Customer Reviews

From Time to Time

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

...but overall it's a disappointment.
I enjoyed Finney's original "Time and Again". This "sequel to a sequel" (I think that's what the author's note called it) was uninspired and made me wonder if the original was as good as I remembered.
I expect that most writers of historical fiction and historical fantasy devise characters and plot first, and then do their research. As I listened to this audiobook I had the distinct impression that Mr. Finney chose a time period (1911-1912), did some research, and then devised a plot to use as much of the research as possible, whether or not it made any narrative sense.
For example, long sections of text described vaudeville in much more detail than made any sense for a subplot.
I also had difficulty in believing the characters' motivations, actions and dialogue. For example, the main character travels back to 1912 and immediately hooks up with a pretty young lady because he is so "completely alone" in the world. Well, if I'd just left a young wife and 4-year old son in 1887 New York City, when I arrived in that same city only 25 years later I think I'd see how they were doing first. (Then maybe I'd buy a drink for the pretty young lady.)
Anyway, Finney's research was interesting and there were some good moments in the book. Enjoy!

I reread both this novel, as well as, the original _Time and Again_, in order at the same time. I was amazed at how well the two books flowed into each other almost seamlessly. I noticed no lack on continuity or deterioration of narrative or style. Simply put, I loved the first book, and this sequel is every bit as good.
Of course, I might be biased here. Finney develops a theme that I've toyed with for years, namely, how much better the 20th century would have been for the vast majority of mankind if WWI never would have occurred. Think about it, no WWI means no Soviet Union, no Nazi Germany, no defacto American Empire.... Moreover, there most probably would have been no overriding pressure to develop an atomic bomb. Things would have flowed along much more orderly and civlized lines. For that matter, Palestine would still be under the firm control of the Ottoman Empire.
It is somewhat eerie to read the main characters discussing the first book. Several times I have been tempted to search Manhattan for a Beekey Bros. warehouse....
As for those that hold that it is totally unbelievable that the government could ever establish any thing as preposterous as The Project, well, I guess they never heard of a little military intelligence project called Project Stargate with a directive to develop mental techniques to transcend time and space. Of course back in 1970 when Finney wrote the first book there was no Project Stargate- or at least no public knowlege of it.

Time and Again was good because if you accepted the single premise, that one could be self-hypnotized into going into the past, the rest followed logically.

Here, the reader is called upon to suspend his disbelief almost continuously. That the seemingly airtight way Time and Again was ended could be reversed, for example. That Morley, given being sent to 1912 to prevent World War I and save his son, would not instead look up his 1912 self (surely still alive and not yet sixty) or at least Julia, and have them find a way to save his (their?) son. That would be an insurance policy in case Si failed in his mission, and Si is bright and curious enough to come up with this or a similar scheme--after all, it is not unlike the plot resolution to Time and Again.

Even though Finney was dying as this was published, I still have the feeling that the book is a setup for a never-written third book of a trilogy. The final chapter seems unresolved. Possibly, it was due to Finney's illness. But he was a great, if underrated writer--but this could have been better. Maybe he was writing to augment his estate.

I also feel that there is an excess of detail, that Finney is sort of showing off with the level of his knowledge (or research) about the past. Take the play to which a chapter is devoted, or the dances, etc.

Just an offhand thought--isn't Si sort of wasting himself in the 1880s by working as an illustrator? Why isn't he trying to invent the zipper or writing Gone With The Wind or doing something else that will assure his and his family's financial security?

From Time To Time may not be better than Time And Again, but it passes for an above-average book. I think that I got more laughs out of this book than the first one, but the ending in this sequel isn't very good. Instead of tying everything up at the end, the plot unravels. One must keep in mind, though, that Jack Finney was probably dying near the end of writing his book (he died of pneumonia and emphysema, which take a while to actually kill you, so I've heard), and couldn't put more time into the final few chapters. The rest of the book is perfect though, and the beginning is particularly interesting if you've read the novel this book is based on. I highly recommend it for anyone, but it's certainly not for anyone who hasn't read the first story, as the book refers to it a lot. So, in conclusion, read Time And Again first, then read this book right after. You'll like them both, believe me!

Finney is, as many reviewers noted, writing a historical novel rather than a time-travel story. He's clearly nostalgic for the world of pre-WWI America, and clearly wants the reader to share his longing for what he sees as a lost "golden age." If you share his nostalgia and his "golden age" view, you'll probably like the book a lot. More power to you.

I tried, but I just couldn't do it.

My problem, I think, is that I just can't see 1912 as the Golden Age that Finney sees it as. I'm interested in it, but not nostalgic for it--not with the teeming slums, the hideous working conditions, the ingrained racism, the casual oppression of women, and the disease-ridden summers that Finney leaves off-screen. Finney's a novelist, not a social historian, and he has every right to pick and choose his scenes (believe me, I'm *glad* we didn't see Si Morley visit the dentist in 1912). Well before the end of the book, though, I'd had enough of his relentless insistence that "everything was better back in the Good Old Days."

_From Time to Time_, for all its fascinating details, is set in the same rose-colored version of 1912 that you see in "The Music Man" and Disneyland's "Main Street USA." If that's where your taste in historical novels runs . . . enjoy. If you prefer your tours of old-time New York a little grittier, try Raymond Paul's _The Thomas Street Horror_ or something by E. L. Doctorow.

If you have read Time And Again, you will be extremely disappointed with this sequel. In the first book, Si Morley traveled into the past and there were long passages discribing a long gone New York City that were well written and absorbing. Jack Finney tries to duplicate that by again sending Si back and all it comes off as is long winded and boring: an excruciatingly boring buildup just so Finney can introduce Al Jolson; page upon page of boring descriptions of vaudeville, clothing, architecture and early flight are other examples. If I did not know better, I would say that the kernel of this book (returning to the past to prevent WW I) was originally lopped off Time And Again in order to shorten that book and Jack Finney decided to expand it into full book length just to make a fast buck. He would have been better off re-issuing an expanded, "uncut" Time And Again rather than putting out this drivel.

Apart from all the other logical flaws, hasn't anyone noticed that although Si meets "Z" initially in 1912 when he boards the Titanic in 1911 Archie recognizes him (and isn't too thrilled to see him because of their prior interactions). I can't believe Finney or the editor didn't notice.
This book could have been so much better; what a shame.

There are some sequels that you ask yourself, why were they made? This book fall into that category. Granted the original classic left a few loose ends, such as how did Simon and Julia escape the clutches of Julia's estranged fiancée? And if Simon and Julia ended up getting married? The first question is still not answered though we see the second is. Getting beyond that the book is boring and lacks the interesting characters and intriguing plot that the first book so rightly produced.

Ruben Prien is able to reverse the interference that Si produced at the end of the first book to restore the present to what it was. The Project however, ran out of funding and was shut down. Si takes a trip back to the present out of curiosity and meets up with Rube again. Rube presents him with a lame argument as to why World War I needs to be prevented. Si accepts the assignment and goes back to 1912.

While in 1912 there are several chapters where Si goes around taking photos (which the author includes in the book). This style worked brilliantly in the first book, while here it seems like it was forced. The photos add nothing to the story or in enabling the reader to get a better flavor of 1912 New York.

Si then goes about trying to locate a man that Rube only knew as "Z." Z was working on some sort of European pact but disappeared shortly thereafter. Rube felt that had Z not disappeared, the pact would have been in place thus preventing the War. Si's 1912 associates turn out to be dull (the main one is a woman that Si calls the Jotta Girl). When Si finally figures out who Z is, it turns out that Z is just as dull as the other lifeless characters in this book.

I found myself skimming over several chapters of the book. One of these chapters explains an entire play that Si attends. What bearing it had on the story, I had no clue.

Towards the end of the book Rube sends Si back on another try to stop World War I by letting Si know that his own son will be killed in the war. I would have felt it a lot easier for Si to just try to save his son directly and not try to change the course of world events. Someone as intelligent as Si, should have come up with the same conclusion.

Jack Finney is a superb writer. Many people seem to agree that he excels in descriptive details, bringing the past to life. But his narrative frames are wonderful too -- this novel's prologue is intriguing, and a number of interesting characters are introduced. It's a shame this is a throwaway chapter, intended to introduce the consequences of time travel and the ways that observers (in The Project) might discover and analyse them. I would have enjoyed updates with this group to see the effects of various actions on the part of protagonist Si Morley. But this was Finney's book to write, and it's a fine novel. The old photographs are fun to look at and are incorporated smoothly into the story.

I suggest that you do not buy this book if you want to read a technical and plausible method for travelling to the past. This is a fantastical opera, in the fine tradition of soap opera and space opera. It is more concerned with painting vivid experience of a past time, as if the novel itself were a time machine. If you are a tech-head, press the "Back" button and search elsewhere. If you are an impressionistic history buff, you will have a grand old time in old New York.

Can you imagine being able to travel in time, merely by thinking yourself there. You could do it; what you would do is set up a space that's decked out to resemble the time you want to go to. Or, simply find a spot to sit where nothing has changed. A park bench that looks out onto a copse of trees with nothing of your present time in sight.

What for?

To go back in time and find the person you need to make a World War something that just didn't happen ... to save the Titanic from sinking by walking up to the captain and telling him he must change speed and course.

Jack Finney almost convinces that this can be done as he takes the reader through his charming tale of From Time to Time.