However, it was soon clear that it was done to actually criticize people like (view spoiler)[the Puritans that would have killed a woman for a witch in their religious mania just because she was different and they, basically, were bored (hide spoiler)]. So I didn't mind. It actually had a mythological feel to it by a certain point.I certainly preferred this kind of quest to that of the previous book although we barely got to be with Meg or even Charles Wallce - it was more about the people Charles Wallce was "visiting" with Gaudior.The writing and audio were both, once again, very good. The author and narrator are both very talented and therefore the books are always of high quality - what influences my rating the most are therefore the repsective adventures. But now I wonder how these 5 volumes will come together in the end. Many things Meg and her brother learnt in book 2 have become essential in this third after the first book lay the foundation of who (mostly) this was about ... but how will it all come together, especially after such a time jump?!
    more
  • Michael Fitzgerald
    January 1, 1970
    This one is pretty weak. The name thing is especially stupid. It takes literally 150 pages (out of 278) for them to figure out "with a startled flash of comprehension" that there's - gosh! - a connection between various people named Madoc, Madog, Maddok, Maddox, Mad Dog, Branwen, Brandon, Bran, Zyll, Zylle, Zillo, Zillah, Zillie, Beezie (B.Z.), Branzillo. And then it's on p.195 that we get "Certainly the name Zillie must have some connection with Madoc's Zyll, and Ritchie Llawcae's Zylle..." Rea This one is pretty weak. The name thing is especially stupid. It takes literally 150 pages (out of 278) for them to figure out "with a startled flash of comprehension" that there's - gosh! - a connection between various people named Madoc, Madog, Maddok, Maddox, Mad Dog, Branwen, Brandon, Bran, Zyll, Zylle, Zillo, Zillah, Zillie, Beezie (B.Z.), Branzillo. And then it's on p.195 that we get "Certainly the name Zillie must have some connection with Madoc's Zyll, and Ritchie Llawcae's Zylle..." Really? You don't say! Give me a break! You are insulting the reader's intelligence and characters in L'Engle books are supposed to be even *more* intelligent and extraordinary than normal readers. This similar names thing is something that L'Engle did in The Other Side of the Sun with several people all named Theron. I'm not sure what the purpose is, but it doesn't work because it's just unclear to the reader. It's like George Foreman and his five sons named George: just dumb - which is the last thing that readers of L'Engle books want. There are enough somewhat interesting stories in all of this, but it's not L'Engle's best work, not by a long shot.
    more
  • Alaina
    January 1, 1970
    Okay this book was weird.Charles is almost grown up because he's freaking 15 years old now. The twins are in like med school or something like that. Meg is married to Calvin and they are having a baby (OMG FANGIRL AND SWOOONING). Not really bummed that Meg and the twins weren't in this book as much, or that Meg wasn't on the adventure.. because Charles didn't really get to go on the last one. So it kind of makes up for it - right?Okay that parts not weird, the weird part was that Charles went to Okay this book was weird.Charles is almost grown up because he's freaking 15 years old now. The twins are in like med school or something like that. Meg is married to Calvin and they are having a baby (OMG FANGIRL AND SWOOONING). Not really bummed that Meg and the twins weren't in this book as much, or that Meg wasn't on the adventure.. because Charles didn't really get to go on the last one. So it kind of makes up for it - right?Okay that parts not weird, the weird part was that Charles went to his star-watching rock, evil echthroi were trying to catch him, and then he finds a random ass unicorn and flies back in time. I'm sorry.. but what.. the hell just happened? From then on, there's a clusterfuck of confusion because I honestly had no idea who the heck was talking .. so I just kind of assumed it was Charles the entire time talking to himself. Yup. It made the book more interesting if I do say so myself.The adventure was okay. The confusion was very confusing and it didn't help that I was completely exhausted today either. I don't really understand why he even went on a trip with a unicorn to begin with. I also don't really understand why he was being chased. I just didn't understand a whole bunch of this book. I have no idea what the next book will have but I hope it's less confusion.Overall, the first book was probably the best and is probably my favorite. Still holding out the judgment though because there are two more books left in this shindig. Let's do this!
    more
  • D.M. Dutcher
    January 1, 1970
    Wow. Out of all of the Time Trilogy novels, I had the fondest memories of this. I guess as a child I skipped over a lot of it.We enter the Murray family, but about 9 years or so from the events of a Wind in the Door. Meg has married Calvin off-screen and is pregnant. Sandy and Denys are bankers, and Charles Williams is 15. I admit I wasn't crazy about that, seeing as Meg was the soul of the first two books, and I really wanted to see her interact with Calvin more. But I can understand.It sets up Wow. Out of all of the Time Trilogy novels, I had the fondest memories of this. I guess as a child I skipped over a lot of it.We enter the Murray family, but about 9 years or so from the events of a Wind in the Door. Meg has married Calvin off-screen and is pregnant. Sandy and Denys are bankers, and Charles Williams is 15. I admit I wasn't crazy about that, seeing as Meg was the soul of the first two books, and I really wanted to see her interact with Calvin more. But I can understand.It sets up well. although not as nicely as a Wind in the Door. The Murrays are sitting around being smart when the President lets Mr. Murray (who is magically here this time, neither away nor kidnapped, what do you know?) that a dictator in a small South American country called Mad Dog Branzillio is threatening nuclear war, and its likely to happen. Meg's new mother in law, Mrs O'Keefe, manages to get a rune and utters a poem/spell. She seems to think Charles Wallace is the key to solving this.This I can get. The point of the first two books seemed to be protecting Charles Wallace, so this is the one where we get to see his capabilities. He's hinted to be more in a way Meg can't be, almost a new type of human in them. So we get to see his stuff. He somehow summons the unicorn Gaudior. The two go off on an adventure, traveling through time.Cool stuff, right? I admit, I was a little psyched, because I'd finally get a chance to see CW in action. And as a fifteen year old, his super intelligence and knowledge wont grate as much. maybe we will even see a love interest for him.NONE OF THIS HAPPENS.IT SUCKS.This is what happens. He saves the world by making tiny changes to Mad Dog's ancestors. It seems that the "bad" brother of two brothers married the wrong person, causing Mad Dog Instead of Blue Eyes, a madman instead of a benevolent ruler. he pops into the ancestor, lives as them, and pops out.He literally does nothing. Most of the book is the story of a welsh clan that moved to patagonia somehow and married native. CW gets subsumed into their identity and doesn't comment or even perceive differences. He dives in, we get their particular story, he dives out. Once in awhile he has a brief micro-adventure which mostly involves waiting for it to be over.He does not grow, he does not meet anyone, he does not fall in love, he just is a vehicle to move these dull stories along. Meg just sits at home being pregnant and kytheing details, recognizing the plot links so we have some semblance of a plot. No one does anything. The book ends with a time swap. Instead of nuclear war Mad Dog just doesn't exist. CW does not face him, or even SEE him. Mad Dog could have been a very interesting character to interact with, but he exists and dies offscreen.It makes no sense. I mean, CW can do this? he broke causality and time traveled specifically to prevent a result, causing one person to not exist at all. This breaks the idea of Naming in the Wind in the Door, and makes a tremendous mockery of any christian idea the trilogy might have had. Maddog is not defeated or redeemed, he is unmade into an entirely different person. It makes no sense.Neither does the rune thing. It's not explained how runes have any real power, and it's jarring considering the christian focus of the first two books. It's like L'Engle wanted to write an epic about the welsh but needed to frame it as part of the time trilogy to sell it. It's tremendously anti-climatic, shortchanges virtually every main character, is passive as all get out, boring, and staggers the mind. The whole historical idea was handled much better in Many Waters with the Denys twins, and that book shows how it should have been done. This? No.
    more
  • Teresa
    January 1, 1970
    As I said of A Wind in the Door, I didn’t know of these sequels to A Wrinkle in Time until I was an adult and read them when my son was reading the quartet. I now own this beautiful edition: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3..., so I’m rereading the books (along with their respective endnotes) but reviewing them separately.If I'd read this when I was a child, I might've been dismayed at the idea of a grown-up Meg, in the same way Peter Pan is at the appearance of the adult Wendy. But I would As I said of A Wind in the Door, I didn’t know of these sequels to A Wrinkle in Time until I was an adult and read them when my son was reading the quartet. I now own this beautiful edition: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3..., so I’m rereading the books (along with their respective endnotes) but reviewing them separately.If I'd read this when I was a child, I might've been dismayed at the idea of a grown-up Meg, in the same way Peter Pan is at the appearance of the adult Wendy. But I would’ve been won over by the stories told within the “time-travel” sequences, especially the one set in Puritan Salem, as well as the overarching story of two families splintered off from two Welsh brothers: a Cain-Abel mix of legend, mythology and historical fiction.
    more
  • Morgan
    January 1, 1970
    At Tara in this fateful hour,I place all Heaven with its power,And the sun with its brightness,And the snow with its whiteness,And the fire with all the strength it hath,And the lightning with its rapid wrath,And the winds with their swiftness along their path,And the sea with its deepness,And the rocks with their steepness,And the earth with its starkness,All these I place by God's almightly help and graceBetween myself and the powers of darkness!This book was absolutely amazing, and an instant At Tara in this fateful hour,I place all Heaven with its power,And the sun with its brightness,And the snow with its whiteness,And the fire with all the strength it hath,And the lightning with its rapid wrath,And the winds with their swiftness along their path,And the sea with its deepness,And the rocks with their steepness,And the earth with its starkness,All these I place by God's almightly help and graceBetween myself and the powers of darkness!This book was absolutely amazing, and an instant classic in my mind. I now understand why everyone raved about these books. It was all because of this story here.As the book begins, we find ourselves in the future. Charles Wallace is 15, the twins are finishing up grad school, and Meg and Calvin are not only married, but expecting their first child. It's Thanksgiving and the whole family, including Calvin's mom, Mrs. O'Keefe are gathered together to celebrate. But it's not long before trouble starts. Mr. Murry receives an urgent call from the President stating that we are on the verge of nuclear war with a small country, Vespugia, and their angry leader. As the family sits around the table discussing scenaries, quiet, distrusting Mrs. O'Keefe begins to recite this ancient rune. As she leaves, she turns to Charles Wallace and demands, "It's all up to Chuck. You have to save us all."Each chapter is named after a line from the rune, and follows the general concept of what is presented there. So, in Chapter 2 "I place all Heaven with it's power", Charles Wallace receives his help from heaven, a Unicorn. On this Unicorn he travels through time to years and years past in an attempt to change the future. This book really drew me in, and reminded me of a Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys Mystery. It's done really intelligently, with wonderful back stories, and lovely characters. And that rune! Oh! It's my new favorite quote. Ever. And that same power is avaliable to us today (well, probably not a Unicorn, but you know what I mean). What an awesome God we serve, one that uses people in such wonderful ways, i.e. that by writing a children's novel, we discover a prayer for our spiritual battle! Amazing!
    more
  • Sarah
    January 1, 1970
    Charles Wallace saves the universe from the forces of evil. Dear Lord, I hated this book. I'm going with two stars because I do try to reserve a one-star rating for truly unreadable books. This wasn't necessarily bad; I just hated it. I hated the wooden dialogue. I hated the vaguely racist patina over the Native American portrayal. I hated the fact that everyone had the same flipping name. I hated that the author circumvented background exposition with awkward over-explaining conversations (or e Charles Wallace saves the universe from the forces of evil. Dear Lord, I hated this book. I'm going with two stars because I do try to reserve a one-star rating for truly unreadable books. This wasn't necessarily bad; I just hated it. I hated the wooden dialogue. I hated the vaguely racist patina over the Native American portrayal. I hated the fact that everyone had the same flipping name. I hated that the author circumvented background exposition with awkward over-explaining conversations (or exclamations to the dog!) and letters. Most of all, I hated that the characters were completely useless as carriers of any individual talent or strength. Literally everything in this puzzle was handed to Charles Wallace and Meg. It might as well have been any rando off the street doing these Missions because they certainly required no initiative, and explicitly discouraged independent thinking. And it had to be that way because that's the way it Was. So if it Was, then why did someone even have to do it? And why did someone special have to do it? The dog really tipped it for me. Really, a random magic dog shows up on this night to pick up the remaining slack between what the unicorn and the powers that Be have determined will happen? Ugh. I came back to add more stuff I hated, because I hated it that much. I hated that it was apparently totally plausible for the President, 24 hours before nuclear meltdown, to call his occasional science advisor just to give him a heads-up about the end of the world. Like, how many people must be 2 or 3 degrees away from the President in this way? Did he literally sit and call every one of them? Maybe the world is about to end because he has a terrible hierarchy of priorities. I hated that NOTHING else in the world changed when Whatshername married Thegoodone instead of Thebadone. C'mon now. First of all, rudi-flipping-mentary time travel. Second, don't make the entire premise of your story the fact that everything is so interrelated and how one tiny change might wipe out the universe, and then make a HUGE change and report that the only difference in the timeline of history is that the dictator isn't evil anymore. Oh, and I so hated that Meg is nothing but dog-whisperer and baby-carrier. Meg is brilliant! And raised in a freaking female Nobel Prize-winning household. Not to say that she has to be a renowned scientist or anything, but it just would have been sweet to say what her non-house-keeping-baby-growing role is in her world. Or at least a short manifesto about feminist choices and the way she is living her feminism in this role. The end, for real this time.
    more
  • Beth
    January 1, 1970
    Five stars for enjoyment and nostalgia and quality of writing. This is so, so formative for me. So many of the things I love in literature today are present in this book. A Swiftly Tilting Planet has runes and myth and might-have-beens, and it does time travel wonderfully. (Adult-me wonders if L'Engle was referencing Barrie and Dear Brutus with her might-have-beens; child-me had never heard of a might-have-been before.)This is lyrical and beautiful. And it still makes me desperate to see a model Five stars for enjoyment and nostalgia and quality of writing. This is so, so formative for me. So many of the things I love in literature today are present in this book. A Swiftly Tilting Planet has runes and myth and might-have-beens, and it does time travel wonderfully. (Adult-me wonders if L'Engle was referencing Barrie and Dear Brutus with her might-have-beens; child-me had never heard of a might-have-been before.)This is lyrical and beautiful. And it still makes me desperate to see a model of a tesseract. Note: I just spent ten minutes searching my old journal for notes on the blue eyes/brown eyes aspect. I know I wrote notes on that a few years ago, about how it really rubbed me the wrong way. It didn't so much on this reread - but it's there nonetheless. This isn't a perfect book. But it is a really, really good one.I did find this, from a speech L'Engle gave:One time I was in the kitchen drinking tea with my husband and our young son, and they got into an argument about ice hockey. I do not feel passionate about ice hockey. They do. Finally our son said. “But Daddy, you don’t understand.” And my husband said, reasonably, “It’s not that I don’t understand, Bion. It’s just that I don’t agree with you.”To which the little boy replied hotly, “If you don’t agree with me, you don’t understand.”I think we all feel that way, but it takes a child to admit it.
    more
  • Espe
    January 1, 1970
    Reseña completa: https://letraslibrosymas.blogspot.com...La edición sigue siendo impecable y preciosa, Gran travesía se lo curra mucho y en esta ocasión tenemos un unicornio en el interior de las solapas y brillos dorados anaranjados en la cubierta (además de pequeños detalles e ilustraciones en el interior que enmarcan el número de páginas, los inicios y finales de capítulos como ya pasaba con los anteriores libros).En cuanto a mis impresiones y lo que podéis encontrar en el interior, pues os p Reseña completa: https://letraslibrosymas.blogspot.com...La edición sigue siendo impecable y preciosa, Gran travesía se lo curra mucho y en esta ocasión tenemos un unicornio en el interior de las solapas y brillos dorados anaranjados en la cubierta (además de pequeños detalles e ilustraciones en el interior que enmarcan el número de páginas, los inicios y finales de capítulos como ya pasaba con los anteriores libros).En cuanto a mis impresiones y lo que podéis encontrar en el interior, pues os podéis hacer una idea bastante aproximada si ya habéis leído alguno de los libros de esta saga, si no es el caso... Estamos ante una historia compleja, con un desarrollo un poco denso y una historia que envuelve muchos factores e historias dentro de la misma, así que puede resultar algo repetitivo o confuso. La pluma de la autora es muy elaborada y se centra mucho en las descripciones de los nuevos lugares a donde nos lleva o a lo que pasa alrededor de los personajes.
    more
  • Christopher
    January 1, 1970
    I hate to admit it, but getting through this book has been a bit of a chore. I'm not altogether certain if I want to finish this chapter of the "Wrinkle in Time" series, though I'm sure I'll press on because I bought the entire series and I want to get through it at least once. What is interesting about this book is that it introduces us to an adult (and very pregnant) Meg, and a teenaged Charles Wallace, who is the center of this book. After getting to know these two characters so well in the p I hate to admit it, but getting through this book has been a bit of a chore. I'm not altogether certain if I want to finish this chapter of the "Wrinkle in Time" series, though I'm sure I'll press on because I bought the entire series and I want to get through it at least once. What is interesting about this book is that it introduces us to an adult (and very pregnant) Meg, and a teenaged Charles Wallace, who is the center of this book. After getting to know these two characters so well in the previous two books, it's a treat to see them as they get older. The fun is tarnished (for me, anyway) with L'Engle's storytelling device of putting Charles Wallace's soul or essence inside various other characters throughout the book, and dedicating entire chapters to random characters completely unassociated with the world of the Murrays. It feels like a kind of cheating on L'Engle's behalf - as if she were tired of writing about the Murray family and the quirky sci-fi creatures these books have become known for, so PRESTO CHANGO! We'll just cram Charles Wallace's soul into a few historical fiction characters and it can still "technically" be a "Wrinkle in Time" book. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh here, but I'm finding this book something of a bore, and I really wish it weren't the case.
    more
  • Tiff at Mostly YA Lit
    January 1, 1970
    4.5 stars. Re-read. Spoilers abound. It amazes me how I can still be finding new things to think about and learn from in L'Engle's work even after 3-4 re-reads. The lyrical bits were a little harder to get through this time around - but no less beautiful. L'Engle has a gift for creating incredible characters - even though you only spend a short time in Madoc, Bran, Harcels, Chuck, and Matthew's brains through Charles, their stories drew me in. And can we talk about the fact that Chuck and Matthe 4.5 stars. Re-read. Spoilers abound. It amazes me how I can still be finding new things to think about and learn from in L'Engle's work even after 3-4 re-reads. The lyrical bits were a little harder to get through this time around - but no less beautiful. L'Engle has a gift for creating incredible characters - even though you only spend a short time in Madoc, Bran, Harcels, Chuck, and Matthew's brains through Charles, their stories drew me in. And can we talk about the fact that Chuck and Matthew are both probably two of the earliest physically challenged characters in juvenile fiction? I also loved how much this book gave a voice and compelling story to Mrs. O'Keefe - a woman who has several children and who isn't very likeable. Really, L'Engle did a ton of things right in this book that blends history, fantasy, time-travel...I'm still completely floored by her talent and work.
    more
  • Janni
    January 1, 1970
    This book was deeply, deeply influential when I first read it. Years later, I can see it's flaws more clearly, but in many ways I don't care. L'Engle's overall sense of the universe having a fundamental all-rightness beneath its darkness, and this particular book's sense that until they do happen the awful things don't have to happen, have stayed with me through the years.Just reread 2/11/12. Still magic. Still so deep a comfort read.(Scattered thoughts about this book and The Arm of the Starfis This book was deeply, deeply influential when I first read it. Years later, I can see it's flaws more clearly, but in many ways I don't care. L'Engle's overall sense of the universe having a fundamental all-rightness beneath its darkness, and this particular book's sense that until they do happen the awful things don't have to happen, have stayed with me through the years.Just reread 2/11/12. Still magic. Still so deep a comfort read.(Scattered thoughts about this book and The Arm of the Starfish here: http://janni.livejournal.com/774451.html)
    more
  • Andrew Leon
    January 1, 1970
    My first ever oral book report was on A Swiftly Tilting Planet. I chose it because I had so much enjoyed the book. And, hey, it had a flying unicorn. I got an A on the written report; I didn't do so well on the oral presentation. I never let that happen again, though. It was what you call "a learning experience."Three books into reading (and re-reading) L'Engle's Time Quintent and I'm finally realizing what it is, exactly, that I don't like about them. The characters don't do anything. They spen My first ever oral book report was on A Swiftly Tilting Planet. I chose it because I had so much enjoyed the book. And, hey, it had a flying unicorn. I got an A on the written report; I didn't do so well on the oral presentation. I never let that happen again, though. It was what you call "a learning experience."Three books into reading (and re-reading) L'Engle's Time Quintent and I'm finally realizing what it is, exactly, that I don't like about them. The characters don't do anything. They spend their time being taken from place to place by various cosmic beings because they're so important but, in the end, they don't actually do anything to affect the outcome of the story. The closest we get to anyone doing anything is Meg in A Wrinkle in Time in which she says the magic words of "I love you" to her brother to break the spell he's under. A Swiftly Tilting Planet is the worst offender so far.There will be spoilers.The world is on the brink of a nuclear war and Charles Wallace is tasked to stop it. He has one day to do it. One day to figure out how to get the madman who is about to start the war to change his mind and not. A madman who is on a completely different continent.Luckily for Charles, a unicorn shows up to help him and his sister's mother-in-law gives him a magical poem to say. L'Engle relies a lot on magic words in these books. Just say the magic words at just the right time and the day is saved! That's what happens in Wrinkle, and that's what happens in this book. Every time anything bad is happening, the poem is recited and everything is better.But let's get back to Charles and the unicorn. The unicorn, as it turns out, has wings that come out of his sides. When Gaudior, the unicorn, is just standing around, he has no wings. It's probably a personal bias, but the whole thing with the wings just seems silly to me. The unicorn, by the way, uses his wings, mostly, to fly through time; he's no good at flying through space, according to him.To stop the madman, the unicorn takes Charles travelling through time. Now, you'd think that would be because Charles is supposed to change something to stop the madman, but, no, actually, Charles is just there to go "Within" different characters and observe. Maybe he'll learn something with which he can stop the crazy dude from blowing up the world. So that's what we spend the book doing, travelling through time learning the history of Crazy Dude's family.Now, the special, magic poem has been in the family for ages (Meg's mother-in-law is from the same family), so, mostly, we just watch people get into bad situations and recite the poem to fix everything. But, evidently, nuclear war is too big for a poem. We travel along until we get to the father of the madman. What we learn along the way is that he has the wrong father. Or grandfather? At any rate, the wrong man married the woman and, so, we get a madman that wants to blow up the world.It turns out that the wrong man married her, because he killed the other guy. The two men were fighting over the woman, and the bad guy stabbed the good guy and threw his body off a cliff. Charles Wallace ends up in the same time as the two guys who will fight over the woman, but is he put in a place to affect any kind of change over the outcome? No. He's put into a guy thousands of miles away. A guy who is dying of, probably, tuberculosis.So, when it comes to the point of the fight, the guy that Charles is in is in the middle of a fevered sleep, and Charles, making his first effort to affect change in the time he's in, keeps whispering in the guy's head, "Do something." The thing is, there's no way for either of them to know that the fight on the cliff is happening at that moment; they just do. But the sick guy can't wake up and they're thousands of miles away, so they do absolutely nothing. But the outcome of the fight changes anyway. The good guy turns to find the guy trying to stab him, knocks the knife out of his hand, and the bad guy, in an effort to catch his knife, falls off the cliff. So the good guy marries the woman, and the madman is never born.Of course, when Charles Wallace gets back, no one knows anything about the imminent nuclear war. Only he (and Meg, a bit) can remember what almost happened.Needless to say, I was very dissatisfied with the ending of the book. Actually, I was dissatisfied with most of the book despite the fact the some of the historical bits are interesting. What the book reminded me of is kids playing on a playground and shouting "magic words" to win their battles against imaginary enemies. So, again, I am left with the impression that these are really kids' books, not like, say, The Chronicles of Narnia at all, books that you can revisit throughout your lifetime.Except that, well, past Wrinkle, my kids have really struggled to read these. My younger son wasn't able to get past the first couple of chapters of A Wind in the Door despite that he tried twice, and my daughter started Swiftly something like four times and just couldn't get interested in it. Maybe, they're already too old. What I do know is that if I had re-read these before handing them to my kids to read, I wouldn't have bothered to do it. Beyond a few concepts, like the tesseract, I haven't really found anything worthwhile in the books.[Which isn't going to stop me from finishing the series, because I'm already halfway through book four (and it's even worse).]
    more
  • Neil R. Coulter
    January 1, 1970
    When I was a kid, the L'Engle's Time series was just a trilogy, so this was the final volume. On this re-read, as bedtime stories with the kids, I enjoyed the first volume, A Wrinkle in Time, and liked the second, A Wind in the Door, even better. This one, though . . . it's a different kind of story. Though L'Engle attempted a much bigger, more substantial story, it falls short in some frustrating ways.What's good about A Swiftly Tilting Planet: the language. L'Engle seems to have put much more When I was a kid, the L'Engle's Time series was just a trilogy, so this was the final volume. On this re-read, as bedtime stories with the kids, I enjoyed the first volume, A Wrinkle in Time, and liked the second, A Wind in the Door, even better. This one, though . . . it's a different kind of story. Though L'Engle attempted a much bigger, more substantial story, it falls short in some frustrating ways.What's good about A Swiftly Tilting Planet: the language. L'Engle seems to have put much more into crafting every word of this book. She often uses alliteration, brings in some really interesting and unusual words, and infuses the sentences with a rhythm that I don't remember being present in the other books in the series. Reading it aloud was often a delight, especially for a family that loves words and good use of language.I also admire L'Engle for looking at a bigger canvas than before in her storytelling. This book includes extensive use of time-travel, as well as Charles Wallace going "Within" other people, in avatar fashion. Elements of this story hint at many other sci-fi stories that have come since. What doesn't work: too much, unfortunately. Though Charles Wallace seems to have some ability to influence the people he goes Within at the beginning, by the end he is lost in the narrative, seemingly not doing much to influence history. It's all a little puzzling--he's supposed to lose himself in the person he's inhabiting, but he's also supposed to repair something in time that went wrong. The idea that something in the future can be changed by making little changes here and there throughout the past is intriguing, but ultimately too simplistic to make a great story. It's also odd how in every generation there is a man from one particular family and a woman from another, who are destined to marry. How can these two family lines always produce people who marry, then after a few generations there is another couple that is distant enough in bloodline that they can marry, on and on? I found it puzzling.So, the plot is a little too much for a children's book. But the bigger issue is what's happened to the main characters in the years since the second book. Charles Wallace is, of course, still brilliant. The Murray parents are still geniuses who are on-call for the President of the United States. Calvin and Meg are married. Calvin, of course, is brilliant, like almost everyone in the book. Even the twins, Sandy and Dennys, the supposedly "normal" ones, not especially intelligent, are studying medicine and law, and are, of course, brilliant after all.You know who isn't brilliant and making an amazing career for herself? Meg. The protagonist. Who, it happens, is female. Instead of accomplishing astounding things in the world, Meg . . . is pregnant. She sits around the house, worrying about her brilliant husband, and being babied by literally every member of the family ("Meg, you shouldn't be outside, you'll catch cold!" "Meg, would you like some hot cocoa?" "Meg, shouldn't you be sleeping?"). It's ridiculous. Meg, who formerly was brilliant, is now just very, very normal, and apparently helpless. During this story, she lies on her bed, observing what Charles Wallace is doing. Sad.I like that L'Engle attempted so much with this story, but I'm disappointed with her treatment of Meg. Had Meg been the true protagonist again, instead of merely an observer, I would like the book a lot more.
    more
  • Jacqie
    January 1, 1970
    I loved this book as a child, and probably much of this review will be my childhood experience of reading it. I've looked through some other reviews and been interested to see the viewpoints of those who don't like the book. There are certainly some race and gender reps that seem dated or not PC now, but I wonder how a child of 10 or 12 (my age when I first read it) would perceive it.For myself, reading it about 1978 or 1980, it was an eye-opening experience. First, one thing I like about L'engl I loved this book as a child, and probably much of this review will be my childhood experience of reading it. I've looked through some other reviews and been interested to see the viewpoints of those who don't like the book. There are certainly some race and gender reps that seem dated or not PC now, but I wonder how a child of 10 or 12 (my age when I first read it) would perceive it.For myself, reading it about 1978 or 1980, it was an eye-opening experience. First, one thing I like about L'engle's writing is that she isn't afraid to work more adult themes into her work. Time travel, the past affecting (even erasing) the future, possible sexual abuse, it's there, but not wallowed in. But they are interesting, challenging concepts upon which to ruminate. Next, I grew up in an evangelical household, with a very authoritative view Christianity, with parents who were sexist and bigoted. Reading about a woman who could be a scientist ( I know, she works from home) and about Indians who were more mature than the white colonists who feared them were both totally new perspectives. As was L'engle's philosophy, always gently there, of a kind and loving deity who makes beautiful music, in addition to her portraying those with belief as actually open-minded, likeable people (again, a first in my experience). Her philosophy of trying to be part of a greater pattern is not confrontational. There is no epic battle in this book. Charles Wallace saves the world by helping someone be with the person they love, at the expense of himself, but it's done without fireworks, hardly even acknowledged by anyone. There's no hero fantasy being played out here. Isn't that kind of an interesting idea? Meg saves him by asking for help instead of strapping on a sword and fighting for him- isn't the idea of asking for help instead of being entirely self-sufficient against the standard tropes of fantasy? There's no sidekick-hero dynamic here. Everyone does what they can do, and the least appealing character in the book is ultimately the one who placed herself, before anyone even knew what she was doing, between her family and the powers of darkness. I'm not a Christian myself, but have more respect for this sort of philosophy than fire and brimstone. And maybe submission is an awkward trope to wrap one's head around, but you certainly don't read much like it in these days of spunky, sassy heroines who are simultaneously totally sexy and totally virginal in the popular teen books. I don't advocate submission as the answer to everything, but maybe butt-kicking isn't the answer to everything either. Don't get me wrong, sometimes a good sassy butt-kicking is what I like to read about. But reading about community, hope and harmony again was a refreshing change.
    more
  • Sesana
    January 1, 1970
    L'Engle is such a gifted writer that it took me much of this book for me to fully realize that it just wasn't working for me. It's essentially a series of small family dramas, which I simply wasn't able to muster up a lot of enthusiasm for. In the end, the fate of the world hinges on making sure that a key character (who never actually appears in person) has the correct ancestry. I do appreciate the reappearance of what I consider a common theme in this series, that people, even unpleasant ones, L'Engle is such a gifted writer that it took me much of this book for me to fully realize that it just wasn't working for me. It's essentially a series of small family dramas, which I simply wasn't able to muster up a lot of enthusiasm for. In the end, the fate of the world hinges on making sure that a key character (who never actually appears in person) has the correct ancestry. I do appreciate the reappearance of what I consider a common theme in this series, that people, even unpleasant ones, have hidden depths and worth. In the hands of a lesser writer, I would have been bored from the start. L'Engle was at least good enough to keep me reading to the end.
    more
  • Kerri
    January 1, 1970
    Charles Wallace, unicorns, telepathy and time travel. For me, there is very little not to like in this book. L'Engle again explores connections through space and time, and how the actions of just one person can alter history as we know it. One of the books I can read again and again and always enjoy.
    more
  • Zeo
    January 1, 1970
    Although I thought it was far better than A Wind in the Door , this book still was a struggle to get through in my recent re-read of this series. Of the first three, which I'd read as a kid, I really only remembered plot elements from the first, and character elements from the first and second. This one, I don't know. I know I read it and enjoyed it. This time, reading the first chapter or so was stunning. It starts off surprisingly political, and despite the generally conservative presentation Although I thought it was far better than A Wind in the Door , this book still was a struggle to get through in my recent re-read of this series. Of the first three, which I'd read as a kid, I really only remembered plot elements from the first, and character elements from the first and second. This one, I don't know. I know I read it and enjoyed it. This time, reading the first chapter or so was stunning. It starts off surprisingly political, and despite the generally conservative presentation of women, stories of indigenous people centering white people, and genocentric concept of value and identity and even politics, it's a book with a pretty political message: listen to people, change as little as possible in their lives if you really must change something, and don't make it all about you.I see a lot of reviews complaining about the passiveness of Charles Wallace in this book, and to a certain extent they're right: he spends a lot of the book not doing anything. That's actually not too different from the other books and other characters: they all spend a lot of time listening, asking questions, and waiting for Meg to stop talking. Interestingly, I see very few reviews talking about Meg's passiveness; in fact, she spends most of this book quietly being a rock for Charles, kything with him while he is silently listening to others. That's a really powerful thing, that's mighty. And I felt like that's what this book was really about at its core. The people whose lives Charles visited and nudged had stories that were generally L'Engle's incarnations of common historical tropes, and were based around this name-focused geneology that seems as much designed for metaphorical interpretation as it is bound to produce unintended interpretations (for example, did she mean to suggest that the one family had an evil thread, or that the one family had a particularly good and leader-y thread, or that reconciliation between the two families was a bad idea with bad consequences, or...?). I can see that potentially being an interesting discussion topic for a group of kids reading the book together; for adults it may be presented a bit amateurly for that purpose, maybe not, but it definitely felt like a slog to get through as an adult.But that listening thread, that's valuable. I wonder how many kids come away with that. It's also a coming of age book for Charles Wallace, and that his coming of age comes in the form of quiet listening makes this an interesting story of possible masculinity - especially since this book introduces L'Engle's thing for boys flying on unicorns. The book is also another exercise in writing the main characters as having a subjective experience, but that's not really fleshed out until Many Waters.
    more
  • Angela Blount
    January 1, 1970
    4.5 Stars Time-travel, evil dictators, Unicorns, and impending nuclear doom. Oh my!When you break it down to it’s basic parts, it doesn’t look like this story could possibly work. And yet, somehow, it does. Not perfectly or without some name-related confusion. But what it sometimes lacks in clear logical progression it makes up for in sheer wonderment, empathy-building, and that Murry family bond which readers have—by this point—come to know and love. In the first book of this series, the focus 4.5 Stars Time-travel, evil dictators, Unicorns, and impending nuclear doom. Oh my!When you break it down to it’s basic parts, it doesn’t look like this story could possibly work. And yet, somehow, it does. Not perfectly or without some name-related confusion. But what it sometimes lacks in clear logical progression it makes up for in sheer wonderment, empathy-building, and that Murry family bond which readers have—by this point—come to know and love. In the first book of this series, the focus was on travel through outer space. The second book centered on traveling through inner-space. And this, the third book, revolves around the space-time continuum. There’s a bit of space travel in this one as well, as we take a little detour to the Unicorn homeworld… (yes, I just wrote that.) The entire story takes place over the course of a day, but spans hundreds of fictional years and many generations.L’Engle’s writing shows a growth in complexity within this book that makes it stand out a bit above the first two books, in this reader’s opinion. As ever, her style is perplexing yet somehow lovely. And the emotional depth she achieves by giving us a glimpse into Mrs. O’Keefe’s background is absolutely moving. (I’d thought I was quite content in not liking that woman. But the author didn’t allow her to continue on as a one-note side character, and I love her for that.) I keep seeing reviewers raging at the fact that Meg is pregnant in this book, seeming to resent her biological state and claiming she “doesn’t do anything” in this story. Sorry, (not sorry) but I call malarkey on that assertion. Yes, she’s now married to Calvin and a bit encumbered by being late-term preggers. Yet, it’s that very condition that makes her an ideal candidate for telepathically aiding Charles Wallace in the general save-the-world endeavors. The premise of this book is all about protecting the future by going back and repairing a past that has been sabotaged. It’s about legacy and lineage. And it effectively drives the stakes higher to be constantly aware that it’s not just the entire impersonal world population that’s theoretically in peril—it’s our brilliant beloved Meg, and the unborn baby she may never get a chance to meet. (Also, Meg has been the main active character for the first two books. The girl deserves a break. And considering he’s now 15, Charles Wallace certainly deserves his own coming-of-age opportunity.)So far, this has been my favorite book in this fantasy/sci-fi series.
    more
  • Kathryn Bywaters
    January 1, 1970
    Surprisingly wonderful! I’m not sure what has changed… maybe L’Engle switched editors? I have no idea but “A Swiftly Tilting Planet” is a great story. Yes, an actual honest to goodness story. It is not just a choppy assortment of events, which is how the first two books seemed to me. I found myself interested in what was going to happen next and becoming emotionally invested in the characters. Plus, any book that has the phrase “I am a mere unicorn” can’t be all bad. Now, this is not to say that Surprisingly wonderful! I’m not sure what has changed… maybe L’Engle switched editors? I have no idea but “A Swiftly Tilting Planet” is a great story. Yes, an actual honest to goodness story. It is not just a choppy assortment of events, which is how the first two books seemed to me. I found myself interested in what was going to happen next and becoming emotionally invested in the characters. Plus, any book that has the phrase “I am a mere unicorn” can’t be all bad. Now, this is not to say that L’Engle hasn’t included a larger message in the story. She stays true to form on that but instead of trying to beat you over the head with it, you learn the lesson through reading about how the actions of the characters affect the world around them. It is both delightful and fascinating. The Echthroi have developed into the true villain of the story. They are evil entities bent on conquering the universe as young Charles Wallace sets out on a quest to stop them. What I loved about this story is how the quest takes you back in time and you follow a family generation after generation. The decisions of each generation effect the outcome of, not only the subsequent generation, but the world and then ultimately the universe. Also, I was tickled at how she dropped herself into the narrative for a quick cameo. As you read L’Engles describes a character that is an author, Matthew Maddox. Mathew has written a book, with a story line resembling “A Swiftly Tilting Planet”, going as far as to say, “There was also a unicorn in the story, who was a time traveler.” L’Engle refers to Mathew as a writer who “…had an uncanny intuition about the theories of space, time, and relativity…” Clearly describing, I think, how she feels about herself. A bold move, I liked it ☺With “A Swiftly Titling Planet” she has redeemed herself in my eyes. I look forward to reading the next book in the series.
    more
  • Ariel
    January 1, 1970
    I re-read all of these in a row: A Wrinkle in Time, A Wind in the Door and this conclusion. What a difference in quality. But this isn't the typical "gold, silver, brass" progression of a trilogy. It's more like 'gold, silver, mud.'A Swiftly Tilting Planet is terribly dated and even racist. There's a bad guy in Patagonia who wants to use The Bomb and Charles Wallace can only fix the problem by traveling back in time and space to make sure the right father begets the guy with his finger on the bu I re-read all of these in a row: A Wrinkle in Time, A Wind in the Door and this conclusion. What a difference in quality. But this isn't the typical "gold, silver, brass" progression of a trilogy. It's more like 'gold, silver, mud.'A Swiftly Tilting Planet is terribly dated and even racist. There's a bad guy in Patagonia who wants to use The Bomb and Charles Wallace can only fix the problem by traveling back in time and space to make sure the right father begets the guy with his finger on the button. The characters actually talk about bloodlines and blood here. So in this scenario, genetics create destiny. Don't even get me started on this strange, ancient connection L'Engle cooks up between Welsh people and Native Americans in Patagonia who are envisioned as living in perfect harmony with each other and their environment. They're beyond Noble Savage and back to the Garden of Eden. The white people bring original sin--well, in the form of a Cain and Abel story--and it gets mixed into the bloodline of the Patagonian Indians. It's better than original sin coming from the Native Americans but not much. And anyway in the end, you can tell the good guy 'cause he has blue eyes. What does this say to you?Oh, Madeleine, you hurt me with this conclusion to the trilogy, really you did.
    more
  • Linda
    January 1, 1970
    Sunday is my day off from housework, laundry etc., so decided to finish the third in this series.....it spans a few years in the children’s ages from A Wind in the Door. Meg and Calvin are now married and expecting their first child, so it was quite a jump in time for me. Somehow Meg and Charles Wallace her younger brother must go back in time, and Charles within ancestors to change destiny, as there is one who has threatened to destroy the world. Trying to follow the different generations and t Sunday is my day off from housework, laundry etc., so decided to finish the third in this series.....it spans a few years in the children’s ages from A Wind in the Door. Meg and Calvin are now married and expecting their first child, so it was quite a jump in time for me. Somehow Meg and Charles Wallace her younger brother must go back in time, and Charles within ancestors to change destiny, as there is one who has threatened to destroy the world. Trying to follow the different generations and their similar names was a bit confusing, all in all though it was a pretty good story....will decide if I want to read #4 & #5, any recommendations?
    more
  • D
    January 1, 1970
    L'Engle's Time Quartet diminishes in cohesion with each installment. Whether from the author's own under-writing or her publishing house's imprudent hands-off editing after the wild success of A Wrinkle in Time, this book is a disappointment. L'Engle has shown herself capable of visionary writing, and the Wallace family is undeniably charming, so why such a half-baked result?
    more
  • C.P. Cabaniss
    January 1, 1970
    Although the following books in the series haven't been as good as the first book, I am glad that I have continued on. Each of the three books I have listened to so far have been a lot of fun, in different ways. This one jumps several years into the future. Charles Wallace is now fifteen, the twins are in graduate school, and Meg has graduated with advanced degrees and is now pregnant with her first child. You can tell that they have all aged and matured, but they still stay true to their younge Although the following books in the series haven't been as good as the first book, I am glad that I have continued on. Each of the three books I have listened to so far have been a lot of fun, in different ways. This one jumps several years into the future. Charles Wallace is now fifteen, the twins are in graduate school, and Meg has graduated with advanced degrees and is now pregnant with her first child. You can tell that they have all aged and matured, but they still stay true to their younger characters. There is something really special about this family. Even though these books are not absolutely brilliant to me, I have fallen in love with this family. I appreciate that the mother is a scientist who found it important to stay home with her children while continuing her research. I like how quirky Charles Wallace is, how loving Meg is, how close the twins are, and the animals that go along with them all. The father is the least known of them, but I appreciate that he listens to his children, giving them a voice and appreciating their concerns. The little interactions with the family are honestly my favorite part. There are a lot of sad events in this story, which kind of surprised me. Neither of the others seemed quite as emotionally harrowing. Charles Wallace travels through time with a unicorn in order to alter events and prevent nuclear war. On these travels, he encounters many people and experiences their daily lives. Most of them are quite sad, some even tragic. But they all had some beautiful moments too. Overall I really enjoyed this. Jennifer Ehle read the audio version I listened to and I enjoyed her narration, for the most part. At times it could be hard to follow a conversation when too many people were involved, but that can happen even when reading a physical version, so it didn't bother me too much.
    more
  • Ariel
    January 1, 1970
    I feel like I've been sucked into the side of an airbrushed panel van. Boom... unicorn!
  • Ciara Wilkie
    January 1, 1970
    I enjoyed this more than the second book. I also enjoyed that we learn more about the O'Keefe side. I would say the ending was anticlimactic. I feel like her books tend to have that oversimplified ending. I would say this book was enjoyable and worth reading but not one I would read many times.
    more
  • Sheila Goicea
    January 1, 1970
    Join up for the Time Quintet Read-A-Thon! Check out the details here if you are interested!
  • Heather Venard
    January 1, 1970
    It is such a cool experience to reread a beloved series from your childhood and have it stand the test of time. I'm not sure if A Swiftly Tilting Planet was my favorite A Wrinkle in Time story as a kid, but I definitely think it is now. The intricacies of the stories interweaving and their emotional impact can't be denied. I flat out love this book and am so glad to revisit it.
    more
Write a review