Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collections
Publication
Vintage (1997), Edition: New edition, Paperback, 256 pages
Description
Fiction. Literature. HTML:A child's abduction sends a father reeling in this Whitbread Award-winning novel that explores time and loss with "narrative daring and imaginative genius" (Kirkus Reviews, starred review). Stephen Lewis, a successful author of children's books, is on a routine trip to the supermarket with his three-year-old daughter. In a brief moment of distraction, she suddenly vanishes�??and is irretrievably lost. From that moment, Lewis spirals into bereavement that effects his marriage, his psyche, and his relationship with time itself: "It was a wonder that there could be so much movement, so much purpose, all the time. He himself had none at all." In The Child in Time, acclaimed author Ian McEwan "sets a story of domestic horror against a disorienting exploration in time" producing "a work of remarkable intellectual and political sophistication" that has been adapted into a PBS Masterpiece movie starring Benedict Cumberbatch (Kirkus Reviews, starred review). "A beautifully rendered, very disturbing novel." �??Publishers Weekly… (more)
Media reviews
A Child in Time is rather a silly novel. It can take a while to notice this because its brilliance and extraordinary intensity have a hypnotic effect. Like Ernst and Magritte, McEwen has the Surrealist knack of making the world gleam with a light that never was on land or sea. He can also be
Show More
extremely funny. Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member DieFledermaus
The overarching theme of this novel is the mutability of time, how it can have no one static definition. As usual, McEwan's crisp, erudite prose makes anything readable. Also like many of his other books - there's one catalyzing event early on and the fallout is depicted. The action that propels
Two years later, the pain is as vibrant as ever for Stephen Lewis. In one chapter, he recalls the day when his normal life ended, through little details. McEwan is exceptionally effective in showing their comfortable home and Stephen's love for his daughter Kate. At the supermarket, he turns his back and she's gone. To his credit, McEwan doesn't solve the mystery of Kate's fate which would be the easy way out. Instead, he depicts Stephen's tenuous relations with the outside world - his estranged wife Julie, his parents, his friend, Tory politician Charles and his duties as a member of a committee on children's reading and writing.
The book is unified by Stephen's connections to various characters and a focus on the subtleties of time. While the child in time is overtly Kate, lost in time forever, frozen always as a 3 year old, unable to continue with her father's time, it also refers to Stephen and Charles. Stephen at different times compares the discrepancy between time as it is generally seen - a straight rush onward - and how it is experienced in both personal events and the physics of Charles' wife Thelma. Charles had always been an 'adult', a contrast to Stephen's slightly druggy, uninhibited, lit-major-college days. However, as his life took on more responsibilities, a disturbing fixation firmly places him outside of time. For Stephen, a slightly surreal experience involving his parents freezes him, for a moment, as a child.
Show More
this story is the unthinkable - a child abduction. Two years later, the pain is as vibrant as ever for Stephen Lewis. In one chapter, he recalls the day when his normal life ended, through little details. McEwan is exceptionally effective in showing their comfortable home and Stephen's love for his daughter Kate. At the supermarket, he turns his back and she's gone. To his credit, McEwan doesn't solve the mystery of Kate's fate which would be the easy way out. Instead, he depicts Stephen's tenuous relations with the outside world - his estranged wife Julie, his parents, his friend, Tory politician Charles and his duties as a member of a committee on children's reading and writing.
The book is unified by Stephen's connections to various characters and a focus on the subtleties of time. While the child in time is overtly Kate, lost in time forever, frozen always as a 3 year old, unable to continue with her father's time, it also refers to Stephen and Charles. Stephen at different times compares the discrepancy between time as it is generally seen - a straight rush onward - and how it is experienced in both personal events and the physics of Charles' wife Thelma. Charles had always been an 'adult', a contrast to Stephen's slightly druggy, uninhibited, lit-major-college days. However, as his life took on more responsibilities, a disturbing fixation firmly places him outside of time. For Stephen, a slightly surreal experience involving his parents freezes him, for a moment, as a child.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Fullmoonblue
I don't think this is a book to be read only once.
Why: The pace and main settings/characters shift pretty distinctly a couple of times over the course of the novel, and the reader who looks for a linear sort of plot development will be disappointed (if not annoyed).
It's not giving anything away
But this is less a detective story than a chronicle of how the somewhat miserable main character watches his life fall apart in the kidnapping's aftermath.
If I did read the book a second time (possibly this summer) I would watch for whether or not McEwan may have snuck in any subtly cohesive plot devices that I missed on the first read. For instance, I wonder if perhaps he interwove gestures toward different stages of grief (eg Stages of Grief) throughout this meandering, somewhat unconventional plot. A device like that might help me understand why and how McEwan chose to include such vastly different (but not unconnected) characters and scenes: the husband and wife, the parents, the political world, institutionalized school-related settings, a pub lost in time, a treehouse...
During a reread, I would also make a list of the overt questions this book raises about childhood and about loss. Some seem grand (as time passes, where does the past go?) and others are more particular (how is it different to lose a child than to lose an old friend?) Can looking at one's parents differently change your own sense of identity? And what role does the state (or rather the wackos who may make up institutional bodies) play in the definition and identity formation of its citizens/subjects/children...?
To sum up, The Child in Time was not, for me, as immediately gratifying as Atonement or On Chesil Beach; those two resist gratifying the reader also, in different ways. But I did enjoy it anyway, especially upon getting to the end and trying to figure out how I felt -- same as I did after finishing Atonement and Chesil. The Child in Time just comes off as more experimental, in my opinion, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Why: The pace and main settings/characters shift pretty distinctly a couple of times over the course of the novel, and the reader who looks for a linear sort of plot development will be disappointed (if not annoyed).
It's not giving anything away
Show More
to say that a child disappears; that's laid out right on the back cover and happens within the first few pages. So one might expect this to become the driving force behind the plot: who took the kid, where is she, will the parents ever find her again...? But this is less a detective story than a chronicle of how the somewhat miserable main character watches his life fall apart in the kidnapping's aftermath.
If I did read the book a second time (possibly this summer) I would watch for whether or not McEwan may have snuck in any subtly cohesive plot devices that I missed on the first read. For instance, I wonder if perhaps he interwove gestures toward different stages of grief (eg Stages of Grief) throughout this meandering, somewhat unconventional plot. A device like that might help me understand why and how McEwan chose to include such vastly different (but not unconnected) characters and scenes: the husband and wife, the parents, the political world, institutionalized school-related settings, a pub lost in time, a treehouse...
During a reread, I would also make a list of the overt questions this book raises about childhood and about loss. Some seem grand (as time passes, where does the past go?) and others are more particular (how is it different to lose a child than to lose an old friend?) Can looking at one's parents differently change your own sense of identity? And what role does the state (or rather the wackos who may make up institutional bodies) play in the definition and identity formation of its citizens/subjects/children...?
To sum up, The Child in Time was not, for me, as immediately gratifying as Atonement or On Chesil Beach; those two resist gratifying the reader also, in different ways. But I did enjoy it anyway, especially upon getting to the end and trying to figure out how I felt -- same as I did after finishing Atonement and Chesil. The Child in Time just comes off as more experimental, in my opinion, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Show Less
LibraryThing member DeltaQueen50
Personally I found The Child In Time a depressing read dealing as it does with the after effects of the unsolved case of a child abducted from a grocery store while she and her father were waiting in line to pay. The book starts two years after this event, but this is the shadow that hangs over
Through his daydreams and musings over his life, we learn of his own childhood, the courtship of his parents, his relationship with his wife, and the slipping into madness of his friend and former publisher all of which adds to Stephen’s own confusion and precarious mental state. The author uses this stream-of-consciousness in other scenes as well to build on the theme of childhood and the loss of innocence.
If the author’s objective was to leave his readers feeling uncomfortable, sad and disturbed then this beautifully written story is a great success. This was my first book by Ian McEwan and I can see that he is a brilliant writer but the subject matter of The Child in Time was too disheartening for me at this time.
Show More
Stephen ‘s life. His child gone, his marriage shattered, his career as a writer stalled, and his psyche totally caught up in the tragedy. I found my heart going out to this man as he first throws himself into the search for his daughter, then works on theories as to why she was taken, he feels that he should continue to buy birthday gifts for her as an ‘act of faith’ that someday she will be returned. Eventually when he mistakes a little girl for his daughter he realizes he needs to move on to other things so he sets himself a routine of tennis, instruction in Arabic and trying to write again but it really seems as if his time is mostly spent mindlessly watching television and daydreaming.Through his daydreams and musings over his life, we learn of his own childhood, the courtship of his parents, his relationship with his wife, and the slipping into madness of his friend and former publisher all of which adds to Stephen’s own confusion and precarious mental state. The author uses this stream-of-consciousness in other scenes as well to build on the theme of childhood and the loss of innocence.
If the author’s objective was to leave his readers feeling uncomfortable, sad and disturbed then this beautifully written story is a great success. This was my first book by Ian McEwan and I can see that he is a brilliant writer but the subject matter of The Child in Time was too disheartening for me at this time.
Show Less
LibraryThing member gbill
The Child in Time really grabs you at the outset. McEwan’s layered description of every parent’s worst nightmare, a child abduction, is brilliant. I also loved the parts of this book which had the husband and wife dealing with loss in their own ways, and their evolving relationship.
I was less
This was McEwan’s third novel, written in 1987. Does it hold up? Absolutely. The book jabs at Margaret Thatcher and the conservative government of the time, as well as (briefly) warns against nuclear Armageddon because of the arms race, which was of heightened concern at the time, but it’s not dated in any way. It’s not my favorite book by the man, but it’s not his worst either, and it’s probably worth a read.
Quotes:
On a child’s perspective, and living in the now:
“The wood, this spider rotating on its thread, this beetle lumbering over blades of grass, would be all, the moment would be everything. He needed her good influence, her lessons in celebrating the specific, how to fill the present and be filled by it to the point where identity faded to nothing. He was always partly somewhere else, never quite paying attention, never wholly serious. Wasn’t that Nietzsche’s idea of true maturity, to attain the seriousness of a child at play?”
On men and women:
“Such faith in endless mutability, in remaking yourself as you came to understand more or changed your version, he had come to see as an aspect of her femininity. Where once he had believed, or thought he ought to believe, that men and women were, beyond all the obvious physical differences, essentially the same, he now suspected that one of their many distinguishing features was precisely their attitudes to change. Past a certain age, men froze into place; they tended to believe that, even in adversity, they were somehow at one with their fates. They were who they thought they were.”
I was less
Show More
of a fan of some of the other elements, which included implied time travel that allowed the husband to get a glimpse of his own parents at a critical moment in his inception, his role on a government committee writing a book on child-rearing (and the conspiracy therein), and his friend’s strange regression into childish behavior. While there are of course ties to childhood with each of these things, they caused the book to meander and lose focus (for me anyway), and unfortunately, as they represent a good hunk of the book, it was heading for a slightly lower rating for awhile there. However, the ending pulled it up, and I do have to recognize McEwan’s skill as a writer. He did hold my interest and respect throughout. This was McEwan’s third novel, written in 1987. Does it hold up? Absolutely. The book jabs at Margaret Thatcher and the conservative government of the time, as well as (briefly) warns against nuclear Armageddon because of the arms race, which was of heightened concern at the time, but it’s not dated in any way. It’s not my favorite book by the man, but it’s not his worst either, and it’s probably worth a read.
Quotes:
On a child’s perspective, and living in the now:
“The wood, this spider rotating on its thread, this beetle lumbering over blades of grass, would be all, the moment would be everything. He needed her good influence, her lessons in celebrating the specific, how to fill the present and be filled by it to the point where identity faded to nothing. He was always partly somewhere else, never quite paying attention, never wholly serious. Wasn’t that Nietzsche’s idea of true maturity, to attain the seriousness of a child at play?”
On men and women:
“Such faith in endless mutability, in remaking yourself as you came to understand more or changed your version, he had come to see as an aspect of her femininity. Where once he had believed, or thought he ought to believe, that men and women were, beyond all the obvious physical differences, essentially the same, he now suspected that one of their many distinguishing features was precisely their attitudes to change. Past a certain age, men froze into place; they tended to believe that, even in adversity, they were somehow at one with their fates. They were who they thought they were.”
Show Less
LibraryThing member dczapka
The Child in Time captures everything that I love about Ian McEwan and everything that I dislike. A novel with an simple but intriguing premise, it feels like it has so much promise in its riveting opening scene. But as the novel wears on, it wears out its welcome early, only to regain momentum in
McEwan's protagonist is Stephen Lewis, a writer of children's books whose daughter, in a scene that occurs two years before the main action, is abducted from his in a supermarket. The girl is never found, and he and his wife Julie find that the trajectories of their guilt lead them in vastly different directions. As Stephen must deal with his temporary position on a government committee trying to draft a book on child-care, as well as the sudden resignation of his friend and colleague Charles Darke, he finds his life spiraling out of control.
Okay, perhaps I've characterized that a bit melodramatically. The truth is that the novel's strength is that, given such an exceptionally strong premise, the first half plods along at an almost intolerable pace. For someone who has just lost his daughter, Stephen is prone to chronic inaction, and McEwan represents this by having him meditate for long passages on complex psychological and scientific issues--as if McEwan was desperate to justify the "Time" part of the title. It's all a bit heavy-handed, and results in a novel that reads quickly at the start, then gets bogged down in the middle, almost to the point of disinterest.
The novel's second half is a totally different story. Several of the subtle subplots, particularly with regards to Charles and his sudden reversion to childhood fancies, are revealed to be part of a larger plan, and McEwan proves that he does have a strong sense of where he wants the novel to go. But there remain moments so inexplicable, so manufactured, that they confound rather than impress the reader. The story of his parents' meeting, while interesting, doesn't seem to go anywhere, and the final scene, while touching, feels too artificial and constructed to truly have much emotional impact. The increase in action is sure worth appreciating, yes, but it's hard to say if it actually redeems the novel as a whole.
I've always felt like McEwan is a talented though uneven writer, and The Child in Time encapsulates this tendency in 263 pages. Each moment feels a little too calculated, a little too manufactured, the result being a novel that strives to be as heartfelt and genuine as possible but nevertheless comes off as false and frustrating. A worthy read, but don't be surprised if it tries your patience--it may not be what you expect it to be.
Show More
the end--though it's hard to tell if the resolution really is too little too late.McEwan's protagonist is Stephen Lewis, a writer of children's books whose daughter, in a scene that occurs two years before the main action, is abducted from his in a supermarket. The girl is never found, and he and his wife Julie find that the trajectories of their guilt lead them in vastly different directions. As Stephen must deal with his temporary position on a government committee trying to draft a book on child-care, as well as the sudden resignation of his friend and colleague Charles Darke, he finds his life spiraling out of control.
Okay, perhaps I've characterized that a bit melodramatically. The truth is that the novel's strength is that, given such an exceptionally strong premise, the first half plods along at an almost intolerable pace. For someone who has just lost his daughter, Stephen is prone to chronic inaction, and McEwan represents this by having him meditate for long passages on complex psychological and scientific issues--as if McEwan was desperate to justify the "Time" part of the title. It's all a bit heavy-handed, and results in a novel that reads quickly at the start, then gets bogged down in the middle, almost to the point of disinterest.
The novel's second half is a totally different story. Several of the subtle subplots, particularly with regards to Charles and his sudden reversion to childhood fancies, are revealed to be part of a larger plan, and McEwan proves that he does have a strong sense of where he wants the novel to go. But there remain moments so inexplicable, so manufactured, that they confound rather than impress the reader. The story of his parents' meeting, while interesting, doesn't seem to go anywhere, and the final scene, while touching, feels too artificial and constructed to truly have much emotional impact. The increase in action is sure worth appreciating, yes, but it's hard to say if it actually redeems the novel as a whole.
I've always felt like McEwan is a talented though uneven writer, and The Child in Time encapsulates this tendency in 263 pages. Each moment feels a little too calculated, a little too manufactured, the result being a novel that strives to be as heartfelt and genuine as possible but nevertheless comes off as false and frustrating. A worthy read, but don't be surprised if it tries your patience--it may not be what you expect it to be.
Show Less
LibraryThing member berrilynn
In what might be Ian McEwan’s least-read, but perhaps best novel, The Child In Time, a children’s book author, Stephen, must come to terms with his three-year old daughter’s abduction and, presumably, her death. Complicating this heart-breaking situation is Stephen’s wife Julie, who has
Show More
hermited herself away in the countryside, and the fascinating and surreal parallel stories of Stephen’s own childhood, and that of his best friends—his publisher and his wife, a physicist. “The child in time” is not merely a title or a play on words, but also describes the seemingly shifting forces of time and experience itself, and how one child lost in time might shift the timeframe of others. Beautifully concise, perfectly worded, heart-wrenching, subtle, avalanching and, at last, imbued with hope, this is perhaps the work that first marks McEwan’s celebrated later novelistic style (Atonement, Saturday). Show Less
LibraryThing member Kirstie_Innes-Will
Another fascinating prism from McEwan. A children's book author grieving a lost child ... a publisher turned politician who regresses to childhood ... a secret from the past, and the torn relationships along the way. There are lots of twists in this reflection on the ephemeralness of childhood, of
Show More
longing (for a child, for a lost past, for a childhood never experienced) and on how precarious existence itself can be. Show Less
LibraryThing member piefuchs
An intriguing story that was a quick read. The main character, an accidental children's author, in a short period of time losses, in different fashions his daughter, his wife, and a close friend who had had a great influence on the course of his life. As a result, he is left alone with his thoughts
Show More
and a minor role in a government commission of child rearing. Like all McEwan, it straddles the fine line between unbelievable (or rather bordering on a cynical mysticism) and genuine surprise. Show Less
LibraryThing member wester
Even though I had resolved not to read any more McEwans as they all tend to be so cynical, this book sucked me in. And I do not regret that at all, as this book, while as clever and intellectual as all the others, has a softness to it that I liked.
LibraryThing member lindawwilson
I did not enjoy this book that much; clearly not as good as Atonement or The Innocent; had some supernatural elements which I generally don't like
LibraryThing member mareki
One of my favourite McEwan's. Compelling plot, sympathetic character, innovative style - incredibly carefully & densely written, without being a laborious read at all. And the ending is beautiful, & redemptive, celebrating the simple miracles of humanity.
feb 08
feb 08
LibraryThing member sebrown
Still my favourite McEwan and one of my favourite books. It's effective in its combination of drama, character exploration and play with reality.
LibraryThing member SirRoger
Like several McEwan books, this one took a while to hook me, but once the hook happens, it doesn't let go. It's a mesmerizing story, not just about a lost child, but about time itself.
LibraryThing member Rach974923
I first came across this book when taking my English literature A-levels in 1994. It remains one of the few books that I have studied in depth and still totally and utterly adore. It has so many levels. Each time I read it (and I've read it a few times now) it gets better, even though I know
Show More
exactly what's going to happen. For me, this is novel writing at its best. Prosaic, haunting, real, emotional and with a wry humour. I can accept that this is a polarizing book: people either love or hate it and it is not an easy read. Stick with it, though, and the rewards are great. Show Less
LibraryThing member jayne_charles
All in all I liked this, with reservations. You can always rely on Ian McEwan for top quality writing though his endings have often been a bit suspect. I actually thought this ended well – despite relying on the sort of plot device soap opera scriptwriters imbibe with their mother’s milk –
Concerning Stephen, a successful author whose only child was kidnapped several years ago and never found, the book avoids the temptation to become overly sentimental, instead concentrating on the long term effects on the child’s parents, who have had to somehow go on with life in the face of this tragedy. Intellectual in tone, it somehow manages to marry up this storyline with a bit of political intrigue: even the Prime Minister is in it, carefully described without the use of gender-specific pronouns. There is also a general musing on the nature of time itself.
The book shows its age a little in that these days Stephen, as a successful author and father of a missing child, would surely be recognisable to just about everyone in the country thanks to the tabloids, but he somehow manages to wander through life unmolested. Also, I wasn’t entirely convinced by the surreal sections – one involving a ‘hallucination’, and another involving the climbing of a tree which bore such an uncanny resemblance to the Magic Faraway Tree that I’m surprised the estate of the late Enid Blyton didn’t sue.
My favourite part by far was the sideways look at the way the official line on how children ‘should’ be brought up changes almost daily. As a parent, I thought that was spot on.
Show More
and though the conclusion was perhaps forehead-slappingly obvious, I didn’t see it coming.Concerning Stephen, a successful author whose only child was kidnapped several years ago and never found, the book avoids the temptation to become overly sentimental, instead concentrating on the long term effects on the child’s parents, who have had to somehow go on with life in the face of this tragedy. Intellectual in tone, it somehow manages to marry up this storyline with a bit of political intrigue: even the Prime Minister is in it, carefully described without the use of gender-specific pronouns. There is also a general musing on the nature of time itself.
The book shows its age a little in that these days Stephen, as a successful author and father of a missing child, would surely be recognisable to just about everyone in the country thanks to the tabloids, but he somehow manages to wander through life unmolested. Also, I wasn’t entirely convinced by the surreal sections – one involving a ‘hallucination’, and another involving the climbing of a tree which bore such an uncanny resemblance to the Magic Faraway Tree that I’m surprised the estate of the late Enid Blyton didn’t sue.
My favourite part by far was the sideways look at the way the official line on how children ‘should’ be brought up changes almost daily. As a parent, I thought that was spot on.
Show Less
LibraryThing member leslie.98
I never got interested in either the characters or the plot...
LibraryThing member kevinashley
I'm reviewing this novel some months after I read it and gave it 3.5 stars and I'm now unsure why I gave it such an average rating. What remains in my memory are not details of the plot but impressions of the scenario in which the novel takes place.
That scenario is unremittingly bleak, matching the
This future is a dystopian view of what Britain might become if the 1980s Conservative administration had been able to pursue some of their ideals to the utmost, combined with an ever-decreasing gross national product. There are licensed beggars instead of Social Security, public infrastructure which is crumbling and unreliable and the sense of an ever-more-intrusive police state.
Against this background are described the different ways in which the loss of their child affects Steven, Julie and those around them, and what are almost a set of meditations on childhood, memory, time and changing meaning.
McEwan's imagined future now seems somewhat odd. Its dystopian elements are believable even though we now know that thankfully some of them did not come to pass. But echnological change, which sometimes plays a key role in the story, is less well imagined. The protagonists have some kind of home access to remote computers, using something reminiscent of Prestel, but the concept of mobile communications is unknown and a number of plot devices hinge on the difficulty of contacting someone via their home landline when they are themselves mobile.
Throughout, Stephen (a children's author) is involved with a cabinet committee producing a government document on childcare and dealing with the increasingly outlandish behaviour of his friend Charles, a government minister.
The elements are intermixed well, each reinforcing or complementating the other and underlying it all the bleakness of the tragedy which defines the characters' lives. It's not an uplifting read much of the time, although the bureaucracy of government brings odd moments of humour, and the end is most definitely positive in a way that's unexpected.
That scenario is unremittingly bleak, matching the
Show More
emotions of two of the main characters, Stephen and Julie, a married coupled who have become estranged following the disappearance and presumed abduction of their daughter, Kate. The novel is set in what, at the time of writing (1987), was a near-future Britain. Although I don't believe the date is ever made explicit, various references suggest it is the late 1990s or early 2000s. Passing reference is made to the Millenium, and an Olympic Games takes place shortly before the events described in the novel.This future is a dystopian view of what Britain might become if the 1980s Conservative administration had been able to pursue some of their ideals to the utmost, combined with an ever-decreasing gross national product. There are licensed beggars instead of Social Security, public infrastructure which is crumbling and unreliable and the sense of an ever-more-intrusive police state.
Against this background are described the different ways in which the loss of their child affects Steven, Julie and those around them, and what are almost a set of meditations on childhood, memory, time and changing meaning.
McEwan's imagined future now seems somewhat odd. Its dystopian elements are believable even though we now know that thankfully some of them did not come to pass. But echnological change, which sometimes plays a key role in the story, is less well imagined. The protagonists have some kind of home access to remote computers, using something reminiscent of Prestel, but the concept of mobile communications is unknown and a number of plot devices hinge on the difficulty of contacting someone via their home landline when they are themselves mobile.
Throughout, Stephen (a children's author) is involved with a cabinet committee producing a government document on childcare and dealing with the increasingly outlandish behaviour of his friend Charles, a government minister.
The elements are intermixed well, each reinforcing or complementating the other and underlying it all the bleakness of the tragedy which defines the characters' lives. It's not an uplifting read much of the time, although the bureaucracy of government brings odd moments of humour, and the end is most definitely positive in a way that's unexpected.
Show Less
LibraryThing member martymojito
I was disappointed in The Child in Time. I am a big McEwan fan but this lacks a compelling story. Not enough plot and too much feelings, is that the right word. McEwan can do great plots but this left me cold. I didn't really care about any of the characters and certainly not about the blasted
It started so well, a very dramatic disappearance of his child, but then lost its way I thought.
Show More
committee about children's literacy.It started so well, a very dramatic disappearance of his child, but then lost its way I thought.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Ninja_lady
Absolutely my favourite McEwan. I can't read his latest stuff. It makes me angry with it's smugness. If you don't like his current stuff give this a go, Read and read again. Lot's in there
LibraryThing member ReneePaule
Excellent book for those who like to read between the lines ... and for those who don't for that matter.
LibraryThing member AlisonY
Although this book starts with the protagonist's daughter going missing one day whilst they're out shopping, this novel wasn't completely about the aftermath of that, or at least it wasn't the aftermath I was expecting in any case.
I didn't entirely get this McEwan novel. Although the loss of their
Instead, the book centred much more on the father's position on a government committee tasked with writing a new recommendation on raising children, which I found desperately dull and tedious. There was a segue into a peculiar little sub-plot centred around his friend who had been on the committee before him, but although that at first seemed like a beacon of light and something vaguely interesting in the plot, it somehow seemed pointless and purposeless.
I hate to say it given how much I love McEwan, but this novel just didn't work for me. I feel like he disappeared up his own backside in academic / political rhetoric, and I don't get what he was trying to achieve with the novel. There seemed to be different plot themes going on which somehow never pieced together.
2.5 stars - harsh, but for me McEwan can do so much better.
I didn't entirely get this McEwan novel. Although the loss of their
Show More
daughter has a huge impact on the parents' marriage, the whole fallout from her disappearance seemed quite quickly dealt with in the prose. Both parents seemed to nearly straightaway give up looking for her and accepted that she was gone forever which I thought was a bizarre and unbelievable reaction in the circumstances.Instead, the book centred much more on the father's position on a government committee tasked with writing a new recommendation on raising children, which I found desperately dull and tedious. There was a segue into a peculiar little sub-plot centred around his friend who had been on the committee before him, but although that at first seemed like a beacon of light and something vaguely interesting in the plot, it somehow seemed pointless and purposeless.
I hate to say it given how much I love McEwan, but this novel just didn't work for me. I feel like he disappeared up his own backside in academic / political rhetoric, and I don't get what he was trying to achieve with the novel. There seemed to be different plot themes going on which somehow never pieced together.
2.5 stars - harsh, but for me McEwan can do so much better.
Show Less
LibraryThing member PilgrimJess
"Only when you are grown up, perhaps only when you have children yourself, do you fully understand that your parents had a full and intricate existence before you were born."
'The Child in Time,' is set in 1980's London and society and this book seems pretty bleak. A fight between a Soviet and an
The book opens with a harrowing event. Stephen Lewis, a well-known writer of children's books, one morning, decides to let his wife have a lie in and takes his 3-year-old daughter, Kate, with him to the supermarket, while waiting in the check-out line, she suddenly disappears - apparently kidnapped by a stranger. Despite extensive searches, posters and flyers she isn't found. Whilst Stephen roams the streets in search for Kate, his wife, Julie, stays at home, retreating further and further into her private grief. Lost in their own despair the couple start to drift apart; and as the weeks turn into months, their marriage falls apart. Julie moves to an isolated cottage in the countryside whilst Stephen spends his days watching television and daydreaming.
Through a series of flashbacks, including in to his own childhood, the reader cannot but help feeling a great deal of compassion for Stephen and his shifting emotions but in truth he isn't a particularly likeable character. Royalty payments from his books means that Stephen doesn't have to go out to work and virtually the only time that he leaves his flat is to attend Westminster committee meetings on the Official on Child Care where he spends his time daydreaming and barely participating. When one day after mistaking a little girl in a school-yard for Kate, Stephen realises that his life is spinning out of control, and he takes steps to create a new routine for himself.
Alongside Stephen's own struggles his friend Charles Darke is also slowing slipping into madness, unable to reconcile his childish nature and his adult responsibilities. This serves to mirror Stephen's own precarious mental state. Just as Kate's disappearance provides a terrible illustration of the loss of innocence so Charles's mental decline is a heavy-handed metaphor for Stephen's own inability to retrieve his youth. Stephen tries to help Charles's wife, Thelma, but is equally ineffectual there as well.
The absurd Committee meetings and Stephen's encounters with the Prime Minister add a little light relief to what is a largely depressing storyline. Throughout the book there are a series of set piece elements mainly centred around loss, some of which worked whereas some were less effective IMHO. I have read several of McEwan's books in the past and been generally disappointed with them but this one despite its rather depressing subject matter I found compulsive reading and hard to put down.
'The Child in Time,' is set in 1980's London and society and this book seems pretty bleak. A fight between a Soviet and an
Show More
American athlete at the recent Olympics has nearly escalated into nuclear war; although she is never named it is pretty obvious that Margaret Thatcher is Britain's Prime Minister and her Government has undertaken all sorts of cutbacks, home-owners have lost touch with their neighbours living separate lives whilst licensed beggars roam the streets of London.The book opens with a harrowing event. Stephen Lewis, a well-known writer of children's books, one morning, decides to let his wife have a lie in and takes his 3-year-old daughter, Kate, with him to the supermarket, while waiting in the check-out line, she suddenly disappears - apparently kidnapped by a stranger. Despite extensive searches, posters and flyers she isn't found. Whilst Stephen roams the streets in search for Kate, his wife, Julie, stays at home, retreating further and further into her private grief. Lost in their own despair the couple start to drift apart; and as the weeks turn into months, their marriage falls apart. Julie moves to an isolated cottage in the countryside whilst Stephen spends his days watching television and daydreaming.
Through a series of flashbacks, including in to his own childhood, the reader cannot but help feeling a great deal of compassion for Stephen and his shifting emotions but in truth he isn't a particularly likeable character. Royalty payments from his books means that Stephen doesn't have to go out to work and virtually the only time that he leaves his flat is to attend Westminster committee meetings on the Official on Child Care where he spends his time daydreaming and barely participating. When one day after mistaking a little girl in a school-yard for Kate, Stephen realises that his life is spinning out of control, and he takes steps to create a new routine for himself.
Alongside Stephen's own struggles his friend Charles Darke is also slowing slipping into madness, unable to reconcile his childish nature and his adult responsibilities. This serves to mirror Stephen's own precarious mental state. Just as Kate's disappearance provides a terrible illustration of the loss of innocence so Charles's mental decline is a heavy-handed metaphor for Stephen's own inability to retrieve his youth. Stephen tries to help Charles's wife, Thelma, but is equally ineffectual there as well.
The absurd Committee meetings and Stephen's encounters with the Prime Minister add a little light relief to what is a largely depressing storyline. Throughout the book there are a series of set piece elements mainly centred around loss, some of which worked whereas some were less effective IMHO. I have read several of McEwan's books in the past and been generally disappointed with them but this one despite its rather depressing subject matter I found compulsive reading and hard to put down.
Show Less
LibraryThing member lxydis
Possibly the best book by McE, though it's not well known. Slight, but very dense, and quite difficult and hard to read especially given its upsetting theme of a lost child. But it's brilliant.
LibraryThing member Kristelh
Reason Read: I read this because it worked for a TIOLI challenge on LT, it is also a 1001 book. It starts out with an abduction of a child and then it deals with the reactions to that abduction. This does not make this a unique story but the scope, themes, and exploration of time. Themes in this
An interesting comment on this book by Nicholas Spice (London Review, 1987) discussed the political atmosphere of the novel as being Thatcherism. The prime minister in the book is 65 y/o with a voice pitched between tenor and alto, old fashioned ideas on child rearing and scorn for the railroad. There is reference to beggars being licensed (enterprise and profit public welfare), public service barely functions, schools being sold off, housing in short supply and police with guns. In the end the author turns away from the problems of society to absorption in private fulfillment. The book ends with hope but can a person ever recover from "losing" a child by a moment of distraction? This won the Whitbread Novel Award in 1987. I enjoyed it.
Show More
book not only include loss (Stephen Lewis lost his daughter, his marriage, his friends, his ability to write), but also parenthood, childhood, being the adult child of your parents and the parent to your child. An interesting comment on this book by Nicholas Spice (London Review, 1987) discussed the political atmosphere of the novel as being Thatcherism. The prime minister in the book is 65 y/o with a voice pitched between tenor and alto, old fashioned ideas on child rearing and scorn for the railroad. There is reference to beggars being licensed (enterprise and profit public welfare), public service barely functions, schools being sold off, housing in short supply and police with guns. In the end the author turns away from the problems of society to absorption in private fulfillment. The book ends with hope but can a person ever recover from "losing" a child by a moment of distraction? This won the Whitbread Novel Award in 1987. I enjoyed it.
Show Less
Subjects
Awards
Costa Book Awards (Shortlist — Novel — 1987)
Prix Femina (1993)
Language
Original publication date
1987
Physical description
256 p.; 7.72 inches
ISBN
0099755017 / 9780099755012