This was originally billed as a Scifi novel, however, it is not. Having said that, it is a very good novel. It is in some ways a truly great novel. If you haven't read it, I must suggest this one. It is a passionate tale that one cannot help but be drawn into and it will catch your imagination.
I will never look at NYC or the statue of liberty the same again. I travel to NYC often and now I will be picturing it 100 years ago.
Very interesting story and wonderful love story.
I listened to this book shortly after finishing 11-22-63 by Stephen King.
Compared to 11-22-63, Time and Again has less "color" and dramatic scenes but compensates it by style and softness.
At least 1/4 of the book are descriptions of streets and buildings in NY which are "There" or "Not There", as someone who has never been to NY I could not associate anything with those parts and found it rather boring. 11-22-63 is better in this sense, it really submerges you into the world of 1950'es without need of knowing street names, numbers and buildings.
Incredibly, this book was recommended by Stephen King in the epilogue of 11-22-63 (a book I HIGHLY recommend). He called it a "definitive time travel story". How could I admire his writing so much and HATE what he liked?
I'll just flat out tell any sci fi junkies, the time travel is completely incidental to the story and very badly designed. Think faster-than-light spaceships using a really really powerful solid rocket. He even violates his own "physics" at one very important point.
As for the story, it could have been told in an hour. He spends so much time explaining and detailing the scenes and people, you will fight the urge to skip forward. I did it routinely and marveled at how he was still droning on after minutes of skipping. His descriptions and ponderings are inane and do nothing to either further the story or develop the characters. The narrator has a deep, authoritative voice which stands in contradiction to the sophomoric writing. He is obviously an artist. He spends a good deal of the book discussing art.
As for the review that calls it a "love story"... well it's much more that than "time travel", but if you're looking for a good love story, DO NOT listen to this. As I mentioned: character development is non-existent. There is no chemistry, no feeling. The story is simple, predictable and extremely shallow unless you are into him going on and on about how incredible it is that he is really in another time and how amazingly different New York is in the 19th century. And art. Incessant discussions of art -- drawing, photography, carving
I really wanted to like this book and was looking forward to it. It took exactly 4.5 hrs to get to anything of interest and then it started picking up the pace. It left me with the feeling as if I had been standing in line all day to go down the waterslide and as I got to the top and it was my turn, they closed the water park and told me to go back down using the stairs. All that anticipation for nothing...
I felt this could have been a much more intriguing and interesting story but it left me flat. I don't consider it a complete waste it has it's moments but few and far between.
the reader was excellent. the story started slowly, then captivated. action and romance kept interest. the ending read a surprise and fitting end.
I chose this book because it was mentioned in Steven King's 11-22-63 time travel tale.
I had a hard time believing the mechanism or method of time travel used in Time and Again.
There is also the fact that the "present" world in the novel seems as far away in the past as the "past" did to the main character. The 70's is another era altogether.
Getting over that, the story reminds me of a 1930's radio drama. I did still enjoy this book.
No. The manner in which the lead character traveled back in time was silly. All the preparation in time and expense for one man to travel back in time and then to find that two women do with with no training, time or expense is ludicrous. They should have clued in and had women do it. Apparently, they can easily travel back and forth in time, if they just think about it.
Be consistent with the means for traveling in time.
No, but he was great.
No way. It stunk. The premise was unbelievable.
The premise was an interesting idea, but Finney should have followed his own rules and been consistent.