Customer Discussions > The Time Traveler's Wife forum

Depressed anyone?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 26 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 27 Sep 2007 18:44:42 BDT
R. L. Barker says:
Did anyone feel really depressed after reading this tripe?
I felt really cheated, the story could have been brilliant - the unconventional narrative is a stroke of genius and so much more could have been done with it.
Very disappointed with this, and like the previous discussion, I have no idea why this book is so highly rated.

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Nov 2007 22:46:46 GMT
Bear KW says:
I found the looming loss in the second part of the book very sad and painful. I skipped many pages and finally just read the last few pages. It's a fascinating book, but not my cup of tea.

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Feb 2008 22:52:31 GMT
Last edited by the author on 20 Feb 2009 21:23:09 GMT
Overby Girl says:
Am I the only person to dislike this book? I can't put into words how much it irritated me. I couldn't feel anything for the characters at all-dull in the extreme. It's 'literature' for the masses-a step up from Dan Brown.My local library has put this book in the 'Classics' section alongside Dickens, Austen, Hardy, Wharton .Are they mad? I will be complaining!

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2008 20:49:00 BDT
katos100 says:
I anticipated this book with much excitement following all the hype and I was very very disappointed, I knew after the first couple of pages it was a load of cobblers and it did not get any better, I am ashamed to say that it was so bad I just could not bring myself to waste any more time reading it and I gave up half way through, I very rarely do this no matter how bad the book and now when I even hear the title of the book mentioned I get really irritated, it was that bad!!

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Aug 2008 16:25:04 BDT
Last edited by the author on 18 Aug 2008 16:25:39 BDT
miss vickies says:
Thank goodness!
I HATED this book, and yet I have heard so many people banging on about how great it is I was seriously starting to think there was something wrong with me. I just kept waiting for something to actually HAPPEN!!!

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2008 01:51:26 GMT
Psyche says:
I loved this book. "Literature" (as I understand literature to be), it isn't. A thought provoking take on a love story, it was, for me. Perhaps there were questions left unanswered or (put another way) pages which weren't written or included, which should have been. (Did Kendrick ever find a solution? How did the world react to the news that there were such things as CDP? Why was Charisse with Gomez?) On the other hand, that wasnt the story, and the incompleteness of continuity and the not knowing was part of Clare and Henry's lives. The story was about, and only about, the effect time that travel might have on a love relationship, and for me, it addressed that question more fully than I could have expected. It has really made me think.

Posted on 3 Aug 2009 20:50:46 BDT
Book WoRm says:
I wouldn't say that I hated this book, but I thought that it could have been soo soo much better. And I don't know whether i'm stupid or not, but I just didn't get how Henry died??? If someone could clarify that, than may be I could understand the book better, because I did kind of feel cheated that the ending was so rubbish - was there any need for Henry to have his feet amputated??? Did Henry have to die, when he in one sense has this incurable disease - sort of that he has to live with, was that not enough for one person?

I didn't mind the relationship between the young Calir and older Henry wrong, but I just thought that it took away any choice that Claire could have had and I did find it a extremely icky that an old Henry took Claire's virginity. I was over all very dissapointed with the book and it was about 200 pages way too long.

Posted on 7 Aug 2009 14:17:46 BDT
B. Khan says:
Chick lit masquerading as a serious work of fiction. Loathed it and resented the time wasted reading it that could have been better spent.

Posted on 10 Jan 2010 23:22:04 GMT
J. Burgess says:
I agree, the book was not a shattering masterpiece. It was a close image of a soap opera, albeit the two main characters provided all the narrative. I was happy to stop reading at the end of part 1, but injected the effort to complete the book in the hope that I could "close" it. Henry's demise is misleading - it's unlikely he dies, he's just in another time. Unanswered dilemmas like this, and the other characters' lack of development are the means by which Niffenegger shows her stage of development as a writer. I wasn't depressed however, and await more elaborate language and plots from Neffenegger's future writing.

Posted on 24 Jan 2010 18:28:47 GMT
I actually enjoyed it. I am only fed up that Henry had to die. But that makes it all the more poignant. OK so it isn't Charles Dickens or Emily Bronte but it is a good story with a strong narrative. It is a book that is that you either get or don't. Literature appreciation is very subjective.

Posted on 31 Jan 2010 22:30:53 GMT
KittyP says:
Yes to the original post. It was a great idea for a book but so poorly executed. I finished it and was left thinking "What the hell was the point of that?" I think the author came up with a plot but rushed to write her book without planning what her story should say.

A pity, with a bit more thought and more rounded characters it could have been an interesting read.

Posted on 10 Feb 2010 14:32:37 GMT
I'm 2/3rds of the way through this book and am finding it really tedious, which is quite disappointing as I have to say that several friends thought it was brilliant. I find it confusing and illogical and, like some of the reviewers, would have liked to read more about what happened on Henry's travels. Also (and I'm not sure if I'm missing the point here), it seems that Henry can sometimes remember things that have happened to him but at other times can't. Generally it was the sheer lack of logic which I found irritating. I also felt that I never got to know the characters (other than that they were both gorgeous, talented, and well bred).

Posted on 11 Feb 2010 21:21:40 GMT
JJG says:
I enjoyed it, but it certainly isn't a masterpiece. It's just part of our culture that we often praise something to the roof, maybe unnecessarily, only for others not to see what we see in it and counter praise with criticism. I have to admit I haven't read it in a few years, but from what I remember it was a really engaging book. But then I've got a thing about time travel.

Posted on 28 Feb 2010 01:47:44 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 28 Feb 2010 06:19:34 GMT]

Posted on 12 Mar 2010 11:59:39 GMT
 says:
I enjoyed The End of Eternity (Panther Science Fiction) much more.

Posted on 7 Apr 2010 16:52:37 BDT
Last edited by the author on 7 Apr 2010 17:00:29 BDT
Mrs. N. Low says:
The Time Traveler's Wife
I was disappointed by the end and not knowing what happened with all the other characters, especially Alba!

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Sep 2010 16:10:13 BDT
It took me a while to get into this book, in parts it is very irratating, and I agree that the ending is rubbish, and could someone please tell me how did Henry die? A very confusing read, I have also read "Her Fearful Symmetry",that has a bad ending too,don't think I shall read any more of Ms. Niffenegger's work.

In reply to an earlier post on 14 Feb 2011 08:37:36 GMT
I tossed the book a 3rd of the way in - it was annoying, pointless and repetative to read. I still havn't found a review that says what its actually about.

Posted on 14 Feb 2011 12:34:15 GMT
L. Palma says:
If Henry keeps time-travelling into the future from his past, how can he really die? Are we saying that time travellers are actually immortal and that Henry's only flaw is that he never learns to control his destinations? (Whereas it would appear that Alba can).
In any case, how can Alba, a young woman be so at ease with appaearing completely naked in time when her father often ends up in cold inhospitable places, not to mention being beat-up.. One would think that a naked you women would attract a lot of VERY UNDERSIRED attention.
I guess I felt that the idea was interesting but somehow along the way it became unclear to the author whether this was to be a metaphore about a love story or whether we were actually exploring time-travel in its possible implications... Was left dazed and confused at the end

Posted on 8 Jan 2012 16:04:57 GMT
What the author I believe is trying to portray is the deterministic point of view, anything that happens has already happened, and it's all happened at once and we have to just play through it, living it. It's one of the theories behind how we live and weather we have the freedom to chose what we want to do or weather it's already all there for us, and we have no control over the events that occur. Just another opinion behind the argument, no-one really knows

Posted on 12 Feb 2012 17:58:38 GMT
Babs h says:
As his mother was also a time traveller why was she not in the book very much .she must have traveled into his future before she died

Posted on 14 Mar 2012 13:56:16 GMT
To those asking how Henry died, I took it that he time travelled from the new years eve party in the present to 1984 and was accidentally shot by either Claire's brother or Father while they were hunting (phesant I think). He then time travelled straight back to the present. I think the point of including the story of Henry losing his feet was to show that injuries sustained while time travelling would also be brought back to the present upon Henry's return. I really enjoyed the book, I am a chick lit fan and although this was a bit deeper than that, I do agree it's not a "classic" in the usual sense of the word.

Posted on 16 Mar 2012 16:16:16 GMT
emily bates says:
The loss of Henry's feet is a contributory factor to his death. It is mentioned again and again, that so long as he can run, he can survive the dangerous situations he finds himself in when he travels. Without feet he cannot even stand up. Hence, when he travels to the long grass near the meadow, footless, Clare's brother shoots him, without even seeing what he is. If he had had feet he could have stood up and indicated that he was a man, not a deer. (Don't think they really shoot pheasant in the states.) The part I had difficulty with was the other Henry, who was with Mark and Philip when the shot was fired. Was he another Henry, travelling from another time in the future?

Posted on 4 May 2012 21:25:12 BDT
Fantasy-Fan says:
I don't really understand how so many people are confused - it's all explained pretty clearly if you read the whole book without skipping.

The previous 2 posters sum it up pretty well. Henry does die, he isn't just "in another time". And yes Emily, the other Henry has traveled back from a slightly earlier future, before he loses his feet.

The reason that Henry sometimes doesn't remember things is because they haven't happened to him yet - an older Henry has traveled backwards in time and had those experiences with the other characters, so they remember them as occurring in "the past" but for Henry they haven't happened yet.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 May 2012 21:27:07 BDT
Fantasy-Fan says:
@ Babs h: I'm not sure where you're getting this from - His mother was not a time traveler.

He has traveled back into the past and seen his mother when she was still alive.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  24
Total posts:  26
Initial post:  27 Sep 2007
Latest post:  4 May 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
The Time Traveler's Wife
The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger (Paperback - 6 Jan 2005)
4.3 out of 5 stars   (1,330)