What do you think?
Rate this book
Time #2
From Time to Time
Jack Finney's beloved sequel to his classic, New York Times bestselling illustrated novel Time and Again.
Simon Morley, whose logic-defying trip to the New York City of the 1880s in Time and Again has enchanted readers for twenty-five years, embarks on another trip across the borders of time. This time Reuben Prien at the secret, government-sponsored Project wants Si to leave his home in the 1880s and visit New York in 1912. Si's mission: to protect a man who is traveling across the Atlantic with vital documents that could avert World War I. So one fateful day in 1912, Si finds himself aboard the world's most famous ship...the Titanic.
Simon Morley, whose logic-defying trip to the New York City of the 1880s in Time and Again has enchanted readers for twenty-five years, embarks on another trip across the borders of time. This time Reuben Prien at the secret, government-sponsored Project wants Si to leave his home in the 1880s and visit New York in 1912. Si's mission: to protect a man who is traveling across the Atlantic with vital documents that could avert World War I. So one fateful day in 1912, Si finds himself aboard the world's most famous ship...the Titanic.
304 pages, Paperback
First published January 2, 1995
349 people are currently reading
2,020 people want to read
About the author
Jack Finney
131books459followersMr. Finney specialized in thrillers and works of science fiction. Two of his novels, The Body Snatchers and Good Neighbor Sam became the basis of popular films, but it was Time and Again (1970) that won him a devoted following. The novel, about an advertising artist who travels back to the New York of the 1880s, quickly became a cult favorite, beloved especially by New Yorkers for its rich, painstakingly researched descriptions of life in the city more than a century ago.
Mr. Finney, whose original name was Walter Braden Finney, was born in Milwaukee and attended Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois. After moving to New York and working in the advertising industry, he began writing stories for popular magazines like Collier's, The Saturday Evening Post and McCall's.
His first novel, Five Against the House (1954), told the story of five college students who plot to rob a casino in Reno. A year later he published The Body Snatchers (later reissued as Invasion of the Body Snatchers), a chilling tale of aliens who emerge from pods in the guise of humans whom they have taken over. Many critics interpreted the insidious infiltration by aliens as a cold-war allegory that dramatized America's fear of a takeover by Communists. Mr. Finney maintained that the novel was nothing more than popular entertainment. The 1956 film Invasion of the Body Snatchers was remade twice.
Mr. Finney first showed an interest in time travel in the short-story collection The Third Level, which included stories about a commuter who discovers a train that runs between New York and the year 1894, and a man who rebuilds an old car and finds himself transported back to the 1920s.
He returned to the thriller genre in Assault on a Queen (1959) and tried his hand at comedy in Good Neighbor Sam (1963), a novel based on his experiences as an adman, played by Jack Lemmon in the film version.
In The Woodrow Wilson Dime (1968), Mr. Finney once again explored the possibilities of time travel. The dime of the title allows the novel's hero to enter a parallel world in which he achieves fame by composing the musicals of Oscar Hammerstein and inventing the zipper.
With Time and Again, Mr. Finney won the kind of critical praise and attention not normally accorded to genre fiction. Thomas Lask, reviewing the novel in The New York Times, described it, suggestively, as "a blend of science fiction, nostalgia, mystery and acid commentary on super-government and its helots." Its hero, Si Morley, is a frustrated advertising artist who jumps at the chance to take part in a secret project that promises to change his life. So it does. He travels back to New York in 1882, moves into the Dakota apartment building on Central Park West and experiences the fabulous ordinariness of a bygone age: its trolleys, horse-drawn carriages, elevated lines, and gaslights. This year Mr. Finney published a sequel to the novel, From Time to Time.
Mr. Finney also wrote Marion's Wall (1973), about a silent-film actress who, in an attempt to revive her film career, enters the body of a shy woman, and The Night People (1977). His other fictional works include The House of Numbers (1957) and the short-story collection I Love Galesburg in the Springtime (1963). He also wrote Forgotten News: The Crime of the Century and Other Lost Stories (1983) about sensational events of the 19th century.
Mr. Finney, whose original name was Walter Braden Finney, was born in Milwaukee and attended Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois. After moving to New York and working in the advertising industry, he began writing stories for popular magazines like Collier's, The Saturday Evening Post and McCall's.
His first novel, Five Against the House (1954), told the story of five college students who plot to rob a casino in Reno. A year later he published The Body Snatchers (later reissued as Invasion of the Body Snatchers), a chilling tale of aliens who emerge from pods in the guise of humans whom they have taken over. Many critics interpreted the insidious infiltration by aliens as a cold-war allegory that dramatized America's fear of a takeover by Communists. Mr. Finney maintained that the novel was nothing more than popular entertainment. The 1956 film Invasion of the Body Snatchers was remade twice.
Mr. Finney first showed an interest in time travel in the short-story collection The Third Level, which included stories about a commuter who discovers a train that runs between New York and the year 1894, and a man who rebuilds an old car and finds himself transported back to the 1920s.
He returned to the thriller genre in Assault on a Queen (1959) and tried his hand at comedy in Good Neighbor Sam (1963), a novel based on his experiences as an adman, played by Jack Lemmon in the film version.
In The Woodrow Wilson Dime (1968), Mr. Finney once again explored the possibilities of time travel. The dime of the title allows the novel's hero to enter a parallel world in which he achieves fame by composing the musicals of Oscar Hammerstein and inventing the zipper.
With Time and Again, Mr. Finney won the kind of critical praise and attention not normally accorded to genre fiction. Thomas Lask, reviewing the novel in The New York Times, described it, suggestively, as "a blend of science fiction, nostalgia, mystery and acid commentary on super-government and its helots." Its hero, Si Morley, is a frustrated advertising artist who jumps at the chance to take part in a secret project that promises to change his life. So it does. He travels back to New York in 1882, moves into the Dakota apartment building on Central Park West and experiences the fabulous ordinariness of a bygone age: its trolleys, horse-drawn carriages, elevated lines, and gaslights. This year Mr. Finney published a sequel to the novel, From Time to Time.
Mr. Finney also wrote Marion's Wall (1973), about a silent-film actress who, in an attempt to revive her film career, enters the body of a shy woman, and The Night People (1977). His other fictional works include The House of Numbers (1957) and the short-story collection I Love Galesburg in the Springtime (1963). He also wrote Forgotten News: The Crime of the Century and Other Lost Stories (1983) about sensational events of the 19th century.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 462 reviews
February 18, 2023
This is a reread. As best as I can recall, I first read this book in the mid to late 1990s. One sentence from the book got stuck in my head. More precisely, I should probably say my personal revision of that sentence got stuck in my brain, as I didn't accurately remember the sentence word for word or even thought for thought. I do choose to believe that I did remember the gist. The sentence was: "We [i.e., Simon and Julia] sat against the dark carved wood of the great bedstead, snug under a thick quilt, in our nightgowns; I'd long since and absolutely refused to wear a nightcap, cold as it could get when the coals in the fireplace across the room burned out."
What I remembered was that a time traveler went back to the past to marry and live with the love of his life, and that he refused to wear a hat to bed no matter how cold it got. Recently, I'd recall this memory on cold nights, and I'd say to myself, "Personally, I'd rather wear a hat than be cold."
I vaguely remembered that Simon had worked for a government financed agency. I inaccurately recalled that Simon was the only person who had successfully traveled back and forth in time. I now know that there were a small number who had (or who had claimed they had) traveled through time. Also, I now know there were at least three people who were adept at time travel (Simon Morley, John McNaughton, and Helen Metzner). Simon, John, and Helen all have a role to play in From Time to Time, and the goodness of their intentions doesn't necessarily determine the outcome.
When I originally read From Time to Time, I would have given it a rating of 5, and I have always remembered this book as one of my all-time favorites. Why am I now giving it a 4? What has changed? I originally read this as a stand-alone book, but now I reread it as the sequel to Time and Again. Before, I didn't know Julia. Now I do. In my view, From Time to Time snubs Julia. It reduces Julia from an active co-conspirator to a loving housewife who passively waits at home.
In Time and Again, Julia shared the adventure. She faced the danger. She stood shoulder to shoulder next to Si. She became a fellow time traveler with Si. In From Time to Time, Julia should have gone back to the future with Si. Si and Julia should have taken on Si's new assignment together.
Oh no, you cry! Who would have taken care of Willy and Rover? Aunt Ada, of course.
It wouldn't work, you claim. What about Helen Metzner, the Jotta Girl? Could anyone really believe Helen's sexual advances towards Si would have been less interesting if Julia had been present to witness them? Personally, I miss the fireworks that Julia would have provided.
Oh, if I could only go back in time! I would ask Jack Finney a question. I'd say, "You had Si narrate Time and Again. Why not have Julia narrate From Time to Time? Remember the fire in the first book? Now imagine the fires Julia could ignite inthe sequel."
Sadly, I'll never have a chance to talk to Jack Finney, but I can talk to you if you'll give me a few more minutes. The first thing I'd tell you is that the Point of View jumps around a bit during the first few chapters, but all that settles down by chapter 6. Secondly, chapter 5 is a bitch, but it's important. Chapter 5 will tell you: (1) How Simon Morley knew The Project had sprung back to life and was now operational again. (2) How Simon Morley knew that E.E. Danziger had come back to life.
After you read chapter 5 you won't be surprised that Si decides he has to go back to the future. (Back to the Future? Where have I heard that phrase before?)
I won't give away the mission Si goes on. Nor will I tell you the outcome other than to say that Dr D was right. (In more ways than even he realized.)
I don't know, maybe I should have given this book a 5 rating after all.
What I remembered was that a time traveler went back to the past to marry and live with the love of his life, and that he refused to wear a hat to bed no matter how cold it got. Recently, I'd recall this memory on cold nights, and I'd say to myself, "Personally, I'd rather wear a hat than be cold."
I vaguely remembered that Simon had worked for a government financed agency. I inaccurately recalled that Simon was the only person who had successfully traveled back and forth in time. I now know that there were a small number who had (or who had claimed they had) traveled through time. Also, I now know there were at least three people who were adept at time travel (Simon Morley, John McNaughton, and Helen Metzner). Simon, John, and Helen all have a role to play in From Time to Time, and the goodness of their intentions doesn't necessarily determine the outcome.
When I originally read From Time to Time, I would have given it a rating of 5, and I have always remembered this book as one of my all-time favorites. Why am I now giving it a 4? What has changed? I originally read this as a stand-alone book, but now I reread it as the sequel to Time and Again. Before, I didn't know Julia. Now I do. In my view, From Time to Time snubs Julia. It reduces Julia from an active co-conspirator to a loving housewife who passively waits at home.
In Time and Again, Julia shared the adventure. She faced the danger. She stood shoulder to shoulder next to Si. She became a fellow time traveler with Si. In From Time to Time, Julia should have gone back to the future with Si. Si and Julia should have taken on Si's new assignment together.
Oh no, you cry! Who would have taken care of Willy and Rover? Aunt Ada, of course.
It wouldn't work, you claim. What about Helen Metzner, the Jotta Girl? Could anyone really believe Helen's sexual advances towards Si would have been less interesting if Julia had been present to witness them? Personally, I miss the fireworks that Julia would have provided.
Oh, if I could only go back in time! I would ask Jack Finney a question. I'd say, "You had Si narrate Time and Again. Why not have Julia narrate From Time to Time? Remember the fire in the first book? Now imagine the fires Julia could ignite inthe sequel."
Sadly, I'll never have a chance to talk to Jack Finney, but I can talk to you if you'll give me a few more minutes. The first thing I'd tell you is that the Point of View jumps around a bit during the first few chapters, but all that settles down by chapter 6. Secondly, chapter 5 is a bitch, but it's important. Chapter 5 will tell you: (1) How Simon Morley knew The Project had sprung back to life and was now operational again. (2) How Simon Morley knew that E.E. Danziger had come back to life.
After you read chapter 5 you won't be surprised that Si decides he has to go back to the future. (Back to the Future? Where have I heard that phrase before?)
I won't give away the mission Si goes on. Nor will I tell you the outcome other than to say that Dr D was right. (In more ways than even he realized.)
I don't know, maybe I should have given this book a 5 rating after all.
May 21, 2012
From Time to Time is an uneven and disappointing sequel to the tremendous novel Time and Again. As a book, it isn't awful, but in comparison it is an outright flop because it never really delivers on its promises.
Simon Morley is a time traveler. He worked on a secret government project in modern times (which in the first novel was the 1970s) which experimented with time travel, and Simon was successful in traveling to the late 1800s. He met a woman and decided to stay there, so we find Simon with his wife and new son living in a by-gone era. He has acted in a way to prevent the birth of one of the project's founders, and in doing so breaking the gateway to return "home."
This is when things start to get confusing. Simon has a feeling he's being called back to modern times and decides to go back one last time. Once there, he meets an old friend and finds out that he has NOT prevented the founder's birth as he thought, and that unexplained time lapses exist in the memories of many people all over the world. (One remembers Kennedy's second term, another recalls seeing the Titanic dock in New York, etc.) Simon is instructed to go back in time and see that a man, known only as Z, successfully travels from America to Europe and then back again with documents that will prevent WWI from ever happening.
Sounds great, right? But wait! We interrupt your regularly scheduled programming to bring you the first days of flight and jewels of vaudeville. Here, the author tours us around New York of the 1910s, but unlike the bus tour in the first novel which was charming and entertaining, this overview seems random and disjointed from the action of the book.
What is worse, the conclusion of the book, which boasts of scenes on the Titanic, is miniscule and disappointing, with an outcome as satisfying as saying, "And then he woke up and realized it was all a dream."
If you read this for the descriptions and not the story, you might have a lot of fun, but this book pales in comparison to the first.
Simon Morley is a time traveler. He worked on a secret government project in modern times (which in the first novel was the 1970s) which experimented with time travel, and Simon was successful in traveling to the late 1800s. He met a woman and decided to stay there, so we find Simon with his wife and new son living in a by-gone era. He has acted in a way to prevent the birth of one of the project's founders, and in doing so breaking the gateway to return "home."
This is when things start to get confusing. Simon has a feeling he's being called back to modern times and decides to go back one last time. Once there, he meets an old friend and finds out that he has NOT prevented the founder's birth as he thought, and that unexplained time lapses exist in the memories of many people all over the world. (One remembers Kennedy's second term, another recalls seeing the Titanic dock in New York, etc.) Simon is instructed to go back in time and see that a man, known only as Z, successfully travels from America to Europe and then back again with documents that will prevent WWI from ever happening.
Sounds great, right? But wait! We interrupt your regularly scheduled programming to bring you the first days of flight and jewels of vaudeville. Here, the author tours us around New York of the 1910s, but unlike the bus tour in the first novel which was charming and entertaining, this overview seems random and disjointed from the action of the book.
What is worse, the conclusion of the book, which boasts of scenes on the Titanic, is miniscule and disappointing, with an outcome as satisfying as saying, "And then he woke up and realized it was all a dream."
If you read this for the descriptions and not the story, you might have a lot of fun, but this book pales in comparison to the first.
February 3, 2013
While it is clear, at least to me, that the characters wrote the book Time and Again, sadly, the sequel did not live up to the magic and wonder of the first book. The good news is that this was a relatively short book and it fulfilled not only the monthly tag, it gave me a chance to read a sequel to a book I enjoyed a lot.
Now the bad news. I'm not sure if it was Jack Finney's editor who had the idea to put out a sequel twenty-five years later or Jack himself that loved the time period and wanted to visit it one last time before his death shortly after he completed the book. The end result is not a pretty one. The book felt disjointed in several places, it certainly did not have the flow that the first book did. The book dragged in many, many places and I wondered why on earth Jack Finney felt the need to go on and on about certain things in the book while at other times he rehashed the same things from the first book that only needed a paragraph to remind the audience about (for example The Project and Simon Morley).
There are old photographs in this one as well but again, the magic is just not in this book at all and I felt myself just want to get through the book. Never a good sign!
Now the bad news. I'm not sure if it was Jack Finney's editor who had the idea to put out a sequel twenty-five years later or Jack himself that loved the time period and wanted to visit it one last time before his death shortly after he completed the book. The end result is not a pretty one. The book felt disjointed in several places, it certainly did not have the flow that the first book did. The book dragged in many, many places and I wondered why on earth Jack Finney felt the need to go on and on about certain things in the book while at other times he rehashed the same things from the first book that only needed a paragraph to remind the audience about (for example The Project and Simon Morley).
There are old photographs in this one as well but again, the magic is just not in this book at all and I felt myself just want to get through the book. Never a good sign!
June 8, 2014
I was a little apprehensive about reading this sequel to because I loved the way that book ended and I didn’t want anything to change for Si Morley. What I found in this book is the same wonderful detailed descriptive writing and that I was lured into another time in New York City. Finney definitely had a way of making you see exactly what Si was seeing and what he was feeling.
Si returns to his present day in the 1990’s from the time and place he has made home for the last four years � New York City of the 1880’s. He is lured into taking another time trip. This time it is back to 1912, with a plan to change the course of history by stopping WW I.
We get an amazing view of New York City in 1912 � the dance halls, the vaudeville stage, the clothes, and especially the people. However, in the middle of the book, I thought it lost a little steam, but the touching moment when Si sees the vaudeville act of Tessie and Ted brought it back for me. I was so taken by what Finney had done here. There are also wonderful photographs and sketches that I’m sure would have been much clearer in the paper version, but even on my kindle, they just helped to bring you where Si was. You even get to be on the Titanic.
I loved the story because I fell in love with SI in and because Finney pulls you so into the time and place that you almost believe that time travel is possible. The writing is that good! But it did happen - didn’t it? I travelled with SI Morley. So did it meet up to how I felt about the first? I wanted more of the story, but it was pretty darn close so it’s 4.5 stars.
( I was really glad to read this along with my very good GoodReads Friend TamElaine. )
Si returns to his present day in the 1990’s from the time and place he has made home for the last four years � New York City of the 1880’s. He is lured into taking another time trip. This time it is back to 1912, with a plan to change the course of history by stopping WW I.
We get an amazing view of New York City in 1912 � the dance halls, the vaudeville stage, the clothes, and especially the people. However, in the middle of the book, I thought it lost a little steam, but the touching moment when Si sees the vaudeville act of Tessie and Ted brought it back for me. I was so taken by what Finney had done here. There are also wonderful photographs and sketches that I’m sure would have been much clearer in the paper version, but even on my kindle, they just helped to bring you where Si was. You even get to be on the Titanic.
I loved the story because I fell in love with SI in and because Finney pulls you so into the time and place that you almost believe that time travel is possible. The writing is that good! But it did happen - didn’t it? I travelled with SI Morley. So did it meet up to how I felt about the first? I wanted more of the story, but it was pretty darn close so it’s 4.5 stars.
( I was really glad to read this along with my very good GoodReads Friend TamElaine. )
January 21, 2015
A very disappointing sequel--gone was the charm of Time and Again. You get the impression Finney was pressured by his publisher to write a sequel twenty-five years later but had no idea where to go with it. I liked Si a lot less too, with his relentless search for 'Tessie and Ted' and the very dull chapter on vaudeville that seemed like mere filler.
June 24, 2024
An alternative title for this novel could have easily been “Sightseeing and Things to Do in New York When You Are Travelling to the Past While Patiently and Leisurely Waiting to Change the Course of History� (but, for some reason, I don’t think that one would have stuck).
I consider Jack Finney’s opening novel to this two-part series, Time and Again, to easily be one of my favorite reads from the past few years. It captured the wonder, enchantment, and magic of being transported to the past with Simon (Si) Morley as its protagonist. I preface this because its second half in the series, From Time to Time, just didn’t live up to the billing or power of the first book.
I feel like this book gets a little too confused and “lost in itself� and this results in being uneven and unfocused.
The novel begins with Simon Morley happily living in the 19th century with wife Julia and their child. In the present time, however, a man named Rube wants someone to use the “gateway� (a portal to a different time period) to go back and get Si to prevent World War I.
One thing Finney seems to bring to the table is imaginative and creative scenarios, whether that being time travel or a character out of their element. For example, a regular empty building can seemingly become a portal to another time period. Also, as always, Finney has vivid descriptions of settings in the past and illustrative ways of entering into a new time or place.
That being said, here everything feels “false as advertised� and this becomes glaringly obvious after the first one hundred pages or so. It’s here where the urgency of Si’s quest to find a mysterious guy known as “Z� takes a major shift and detour and becomes unfocused as Si, instead of actively pursuing this individual, gives us a guided tour of New York and its many places and attractions. For example, there is a 20-page description of vaudeville actors going on about their job and performers they know.
All the tension and build up and urgency from the first book is not there. The book stalls and loses momentum. (It’s like Finney had a bad case of writer’s block and just went with whatever came to mind). Too many asides about trivial stuff.
Si does end up meeting a woman who he calls “The Jotta Girl� and they go on a few excursions and meet some people. And I suppose she is somewhat relevant to the plot, but the book mostly becomes a tad of a chore to finish.
There is a blurb on my edition mentioning the Titanic as part of the plot, but this makes up a very tiny section of the novel.
I did like some parts of Finney’s actual writing here, and have loved some of his other works like “The Body Snatchers� as well as the first installment in this series, but From Time to Time, while not entirely bad, was fairly a pedestrian novel.
I consider Jack Finney’s opening novel to this two-part series, Time and Again, to easily be one of my favorite reads from the past few years. It captured the wonder, enchantment, and magic of being transported to the past with Simon (Si) Morley as its protagonist. I preface this because its second half in the series, From Time to Time, just didn’t live up to the billing or power of the first book.
I feel like this book gets a little too confused and “lost in itself� and this results in being uneven and unfocused.
The novel begins with Simon Morley happily living in the 19th century with wife Julia and their child. In the present time, however, a man named Rube wants someone to use the “gateway� (a portal to a different time period) to go back and get Si to prevent World War I.
One thing Finney seems to bring to the table is imaginative and creative scenarios, whether that being time travel or a character out of their element. For example, a regular empty building can seemingly become a portal to another time period. Also, as always, Finney has vivid descriptions of settings in the past and illustrative ways of entering into a new time or place.
That being said, here everything feels “false as advertised� and this becomes glaringly obvious after the first one hundred pages or so. It’s here where the urgency of Si’s quest to find a mysterious guy known as “Z� takes a major shift and detour and becomes unfocused as Si, instead of actively pursuing this individual, gives us a guided tour of New York and its many places and attractions. For example, there is a 20-page description of vaudeville actors going on about their job and performers they know.
All the tension and build up and urgency from the first book is not there. The book stalls and loses momentum. (It’s like Finney had a bad case of writer’s block and just went with whatever came to mind). Too many asides about trivial stuff.
Si does end up meeting a woman who he calls “The Jotta Girl� and they go on a few excursions and meet some people. And I suppose she is somewhat relevant to the plot, but the book mostly becomes a tad of a chore to finish.
There is a blurb on my edition mentioning the Titanic as part of the plot, but this makes up a very tiny section of the novel.
I did like some parts of Finney’s actual writing here, and have loved some of his other works like “The Body Snatchers� as well as the first installment in this series, but From Time to Time, while not entirely bad, was fairly a pedestrian novel.
May 28, 2017
Ah, the good old days without all that nasty feminism. Of course it's better to live a hundred years ago, when there wasn't pollution except from all the fires and the horse poop, and when pregnancy was quite likely to kill the girl of your dreams, if some other disease for which she's never been vaccinated doesn't.
Pleh.
Pleh.
February 23, 2023
Having read and loved Time and Again and discussing this one recently on GR I decided it was time to read it.
You need a lot of patience reading this book. It's very detailed. The descriptions are fantastic and this is what the book is, a descriptive novel. I've never visited New York and never will but Finney took me down old New York streets and I could see everything and almost smell the air. He's wonderful at drawing you in to the book and there lies the rub, there really isn't much of a story. Simon Morley is supposedly gone back, or forward, whichever way you look at it, to try and stop World War I from happening. Nothing to do with this mission happens until the end of the book. He spends his time in 1911 wandering around, meeting people, attending parties and going to a tedious Vaudeville show which we are treated to with minute description. The author was also obsessed with what people wore and the moment we met anyone we immediately were informed of their apparel.
There's a big thing in the synopsis about the fact the man carrying the secret papers travels on the Titanic and any mention of this ship always attracts me. I was disappointed. It hardly featured at all and what there was of it did nothing for the story.
However, I did enjoy the writing and other than the couple of drawn out boring chapters, it kept me reading.
His short story collections are better.
You need a lot of patience reading this book. It's very detailed. The descriptions are fantastic and this is what the book is, a descriptive novel. I've never visited New York and never will but Finney took me down old New York streets and I could see everything and almost smell the air. He's wonderful at drawing you in to the book and there lies the rub, there really isn't much of a story. Simon Morley is supposedly gone back, or forward, whichever way you look at it, to try and stop World War I from happening. Nothing to do with this mission happens until the end of the book. He spends his time in 1911 wandering around, meeting people, attending parties and going to a tedious Vaudeville show which we are treated to with minute description. The author was also obsessed with what people wore and the moment we met anyone we immediately were informed of their apparel.
There's a big thing in the synopsis about the fact the man carrying the secret papers travels on the Titanic and any mention of this ship always attracts me. I was disappointed. It hardly featured at all and what there was of it did nothing for the story.
However, I did enjoy the writing and other than the couple of drawn out boring chapters, it kept me reading.
His short story collections are better.
December 7, 2014
Unfortunately, this sequel cannot compare to . While I whipped right through the 1st third of the book, the storyline quite suddenly loses its focus giving detailed descriptions of the vaudeville era which have nothing to do with the plot. The end does pick up a bit, but I must admit to being disappointed so little time was spent on the Titanic. There are some great old black and white photo's of the early 1900's as you read along, and I love the time travel aspect of the book, but not enough to recommend this one.
January 30, 2012
In reading the acknowledgements in Stephen King thanks Jack Finney for his time travel novel . That reminded me that I had never got around to reading the sequel.. Ugh. It was not very good. I wish Jack would have stopped at Simon Morley's first time traveling adventure which is a classic. Inconsistent is the only way I can describe this book. Some things were barely mentioned yet vaudeville which isn't even that crucial to the story receives the attention of many many pages. Find another time travel book to read and skip this one.
March 23, 2011
A semi-great time travel novel, Time and Again, was followed up with this-certifiably one of the worst books I have ever read.
The action begins with Ruben Prien recovering memories of the time travel project he was working on, a project that disappeared when Si Morley changed history at the end of Time and Again. Prien finds another person who had time-traveled successfully; the traveler goes back to 1882 and stops Simon from stopping the creator of the project from being born. Are you with me?
A concerned Simon goes back to the present (1975 in the book) to see what shenanigans Ruben and the boys are up to. The novel heads downhill from there. Ruben recruits him to stop World War I from ever occurring. And how does he do this? He has him go back to 1912 to stalk "Z" a mystery member of President Taft's cabinet, in order to find out his identity. Simon does so-and stalks Z for pages upon detailed pages. Then once he finds out that Z is Archibald Butt, he returns to 1975 to give Ruben this info, to which Rube says "you and I must've been the only two people who didn't know that." GAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Once again, we get an "AHA! I knew it all along!" moment.
Anyway, Finney's idea is that the sinking of the Titanic set off the series of events that started WW I. Why? Because Archibald Butt was returning from a summit with European powers and carrying memos to Taft. Butt died in the sinking of the Titanic and was never able to get the news from the summit to Taft. So Finney actually believed that the sinking of the Titanic led to World War I. Uh, what? If I were Ruben Prien I'd have sent Si to stop the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, but that's just me.
So Si goes back and we get copious details of every little nook and cranny of the Titanic. He also meets another time traveler he called the "Jotta Girl."
One thing I remember about it-I was reading it while working at a hotel in California. People would ask me "what are you reading?" I would tell them "a book about a guy who goes back in time to try and stop World War I." And they'd look at me like I had three heads.
I will give Jack Finney credit-he was a gifted and funny writer. But "FTTT" was not one of his better works. In fact, if I may be allowed to use the word here...it sucked.
The action begins with Ruben Prien recovering memories of the time travel project he was working on, a project that disappeared when Si Morley changed history at the end of Time and Again. Prien finds another person who had time-traveled successfully; the traveler goes back to 1882 and stops Simon from stopping the creator of the project from being born. Are you with me?
A concerned Simon goes back to the present (1975 in the book) to see what shenanigans Ruben and the boys are up to. The novel heads downhill from there. Ruben recruits him to stop World War I from ever occurring. And how does he do this? He has him go back to 1912 to stalk "Z" a mystery member of President Taft's cabinet, in order to find out his identity. Simon does so-and stalks Z for pages upon detailed pages. Then once he finds out that Z is Archibald Butt, he returns to 1975 to give Ruben this info, to which Rube says "you and I must've been the only two people who didn't know that." GAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Once again, we get an "AHA! I knew it all along!" moment.
Anyway, Finney's idea is that the sinking of the Titanic set off the series of events that started WW I. Why? Because Archibald Butt was returning from a summit with European powers and carrying memos to Taft. Butt died in the sinking of the Titanic and was never able to get the news from the summit to Taft. So Finney actually believed that the sinking of the Titanic led to World War I. Uh, what? If I were Ruben Prien I'd have sent Si to stop the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, but that's just me.
So Si goes back and we get copious details of every little nook and cranny of the Titanic. He also meets another time traveler he called the "Jotta Girl."
One thing I remember about it-I was reading it while working at a hotel in California. People would ask me "what are you reading?" I would tell them "a book about a guy who goes back in time to try and stop World War I." And they'd look at me like I had three heads.
I will give Jack Finney credit-he was a gifted and funny writer. But "FTTT" was not one of his better works. In fact, if I may be allowed to use the word here...it sucked.
October 12, 2013
This is the sequel to Time and Again, featuring time-traveler Si Morley now living in the 1880s with his wife and their young son. He returns to the present/future to speak with those who would be working at The Project (the time-travel experiment that originally recruited Si, but whose organization he prevented from forming in the previous book), and Si is again recruited by the men he once knew. This time, they want him to go back to 1912 and prevent WWI from occurring by ensuring that a mysterious figure only known by the nickname of "Z" is identified and produces a document that could prevent the outbreak of war.
I really, really liked the way this book began, with a society forming in present day to discuss its members' finds: various memories - and occasionally physical proof - of an alternate history that seems to exist alongside the one that others lived/remembered. For example, one member remembers JFK's second term (and even has a campaign button from it)... but he also remembers the JFK assassination. I loved the idea that these two histories were somehow existing side by side, and I loved the idea that there was a society devoted to investigating this.
Unfortunately, this storyline seemed to evaporate into nothing once Si's new task of going back (forward?) in time was introduced. From that point forward, the book focused almost exclusively on Si wandering the streets of New York City in 1912. As with Time and Again, old photos and etchings were included to illustrate the story, and I enjoyed getting this glimpse into 1912 NYC. As an old travel guide, this was stellar. Si's story, on the other hand, seemed to meander along slowly, filled with more than a few stories about various vaudeville acts he sees while waiting to figure out who "Z" is. These descriptions got old and kinda of boring, since they didn't seem to advance the plot any.
As for characters, Si seemed like an especially weak main character in this follow-up novel. He wasn't perfect in the previous novel, but in this one, he seemed weaker and less likable. He meets a woman named Helen soon after arriving in 1912 New York, but he refuses to call her by her real name and instead nicknames her "the Jotta Girl" - the only name he then refers to her as, in either description or dialogue. In the end, I liked her story, but the dynamic between her and Si was grating. While Si's married and claims nothing could ever come between him and his wife, he's overwhelmed with attraction to the Jotta Girl and can't help but kiss her because, obviously, he's irresistible to her. It made me sigh. Like I said, he was a weak character in this follow-up.
The dust jacket for this book mentions that Si eventually needs to stop the Titanic from sinking - a plot I kept waiting to be introduced... but the Titanic wasn't even mentioned until the last 50 pages of the novel. A lot of vaudeville happened in the meantime. And when the Titanic plot began, it was over almost as quick as it started; vaudeville got more page time than what should have been this supposedly big plot point. The ending felt rushed, and I don't even feel like I fully understood what happened in the very end. That's follow with a short chapter about where he ended up, with no description of how.
This book was about half the length of the previous one, and it was also half (if that!) as satisfying. I felt like interesting plot points were ignored instead of being further explored and that things that should have been glossed over were described in too much detail. The book as a whole did not feel balanced, and the first half of the book was overwhelmingly better than the second half. Although I liked parts of this book, I was disappointed overall. I kind of wish I'd just left the characters where they were at the end of Time and Again.
I really, really liked the way this book began, with a society forming in present day to discuss its members' finds: various memories - and occasionally physical proof - of an alternate history that seems to exist alongside the one that others lived/remembered. For example, one member remembers JFK's second term (and even has a campaign button from it)... but he also remembers the JFK assassination. I loved the idea that these two histories were somehow existing side by side, and I loved the idea that there was a society devoted to investigating this.
Unfortunately, this storyline seemed to evaporate into nothing once Si's new task of going back (forward?) in time was introduced. From that point forward, the book focused almost exclusively on Si wandering the streets of New York City in 1912. As with Time and Again, old photos and etchings were included to illustrate the story, and I enjoyed getting this glimpse into 1912 NYC. As an old travel guide, this was stellar. Si's story, on the other hand, seemed to meander along slowly, filled with more than a few stories about various vaudeville acts he sees while waiting to figure out who "Z" is. These descriptions got old and kinda of boring, since they didn't seem to advance the plot any.
As for characters, Si seemed like an especially weak main character in this follow-up novel. He wasn't perfect in the previous novel, but in this one, he seemed weaker and less likable. He meets a woman named Helen soon after arriving in 1912 New York, but he refuses to call her by her real name and instead nicknames her "the Jotta Girl" - the only name he then refers to her as, in either description or dialogue. In the end, I liked her story, but the dynamic between her and Si was grating. While Si's married and claims nothing could ever come between him and his wife, he's overwhelmed with attraction to the Jotta Girl and can't help but kiss her because, obviously, he's irresistible to her. It made me sigh. Like I said, he was a weak character in this follow-up.
The dust jacket for this book mentions that Si eventually needs to stop the Titanic from sinking - a plot I kept waiting to be introduced... but the Titanic wasn't even mentioned until the last 50 pages of the novel. A lot of vaudeville happened in the meantime. And when the Titanic plot began, it was over almost as quick as it started; vaudeville got more page time than what should have been this supposedly big plot point. The ending felt rushed, and I don't even feel like I fully understood what happened in the very end. That's follow with a short chapter about where he ended up, with no description of how.
This book was about half the length of the previous one, and it was also half (if that!) as satisfying. I felt like interesting plot points were ignored instead of being further explored and that things that should have been glossed over were described in too much detail. The book as a whole did not feel balanced, and the first half of the book was overwhelmingly better than the second half. Although I liked parts of this book, I was disappointed overall. I kind of wish I'd just left the characters where they were at the end of Time and Again.
April 13, 2012
No one loves Jack Finney more than I do. I read Time and Again so many times I can still visualize the snow and the cold and the Dakota when the hero goes back to 1880s New York...but I digress. Here we are discussing Mr. Finney's follow-up to his extraordinary novel called From Time to Time.
Let me say this up front. The only reason I didn't give the book five stars is because I expected more of the Titanic and the grand ship doesn't show up until page 279. From then on, we're at the races until that fateful moment when the ship founders. The beginning of the story up to that point shows Simon's (the time-traveling hero) attempts to change history by warning one of the first class passengers and trying to save his life. I shan't spoil it for you, but it's an excellent story with twists and turns and filled with the gala and ragtime of 1912 New York.
I must admit playing the part of time-traveler myself when I wrote Titanic Rhapsody, my Titanic romance, when my hero, Captain Lord Jack Blackthorn, plays poker in the smoking room with the same character Simon is trying to save.
All in all, if you enjoy time travel, nobody does it better than Jack Finney.
Let me say this up front. The only reason I didn't give the book five stars is because I expected more of the Titanic and the grand ship doesn't show up until page 279. From then on, we're at the races until that fateful moment when the ship founders. The beginning of the story up to that point shows Simon's (the time-traveling hero) attempts to change history by warning one of the first class passengers and trying to save his life. I shan't spoil it for you, but it's an excellent story with twists and turns and filled with the gala and ragtime of 1912 New York.
I must admit playing the part of time-traveler myself when I wrote Titanic Rhapsody, my Titanic romance, when my hero, Captain Lord Jack Blackthorn, plays poker in the smoking room with the same character Simon is trying to save.
All in all, if you enjoy time travel, nobody does it better than Jack Finney.
October 6, 2012
I was a big fan of Finney's "Time and Again" but I was hesitant to read the sequel because I didn't see a good reason why there needed to be one. "Time and Again" had a nice tidy conclusion that I found to be both unexpected and satisfying. I didn't want it to be ruined by a sequel that was written many years later.
However, much like with "Time and Again", I immediately got sucked into "From Time to Time". I found the beginning of the novel to be captivating and fresh. Unfortunately, I felt that it went steadily downhill from there. The events in the time travel portion of the story itself felt somewhat forced, very coincidental and, to be honest, a lot like they just revolved around Finney's desire to recreate the history of the Titanic. The biggest disappointment for me was that the very storyline that I found so interesting at the beginning of the novel was never revisited as the story progressed nor given a proper conclusion.
I'd still recommend Finney to anyone interested in reading a novel about time travel, but I'd suggest that you stick with "Time and Again" and skip "From Time to Time" unless you are interested in reading it for its value as a period piece.
However, much like with "Time and Again", I immediately got sucked into "From Time to Time". I found the beginning of the novel to be captivating and fresh. Unfortunately, I felt that it went steadily downhill from there. The events in the time travel portion of the story itself felt somewhat forced, very coincidental and, to be honest, a lot like they just revolved around Finney's desire to recreate the history of the Titanic. The biggest disappointment for me was that the very storyline that I found so interesting at the beginning of the novel was never revisited as the story progressed nor given a proper conclusion.
I'd still recommend Finney to anyone interested in reading a novel about time travel, but I'd suggest that you stick with "Time and Again" and skip "From Time to Time" unless you are interested in reading it for its value as a period piece.
July 20, 2016
Having enjoyed two previous Jack Finney novels in quick succession, I came to this one thinking he was underappreciated. This sequel to
Time and Again
seemed just the thing to tackle next. I found it to be clearly a product of the same author, but unfortunately this installment doubles down on the weaknesses of the first title without offering anything new.
As in book one (and, come to think of it, as in H.G. Wells' A Modern Utopia ), the premise is that it's possible (at least for Si Morley and one or two other gifted people) to transition from one point in time to another simply via something akin to an act of will--because bygone times coexist with the present, in the sense that other physical places coexist. What's needed is to research the target era in depth, remove all evidence that you’re inhabiting the one you're in, and then expectantly step forth. If I wanted to be difficult, I would wonder why a similar act of will does not enable people to teleport themselves to other locations (say, from modern-day New York to modern-day Beijing). On the level of the plot, I also wondered, at the conclusion of Time and Again, how Si and Julia got away with returning to 1882 without again being arrested by Inspector Byrns. But the willing suspension of disbelief comes in when a reader doesn't want to pick at loose threads like that because it's more fun to go along for the ride.
Alas, in this book, there really wasn't much of a ride at all, despite a beginning with great potential.
Book one raised the specter of unforeseen outcomes for the present world if even minor changes are introduced in the past. This story begins with a sort of Meetup gathering for the purpose of discussing an unexplained phenomenon: Some folks have memory or knowledge of parallel, mutually exclusive events. It's known of that Kennedy was assassinated in his first term, for example, but there's also evidence he ran for re-election. It's known that the Titanic sank on her maiden voyage, but there's also a detailed eye-witness account of her arrival in New York. More to the point, because of an action Si took at the conclusion of book one, the hush-hush time-travel "Project" of which he'd been a part has never existed; and yet some of Si's former colleagues at the Project persist in having confused memories about it. In other words, changes introduced in the past actually lead to alternate, coexisting timelines that sort of overlap.
That is a concept that could have made a great story! (Imagine living in a scenario you don't like and discovering a much better one that's also under way. Now there's a transition I could go for.)
Instead of building on that, the author has another time-traveler go back to 1882 and prevent Si from making his change, thereby restoring the original sequence of events, including the Project. Then, for no discernable reason, given that he is very happy with a new family in his adopted era, Si returns to the modern day and accepts another assignment. Now he's supposed to hop back to 1912 and prevent the First World War from occurring, and/or prevent the Titanic from sinking.
But those quixotic endeavors never acquire much urgency, in his mind or in the story. They simply provide an excuse for more of the detailed travelogue-type descriptions of New York life in bygone times. As in the previous book, the narrator presents several grainy old photos (lifted from historical archives) as if he'd snapped them in the course of his wanderings.
The H.G. Wells title mentioned above probably came to mind because the mostly rosy depictions of life in 1912 (and, in the earlier book, 1882) almost place these books in the genre of utopian writings. Finney isn't holding up the past as a lost utopia, but he is definitely suggesting that we may have lost more than we gained in moving on. (WWI and the sinking of the Titanic are viewed as having contributed to that loss, and hence the endeavor to head off those events.)
All this may have merit. But in comparison with what might've been done with the author's material, the story he ended up with feels like an abdication. I wish he'd handled it much differently.
As in book one (and, come to think of it, as in H.G. Wells' A Modern Utopia ), the premise is that it's possible (at least for Si Morley and one or two other gifted people) to transition from one point in time to another simply via something akin to an act of will--because bygone times coexist with the present, in the sense that other physical places coexist. What's needed is to research the target era in depth, remove all evidence that you’re inhabiting the one you're in, and then expectantly step forth. If I wanted to be difficult, I would wonder why a similar act of will does not enable people to teleport themselves to other locations (say, from modern-day New York to modern-day Beijing). On the level of the plot, I also wondered, at the conclusion of Time and Again, how Si and Julia got away with returning to 1882 without again being arrested by Inspector Byrns. But the willing suspension of disbelief comes in when a reader doesn't want to pick at loose threads like that because it's more fun to go along for the ride.
Alas, in this book, there really wasn't much of a ride at all, despite a beginning with great potential.
Book one raised the specter of unforeseen outcomes for the present world if even minor changes are introduced in the past. This story begins with a sort of Meetup gathering for the purpose of discussing an unexplained phenomenon: Some folks have memory or knowledge of parallel, mutually exclusive events. It's known of that Kennedy was assassinated in his first term, for example, but there's also evidence he ran for re-election. It's known that the Titanic sank on her maiden voyage, but there's also a detailed eye-witness account of her arrival in New York. More to the point, because of an action Si took at the conclusion of book one, the hush-hush time-travel "Project" of which he'd been a part has never existed; and yet some of Si's former colleagues at the Project persist in having confused memories about it. In other words, changes introduced in the past actually lead to alternate, coexisting timelines that sort of overlap.
That is a concept that could have made a great story! (Imagine living in a scenario you don't like and discovering a much better one that's also under way. Now there's a transition I could go for.)
Instead of building on that, the author has another time-traveler go back to 1882 and prevent Si from making his change, thereby restoring the original sequence of events, including the Project. Then, for no discernable reason, given that he is very happy with a new family in his adopted era, Si returns to the modern day and accepts another assignment. Now he's supposed to hop back to 1912 and prevent the First World War from occurring, and/or prevent the Titanic from sinking.
But those quixotic endeavors never acquire much urgency, in his mind or in the story. They simply provide an excuse for more of the detailed travelogue-type descriptions of New York life in bygone times. As in the previous book, the narrator presents several grainy old photos (lifted from historical archives) as if he'd snapped them in the course of his wanderings.
The H.G. Wells title mentioned above probably came to mind because the mostly rosy depictions of life in 1912 (and, in the earlier book, 1882) almost place these books in the genre of utopian writings. Finney isn't holding up the past as a lost utopia, but he is definitely suggesting that we may have lost more than we gained in moving on. (WWI and the sinking of the Titanic are viewed as having contributed to that loss, and hence the endeavor to head off those events.)
All this may have merit. But in comparison with what might've been done with the author's material, the story he ended up with feels like an abdication. I wish he'd handled it much differently.
October 27, 2018
Twenty five years later - the author, now in his 80s - decides to write a sequel. Why? I confess, I am still curious about the mechanism that they use for time travel. And, of course, the protagonist did change history so what happened to "The Project?"
Without too much retelling of backstory - the author much more clearly articulates the mechanism for time travel this time:
"...find a place that exists in both times unchanged; “Gateways,� he called them. And live in that place which also exists in the time you want to reach—dressing, eating, and thinking the way they did—and presently the ties holding you to the present will relax. Then blank out even the knowledge of these ties through self-hypnosis. And let your knowledge of the time you want to reach come flooding up in your mind. And there—in a Gateway existing in both times—you may, you just may make the transition."
However, by this point the protagonist has figured out other potential gateway locations and is able to just think himself around to different points of time.
Meanwhile, back in the 1970s, there's a team of researchers trying to make sense of historical anomalies -- for example, a world where WWI never happened (and by extension, perhaps WWII but we don't go so far as to talk about killing Hitler).
I'm not quite sure HOW anyone could remember the parallel timelines -- or the possible outcomes -- when our protagonist's interference nullified the birth of the director of the Project. So, how is it that different participants in the Project are now starting to have memories? And how on earth does one of the other time travelers actually stop Simon from changing that event?
It seems like he is tracked down, beaten and then in his mind recalls that event and was too late to stop meeting of the director's parents. That part confused me. And, of course - once they met and history resumed the original course, we go back to Ruben et. al. in "present day" about 4-5 years after the first story. It made no sense to me after several re-readings.
While a bit lessened, it seems the author can't resist his innate sexism and racism. In describing the name of his dog, inserts random comment: "Big black dogs, I’m afraid, are often Nig." And there are an equal number of uses of "girl/s" as "women/woman" -- which is even justified in text, noting that "girl" is not equating women to children, "The English language is hardworking; the meaning of a word can vary by context. And to compare using “girl� for “young woman� with the Southern use of “boy� for a black man is thoughtless, and just plain dumb." Oh, good - we're not being racist just sexist, thanks for clearing that up.
The Bechdel Test failure is ongoing -- Julia and the Jotta Girl being the primary female characters. The protagonist can't even refer to Helen by her name just by "Jotta Girl" from a childhood memory of poorly pronounced song lyric. And then there's ongoing gratuitous objectification of women:
"a pair of more than usually nice-looking young women walked by, glancing over at us, then walking on with just a tiny bit of extra hip-sway, maybe three eighths of an inch. Rube said, “Those are called girls, I think. Or used to be."
Much of the book consists opportunities for the author to wander off and indulge in relatively unimportant period fantasies that are orthogonal to the plot -- like the hyper-fetishistic focus on clothing and "set pieces" around airplanes, vaudeville and the Titanic. I don't even live in New York and could tell you that a building that looked like the prow of a ship would likely be the triangular Flatiron building (you don't need to get in a "hydro plane" to see that).
Now that we don't need elaborate gateways -- I need to be reminded why the protagonist, or even "Jotta Girl" are able to travel in time. What makes them different or special? We certainly don't get a sense of "Jotta Girl" as a special person because she's barely one dimensional.
I recommend "Kindred" for a really good, short time travel story -- it provides rich depth of characters, motive and substantial period description without being a whitewashed homage to "good ole days."
Without too much retelling of backstory - the author much more clearly articulates the mechanism for time travel this time:
"...find a place that exists in both times unchanged; “Gateways,� he called them. And live in that place which also exists in the time you want to reach—dressing, eating, and thinking the way they did—and presently the ties holding you to the present will relax. Then blank out even the knowledge of these ties through self-hypnosis. And let your knowledge of the time you want to reach come flooding up in your mind. And there—in a Gateway existing in both times—you may, you just may make the transition."
However, by this point the protagonist has figured out other potential gateway locations and is able to just think himself around to different points of time.
Meanwhile, back in the 1970s, there's a team of researchers trying to make sense of historical anomalies -- for example, a world where WWI never happened (and by extension, perhaps WWII but we don't go so far as to talk about killing Hitler).
I'm not quite sure HOW anyone could remember the parallel timelines -- or the possible outcomes -- when our protagonist's interference nullified the birth of the director of the Project. So, how is it that different participants in the Project are now starting to have memories? And how on earth does one of the other time travelers actually stop Simon from changing that event?
It seems like he is tracked down, beaten and then in his mind recalls that event and was too late to stop meeting of the director's parents. That part confused me. And, of course - once they met and history resumed the original course, we go back to Ruben et. al. in "present day" about 4-5 years after the first story. It made no sense to me after several re-readings.
While a bit lessened, it seems the author can't resist his innate sexism and racism. In describing the name of his dog, inserts random comment: "Big black dogs, I’m afraid, are often Nig." And there are an equal number of uses of "girl/s" as "women/woman" -- which is even justified in text, noting that "girl" is not equating women to children, "The English language is hardworking; the meaning of a word can vary by context. And to compare using “girl� for “young woman� with the Southern use of “boy� for a black man is thoughtless, and just plain dumb." Oh, good - we're not being racist just sexist, thanks for clearing that up.
The Bechdel Test failure is ongoing -- Julia and the Jotta Girl being the primary female characters. The protagonist can't even refer to Helen by her name just by "Jotta Girl" from a childhood memory of poorly pronounced song lyric. And then there's ongoing gratuitous objectification of women:
"a pair of more than usually nice-looking young women walked by, glancing over at us, then walking on with just a tiny bit of extra hip-sway, maybe three eighths of an inch. Rube said, “Those are called girls, I think. Or used to be."
Much of the book consists opportunities for the author to wander off and indulge in relatively unimportant period fantasies that are orthogonal to the plot -- like the hyper-fetishistic focus on clothing and "set pieces" around airplanes, vaudeville and the Titanic. I don't even live in New York and could tell you that a building that looked like the prow of a ship would likely be the triangular Flatiron building (you don't need to get in a "hydro plane" to see that).
Now that we don't need elaborate gateways -- I need to be reminded why the protagonist, or even "Jotta Girl" are able to travel in time. What makes them different or special? We certainly don't get a sense of "Jotta Girl" as a special person because she's barely one dimensional.
I recommend "Kindred" for a really good, short time travel story -- it provides rich depth of characters, motive and substantial period description without being a whitewashed homage to "good ole days."
December 14, 2011
I read Time and Again back in 1999, and I read it again for book club about 5 years ago. I acquired this sequel at some point in between and finally got around to reading it!
In the first book Si works with some professors and army personnel on The Project and eventually he is one of the few successful people who learned how to time travel. It's a somewhat simple (and yet very complicated) notion related to Einstein's theories of time, that we are harnessed to the here and now by things and our thoughts and the knowledge that now is when we are. If you immerse yourself in another time and eventually truly believe you live in that time, with the help of self-hypnosis, you can be then. In the first book, Si's portal is The Dakota, an apartment building that is in present-day Manhattan and also existed in the 1880s. But now that he has gotten better at it, he doesn't need massive preparations and he can go to the Brooklyn Bridge (actually called the East River Bridge in the 1880s) and go back to "now" (which I assume is still the 1970s although this book was written in 1995 and isn't specific.) He did something kind of bad at the end of the first book and he goes back because he feels guilty and wants to see if what he did has the effect on the future (or present) that he thinks it did.
When back in the present-day, he runs into the army liaison from The Project and he convinced Si that he should do one last trip before heading back to the 1880s for good (he's fallen in love and has a family there.) It's vitally important and ought to be relatively easy considering how momentous it is: prevent WWI. WWI apparently didn't have to happen, could have been averted, and was such a stupid, senseless war that it really shouldn't have been. So off to 1911 Si goes, into the world of vaudeville and the Turkey Trot.
Why on earth there was such a terribly long divergence into vaudeville I surely don't know, other than that the author was intrigued by it and did a lot of research. It's interesting how sometimes we get an overwhelming mass of details and information about things like vaudeville, and other times he'd just mention in passing "though of course I knew, as who didn't, who the sinister and notorious Gerald Montizambert was." (p. 254). Well I've never heard of him. Do I really need a 6-page description of an all-day horse-ride with Theodore Roosevelt, when other things from the past are just tossed off? It felt unbalanced in that.
Also there were a few errors like using "entitled" for "titled" (a big pet peeve of mine), and to me the most difficult to believe (after the whole time travel thing) is that Si, a lifelong New Yorker (I believe, or at least his whole adulthood - I don't remember that detail from the first book all that well) wouldn't recognize what building looks like a ship and "one might sail her up Broadway or the Fifth Avenue." (p. 117). Yes, the Flatiron building didn't exist in the 1880s but he's only been in the 1880s for about 5 years. I've been gone from New York for 7 years and it was glaringly obvious to me. For Pete's sake, it is where Broadway and Fifth Avenue cross! It made me think Si was an idiot.
Overall, the book was fast-paced and intriguing, but it does bog down a bit in vaudeville and I was annoyed that he kept calling (to himself) this woman the Jotta Girl instead of her name, and it was uneven. Also, the long-awaited for scenes on the Titanic, which are teased on the back of the book, are only in the second to last chapter so you have to wait a long, long time for that to pay off! It was nice to see what happened to Si, but it was nowhere near as good as Time and Again, and I'm glad it was short and sweet as it certainly was a trifle.
In the first book Si works with some professors and army personnel on The Project and eventually he is one of the few successful people who learned how to time travel. It's a somewhat simple (and yet very complicated) notion related to Einstein's theories of time, that we are harnessed to the here and now by things and our thoughts and the knowledge that now is when we are. If you immerse yourself in another time and eventually truly believe you live in that time, with the help of self-hypnosis, you can be then. In the first book, Si's portal is The Dakota, an apartment building that is in present-day Manhattan and also existed in the 1880s. But now that he has gotten better at it, he doesn't need massive preparations and he can go to the Brooklyn Bridge (actually called the East River Bridge in the 1880s) and go back to "now" (which I assume is still the 1970s although this book was written in 1995 and isn't specific.) He did something kind of bad at the end of the first book and he goes back because he feels guilty and wants to see if what he did has the effect on the future (or present) that he thinks it did.
When back in the present-day, he runs into the army liaison from The Project and he convinced Si that he should do one last trip before heading back to the 1880s for good (he's fallen in love and has a family there.) It's vitally important and ought to be relatively easy considering how momentous it is: prevent WWI. WWI apparently didn't have to happen, could have been averted, and was such a stupid, senseless war that it really shouldn't have been. So off to 1911 Si goes, into the world of vaudeville and the Turkey Trot.
Why on earth there was such a terribly long divergence into vaudeville I surely don't know, other than that the author was intrigued by it and did a lot of research. It's interesting how sometimes we get an overwhelming mass of details and information about things like vaudeville, and other times he'd just mention in passing "though of course I knew, as who didn't, who the sinister and notorious Gerald Montizambert was." (p. 254). Well I've never heard of him. Do I really need a 6-page description of an all-day horse-ride with Theodore Roosevelt, when other things from the past are just tossed off? It felt unbalanced in that.
Also there were a few errors like using "entitled" for "titled" (a big pet peeve of mine), and to me the most difficult to believe (after the whole time travel thing) is that Si, a lifelong New Yorker (I believe, or at least his whole adulthood - I don't remember that detail from the first book all that well) wouldn't recognize what building looks like a ship and "one might sail her up Broadway or the Fifth Avenue." (p. 117). Yes, the Flatiron building didn't exist in the 1880s but he's only been in the 1880s for about 5 years. I've been gone from New York for 7 years and it was glaringly obvious to me. For Pete's sake, it is where Broadway and Fifth Avenue cross! It made me think Si was an idiot.
Overall, the book was fast-paced and intriguing, but it does bog down a bit in vaudeville and I was annoyed that he kept calling (to himself) this woman the Jotta Girl instead of her name, and it was uneven. Also, the long-awaited for scenes on the Titanic, which are teased on the back of the book, are only in the second to last chapter so you have to wait a long, long time for that to pay off! It was nice to see what happened to Si, but it was nowhere near as good as Time and Again, and I'm glad it was short and sweet as it certainly was a trifle.
September 4, 2014
The reviews I've read of this book are pretty evenly split: love it and hate it. Most think the earlier time travel novel by the same author, Time and Again, much superior. I'm a little stuck on this one. The book is ok, though it really isn't as impactful as the first. The plot is clever and there's a good twist or two towards the end. But, and it's a big but, having read the earlier book this does very much follow the same pattern: lots of pictures (which if you've read the Time and Again 'afterward' you now know is simply a series of snaps picked up from random sources, not even necessarily depicting the correct year; in depth descriptions of streets and buildings; and in this one a long and rambling account do fall things Vaudeville. That said, I did quite enjoy it and - unlike some others - enjoyed how the tale was wrapped up and lose ends closed off.
February 28, 2008
What a shockingly bad book. This book's prequel, "Time and Again," is a kind of masterpiece of science fiction, mainly because it effectively communicates the wonder at the thought of stepping back in time and how a real human being might react to such an event. This book, on the other hand, is plodding and dull. Where Finney tried to insert historical set pieces, the reader finds long expository passages on aspects of 1912 New York life that are only marginally related to the plot. What could have been a great page-turner, a novel connecting the Titanic to World War One and the moral dilemma of altering history, is diluted with poorly-incorporated research and awful plotting.
April 8, 2008
Poor sequel to a great book. I kept reading it hoping it would get better, but it only deteriorated. Skip this one and preserve the goodness of the original Time and Again.
August 4, 2022
I certainly didn't enjoy this as much as Finney's first book with protagonist Simon Morley and his ability to time-travel. In this one I felt there was too much padding - for example, when Si goes to a play and we get a blow by blow description of the whole play.
Also, I was astonished that a New Yorker would not immediately recognise the description of a building like the prow of a great stone ship as being the Flatiron Building. Perhaps people just don't know the photographs of Edward Steichen, which include a wonderful image of that building.
Also, I was astonished that a New Yorker would not immediately recognise the description of a building like the prow of a great stone ship as being the Flatiron Building. Perhaps people just don't know the photographs of Edward Steichen, which include a wonderful image of that building.
September 8, 2021
Чудово проведений час: попаданці, передвоєнна епоха Нью-Йорка, "Титанік", будні театралів, трохи детективу та мила романтика.
March 3, 2010
In From Time to Time, we revisit Si Morley, picking up several years after we left off at the end of . It's a promising start, back in the head of our familiar protagonist, though we quickly take a detour into the machinations of the plot. In order to make the story here work -- Si has to leave his comfortable 19th century home, come back to modern times, then travel back to 1912 -- Finney has to engage in some contrivances that undo things that were done at the end of the previous book. But, seeing as this is a time travel novel, I plugged on, willing to suspend disbelief.
The problem with this book has its roots in the words I used in the first paragraph. Machinations. Contrivances. Plot. In my review of Time and Again, I expressed pleasure at the combination of leisurely, descriptive immersion in a time and place, and an engaging storyline. Here, though, we have a lot of description and detail, but without the compelling story to carry it along. Morley isn't at home in 1912, he isn't in love with 1912, and the character's (and author's?) love of the setting is what lent such care and beauty to the descriptions in the first book. Here, instead, we get thrown lots of detail, and schooled in histories of various kinds, but through much of it we're left wondering just what Si is doing!
The plot such as it is comes to not much. Si is seeking a couple named Ted and Tessie, and I paged back through the book, trying to figure out why, assuming I must have missed something -- but no, his motivation isn't revealed until later. Confusingly, a different character named Ted appears at the beginning of the book, and then disappears, completely immaterial to the story. Confusing and unnecessary. Si also sets out to change the course of major world events, but that is mostly crammed into the tail end of the book, and is dealt with in a frustratingly anticlimactic way.
Although From Time to Time suffers in comparison to its predecessor, it's still a passable read for those who read and loved Time After Time. It has its moments -- it just doesn't come together as a well-constructed whole.
The problem with this book has its roots in the words I used in the first paragraph. Machinations. Contrivances. Plot. In my review of Time and Again, I expressed pleasure at the combination of leisurely, descriptive immersion in a time and place, and an engaging storyline. Here, though, we have a lot of description and detail, but without the compelling story to carry it along. Morley isn't at home in 1912, he isn't in love with 1912, and the character's (and author's?) love of the setting is what lent such care and beauty to the descriptions in the first book. Here, instead, we get thrown lots of detail, and schooled in histories of various kinds, but through much of it we're left wondering just what Si is doing!
The plot such as it is comes to not much. Si is seeking a couple named Ted and Tessie, and I paged back through the book, trying to figure out why, assuming I must have missed something -- but no, his motivation isn't revealed until later. Confusingly, a different character named Ted appears at the beginning of the book, and then disappears, completely immaterial to the story. Confusing and unnecessary. Si also sets out to change the course of major world events, but that is mostly crammed into the tail end of the book, and is dealt with in a frustratingly anticlimactic way.
Although From Time to Time suffers in comparison to its predecessor, it's still a passable read for those who read and loved Time After Time. It has its moments -- it just doesn't come together as a well-constructed whole.
December 15, 2023
A great sequel to an equally great book (Time And Again).
July 10, 2017
I did not realize until recently that this sequel was written long after Time After Time, and I admit it makes sense that it was at the end of Finney's career and had a sometimes rambling narrative that fixed on certain aspects of exposition that did not advance the plot. A shorter story than its predecessor, it unfortunately feels longer due to these detours, specifically into the world of vaudeville and the background forces in the conflict that culminated in World War I.
The most disappointing thing, and one that had me flipping back to make sure I hadn't missed a chapter, was the way in which the time anomalies that protagonist Si Morley learns about on his trip back to the future (people who have memories of the Titanic sailing into New York Harbor safely, a campaign button from Jack Kennedy's 2nd run for President) are never explained beyond a theory that altering the past had somehow caused a second "future" to proceed. This was a fascinating idea, the kind that has time travel fans jumping up and down in their seats. And it was abandoned with no satisfying explanation at all.
Disappointing as well was the lack of a moment when Si gets to see how his wife and son have fared in the 'future" of 1912, when all his attempts to avert disaster are done. The book felt as if it had been badly edited as a result, or it had been largely abridged (albeit inconsistently, as the pages of vaudeville descriptions can attest to).
But this book did have the feeling of awe that the first did, in Morley's realization that he had stepped into a different world, the description of the mild May evening in 1912, at L'Heure Bleu (The Blue Hour) at a time before much of the ugliness of the 20th Century had begun, before World Wars, and nuclear weaponry, and the Influenza Outbreak, and, presumably, disillusionment with Hope in the new century. This was well conveyed, and there are images in this book that have stuck with me ever since I first read it in the 1990s.
I have read many books that were the last book of a famous author, and this feels like those; a bit rambling, a bit tame, and clearly the work of an elderly person. Beautiful, uneven, a tad bit tedious.
The most disappointing thing, and one that had me flipping back to make sure I hadn't missed a chapter, was the way in which the time anomalies that protagonist Si Morley learns about on his trip back to the future (people who have memories of the Titanic sailing into New York Harbor safely, a campaign button from Jack Kennedy's 2nd run for President) are never explained beyond a theory that altering the past had somehow caused a second "future" to proceed. This was a fascinating idea, the kind that has time travel fans jumping up and down in their seats. And it was abandoned with no satisfying explanation at all.
Disappointing as well was the lack of a moment when Si gets to see how his wife and son have fared in the 'future" of 1912, when all his attempts to avert disaster are done. The book felt as if it had been badly edited as a result, or it had been largely abridged (albeit inconsistently, as the pages of vaudeville descriptions can attest to).
But this book did have the feeling of awe that the first did, in Morley's realization that he had stepped into a different world, the description of the mild May evening in 1912, at L'Heure Bleu (The Blue Hour) at a time before much of the ugliness of the 20th Century had begun, before World Wars, and nuclear weaponry, and the Influenza Outbreak, and, presumably, disillusionment with Hope in the new century. This was well conveyed, and there are images in this book that have stuck with me ever since I first read it in the 1990s.
I have read many books that were the last book of a famous author, and this feels like those; a bit rambling, a bit tame, and clearly the work of an elderly person. Beautiful, uneven, a tad bit tedious.
June 8, 2014
I was drawn into the book immediately, and as with the first book felt a sense that time travel actually happened, that it was entirely possible, realistic and authentic. The evidence and theories presented go beyond most time travel books.
I loved the suspense in the book � even so much as the suspense built in one chapter that was revealed/resolved by the end of the same chapter or in some cases several chapters later. Who was the man in the psychologist office? Who is Jotta Girl? Who are Ted and Tessie? And I’ll be honest and say I didn’t predict any of it !
I found myself daydreaming a few times in the book � The story begs a sort of reflection at times....like what might today look like if there had never been a World War?
I can’t help but picture and hear Frasier Crane in the character of Dr. Danziger, and then I started imagining Niles as Rube.
Jack Finney has a way of placing you in the book, in the scene, scenery....wonderful description without being bogged down.
If I had any criticism about this book, it would be to say that
I loved the suspense in the book � even so much as the suspense built in one chapter that was revealed/resolved by the end of the same chapter or in some cases several chapters later. Who was the man in the psychologist office? Who is Jotta Girl? Who are Ted and Tessie? And I’ll be honest and say I didn’t predict any of it !
I found myself daydreaming a few times in the book � The story begs a sort of reflection at times....like what might today look like if there had never been a World War?
I can’t help but picture and hear Frasier Crane in the character of Dr. Danziger, and then I started imagining Niles as Rube.
Jack Finney has a way of placing you in the book, in the scene, scenery....wonderful description without being bogged down.
If I had any criticism about this book, it would be to say that
January 5, 2010
I enjoyed this book, though not as much as Time and Again, which better captured the wonder of being able to travel through time. In this story Simon Morley revisits the present after living in the 1880's with his wife and son for some time. He's really just dropping by to see what's going on, but is pressed by Ruben Prien to go on just one more mission, to 1912, to try and prevent WWI. Simon goes, but his interest and amazement at the changes in NYC from the 1970's to 1912 somehow ring false, since he was already living for 5 years in the 1880's. He shouldn't seem so surprised at the lack of an Empire State Building.
Finney also spends an inexplicably long time delving into the world of vaudeville, which was interesting at first, but eventually got tedious, since it really had nothing to do with the actual story. I was interested to see if he would encounter Julia, or his son Willy, in 1912, but that never happened. Overall, it was still a good read, but I think with better focus and editing it would have been much better.
Finney also spends an inexplicably long time delving into the world of vaudeville, which was interesting at first, but eventually got tedious, since it really had nothing to do with the actual story. I was interested to see if he would encounter Julia, or his son Willy, in 1912, but that never happened. Overall, it was still a good read, but I think with better focus and editing it would have been much better.
April 5, 2017
Very slow and confusing, but it was nice to hear more adventures of Simon Morley, though it's been years since I read the first book and didn't remember much. This book is more about, trying to alter history and life in 1811 than a mystery or any action.
Likes:
* Time travel
Dislikes:
* Jotta girl
Likes:
* Time travel
Dislikes:
* Jotta girl
August 17, 2014
Picked this book since it's the sequel of "Time and Again".
As the previous book, the first 15% of the book is spent to nicely develop the sequel where a series of events will lead to another mission.
Unfortunately, afterwards, it becomes just a showcase of events from the past. The author picks some newspaper articles, citing them and developing a story on them. Sadly these stories are just a distractions, besides few interesting events.
At around 90% the book picks up the real story and quickly finally develops it and with few interesting turn of events wraps it up real quick.
I would still read it to know what happens after the first book, but not really a game changer.
As the previous book, the first 15% of the book is spent to nicely develop the sequel where a series of events will lead to another mission.
Unfortunately, afterwards, it becomes just a showcase of events from the past. The author picks some newspaper articles, citing them and developing a story on them. Sadly these stories are just a distractions, besides few interesting events.
At around 90% the book picks up the real story and quickly finally develops it and with few interesting turn of events wraps it up real quick.
I would still read it to know what happens after the first book, but not really a game changer.
January 17, 2016
started out so well and then just wandered around and went nowhere! Very anticlimatic and disappointing ending! only good thing were the pics of New York City. Feel cheated.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 462 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.