A Wrinkle in Time: not a review

SPOILER ALERT: This post may contain light spoilers in regard to the book "A Wrinkle in Time" by Madeleine L'Engle. I didn't give away major plot points, but do discuss the tone and general outcomes of some of the characters.

---

Show of hands, who had to read "A Wrinkle in Time" in school? I never did. I only recently began hearing about the book, and there were 2 main reasons I decided to read it:

1) my affinity for all things time-travel
2) the fact it has been included in lists of challenged and/or banned books in the US

Enough for me (although it also didn't hurt that it also won a Newbery Award).

I grew up in a conservative environment, so there were always plenty of "banned books" to go around. I think that might explain my attraction for them today. What can I say? I'm a rebel.

While I was reading it, my husband would ask, "How's your book?" to which I always replied, "Slow. And I still haven't figured out why it was a banned book."

The answer never became clear. I hypothesized it was because the book mentions Jesus in an almost off-handed way, seeming to put him equal with Da Vinci and other great thinkers, artists, and philosophers. That was it. That was the only damning evidence I could find.

Since I didn't want to spoil the book, I looked up the reasons after I had finished. Turns out, I was right, at least partly. The fact that L'Engle mentions Jesus like that, and the fact that there is a "witch" with a crystal ball and magic is the reason that some considered it too appalling to let their children read.

Yet, there are other reasons to find the book overtly religious, including instances of Scripture being quoted and characters talking about a divine God.

This article points out the irony of one side thinking the book is anti-religion, while the other side of the same coin applauds it for its religious overtones.

So that's that. There are plenty of other books I could understand being "banned" in the sense of not kept in the Children's section or something along those lines, but not this one.

What fascinated me more than this, especially as I read the book, was why it had won an award and was lauded as a classic and wonderful book. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it. And I think everyone is entitled to their opinion, including award givers, but I found it slow. And I especially didn't like the main character. I thought she was just a big ball of annoying.

Again, after I finished, I did a little research. Back when the book was published, it was one of the first science fiction stories that featured a female lead. I can dig that.

I think ultimately I was just disappointed that she was so whiny, and she only seemed to do the right thing when there was literally no other option. I love that she had flaws. I love that she wasn't perfect. But none of the other characters were perfect, either, and they weren't nearly as irritating. Had she gone through some sort of transformation throughout the book, I think I would have had a different opinion. Instead, she felt the same. There was even a perfect set-up in the beginning! She could have been a different person by the end!

And isn't that what we want to see from characters? See them struggle and learn and come out different in the end, even if just a little? Isn't that what makes them relatable, but also gives us hope for OUR stories, for OUR outcomes?

Have you read the book? What do you think? Why do you read?