Support the Café

Search our Site

A new wrinkle to “A Wrinkle in Time.”

A new wrinkle to “A Wrinkle in Time.”

Madeline L’Engle’s “A Wrinkle in Time” is one of the most beloved and best-selling young-adult books in American literature. Published in 1962,  sold 14 million copies and inspired a TV-movie adaptation, a graphic novel, and an opera. A deleted passage found in an early manuscript, discovered by L’Engle’s granddaughter, sheds light on the meaning of  Camazotz and on the struggle inherent in the story.

The Wall Street Journal:

Scholars invited by the Journal to review the new passage say it offers a window into L’Engle’s thinking. The excerpt is the most direct discussion of politics in her writing, the scholars said, offering a richer explanation of the author’s political views.

They agreed with [Charlotte Jones Voiklis, the author’s granddaughter] that cutting it was the right decision, one which strengthened the narrative. The section was too didactic, and would have dated the book, some said. Suzanne Bray, a L’Engle scholar who teaches at Université Catholique de Lille in France, said the section likely was cut precisely because it was “too political, or too obviously political”—something the author generally avoided in her writing.

In the passage, Meg pushes back against her father’s argument about the dangers of fixating on security:

“Well—but I want to be secure, Father. I hate feeling insecure.”

“But you don’t love security enough so that you guide your life by it, Meg. You weren’t thinking of security when you came to rescue me with Mrs. Who, Mrs. Whatsit, and Mrs. Which.”

Naomi Wood, an associate professor at Kansas State University who has studied L’Engle, said she was intrigued by the conversation between Meg and her father. “It does confirm that L’Engle had the democratic, capitalist U.S. in mind as well as the autocratic, communist U.S.S.R.,” she said.

Posted by Andrew Gerns


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michelle Boomgaard

Or perhaps it was cut because the political situation of the era would obscure its deeper meaning. . .
Personally, I find it a rather profound sentiment, one somewhat central to our call to trust God. How often have we preferred security rather than risking it for the cause of justice or love? How often do we seek our own individual solutions to insecurity, rather than seeking God?
I will confess, it’s a common theme in my sermons, but I was glad to have it summed up so succinctly. It will give me much to ponder today. Thank you for sharing.

Jerald Liko

So … In a book written about Americans, by an American, published in 1962, the evil planet where everyone is cruelly oppressed and forced into monotonous obedience under central control secretly represents the USSR?

You’re blowing my mind, professor.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café