April 12, 2008

The Books: "The Time Traveler's Wife" (Audrey Niffenegger)

timetraveler.jpgNext book on my adult fiction shelves:

The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger

This is not my kind of book. I never would have picked it up on my own, for multiple reasons:

1. It's "popular fiction" - and for a while there the book was EVERYWHERE, and usually I don't like books like that (Nicholas Sparks, Tuesdays with Morrie, and etc. etc. - although I have been ringingly wrong in this department before, and am not afraid to admit it. But, in general, if it's so popular that everyone is reading it, it is usually not my cup of tea.

2. It's a first novel by the author. In general, I stay away from first novels - unless it's an author who has proved him/herself with a bunch of other books and then I go BACK to check out the first novel. Now, there are exceptions of course to this - here, or here - and thank God I read Nancy Lemann's first novel (and I read it first of all of her books) - because her books and her writing and her outlook on life have become SO important to me now .... in the warp and weft, as it were. But in general. I don't read first novels.

3. It seemed too soulmate-y. This is obviously totally subjective (but duh - why on earth would anyone look for "objectivity" -whatever that means - on a personal website??) - and I just am not into that stuff. It seemed like it might go the way of Nicholas Sparks' stuff - which is not just boring but horribly written. Or maybe it would be well-written ... but too much about love conquering all, and timeless soul-time continuums, and meeting in the space-time ether, and souls communing ... I was into that stuff once upon a time, but now I find it almost unbearable. My mega-essays on soulmates and Richard Bach are here, here, and here. Again, if you're into soulmate stuff, then please do not get defensive. It is ridiculous to get defensive when someone is expressing her subjective opinion. It shouldn't touch your opinion at all, unless you're interested in having it be touched. So. Okay. I'm against that soulmate stuff.

Now. I've talked about my reasons for resisting the book.

Then something kind of extraordinary happened. A dear friend of mine told me I had to read the book. And here's the thing: my friend has never recommended a book to me in her life. She doesn't really read. Or - she reads for information - you know, job applications, and health books, and stuff like that ... but to sit down and read for pleasure is just not her thing. So it was stunning. She had gone on a vacation all by herself, to the Cape - and someone had left a copy of The Time Traveler's Wife behind in the motel room - so what the hell, she was all alone, she picked it up - and read it. All the way through. That was all she did for about 3 days. She'd lie in bed reading. She'd sit on the beach reading. I know my friend very well - and just the way she told me this story, I could tell what a HUGE deal it was. Reading?? For pleasure??? You?? She has a lot of guilt about free time and stuff like that, always feels like she needs to be doing something and reading doesn't count. But she got lost in The Time Traveler's Wife. And she couldn't WAIT to talk to me about it - because there are epigraphs through the book - and one of them was from Possession and she knew how much I loved Possession, so she thought maybe I would like this book. Anyway, I have friends who recommend me books all the time. It's a give and take thing. My siblings, David, Allison, Kate, Mitchell, Ted ... but this friend? She would NEVER have recommended me a book - so it was a big deal. And she actually had bought me a copy so that I could read it. Well. I dropped whatever I was reading, and picked up Time Traveler's Wife - not so much because I suddenly ached to read it - but because this was a big moment ... a moment when a friend was asking to share something with me, and it was not at all casual ... a singular moment ... It was important to me to respond immediately. I don't feel like I'm describing what a big deal it was for this particular friend to recommend a book to me and why I felt obligated (terrible word - think about "obligation" in the beautiful sense of the word, and you will know where I was at) to read it immediately - even though I didn't think it was my cup of tea.

NOW. ONTO THE BOOK. FINALLY.

I absolutely LOVED it. I loved the writing, I loved the story, I loved the Chicago setting, I loved the humor of it (the book REALLY gets what it's like to be in Chicago when you're in your 20s), and I also loved more than anything its lack of sentimentality. Niffenegger uses sentimentality very sparingly, and I so appreciated it. It's not a "this was my great love once upon a time and let us all weep for what I have lost" kind of thing ... it's not suffused with bittersweet melancholy, or a kitsch version thereof. It's about a guy who - for some unknown reason - has the ability to leap through time. He's been doing it since he was a kid. So imagine Sam Beckett of Quantum Leap leaping through time on his own - and then returning home - knowing the future, the past, what's going to happen - and then leaping out again. He never knows where he's going to land (although, like Quantum Leap, it's always within his own lifetime. Also, just to throw a wrench into the works - a horrible wrench - whenever he leaps, he finds himself stark naked in the new time and place. Naked! He could land in the middle of Michigan Avenue during a big shopping day - NAKED. So he becomes expert at how to handle this - he knows where every thrift store is in the city, he knows how to rummage through garbage for a coat, shoes - he knows what to do first. And during one of his leaps - Henry meets a little girl named Clare. She is curious about him. She runs into her house to get him clothes from her father. Henry is a grown man when he first meets Clare - although in reality they are closer to the same age. So it's this weird time-wrinkle thing ... where Henry is a little boy, and he leaps into himself at age 35 or whatever ... and he knows the end. He knows that he and Clare eventually get married. And they have problems. They have a deep love. There is much to struggle against and work out ... but he still, with all this prior knowledge, has to go through with the courtship, the romance ... he loves her dearly. But the time travel thing is so much a part of his life and he can't count on it, or plan for it ... sometimes he returns to their apartment, and he's lying in the hallway, battered and bloody from something that happened back there in the past. Clare has to accept this part of him. She is "the time traveler's wife". The story is told from both points of view - we leap back and forth from Henry to Clare - and the story is broken up into the dates and the ages - which gives you a dizzying sense of travel, and disorientation, the way it must be for Henry. Like: April 12, 1984. Henry is 36, Clare is 12. So you start to ache for them to "catch up" with each other, to bridge the gap ... to have Henry come closer in time to Clare's age ... so they can actually connect. It's a huge burden on Henry. To know the future. It gives him a great sadness that hovers around him. He's an odd guy. And Clare is wonderful.

I think the book is maybe 100 pages too long ... that's my only complaint - BUT - the ending packed such a huge punch that I almost had to go lie down. It ended so perfectly, on such a resonant symmetrical note - I thought: Yes. Of course. That's where we have been going all this time ... Of course.

It's a helluva first novel, I have to say. Niffenegger writes with great confidence, sweeping her characters through the landscape - and I just loooove the FEEL of Chicago she gets into the book. Clare is in Chicago, in her mid-20s - during the mid-1990s - which is when I lived there, and the age I was when I lived there. The clubs mentioned - Berlin! Aragon! - Niffenegger is obsessed with Chicago, and it becomes another character in the book. I could SEE every scene - the intersections, the specific place-names - Ann Sather, etc. It's got a great sense of place. Clare and Henry, to me, feel very Chicago-ish. They are locals. It's obvious.

Loved the book. I was nervous when I heard they were making a movie of it - scared that it might be ruined - or made too maudlin or treacly - but then I heard that Rachel McAdams and Eric Bana were starring - and I thought: Well. Now I can't WAIT to see it.

The book is so episodic and almost frantic in its pace - that I found a hard time picking an excerpt. I decided to go with the following. One of the best things about it is that it displays Niffenegger's sense of WHIMSY - how romance is so often silly and whimsical - that couples have private jokes, a way of being with each other - that is not lovey-dovey ... but simple enjoyment ... I love that about the book, and the way she writes it.

EXCERPT FROM The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger

March 1994 (Clare is 22, Henry is 30)

CLARE: And so we are married. At first we live in a two-bedroom apartment in a two-flat in Ravenswood. It's sunny, with butter-colored hardwood floors and a kitchen full of antique cabinets and antiquated appliances. We buy things, spend Sunday afternoons in Crate & Barrel exchanging wedding presents, order a sofa that can't fit through the doors of the apartment and has to be sent back. The apartment is a laboratory in which we conduct experiments perform research on each other. We discover that Henry hates it when I absentmindedly click my spoon against my teeth while reading the paper at breakfast. We agree that it is okay for me to listen to Joni Mitchell and it is okay for Henry to listen to the Shaggs as long as the other person isn't around. We figure out that Henry should do all the cooking and I should be in charge of laundry and neither of us is willing to vacuum so we hire a cleaning service.

We fall into a routine. Henry works Tuesdays through Saturdays at the Newberry. He gets up at 7:30 and starts the coffee, then throws on his running clothes and goes for a run. When he gets back he showers and dresses, and I stagger out of bed and chat with him while he fixes breakfast. After we eat, he brushes his teeth and speeds out the door to catch the El, and I go back to bed and doze for an hour or so.

When I get up again the apartment is quiet. I take a bath and comb my hair and put on my work clothes. I pour myself another cup of coffee, and I walk into the back bedroom which is my studio, and I close the door.

I am having a hard time, in my tiny back bedroom studio, in the beginning of my married life. The space that I can call mine, that isn't full of Henry, is so small that my ideas have become small. I am like a caterpillar in a cocoon of paper; all around me are sketches for sculptors, small drawings that seem like moths fluttering against the windows, beating their wings to escape from the tiny space. I make maquettes, tiny sculptures that are rehearsals for huge sculptures. Every day the ideas come more reluctantly, as though they know I will starve them and stunt their growth. At night I dream about color, about submerging my arms into vats of paper fiber. I dream about miniature gardens I can't set foot in because I am a giantess.

The compelling thing about making art - or making anything, I suppose - is the moment when the vaporous, insubstantial idea becomes a solid there, a thing, a substance in a world of substances. Circe, Nimbue, Artemis, Athena, all the old sorceresses: they must have known the feeling as they transformed men into fabulous creatures, stole the secrets of the magicians, disposed armies: ah, look, there it is, the new thing. Call it a swine, a war, a laurel tree. Call it art. The magic I can make is small magic now, deferred magic. Every day I work, but nothing ever materializes. I feel like Penelope, weaving and unweaving.

And what of Henry, my Odysseus? Henry is an artist of another sort, a disappearing artist. Our life together in this too-small apartment is punctuated by Henry's small absences. Sometimes he disappears unobtrusively; I might be walking from the kitchen into the hall and find a pile of clothing on the floor. I might get out of bed in the morning, and find the shower running and no one in it. Sometimes it's frightening. I am working in my studio one afternoon when I hear someone moaning outside my door; when I open it I find Henry on his hands and knees, naked, in the hall, bleeding heavily from his head. He opens his eyes, sees me, and vanishes. Sometimes I wake up in the night and Henry is gone. In the morning he will tell me where he's been, the way other husbands might tell their wives a dream they had: "I was in the Selzer Library in the dark, in 1989." Or: "I was chased by a German Shepherd across somebody's backyard and had to climb up a tree." Or: "I was standing in the rain near my parents' apartment, listening to my mother sing." I am waiting for Henry to tell me that he has seen me as a child, but so far this hasn't happened. When I was a child I looked forward to seeing Henry. Every visit was an event. Now every absence is a nonevent, a subtraction, an adventure I will hear about when my adventurer materializes at my feet, bleeding or whistling, smiling or shaking. Now I am afraid when he is gone.

HENRY: When you live with a woman you learn something every day. So far I have learned that long hair will clog up the shower drain before you can say "Liquid-Plumr"; that it is not advisable to clip something out of the newspaper before your wife has read it, even if the newspaper in question is a week old; that I am the only person in our two-person household who can eat the same thing for dinner three nights in a row without pouting; and that headphones were invented to preserve spouses from each other's musical excesses. (How can Clare listen to Cheap Trick? Why does she like the Eagles? I'll never know, because she gets all defensive when I ask her. How can it be that the woman I love doesn't want to listen to Musique du Garrot et de la Farraille?) The hardest lesson is Clare's solitude. Sometimes I come home and Clare seems kind of irritated; I've interrupted some train of thought, broken into the dreamy silence of her day. Sometimes I see an expression on Clare's face that is like a closed door. She has gone inside the room of her mind and is sitting there knitting or something. I've discovered that Clare likes to be alone. But when I return from time traveling she is always relieved to see me.

When the woman you live with is an artist, every day is a surprise. Clare has turned the second bedroom into a wonder cabinet, full of small sculptures and drawings pinned up on every inch of wall space. There are coils of wire and rolls of paper tucked into shelves and drawers. The sculptures remind me of kites, or model airplanes. I say this to Clare one evening, standing in the doorway of her studio in my suit and tie, home from work, about to begin making dinner, and she throws one at me; it flies surprisingly well, and soon we are standing at opposite ends of the hall, tossing tiny sculptures at each other, testing their aerodynamics. The next day I come home to find that Clare has created a flock of paper and wire birds, which are hanging from the ceiling in the living room. A week later our bedroom windows are full of abstract blue translucent shapes that the sun throws across the room onto the walls, making a sky for the bird shapes Clare has painted there. It's beautiful.

The next evening I'm standing in the doorway of Clare's studio, watching her finish drawing a thicket of black lines around a little red bird. Suddenly I see Clare, in her small room, closed in by all of her stuff, and I realize that she's trying to say something, and I know what I have to do.

Posted by sheila | TrackBack
Comments

My journey to finally reading this book is ridiculously similar to your's! I saw everyone on the subway reading it at one point and KNEW with a great and horrible certainty that I should never trust that I could never possibly like such a popular book. But when Kathleen recommended it I knew it would actually be a worthwhile read and I just loved it (except for the over-obvious epilogue).

Posted by: ted at April 12, 2008 9:59 AM

I had the same experience. I thought I was going to hate it, resisted reading it, and then was sort of pulled into it and really felt the ending very intensely. Plus, Chicago.

Posted by: Anne at April 12, 2008 10:35 AM

Yes sheila...I thought..treachly-soul-matey 'notebook'' book.

loved it loved it loved it.

I really hope the movie's good!

Posted by: bill at April 12, 2008 3:30 PM

very similar on the how I read it.... it took a long while, because it was so popular. Then, I finally picked it up and devoured it.

Posted by: melissa at April 12, 2008 11:40 PM

This is my favorite book. And let me just tell you, it has my two biggest plot pet peeves OF ALL TIME in it. (I won't say what they are because it'll spoil.) I tend to hate books with #1 peeve or #2 peeve in them, and this has both. And it's THAT GOOD that I have to overlook the pet peeves and make it my favorite. Holy damn.

Glad to see the love is shared.

Posted by: Jennifer at April 13, 2008 12:30 AM

Oh you have to tell me what your pet peeves are!! I'm dying to know. Just preface it with SPOILERS so the newbies know to stay away .. but I'd love to hear!!

Posted by: red at April 13, 2008 12:51 AM

i LOVED this book too. the ending didn't even make much sense to me but i still treasured all the new perspectives on life and love and time along the way. an incredible mix of sci fi and literary writing.

Posted by: beth at April 13, 2008 2:00 PM

I loved the writing of this book, and the characterizations. I didn't resist it nearly as long as you or some of your other commentators have. If I'd considered it was a 'soul-mate' book, I might have. I just don't connect, normally, to literary fiction circles. But when I heard how the book began with Henry's first meeting with Claire (from his perspective, not hers) I knew I wanted to read it.

There's so much in the book that I really loved. Probably the thing that both satisfied me the most, and that I enjoyed the most, was how Henry worked himself over. When I first encountered him, he was self-centered in ways that were a bit off-putting for me to read. Then he meets this girl, this fascinating, vibrant, compassionate and loyal girl. And he sets out to change himself to be someone whom he can imagine being with her, not just for a night, or for a while, but for a lifetime.

It's a common journey, of course, but Niffenger does it so well, especially after demonstrating why Henry had become so self-centered, jaded, and living so much in the present.

This isn't to say that I found the book to be without flaws. I'm a long-time SF reader, and so I believe I considered things that many of her readers simply accepted when reading her explanations.

(possible spoilers)

The mechanics of the time travel were annoying - first, the cliche of no non-living matter being transported. Fine, and it's interesting that fillings, and glasses, or contact lenses, don't travel with Henry. But, why doesn't he lose his hair for those same reasons? Or the enamel on his teeth?

That's relatively minor, though. The big flaw, to my mind, was that Niffenger tried to explain why Henry was jumping through time. Tying it to a gene complex became hopelessly complex. Just for an example: The Earth is rotating, on the equator, at 465 meters/second. At the same time it is moving almost 30 kilometers/second along its orbit. So, in order for the genetic clock that Niffenger used to explain Henry's condition to work, one has to assume that the clock also contains coding for the Earth's rotation and orbital movement. And for the Sun's orbit in the galaxy as well. Without all that information, jumping through time would have left Henry falling from a great height. If he were lucky. And if he were unlucky, as a free-floating body in solar orbit.

I think that the story would have been stronger if the time traveling mechanism had simply been left as something "magical" not "scientific." In fiction, at least, the difference is that things that are magical can simply be left as axiomatic to the story, and once their behaviors are defined, there's no arbitrary need for the story to go back and explain why the magic works the way it does. By focusing the reader's attention on a scientific explanation of Henry's condition, it invited, I found, a contemplation of just what else needed to be coded in that gene complex to make the whole thing work.

It's not that I expect SF to provide me with situations that are all workable, and believable. As I mentioned magical devices, or handwavium, is pretty common. But, for them to work well, they shouldn't be inviting too much attention to themselves. To use an example that I think you might find more germane to your experiences: stage placement is rather artificial, often making choices for what the audience will be able to see, rather than what the characters might do on their own. For the most part, the theater goer accepts it as a necessary fiction for the sake of the greater work. But when the stage placement becomes jarring, even if only for those people familiar enough with the conventions to notice it, it's a flaw in the production, because it distracts the audience from the story.

The other flaw, for me, was simply stylistic. I hated the ending. Not for how it was with Henry, but the end for Claire. I'm not saying that the ending didn't work - it fits with Claire's personality, but it's bleak. So very bleak. I'd have liked a little grace for Claire, especially after Niffenger gave us the grace scene with Henry and Alba.

Just my $0.02, and worth about twice what you paid for it.

-Loki

Posted by: Loki at April 13, 2008 4:09 PM

I'll have to read this now. Interestingly, it seems that whoever penned the television show Journeyman may have borrowed heavily from this book.

I completely understand reading a book for that reason. I have a friend who is actually the opposite - she reads constantly (she might even give you a run for your money - THAT much reading. Haha) and she is not easily impressed. Once every year or so I will get a call, "You have to read this. You have to read this RIGHT NOW because I have to talk to you about it." And I go buy a copy - unless she's already shown up on my doorstep with a copy in hand. I drop what I'm doing and I read it. It's so rare that this happens that I know when it does - she will be right. I will need to read the book as badly as she needs me to read it. And also, I love that she knows I will do it... because I understand that sometimes you need to be abe to talk about a book with someone you are close to.

Posted by: Marisa at April 14, 2008 9:29 AM

Kerry O'Malley sent me this link because I just read this book for my first ever book club meeting. I couldn't put this book down after I got through the first 100 pages (which were hard for me; my trainer had to yell at me to suspend belief and not try to figure it out). And I am missing the book now that it's done. That said, a couple of gripes. I wish the author had trusted the reader more. Was it really necessary to put Claire and Henry's ages in all the way through? I think it would have been more interesting to have to glean that info from the context. Further, it bothered me that Gomez had to see Henry disappear before he accepted the time travel...and all the explanation of the travel itself as well, much of which really doesn't make sense if you think about it. Not to mention the meddling with the future which was sometimes okay, but mostly not. I wish the author had stayed consistent. I wish Anyway, at Book Group we thought maybe some meddlesome editor made the author put in more explanation fearing that readers wouldn't be able to follow, but I thought it detracted and sometimes trivialized the book.

In my mind I cast Adrien Brody as Henry, and Kerry O'Malley as Claire! I am interested to see how they approach the film.

Posted by: Janis at April 14, 2008 1:23 PM

I am so glad to read that you've liked this book. I am getting so tired of reading reviews from people who had the hype of the book ruin the experience for them. I think this is such a marvelous and powerful story. I cried for the last 50 or so pages the entire time I was reading it.

Posted by: Carl V. at April 14, 2008 1:23 PM

SPOILERS for my pet peeves, which may ruin many a book for you and not just this one:

Pet peeve #1: Entire book is love story, and one of the lovers dies. Other lover is left to pine alone miserably for the rest of his/her life. (Oddly enough, if Romeo and Juliet both die, it doesn't bother me.) And as was said above, it's VERY bleak here.

Pet peeve #2: People who are forced to have children when they don't want to/people who have children who shouldn't.

I like the character of Alba, but man, if your fetuses time travel, MAYBE HAVING CHILDREN ISN'T A GOOD IDEA. Especially given what happens to Henry having this disorder. Especially since Alba's a girl and I shudder to think of what happens if she time-travels naked into the middle of a frat party at 16. I hope to God Claire enrolled her in every martial art known to man from the age of five. You'll note that we don't find out what happens to her in the future...and man, I don't think I'd want to.

Posted by: Jennifer at April 14, 2008 7:26 PM

Just reading it now

Posted by: ED at May 27, 2008 10:57 AM

Just reading it now

Posted by: ED at May 27, 2008 10:57 AM

Yes, this book definitely stretches the bounds of reality, but it's FICTION. That's why the scientific (versus magical) approach to time travel didn't bother me. Kudos for using your imagination, author.

Plot issues aside, I would like to thank Niffenegger: her novel's characters are a true gift. Both Henry and Clare are so complex, so flawed, so brilliantly created, you get that depressed feeling when you finish the book. I could no get enough of these two! As a female reader who falls hopelessly for characters rather than plot, I found myself wishing I was Clare. Then I found myself wishing I was Henry. They were, individually, unbelievably touching. And their love was icing on the cake.

Posted by: Maureen at August 8, 2008 2:32 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?