First, I think your views on the book are very succinct. Second, that's a LOT of questions... maybe they could broken into invidual discussion threads?

And finally, my opinions about the book.

Being a native of Chicago and particularly fond of the Newberry Library, I frequently fell into rapturous moments of homesickness reading the book. Audrey writes in a few choice descriptions of Chicago that brought my hometown to life for me. So on top of this book being a melancholy love story about a papermaker and a librarian, it was a story of the city that could hold their love.

And to be honest, lots of weird things happen in Chicago. I don't think its too much of a stretch that the characters in the book accepted the time-traveling without too much trouble. In my neighborhood there was a man we called the Praying Man who would chant/yell in a mixture of gibberish and Spanish who we all accepted as a holy man. He was never arrested or asked to move off a shop doorstep. We just accepted his gift. Now, I don't think he could time-travel but I think its because it never occurred to him to be anywhere but exactly where he was.

Okay, sorry for the sidebar. Shall we start with the first question?

I loved this book, but only after I was able to accept the necessary "temporary suspension of disbelief" condition. I couldn't understand the logic of what was happening at first, and I had to just go with it, finally.

Also, you touch on the idea of why Henry travels to the meadow so often, and it took me awhile to realize that he travels there because it's where he meets his death~though of course he meets his death because he travels there. . .the same reason he relives his mother's death and travels to that place at many different places in time.

I think the only reason people accepted Henry's "condition" was that they were faced with indisputable evidence. Each one who accepted it witnessed it.

I thought the Gomez character, while certainly despicable, was an interested addition and loyal friend/foe for Henry and Clare.

Did Henry ever only stay somewhere for a few hours at most? This seemed unclear in the book.

Overall, I really enjoyed this book. The passionate love affair is delightful to live within.

I'm still worried about Alba, though.

Ana - I get what you're saying about Chicago, but I felt she went overboard almost. (And the whole weird things happen here could be said of anywhere, I'm sure.) I would've liked a few less-specific references - I'm not talking about the Newberry Library - more like the gazillion restaurants. At times it felt like a travel-guide. (I'm being nit-picky here.) Also, feel free to answer some, all, or none of the questions - think of them as a starting point - nothing more.

As far as people believing the whole thing - yes - they had irrefutable proof - but how come no one ever went to the tabloids, or the police, or the government? I would think this would've been something people got upset about. Everyone seems to accept it in the way of "Oh it's just Henry." Does that make sense? And I guess it's true - he never goes anywhere more than once? What about the people that he works with? All of them just accept the fact that he time travels?

Laurie - you bring up an EXCELLENT point about his death. I did not connect it like that - but I think you're right! Of course he keeps going back there because that's where he dies! Duh! Excellent. (I was crying too hard through the whole end - he dies when Clare's father and brother shoot him accidentally, right?) I think that makes the whole Clare/Henry relationship all the more beautiful and tragic. She falls in love with him while he's visiting his death. Very good, Audrey! Hmmm. Puts a whole different perspective on the book for me. Thank you Laurie!!!

I loved this novel. Once I was able to move beyond the "what year", "how old" confusions it became an almost addictive read. Yes, I cried. Yes, this book stayed with me for days. I cannot resist a well written love story.

Laurie, is Gomez really such a despicable character? No, it is not right to take your bereaved friend amongst the Cheerios on the breakfast table while your wife runs errands with your children. But that scene showed the desperation of both characters; I needed to see the flaws of these characters. Up to that point, Clare had almost been too "perfect". If such a genetic abnormality existed, how many of us would be so understanding? How many of us could build lives around someone's outrageous exits and entrances?

I love the fact that both the first and last chapters are based on the premise that Clare is "waiting for Henry". It brings it full circle. The idea that Henry's death was not the last time she would see him was wonderful. That Alba could spend afternoons with her father long after his death was so bittersweet. For Clare it was probably like chasing a ghost, but who has not wished for such a thing?

I jumped at the chance to read about Henry and Clare for a second time. Their love got under my skin-I fould myself looking at my own husband and wishing that he would disappear and wisk me off my feet for missing him! What a wonderful adventure in the meadow too...

I also had the question in mind as to why Henry ever began visiting the meadow and thank you Laurie for offering your observation and I second the "duh".

I somewhat agree with Cara about conflict, however, I felt deep down that the ongoing conflict was Clare waiting and waiting...for Henry, for a baby, for herself even. If there had been another greater conflict going on, I think I would not have enjoyed these characters as much. Am I just a sucker?

Shelly

Quick post for now - does anyone have any thoughts on Clare spending the rest of her life waiting for that one last time to see Henry? His telling her about it caused her to sit for decades in a rocking chair waiting for him.

It is almost as if she had spent her life waiting for him and didn't know how else to live her life. She had no closure regarding his death, and lived the rest of her life in desperation to see him that one last time, because she *knew* it would happen (just not when). It was almost cruel that she knew.

So sad.

Like all of you, I am an avid reader. I try to read all the time. I read a lot of books but I have never read a book like this. I sobbed at the end. I cried like I haven't cried. For all of its shortcomings (like I hated for the first 30 - 40 pages because I had no idea what was going on and had to "suspend disbelief" like Laurie), I fell in love with this book. I wanted to read more and more but didn't want it to end. I have given it to everyone I know. Now, to make it even better, I am listening to it on CD and I am reading all of the comments and so many parts of the book are more clear now - I never ever thought of the meadow (triple duh).

Two things I have noticed from the CD (and I am only on CD #4) - the chapter at the beginning of the novel where Clare (at 13) hears her name being called and goes outside to see Henry, her father and her brother is called "The Beginning of the End" (how fitting), and when Clare takes Hnery home for the first time and they are talking in her car on the way there about future time travel and he says he knows when he is in the future because it is harder to breath and to run. Clare then remarks that his feet are like leather and he says "If I don't have my feet, you might as well shoot me" - yeah, didn't catch those the first time around.

The one thing that I keep thinking about is the "why". Why did I love this book so much? Why would I get so upset? How did the author do it so seamlessly (make me love the book, that is). Why did I hate Gomez so much for the scene after Henry's death (but I am so glad that the scene is there because it made Clare more "human" to me)?

I swear that I do not normally do not get so wrapped up in a book and I guess I am still a little bewildered by my reaction.

oh wow, I have so much to say and not enough time. Of course I loved the book, how couldn't I? I can't stand sci-fi..but this made it so much more than time travel! I think that the 'spine' that held it all together was their love affair...you wanted to get to the beginning (for claire and then for henry) and you wanted to see what would happen with him going back and forth at all ages to her (at all ages) and then...how would it end? Would their love keep him coming back to her? That was all the conflict I needed, although I did expect for Gomez to be a bigger problem (they seemed to handle their fling(s) with such disregard and never visit the subject again)...I also thought, when it was starting out (claire as a young girl) when he visited her and looked so stressed out and old...I thought perhaps they hadn't made it as a couple or that something to come would break them up.
I agree that the author seemed to take short cuts in her descriptions...I also wanted more of Henry when he wasn't visiting Clair or himself (the author adresses this in an interview and points out, quite rightly, that it would have taken the focus off the love story and just been little side jaunts without importance.)
I was in awe over the author's ability to keep the storyline strait and to keep me right there with her. In the beginning I had no idea what was going on, but it didn't frustrate me-it made me want to keep going!
oh! and as a christian that often debates the idea of free will vs. divine control with my hub, I thought this book adressed the concept of time/free will beautifully. My favorite philosophical moment was when Henry told Claire that he thinks free will just runs foward...as in you had one chance to make the decision and once you made it, it's there, whether you can go back or not. The problem is, once you know what you WILL choose (as Henry does many times when he is with a younger version of himself) do you still have a choice? I mean: you know, you've already decided, but you decided after you knew what you would decide...quite a thinker!
More later... I really want to adress some of those discussion questions.

Along with everyone else, this book was an emotional roller coaster ride for me. About half way through (once they began trying for a child and the miscarriages began)the tears began and didn't stop. There are several people in my life right now who have suffered recent miscarriages, which made that particular plot line even more poignant. I truly loved this book and would love to read it again but probably need an emotional reprieve.

As a Chicagoan myself, I enjoyed the little additions that make it more specific to the city. So often when you're reading a book the descriptions are generic and the story could really be taking place anywhere. But when you live life it's all thos little details about where you love to go and why and how that make you unique. I'm sure it could get a little tedious for those who don't know Chicago, but I thoroughly appreciated those details.

I thought it was very interesting that Niffenegger leaves the story open between Clare at 40 (I can't remember the exact age we left her) and Clare at 82. It appears that she was left yearning after Henry for those 40 odd years, but we don't really know what happened and how she and Alba dealt with life and Alba's chrono-impairment (especially with her being a woman...how much different her experiences with time travel had to be than Henry's). The first half of Clare's life was completely characterized by Henry, his appearances first, and then his disappearances later. So what does she do when her days no longer involve Henry in the flesh? Clare's longing for a child so that she could have a bit of physical Henry probably plays a large role in that. Does Alba (who looks remarkably like Henry and not Clare) fill that void for her? And does that correlate to why Henry does not appear to Clare after his death (except that once)?

I'd also like to discuss AN's use of the dramatic (as per the discussion question above). She doesn an excellent job of tying in all the loose ends to create a sequence of the events that reveal themselves slowly but surely. Like Leanne said, I am sure I missed quite a bit of the foreshadowing details that you would pick up on a second read. And of course Henry must die (as we all do) but his time traveling almost makes him seem like he has an endless supply of time awaiting him. The drama is heightened when you begin to realize that Henry knows when his time is up and the details are slowing being revealed to the reader.

All in all, I loved this book.

I still want to know how Clare got pregnant. Earlier in the book, slightly-older Henry explains to younger-Henry that he cannot affect things outside his own time--he can't, for example, save lives that weren't meant to be saved. Wouldn't the same hold true for creating life? So how could a younger-Henry come along to get Clare pregnant if current-Henry had had a vasectomy? A question that's been bugging me since the first time I read the book, two summers ago!

Sarah - It is so funny that you post about Alba and her ability to time travel. I am on disc 8 at the time when Henry first meets Alba at the Art Institute and confirms that she is also a CDP. I have been thinking thinking thinking about Alba and the videotapes Henry leaves her about picking locks etc. How would she handle travelling through time and winding up somewhere without clothes? Would it be more dangerous for her? Where is Clare - does she just sit around and wait for Henry? Does she actively participate in helping Alba with her CDP (whether it is "interesting" or not, as Alba says) or does she just wait? Is Clare's waiting for Henry fair to Alba?

Listening to the scene where Henry finds out he dies when Alba is 5 is sooo hard. I don't think I took a breath while the scene played out. It is difficult to keep listening because from here on in, it only gets more sad.

I didn't get the impression that Clare was just sitting in a chair waiting for Henry - I mean when Alba sees him at the museum, doesn't Clare come to meet him? Maybe it was just my impression, but I got the feeling she was at work or something. Not sitting at home.

I'm with you on the whole he has a vasectomy but then a younger Henry comes and impregnates her. Isn't that totally messing with the outcome of the future?

I agree, too, with the idea that Henry seems to cheat death - since he sees Alba (it seems) often. It's one thing for her to travel back in time (like when she says she sees Henry with Ingrid) but when he goes to the museum Alba's in her real time.

In my opinion, these things don't necessarily play out - AN is taking license, but it's okay, because we've already bought the farm.

I'm really enjoying the discussion. Thanks for keeping it going.

I don't think I was clear on the whole "waiting for Henry" thing. Like Cara, I didn't think that Clare was just sitting at home waiting for Henry the day he and Alba met at the Art Institute. What I wonder about is the 42 years in between when he dies and when he goes to her at the end. When Henry asks Alba how her mother is, her response is that she is sad. So it just got me wondering about the impact Clare's waiting for Henry would have on Alba.

I have to say that I loved this book when I read it when it first came out for the Today show's book club. It was pretty easy for me to believe everything since I saw her interview on said show. Like everyone else, I cried, laughed, and cried some more.

Time travel seems so magical to me and it's a power I would pick, I think, if I had the choice. I often wonder what my boyfriend was like when he was younger and wish that I could have known him then. Who knows, maybe we could have dated through high school and then college. But then I think, no we were meant to meet at the time in our lives we were ready to meet. I'm sure I was a totally different person in high school and college compared to who I am now, as was he. Maybe, if I had met him earlier, then I would have never been interested in him and I wouldn't have the times I have now. Then who would I be now?

Looking through the book again I noticed some things irked me. I know that the bulk of the story is their love and how it was meant to be, but did Clare ever really have a choice with Henry? She met him when she was so young; did she instill in her mind that this was the man that she was suppossed to be with? If he hadn't met her in the meadow, would they have ended up together? I supposse with any relationship you have to have that first meeting sometime and you basically make up your mind right then (or at least you have an inkling). But these weren't normal circumstances. So basically, didn't Henry affect the future by meeting Clare so young? In his pov, he's already know Clare for 12 years I think, but she had never met him or known he was coming. I guess this goes back to the free-will comment, did Clare have free will?

The waiting! The waiting kills me. Clare, from the beginning, is waiting. I almost wish he hadn't told her that he was going to visit one more time. Though I don't think that she was literally sitting in a chair for 40 years, I still think that mentally she was. It almost seems unfair, maybe bittersweet.

Those are some quick thoughts from me. Im probably not coherent since it's late and I can't sleep. I'll post some more later and the conversation continues.

Let me first say, I enjoyed reading this book. While I agree about the lazy writing, the plot was intriguing.

But. Does anyone else think that this is not so much a *love* story as a *dependence* story? What does Clare have to love, except the Henry of her past? She has grown up knowing she will be with him, isn't that what keeps her there, even through his disappearances and sometimes deplorable behavior (did he *have* to nearly kill that friend of Gomez's, or did he enjoy it)?

I was heartbroken and troubled by the last bit of the book. Up until then, I cared and cried and swooned with everyone else... But in the end Clare does "wait for Henry" her whole life! Even if she has life in between, her lifetime from 6 to 82 is her breath held, waiting for an arrival or a departure to jar her back to him. Based on the book, one could guess that she just expired after seeing him for one last time. But, again... what was so great about Henry, so *lovable* after they met in real time, except his existence in the past?

This story has a quality that reminds me of the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. That, too, seems like a love story until you realize that it all happens in the boy's head - not between two people. In TTW, Henry seems to be the only one having the conversation: by interspersing himself in Clare's entire life (even if unwillingly), he binds her to him. Not because she wouldn't dream of being anywhere else, but because she can't.

Oh, this is a fun conversation!

Cara: I agree that the Chicago references, at least the more mundane ones, were tedious. I could picture the library, but the labels wthout pictures were useless to someone, like me, without a visual reference.

Rebecca: The reasons I perceive Gomez as despicable (yet loyal) have more to do with the pain he causes his wife--she knows he's in love with Clare. I can understand the quickie sex scene in terms of the grief Clare is feeling, but Gomez took advantage. On the other hand, he saves Henry's ass time and again--and I don't think he does this just for Clare's benefit. He is complex, and that's what I liked about him.


Deb:Clare got pregnant because the Henry she had sex with hadn't had a vasectomy because he came from the past. Just like when he visits Alba in the future, he still has his feet, because he's coming from the past, at least from her perspective. That part made sense to me. Also, her pregnancy wasn't a conscious decision on Henry's part--he doesn't know the future until he's lived it, right? So he's just having sex with her (as usual) and the sneaky sperm do their own thing (as they always have, I might add). His take on free will was tied to conscious decisions and actions. Tell me if this makes sense to you.

Anyone: The part I don't get is the last visit from Henry. Why does this happen? Is it because he's dead and a ghost? And did she wear that stupid pink sweater every freakin' day, waiting for him?


Chelsea: You make a good point; Clare's entire exsistance, until she's 40, is wrapped up in Henry. However, I can't blame Henry for this. It happened, as it does. But we don't know about Clare's life after 40, really, so I'd like to think she came into her own, then (as women often do!) Released from the shackles of the past, and in that great house with all the lottery money (loved that!) her pain inspires her art and Henry is now her muse, instead of the other way around. Seems fair--perhaps metaphorical.


I wish we could sit around and have this discussion in person, but I recognize that it is enriched by the thoughtful responses to comments, and that takes time. Love your brains, fellow readers!

Wow, great comments here.

I just finished the book and loved it, but I'm annoyed with the ending.

When Clare finally returns to her studio and creates her universe self-portrait, Niffenegger writes:

"I place my finger on her forehead and say, 'Vanish,' but it is she who will stay; I am the one who is vanishing."

That's how the penultimate chapter ("Renascence") and the story in the present ends: with the beginning of the end of Clare's mourning and the rebirth of the self, of the artist.

However, that message is only a thin ray of optimism, delivered swiftly by metaphor. We've been Clare's emotional companion for 500+ pages but we never experience the post-Henry, healthy Clare. We just go straight into that wrenching, minimalist final chapter!

Was Clare a whole person during those decades? Clare's last entry is ten days earlier than Henry's arrival to illustrate her fall into an obsessive routine over which she has "no choice," which she's followed often enough that she "sometimes" wonders if it will prevent the miracle from happening. She continually stages the conditions described in Henry's letter -- hair, sweater, tea, etc. That's realistic and touchingly human, but it's also horrific: a slice of Hades, epic in its cruelty!

wtf?

imho, the book suddenly switches genres, to horror or bathetic tragedy.

That and the violence of the final Ingrid chapter -- Henry, in pain, naked, crippled, kicked in the chest, spat upon, blamed for and witness to Ingrid's suicide -- makes me wonder if Niffenegger has some anger issues she's working out through her art, and if, as a result, her work might have a slight toxic quality. Reader beware.

Those issues aside, it pretty much rocked, eh?

:)

I loved this book.

I have a question: does anybody else think that when Henry goes to her that last time, he stays with her for the rest of her life?

I think that it is what Niffenegger is hinting.

Dunno Lu. Henry says in the letter,

It was sweet, Clare, it was sweet beyond telling, to come as though from death to hold you, and to see the years all present in your face.

That suggests that they might actually just spent a few minutes together.

I like your ending better.

Lu - I saw the end as kind of a Ghost & Mrs. Muir ending - he comes (almost like a ghost) and she dies. I felt sort of like they go off together (in death.)

I'm still having problems with how she gets pregnant. Okay - maybe I'm forgetting here - but why does PAST Henry have sex with her. So he's being led around by his penis and can't resist? Isn't that still a little weird. Where was PRESENT Henry? I forget. I'll have to go back and look up that scene. I was reading really fast at that point.

Another thing that bothers me - the whole winning the lottery thing. How does that NOT affect the future? Even if Henry picks a week that no one won (in real time) it will totally affect all the winners/winnings after that. It seemed so cheap in a way to have them win. Like, oh they need money, let's win the lottery. I liked the idea of the stock market better - and how Henry would tell Kim to buy a certain stock. Seems like that would have much less affect on things than winning the lottery.

Again - a far from perfect book. But I still think it works. Great discussion! Thank you!

Cara ~ "Past Henry" has sex with Clare because he shows up during the night when she is an adult and AREN'T THEY ALWAYS HAVING SEX? They don't need a reason. Current Henry is ill with the flu or something, as I recall, and is in the bed next to them, but asleep. Yeah, whatever.

Also, I don't think we can entirely trust Henry's explanation for the whole free will/affecting the future idea. I think he sometimes uses it to manipulate Clare. At any rate, we have to remember that it's Henry's perception, and not necessarily real time travel physics. . .er, as it were.

Perhaps it's time for me to shelve the "temporary suspension of disbelief" concept.

To Cara:

well, I am giving them a week, how about that?

OT, bloglines is not updating this feed for me :-(

This book seemed very circular with a heavy fatalist hand. It was as though Clare and Henry never had a choice, with several times when either could have made a different decision or reacted differently.

When Henry would visit his younger self, he would know what to say and do, because he has lived it before. Niffenegger addresses the inability to change fate in the scene when Henry is 15, in his room with his self from a few months in the future, both exploring their changing bodies. Robert catches them and the "younger" Henry can't figure out why the "older" Henry didn't warn him. Had the older Henry issued a warning, would the future have changed? I believe that Henry develops this idea early on and never really experiments, maybe picking it up from an older self, accepting it, and thereby reinforcing the idea that one can't change their fate, which an older Henry would convey when he meets the younger Henry.



All of Clare's actions from six on are based around Henry. In a way, Clare has been cheated out of the so-called normal experiences of growing up. I think Henry's visits to Clare as a child completely stunt her ability to be content without him. I honestly believe that the second her hair turned grey, Clare wore a coral sweater every day, never moving from her window.

I adore this book. I've read it twice, and I don't know why it is so compelling for me! Obviously I'm not the only one. I wonder what place in us it speaks to so directly.

There is a self-help author who believes that our experiences as small children directly influences who we pick to be partnered with in adulthood. That's it's all basically chance, really. We build our "ideal" (who in reality, may be anything but ideal) on encounters that have become anchored in some way. Thinking of it in this context, I wasn't as disturbed that Clare didn't have "free will" in picking her adult partner. I don't think any of us really do, unless we delibrately analyze our choices. I also didn't see it so much as him visiting her as a child that governed her choice of him later - that view seems to look at the story in a linear way, and it wasn't written that way. He didn't have a choice, either - he just got thrown back there at those moments. It wasn't in his control. It's like something John Irving does - he introduces us to characters separately, then they meet each other, so it seems like a coincidence, and much more significant to the reader. If he had written the characters as already knowing each other before the reader meets them, it wouldn't have the same effect on the reader.

Patti, I like your idea that we might not have as much of a choice as we think in choosing our future partner.

We've been discussing this mostly from Clare's viewpoint, as she seems to have gotten the raw end of the deal here. And yes, I am sure it would be very difficult to give up the love she grew for Henry as a child. But is it so bad that she ended up with him? They became wonderful partners and lovers and deeply impacted those around them, because they made one another better people. But what if we look at it from Henry's point of view? Given the state of Henry's life (time traveling and whatnot), wouldn't he need someone that utterly understood the whole concept and would be accepting no matter what? And didn't he need someone good and loving to help him become a better man (which obviously Ingrid or any of his other girlfriends were not helping out with)?

I think it's a conundrum because we don't want to feel like our life is chosen for us before we get there. Especially being in Western Culture, we like to think that we choose what we want, when we want it, and are very self sufficient. Being a Christian, this is a concept I have wrestled with as it's debated hotly in Christian theology, but I won't get into that here. I don't mind thinking that God ordained the fact that I would meet and fall in love with my husband. Maybe for Clare and Henry it just happened earlier. (and note that she fell in love with the "good" Henry, rather than previous versions of himself...which might have a lot to do with why she loved him. Would she have loved the more punky version of him?)

Awesome dicussion everyone!!

I wrote this a few days ago and was waiting for a password, but guess I'll give this a shot. :)

I just finished listening to TTW on CD and loved it! I didn't have any problem figuring out what was going on, mostly because there were two narrators. I enjoyed the love story--even though I had some problems with it--and would sit in the parking lot or driveway for a couple of extra minutes to see what would happen next.

This might be stretching it a bit, but it seemed ironic that AN chose papermaker and librarian for the professions of her two main characters. Clare, an artist or active creator, spent much of her life waiting for Henry. It was Henry who molded events and created relationships and Clare who cared for and preserved their family. Obviously this model didn’t work for the entire book, but I thought it was worth mentioning. What do all of you think?

Also, what about the sailor/Odysseus thing? The prologue says, “Long ago, men went to sea, and women waited for them, standing on the edge of the water, scanning the horizon for the tiny ship. Now I wait for Henry.” And then the book ends with a quote--I listened to the book so it’s a different experience and I was a little confused (I wanted the book in front of me!), but was TTW supposed to be a modern re-telling of The Odyssey? Am I remembering the quote incorrectly?

I agree with Chelsea about the story being about dependence, not only of Clare on Henry, but also of Henry on everyone who covered for him or befriended him.

Overall I loved the book, but I was upset by a few things:

--In general, I don't know how I feel about Clare having sex with any of the time-traveling Henrys. On Clare's 18th birthday it seemed wrong because he was so much older than her. I suppose it was supposed to be sweet that he was her first (even though she wasn't his); although she claims that was the best day of her life, her nervousness (a completely normal reaction) made me uneasy--almost like he was taking advantage of her. Also, I was surprised that present-Clare didn't mind! Wouldn't she have been a little self-conscious? (I guess he wasn't jealous of his younger/older self sleeping with her either.)

Later on, when Henry came to Clare in the night and got her pregnant, I didn't like that real-time Henry was lying next to them in bed. I thought it more appropriate for her current Henry to do the honors right before he got his vasectomy. Is there any reason AN chose not to do it this way?

--Gomez and Clare’s kitchen episode left me feeling bad for both of them, but especially for Charisse who was betrayed by her husband and by her best friend. I found it depressing that Gomez still wanted Clare after so many years, and wonder how he feels about being married to Charisse while having so much interaction with Clare, Henry, and Alba. And how his feelings effect his own family. Sad, really.

--The end. I got the impression that Clare sat around waiting for Henry to appear. I got upset and had to remind myself that Clare is a fictional character, but I wish there had been some indication that she moved on with her life after Henry’s death. I think Henry was selfish for telling her about their meeting; after all, he had kept so many things from her as she was growing up, and he saw how his mom’s death tainted the rest of his father’s life...

Yikes! This ended up being long.

Regarding Sandy's comment above, I thought it was fabulous that Henry and Clare got to experience each other sexually at different ages. Like the excitement of a new partner with none of that pesky guilt.

But that's just me. :)

This is a BEAUTIFUL book which BROKE MY HEART. I laughed with Henry and Clare, and I cried with them. BEAUTIFUL...I dreaded the inevitable dying of Henry...How does she do it?How does she make you SO fall in love with a character?!

LOVELY read!AMAZING!!!!!!!BEAUTIFUL!!!