What do you think?
Rate this book
Austin Family Chronicles #3
The Young Unicorns
They had been standing around the lamp, looking at Emily holding it in her strong fingers, rubbing it. Certainly none of them, not even Rob, expected to hear a sepulchral voice behind them.
" You called me?"
They swung around...
" You called me?"
They swung around...
288 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1968
About the author
Madeleine L'Engle
196 books8,894 followersMadeleine L'Engle was an American writer of fiction, non-fiction, poetry, and young adult fiction, including A Wrinkle in Time and its sequels: A Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters, and An Acceptable Time. Her works reflect both her Christian faith and her strong interest in modern science.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews
March 23, 2011
My L'Engle reviews seem to have a theme: complaining noises followed by assertions why said complaints are meaningless in view of the whole, and a reference to love as the universal solvent. This book is no different.
I'm unable to keep from rolling my eyes when Rob, age 7, pipes up with a malapropism followed with an erudite comment on the second movement of some obscure 12th century piece of music which he knows by heart.
The plot here is so unrealistic it would be laughable in anyone else's hands. The scary laser? The tough, gun-toting 'hoods' with the third-grade name? The hysteria about what L'Engle insisted on calling "pot" and "acid" to further distance herself from them? The villains are one-dimensional. Wait for it...
Yeah, not a bit of this matters. Honest. Just doesn't matter. The preachifying, the transparent manipulation? Just doesn't matter. Somehow, L'Engle transcends all of that, sucks you in, makes you believe, and holds your hand throughout. Her unvarying theme- love, love, love- makes the Austins real, makes Canon Tallis true, makes the Rabbi lovable, makes your heart pound at all the right places. It's a wonderful book. Put that in the pocket of your scorflam jacket and take it to the bank.
I'm unable to keep from rolling my eyes when Rob, age 7, pipes up with a malapropism followed with an erudite comment on the second movement of some obscure 12th century piece of music which he knows by heart.
The plot here is so unrealistic it would be laughable in anyone else's hands. The scary laser? The tough, gun-toting 'hoods' with the third-grade name? The hysteria about what L'Engle insisted on calling "pot" and "acid" to further distance herself from them? The villains are one-dimensional. Wait for it...
Yeah, not a bit of this matters. Honest. Just doesn't matter. The preachifying, the transparent manipulation? Just doesn't matter. Somehow, L'Engle transcends all of that, sucks you in, makes you believe, and holds your hand throughout. Her unvarying theme- love, love, love- makes the Austins real, makes Canon Tallis true, makes the Rabbi lovable, makes your heart pound at all the right places. It's a wonderful book. Put that in the pocket of your scorflam jacket and take it to the bank.
July 24, 2008
I found this book quite unnerving when I first read it, and it made a profound impression. However, my proudest (most shameful?) moment was in college taking Shakespeare when the final exam included a question about Coriolanus, which I had not actually had time to read because so busy writing in my journal. I had a moment of terror, then gritted my teeth, and began, "The noted writer, Madeleine L'Engle, in her tribute to Coriolanus..."
June 3, 2022
Albeit I have very much enjoyed the first two instalments of Madeleine L’Engle’s Austin Family series, finding both Meet the Austins and the sequel The Moon by Night for the most part delightfully realistic family type stories and first person narrator (and Austin daughter) Vicky (Victoria) sweetly relatable and in fact a total and true kindred spirit, sorry, but with the third of the Austin Family novels, with The Young Unicorns, I really have not AT ALL been even remotely enamoured of either the mysteriously uncanny, disturbingly eerie story premise or how Madeleine L’Engle has chosen to narrate The Young Unicorns. And indeed, if the writing style of The Young Unicorns were more to my reading tastes, if Madeleine L’Engle would not have her story quasi begin in the middle (in medias res so to speak) and with two totally unknown to me characters (Josiah and Emily) with really no backstories and with the Austins often not really appearing as all that well developed either (and in particular finding the switch from Vicky Austin’s first person narration in books one and two to a rather disjointed and distracting third person omniscient mode of expression for The Young Unicorns totally annoying and frustrating), perhaps I would actually be sufficiently interested with continuing with The Young Unicorns.
But no, in particular the for me absolutely unpleasant writing style and the inconvenient truth that after about three chapters I was feeling both totally bored and also totally lost, this has definitely made me decide to abandon The Young Unicorns as a DNF and to also and sincerely hope that for the final two Austin Family novels, that for A Ring of Endless Light and for Troubling a Star Madeleine L’Engle goes back to a writing style, that she returns to a mode of narrative expression which is more to my reading tastes. And while I do feel a bit guilty and contrite rating The Young Unicorns with just one star (since I really did not actually manage to read all that much of L’Engle’s text), well and to put it bluntly, if I cannot textually stomach a given book’s writing style and have to quit reading because of this, my rating will usually, will in fact generally be only one star, and I do indeed stand by this, for annoying and substandard stylistics do often if not even usually totally ruin books and in particular novels for me (and I really in truth do also not at all understand why Madeleine L’Engle has ended up choosing a third person narration for The Young Unicorns, considering that Vicky Austin’s first person voice is so delightful and so strong in both Meet the Austins and in The Moon by Night).
But no, in particular the for me absolutely unpleasant writing style and the inconvenient truth that after about three chapters I was feeling both totally bored and also totally lost, this has definitely made me decide to abandon The Young Unicorns as a DNF and to also and sincerely hope that for the final two Austin Family novels, that for A Ring of Endless Light and for Troubling a Star Madeleine L’Engle goes back to a writing style, that she returns to a mode of narrative expression which is more to my reading tastes. And while I do feel a bit guilty and contrite rating The Young Unicorns with just one star (since I really did not actually manage to read all that much of L’Engle’s text), well and to put it bluntly, if I cannot textually stomach a given book’s writing style and have to quit reading because of this, my rating will usually, will in fact generally be only one star, and I do indeed stand by this, for annoying and substandard stylistics do often if not even usually totally ruin books and in particular novels for me (and I really in truth do also not at all understand why Madeleine L’Engle has ended up choosing a third person narration for The Young Unicorns, considering that Vicky Austin’s first person voice is so delightful and so strong in both Meet the Austins and in The Moon by Night).
January 9, 2016
I always forget how weird this book is. I like most characters a lot, but the plot makes no sense at all.
It's kind of shocking to think that this book is followed by A Ring of Endless Light, which is practically perfect in every way. It's less shocking that there are twelve years between the two.
It's kind of shocking to think that this book is followed by A Ring of Endless Light, which is practically perfect in every way. It's less shocking that there are twelve years between the two.
April 5, 2013
Originally reviewed here @ Angieville
So. I am a longtime Madeleine L'Engle devotee. It started back when I was 10 with A Wrinkle in Time and it has stretched out over the years into a lifelong love affair. One of the more treasured and personal ones in my life. And while I love all her worlds, this little series, this family, holds a couple of my most beloved. This is actually the third full-length novel in the series, and it's something of a dark sheep, if you will. It's the departure novel, for lack of a better term, the one in which dark things happen and you question whether or not these young characters whom you love will be able to rebound after the fallout. It surprised me when I first read it, coming as it did after the gentler and more staid introductory installments. But the setting, the language, the new characters all wove their spell around me and I always return to it when I am in the mood for whistling in the dark.
The Austins have up and moved to New York City. Dr. Austin is working on a research project which requires his residence in the city, and so the family has uprooted itself and settled in Manhattan, not far from the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. It is there that Vicky, Suzy, and Rob meet a young girl named Emily Gregory. Emily is a piano prodigy studying with the brilliant and temperamental Mr. Theotocopulous (Mr. Theo for short). Emily is generally accompanied by an outsider boy named Dave whose job it seems to be to look out for her and be suspicious of things in general. Vicky is sure there's something in Dave's past he's hiding. But the rag-taggle group quickly become fast friends, and the Austins are willing to let Dave tell them his story when he is good and ready. It isn't until Rob, on one of his many rambles through the neighborhood, makes the acquaintance of a genie that danger strikes. This encounter with the genie (complete with magic lamp) leads the children on a journey through the darker underworld of their new home. A gang called the Alphabats dog their heels, with a particular emphasis on Dave. A strange man by the name of Canon Tallis has taken up residence at the Cathedral and appears intent on following the children as well. Everyone's motives are unclear, and soon events are spiraling out of control as the Austins and Co. race to uncover the thread connecting them all.
Just to whet your appetite, here's a favorite scene from the first couple of pages of the book:
What an opener. This book reminds me in many ways of Philip Pullman's Sally Lockhart series. Mysterious. Dark. A sense of impending doom drooping over the whole thing. I eat this stuff up with a spoon. I love THE YOUNG UNICORNS because it branches out so ambitiously. Dave, Emily, and Mr. Theo burst onto the scene and into the reader's heart without even a by your leave, and the Austins almost take a back seat to their new friends, their new neighborhood, their new life. I love L'Engle's New York City. I love the way she just plops her quiet family down in the middle of a boiling and boisterous city and allows them to explore and be worked upon and changed by its life and color and variety. The cathedral itself is essentially a character in its own right, serving as the perfect backdrop for the secret plots and underhanded machinations that take place within the pages of this story. Ms. L'Engle was writer-in-residence at this very cathedral for many years, and her knowledge of (and love for) its halls and corners and denizens is evident here. To say nothing of the crossover characters with which she graces the tale. Canon Tallis is a particular favorite and one I am always relieved to see show up, both for his keen intelligence and his checkered background. I knew the children would be safer with him at their backs. But things do get decidedly bleak (and a fair bit deranged) before they get better. But if a love of mystery lurks anywhere in your heart, you do not want to pass this one up. L'Engle's lovely words wrap around these precocious children and see them through to the very end. I think I've been in love with Dave ever since I first read this book, and it is his journey that is the most compelling to me. A true standout in the middle of an excellent series.
So. I am a longtime Madeleine L'Engle devotee. It started back when I was 10 with A Wrinkle in Time and it has stretched out over the years into a lifelong love affair. One of the more treasured and personal ones in my life. And while I love all her worlds, this little series, this family, holds a couple of my most beloved. This is actually the third full-length novel in the series, and it's something of a dark sheep, if you will. It's the departure novel, for lack of a better term, the one in which dark things happen and you question whether or not these young characters whom you love will be able to rebound after the fallout. It surprised me when I first read it, coming as it did after the gentler and more staid introductory installments. But the setting, the language, the new characters all wove their spell around me and I always return to it when I am in the mood for whistling in the dark.
The Austins have up and moved to New York City. Dr. Austin is working on a research project which requires his residence in the city, and so the family has uprooted itself and settled in Manhattan, not far from the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. It is there that Vicky, Suzy, and Rob meet a young girl named Emily Gregory. Emily is a piano prodigy studying with the brilliant and temperamental Mr. Theotocopulous (Mr. Theo for short). Emily is generally accompanied by an outsider boy named Dave whose job it seems to be to look out for her and be suspicious of things in general. Vicky is sure there's something in Dave's past he's hiding. But the rag-taggle group quickly become fast friends, and the Austins are willing to let Dave tell them his story when he is good and ready. It isn't until Rob, on one of his many rambles through the neighborhood, makes the acquaintance of a genie that danger strikes. This encounter with the genie (complete with magic lamp) leads the children on a journey through the darker underworld of their new home. A gang called the Alphabats dog their heels, with a particular emphasis on Dave. A strange man by the name of Canon Tallis has taken up residence at the Cathedral and appears intent on following the children as well. Everyone's motives are unclear, and soon events are spiraling out of control as the Austins and Co. race to uncover the thread connecting them all.
Just to whet your appetite, here's a favorite scene from the first couple of pages of the book:
The man in the fur hat left the shadows of the doorway and followed the oddly assorted trio: the dark, shabby boy; the definitely younger and rather elegant girl; and the fair little boy who couldn't have been more than seven or eight years old.
They reached the corner and turned down Broadway. The bitter wind whipped a few brown leaves and bits of soiled newspaper across the sidewalk. Strands of Emily's fine, dark hair blew across her face and she pushed it back impatiently. As they passed a shabby little antique shop with a gloomy bit of oddments on the sidewalk in front of the dusty windows, Dave paused.
"It was here," Rob said. "Right here."
Emily pulled impatiently at Dave's arm, but the older boy stood, looking at the shop window, at the door with the sign PHOOKA'S ANTIQUES, then moved on, more slowly.
Shortly before they reached 110th Street the man with the fur hat pulled ahead of them and merged with a group of people clustered about a newsstand. He held a paper so that he could look past it at the children as they came by.
The little boy, who had made friends with the crippled man who owned the newsstand, looked up to wave hello. His mouth opened in startled recognition as his eyes met those of their follower. He didn't hear the news vendor call out, "Hi, Robby, what's up?"
The man in the fur hat smiled at the small boy, nodded briefly, rolled up his newspaper, and turned back in the direction of the Cathedral.
Dave and Emily had gone on ahead. Rob ran after them, calling, "Dave! He's the one!" He tugged at the older boy's sleeve.
"Who's what one?" Dave pulled impatiently away from the scarlet mitten.
"The man we saw yesterday, the one who talked to Emily!"
Dave stopped. "Where?"
Rob pointed towards the Cathedral.
"Wait!" Dave ran back around the corner.
"Emily, he was the one," Rob said. "I'm sorry, but I know he was."
"I don't want to talk about it." Emily's face looked pale and old beyond her years. She was just moving into adolescence, but her expression had nothing childlike about it. "It couldn't have been the same one," she whispered.
"But it was real," Rob persisted. "It did happen."
Dave returned. "I didn't see anybody. Anyway, how do you know he was the one?"
"Because he had no eyebrows."
Emily gave a shudder that had nothing to do with the cold.
What an opener. This book reminds me in many ways of Philip Pullman's Sally Lockhart series. Mysterious. Dark. A sense of impending doom drooping over the whole thing. I eat this stuff up with a spoon. I love THE YOUNG UNICORNS because it branches out so ambitiously. Dave, Emily, and Mr. Theo burst onto the scene and into the reader's heart without even a by your leave, and the Austins almost take a back seat to their new friends, their new neighborhood, their new life. I love L'Engle's New York City. I love the way she just plops her quiet family down in the middle of a boiling and boisterous city and allows them to explore and be worked upon and changed by its life and color and variety. The cathedral itself is essentially a character in its own right, serving as the perfect backdrop for the secret plots and underhanded machinations that take place within the pages of this story. Ms. L'Engle was writer-in-residence at this very cathedral for many years, and her knowledge of (and love for) its halls and corners and denizens is evident here. To say nothing of the crossover characters with which she graces the tale. Canon Tallis is a particular favorite and one I am always relieved to see show up, both for his keen intelligence and his checkered background. I knew the children would be safer with him at their backs. But things do get decidedly bleak (and a fair bit deranged) before they get better. But if a love of mystery lurks anywhere in your heart, you do not want to pass this one up. L'Engle's lovely words wrap around these precocious children and see them through to the very end. I think I've been in love with Dave ever since I first read this book, and it is his journey that is the most compelling to me. A true standout in the middle of an excellent series.
August 16, 2019
The only reason I’m giving this book 3 stars instead of 2 is because it breaks my heart to speak badly about Madeleine L’Engle. Up until now I’ve loved the Austin Family chronicles. The books show such a comforting view of 1950’s and 60’s America and focus on Vicky Austin as she grows up. The Young Unicorns has so many bizarre plot threads: a genie and a magic lamp, a crazed bishop, a teen gang who is terrorizing the city, a music prodigy blinded by a thief, the development of a micro ray. It’s as though Madeline L’Engle couldn’t make up her mind whether she wanted to write a family drama, mystery or fantasy so she crammed a little bit of everything into this book. The Austin family was only a small part of the book and it’s a shame because they are the best part of the book. Even the title doesn’t make sense to me – The Young Unicorns?? There are no unicorns. I guess it’s a reference to how rare young and innocent people like the Austins are. I’m looking forward to book #4 – A Ring of Endless Light – the focus in the next book is Vicky and her family. Thank goodness!
October 28, 2016
I really didn't like this book. The atmosphere of the book is disturbing, the main plot is ridiculous, but it is the lack of characterization that is the main flaw. I have read other books about the Austins and enjoyed their understanding of each other and the rapport between the family members. And who are David and Emily? They appear in the story with no introduction or explanation, and turn out to be key players in the plot.
I have read The Wrinkle in Time more than once, and really enjoyed The Ring of Endless Light, also about the Austins.
The Young Unicorns was a real disappointment.
I have read The Wrinkle in Time more than once, and really enjoyed The Ring of Endless Light, also about the Austins.
The Young Unicorns was a real disappointment.
September 22, 2020
The Young Unicorns differs completely from the previous two novels in Madeleine L’Engle’s Austin Family Chronicles. The first novel, Meet the Austins, introduces us both to the lovely Austin family but also to the theme of the importance of family — which is defined more by love than blood. The second, The Moon by Night, is one of the best, most realistic coming-of-age stories I’ve read, despite its original release being 1963; the novel holds up well nearly 60 years later.
However, The Young Unicorns most resembles The Arm of the Starfish, published just two years earlier; indeed, Canon John Calvin O’Keefe, a main character in The Arm of the Starfish, is mentioned. In both, science-fiction melds with a suspenseful thriller, where the forces of innocence and compassion combat egomania and a hunger for power, not always winning. Phrased bluntly like that, it makes it sound as if L’Engle had penned a shallow polemic, but it’s a testament to her writing that The Young Unicorns never becomes twee or predictable. The Moon by Night remains my favorite book in the series, but it only beats this one by a hair.
However, The Young Unicorns most resembles The Arm of the Starfish, published just two years earlier; indeed, Canon John Calvin O’Keefe, a main character in The Arm of the Starfish, is mentioned. In both, science-fiction melds with a suspenseful thriller, where the forces of innocence and compassion combat egomania and a hunger for power, not always winning. Phrased bluntly like that, it makes it sound as if L’Engle had penned a shallow polemic, but it’s a testament to her writing that The Young Unicorns never becomes twee or predictable. The Moon by Night remains my favorite book in the series, but it only beats this one by a hair.
August 10, 2012
The Young Unicorns is the third book about the Austin family. This book gets a little bit more fantastical, but L'Engle was still trying to remain more or less within the confines of science fiction rather than fantasy (well, I guess Wrinkle could be considered SF, but Planet - which is my favorite - has got to be fantasy, hasn't it? Unicorns and time travel?); most of the things that happen really could happen given the technology to do so.
The Young Unicorns focuses more on Josiah "Dave" Davidson, a new character, and less on the Austins. I like Dave (and I think he deserves better than Suzy, whom he marries according to the family tree in the front of the book, but perhaps Suzy improves upon maturity. I don't care for her in any of these first five Austin books and haven't read Wasp), and it's interesting to see the Austins from an outside perspective. I also like Emily, Mr. Theo, and of course Canon Tallis.
The plot in this book is a lot of fun, and the characters are great. There is a real sense of danger, which is often missing from YA; the suspense is well-done in this book. (L'Engle is good at creating that sense of danger; I had nightmares about Echthroi in my toothpaste when I was a kid.) And best of all, no Zachary Gray!
The Young Unicorns focuses more on Josiah "Dave" Davidson, a new character, and less on the Austins. I like Dave (and I think he deserves better than Suzy, whom he marries according to the family tree in the front of the book, but perhaps Suzy improves upon maturity. I don't care for her in any of these first five Austin books and haven't read Wasp), and it's interesting to see the Austins from an outside perspective. I also like Emily, Mr. Theo, and of course Canon Tallis.
The plot in this book is a lot of fun, and the characters are great. There is a real sense of danger, which is often missing from YA; the suspense is well-done in this book. (L'Engle is good at creating that sense of danger; I had nightmares about Echthroi in my toothpaste when I was a kid.) And best of all, no Zachary Gray!
July 30, 2017
This was my least favourite book of the Austin Family series. I think it tried to be a mystery but it was just so hard to get interested in. I felt like there should have been a book before this one to explain a lot of what happened. Let's just say that bishops, abandoned subway stations, genie's and lasers don't belong in the same book. Maybe it is one of those books where it is better when you read it as a child?
September 1, 2020
I totally went out of order in this series BUT I have a couple of good reasons:
That being said, I'm sure one day I will dive into this series in the correct order. Maybe. Who knows. I like to go rogue on all things book related. Work related too, let's be honest.
Weirdly enough this has been on my TBR since 2016 - yikes! So me finding this book was obviously a sign that I had to dive into - ya know? The Young Unicorns was an okay book. Pretty weird but somehow the story and characters worked for me. Sometimes you need weird.
Without reading the other books, it did seem pretty obvious that the Austen family wasn't the main focus. Which okay, it's still my bad for diving into book 3 but whatever. Go with it people. Instead of the Austen's, you get to meet Josiah/Dave. He was pretty interesting but honestly... why Suzy? Ugh, he deserved way better than her.
In the end, it was cute and fun light read.
1) It worked for a challenge
2) I was way too lazy to see if any other book in the series worked for it instead
3) It was pretty easy to get a hold of
That being said, I'm sure one day I will dive into this series in the correct order. Maybe. Who knows. I like to go rogue on all things book related. Work related too, let's be honest.
Weirdly enough this has been on my TBR since 2016 - yikes! So me finding this book was obviously a sign that I had to dive into - ya know? The Young Unicorns was an okay book. Pretty weird but somehow the story and characters worked for me. Sometimes you need weird.
Without reading the other books, it did seem pretty obvious that the Austen family wasn't the main focus. Which okay, it's still my bad for diving into book 3 but whatever. Go with it people. Instead of the Austen's, you get to meet Josiah/Dave. He was pretty interesting but honestly... why Suzy? Ugh, he deserved way better than her.
In the end, it was cute and fun light read.
July 22, 2021
I first read this book out of context of the series, when I was in 4th grade, and I figured the themes were simply too mature for me to understand at the time - that must have been why it went over my head. Rereading the entire Austin Family Chronicles now, as an adult, the book still doesn't quite make sense and disconnects severely from the rest of the chronicles. It's an interesting story, but doesn't fit with the other books.
September 8, 2017
Not my favorite of the Austins' series--too much "mystery", not enough Vicky/young romance. The mystery is kind of hokey, too, but I guess I can't expect too much from a YA, I just hold L'Engle to a higher standard in general, though.
August 23, 2019
Another Austin story and wow! isn't it different both in tone and octave 🤭, cause we do get loads of music in this precious, which is so very wonderful. We have a host of new characters (Mr Theotocoupulos and Canon Tallis being singularly wonderful, with wit and fun that had me mesmerized) the slightly somber feeling hovering, reminiscent of Moon by Night, yet not so bone-marrowly pervasive that it upsets you in a disquieting way. It's a mysterious kind of somberness which is the reason the book is more a detective story than the usual first-person Vicky account from the first two books. Now the focus is more on Josiah (Dave) Davidson (who is awesome in a very swaggery kind of way, Zachary and Andy all mixed together, yet with a uniqueness wonderful to behold) who finds himself in a mysterious, hardly believable plot, dragging along the Austins, the dear Austins, in a mad version of New York, in "parlous times" ruled in fear by a gang of Alphabats, a member of which Dave used to be, trying as hard as anyone to get rid of the "mark", the mark of sin and delinquency, trying nonetheless to find who he truly is and to make sense of all that happens around him. Alongside we have vicious doctors, petty make-believe bishops, swarty deans and mysterious canons.
I was surprised to find myself often feeling that I was again reading about the Murrys, mistaking Vicky for Meg, Rob for Charles Wallace and the parents for the Murrys parents, and I actually got the feeling of the cosmic danger prevalent in the Wrinkle series, what with the evil lurking on every step, Echtroi distorting and confusing, trying to conform and thus distroy more easily, a force in this case which threatens to distroy not only the order of the city but also the family unity that used to be so warm and close. And I could not help see the main engine, the Laser, the Micro-Ray, as some sort of the Ring in Tolkien's masterpiece, with a self-righteous eccentric trying to do just what someone wielding the ring would do, whether is someone good like Gandalf or bad like Sauron, make of it a tool for coercion, to coerce the world, to transform and control it. The ring that for ever so long changed, distorted and filled every kind, hobbit heart with fear, uncertainty, disquiet and foreboding. And also maybe because Dave first sees him as an ape, I could not help thinking of Shift, the ape from The Last Battle, plotting and ordering, pretending to do good by people, and managing only to distort and thwart and blemishing, all for his own purposes.
Oh, I liked this story so much that I wished it'd go on and on, the new characters becoming very dear to me, and I am glad that Madeleine L'Engle wrote this precious, which not many fans seem to enjoy that much, how she skillfully made all the seams come together in a delicate but beautiful pattern, finishing with a dear quote by Saint Macrina, which I was very pleased to discover.
I was surprised to find myself often feeling that I was again reading about the Murrys, mistaking Vicky for Meg, Rob for Charles Wallace and the parents for the Murrys parents, and I actually got the feeling of the cosmic danger prevalent in the Wrinkle series, what with the evil lurking on every step, Echtroi distorting and confusing, trying to conform and thus distroy more easily, a force in this case which threatens to distroy not only the order of the city but also the family unity that used to be so warm and close. And I could not help see the main engine, the Laser, the Micro-Ray, as some sort of the Ring in Tolkien's masterpiece, with a self-righteous eccentric trying to do just what someone wielding the ring would do, whether is someone good like Gandalf or bad like Sauron, make of it a tool for coercion, to coerce the world, to transform and control it. The ring that for ever so long changed, distorted and filled every kind, hobbit heart with fear, uncertainty, disquiet and foreboding. And also maybe because Dave first sees him as an ape, I could not help thinking of Shift, the ape from The Last Battle, plotting and ordering, pretending to do good by people, and managing only to distort and thwart and blemishing, all for his own purposes.
Oh, I liked this story so much that I wished it'd go on and on, the new characters becoming very dear to me, and I am glad that Madeleine L'Engle wrote this precious, which not many fans seem to enjoy that much, how she skillfully made all the seams come together in a delicate but beautiful pattern, finishing with a dear quote by Saint Macrina, which I was very pleased to discover.
September 29, 2018
I love Madeline L'Engle. Her books are not only good stories, but she deals with important themes, too. This book is a suspense novel, but it's also an extended discussion about agency, freedom, and identity. Lovely story with characters you care about.
September 2, 2007
Although I'm not a big reader of fantasy, I absolutely love Madeleine L'Engle's books. It doesn't matter if you are a grown-up, and this book is billed as young adult; read it anyway!
L'Engle explores the topic of a powerful gang in New York City (not your typical shoot-out gang, but more psychological and sinister), which meets in an abandoned subway station. The leader has come into the possession of a powerful laser, which he uses to control his subjects. He obtained the laser by breaking into the apartment of the scientist who developed it, blinding the scientist's musically talented daughter, Emily, in the process.
The gang is working to control New York City, and travels through a series of subway tunnels. The workings of the Alphabats (as they call themselves) intersect with the lives of Emily and the Austin family (from another L'Engle series), who are on a year's sabbatical in New York.
I don't have the words to describe how gripping this book is. The point of the novel is not to terrify the reader, but to explore issues of morality, and to a lesser extent, religion, and how good can triumph over evil.
L'Engle explores the topic of a powerful gang in New York City (not your typical shoot-out gang, but more psychological and sinister), which meets in an abandoned subway station. The leader has come into the possession of a powerful laser, which he uses to control his subjects. He obtained the laser by breaking into the apartment of the scientist who developed it, blinding the scientist's musically talented daughter, Emily, in the process.
The gang is working to control New York City, and travels through a series of subway tunnels. The workings of the Alphabats (as they call themselves) intersect with the lives of Emily and the Austin family (from another L'Engle series), who are on a year's sabbatical in New York.
I don't have the words to describe how gripping this book is. The point of the novel is not to terrify the reader, but to explore issues of morality, and to a lesser extent, religion, and how good can triumph over evil.
January 6, 2019
One of the things L'Engle does best is carefully intertwine her otherwise disparate tales. I delighted in stumbling across peripheral characters whom I recognized as well-loved protagonists from her other series. The Austins serve as a homey, grounding backdrop for the story of a gifted, troubled former gang member in 1960s New York City. I read and reread this tale as a young adult but was saddened to discover upon picking it up again maybe a year ago that it doesn't age as well as I'd hoped. But L'Engle's descriptions of cozy, functional, imperfect family life stand out, and her treatment of high-church music-liturgical culture resonates.
March 21, 2018
I liked the atmosphere in this book, an almost noir feel of New York City. After re-reading A Wrinkle in Time a few weeks ago (and seeing the movie), I decided to read all of L'Engle's YA books in publication order. Even though there are 3 series, a number of the characters crossover, albeit only a sentence or two, in more than one series. It was a good choice to read them in pub. order.
July 8, 2012
I just don't like L'Engle's intrigue novels as much as her other ones -- maybe because I like the other ones so much. I think the intrigue ones try to be realistic, but they come off as less grounded in reality than the Wrinkle in Time series.
September 10, 2018
Everyone in this book is angry. It feels very much a product of the mid-60's, when Americans were shocked by the social upheaval. I think I get what L'Engle is trying to get at but it feels clunky with not fully realized ideas.
November 1, 2019
I want to love these books because I love the rest of the books I've read by Madeleine L'Engle, but I am struggling to get into this series...
September 7, 2023
What a bizarre and lovely instalment in this series. The first introduces the Austins and their home life, the second focuses on Vicky's angsty rebellious teenage phase as they roadtrip their way around America to New York, and where we land here is when they've settled in New York. But this book is so unlike the first two. It's my favourite so far - it rocketed up there when I realised what a topsy-turvy, tightly-woven explosion of a book it is.
TYU is incredibly atmospheric. It's creepy. It's melancholic. It's vibrant. It's got a vaguely gothic urban fantasy feel to it. The themes, the storytelling, the pacing, the many moving pieces are all just fantastic. And it has some of the best bits in this series so far: of prickly Josiah Davidson, as tightly closed as a fist, trying and failing to resist the opening power of love; the patchwork neighbourhood community in a city as dense and busy as New York City; the palpable fear of a parent for the safety of their child; the ugliness of evil and the beauty of goodness; the gathering of many different people (scientists, children, priests, rabbis, cranky piano teachers) into a circle of kindness. TYU also talks about a surprising range of things: power-hunger, free will, knowledge vs. wisdom, individual thought vs. groupthink / isolation vs. community.
FASCINATING STUFF!!! I would love to reread this again sometime, especially focusing on themes of innocence (childhood or ignorance) and corruption (dangerous knowledge or learning wisdom or maturity).
Some of my favourite parts:
- "I believe that people become trustworthy only by being trusted" (Dr Austin, 117)
- "If no demand is put on you, then you are in a sense excluded." / "From what?" / "Life itself. To be demanded of gives us dignity." (Rabbi Levy to Rob, 126)
- "Think of taking a vicious degenerate, someone whose willful descent into evil has made him subhuman in every way. A brief and painless touch by the Micro-Ray can turn him into a happy law-abiding citizen. What do you think of that?" / For a long moment Tallis did not answer. Then he said, "My Lord, I think that is monstrous, too." / "Why?" / "Because it would be to take away man's freedom, my Lord. Because to take away a man's freedom of choice, even his freedom to make the wrong choice, is to manipulate him as though he were a puppet and not a person." (139, Bishop Fall and Canon Tallis)
- "...it's all about what Grandfather's always saying, how we can't love each other if we separate ourselves from anybody, anybody at all, and how anything that happens to anybody in the world really happens to everybody" (142, Suzy)
TYU is incredibly atmospheric. It's creepy. It's melancholic. It's vibrant. It's got a vaguely gothic urban fantasy feel to it. The themes, the storytelling, the pacing, the many moving pieces are all just fantastic. And it has some of the best bits in this series so far: of prickly Josiah Davidson, as tightly closed as a fist, trying and failing to resist the opening power of love; the patchwork neighbourhood community in a city as dense and busy as New York City; the palpable fear of a parent for the safety of their child; the ugliness of evil and the beauty of goodness; the gathering of many different people (scientists, children, priests, rabbis, cranky piano teachers) into a circle of kindness. TYU also talks about a surprising range of things: power-hunger, free will, knowledge vs. wisdom, individual thought vs. groupthink / isolation vs. community.
FASCINATING STUFF!!! I would love to reread this again sometime, especially focusing on themes of innocence (childhood or ignorance) and corruption (dangerous knowledge or learning wisdom or maturity).
Some of my favourite parts:
- "I believe that people become trustworthy only by being trusted" (Dr Austin, 117)
- "If no demand is put on you, then you are in a sense excluded." / "From what?" / "Life itself. To be demanded of gives us dignity." (Rabbi Levy to Rob, 126)
- "Think of taking a vicious degenerate, someone whose willful descent into evil has made him subhuman in every way. A brief and painless touch by the Micro-Ray can turn him into a happy law-abiding citizen. What do you think of that?" / For a long moment Tallis did not answer. Then he said, "My Lord, I think that is monstrous, too." / "Why?" / "Because it would be to take away man's freedom, my Lord. Because to take away a man's freedom of choice, even his freedom to make the wrong choice, is to manipulate him as though he were a puppet and not a person." (139, Bishop Fall and Canon Tallis)
- "...it's all about what Grandfather's always saying, how we can't love each other if we separate ourselves from anybody, anybody at all, and how anything that happens to anybody in the world really happens to everybody" (142, Suzy)
January 21, 2019
This was an interesting book that didn't start at all as I had been expecting. It has a decidedly different feel to The Moon by Night which I wasn't expecting and there was a slightly weird, "does this fit in the real world" sense to it that threw me off.
However, the answer all that was to trust the author. She pulls it all together and makes it all fall together in a most satisfactory way. That slight weirdness doesn't totally disappear (but don't worry about it) and leaves me wondering if there was something in the zeitgeist of when it was written (it was first published in 1968) that I, born a year later on the other side of the world, I unable to pick up on.
It's also aiming to be futuristic (there's an author's note in the beginning saying some things - I suspect mainly the subject of Dr Austin's research - are ahead of us) but written 50 years ago, which may be a contribution to that slightly surreal feeling.
It doesn't matter. It works.
I took a few notes along the way, the main one being in regards to the timeline compared to the Murray-O'Keefes, which I mentioned confused me in my review of the previous book. This book indicates that the Austins are supposed to be a generation after the Murrays (Dr and Mrs Austin would be contemporaries of Meg and Calvin). To me, both series read as contemporaneous to when they were written, which brings in the discrepancy. But this explains the Zach and Polly thing that was confusing me.
I remain confused about the chronological order of both series of books, but I can live with that.
I thought the idea of violence as a disease was an interesting one. I'm not exactly sure I agree with it. Maybe as a contagion, which is almost the same thing but not quite. Food for thought, anyway.
I did make a note when I was reading this (at 65%) because I'd made a guess about one of the things that was going on and I wanted to record when I twigged if I turned out to be right. I was right and knowing that thing was what made the weirdness into not-weirdness. (Can I be more vague than that?)
The horrible racism of one of the villains, once revealed, did seem a bit on the nose compared to the implicit diversity of the "good guys" but hey, at least the racist got his just desserts, which doesn't always seem to happen these days.
It's a good book. Once my teetering pile of library books that have turned up eases a little, I suspect I'll go on to the next one.
However, the answer all that was to trust the author. She pulls it all together and makes it all fall together in a most satisfactory way. That slight weirdness doesn't totally disappear (but don't worry about it) and leaves me wondering if there was something in the zeitgeist of when it was written (it was first published in 1968) that I, born a year later on the other side of the world, I unable to pick up on.
It's also aiming to be futuristic (there's an author's note in the beginning saying some things - I suspect mainly the subject of Dr Austin's research - are ahead of us) but written 50 years ago, which may be a contribution to that slightly surreal feeling.
It doesn't matter. It works.
I took a few notes along the way, the main one being in regards to the timeline compared to the Murray-O'Keefes, which I mentioned confused me in my review of the previous book. This book indicates that the Austins are supposed to be a generation after the Murrays (Dr and Mrs Austin would be contemporaries of Meg and Calvin). To me, both series read as contemporaneous to when they were written, which brings in the discrepancy. But this explains the Zach and Polly thing that was confusing me.
I remain confused about the chronological order of both series of books, but I can live with that.
I thought the idea of violence as a disease was an interesting one. I'm not exactly sure I agree with it. Maybe as a contagion, which is almost the same thing but not quite. Food for thought, anyway.
I did make a note when I was reading this (at 65%) because I'd made a guess about one of the things that was going on and I wanted to record when I twigged if I turned out to be right. I was right and knowing that thing was what made the weirdness into not-weirdness. (Can I be more vague than that?)
The horrible racism of one of the villains, once revealed, did seem a bit on the nose compared to the implicit diversity of the "good guys" but hey, at least the racist got his just desserts, which doesn't always seem to happen these days.
It's a good book. Once my teetering pile of library books that have turned up eases a little, I suspect I'll go on to the next one.
May 10, 2022
I'm on a Madeleine L'Engle kick because I follow her on Instagram and as I read her quotes I am reminded how wise she was/is. I have never read this one and I liked it fine, but it's not my favorite. At first I thought I had missed something because I hadn't read the previous book but I think she just started this one in medias res, which is interesting.
There are no unicorns in the book but I found this:
"The Young Unicorns, takes its title from an apocryphal writing of St. Macrina: "In their early days they were like the unicorn, wild and uncommitted, which creature cannot be caught by the hunter, no matter how skillful. Nay, but he can only be tamed of his own free will." https://scifi.stackexchange.com/quest...
Somewhere else I read that Emily and Dave are the young unicorns in the novel. And the old unicorns are the Dean and Mr. Theo.
Here is a great quote:
"And it's all about what Grandfather's always saying, how we can't love each other if we separate ourselves from anybody, anybody at all, and how anything that happens to anybody in the world really happens to everybody. And Grandfather says that you sort of understand this especially in a family." (p. 205)
Also this:
They're a good family...One can tell a great deal around a dinner table...I think the closest we ever come in this naughty world to realizing unity in diversity is around a family table. I felt it at their table, the wholeness of the family unit, freely able to expand to include friends, to include me even through Austin's and my suspicions of each other, and yet each person in that unit complete, individual, unique, valued.
And (because I love to read about drinking tea) this:
He put the tray down on a long marble table in front of the fire. The Dean seated himself and lifted an enormous chintz tea cozy from a chipped earthenware teapot, incongruous in the midst of a handsome silver tea service,. There were eggs in china cups, a plate of muffins dripping with butter, and a raisin cake.
There are no unicorns in the book but I found this:
"The Young Unicorns, takes its title from an apocryphal writing of St. Macrina: "In their early days they were like the unicorn, wild and uncommitted, which creature cannot be caught by the hunter, no matter how skillful. Nay, but he can only be tamed of his own free will." https://scifi.stackexchange.com/quest...
Somewhere else I read that Emily and Dave are the young unicorns in the novel. And the old unicorns are the Dean and Mr. Theo.
Here is a great quote:
"And it's all about what Grandfather's always saying, how we can't love each other if we separate ourselves from anybody, anybody at all, and how anything that happens to anybody in the world really happens to everybody. And Grandfather says that you sort of understand this especially in a family." (p. 205)
Also this:
They're a good family...One can tell a great deal around a dinner table...I think the closest we ever come in this naughty world to realizing unity in diversity is around a family table. I felt it at their table, the wholeness of the family unit, freely able to expand to include friends, to include me even through Austin's and my suspicions of each other, and yet each person in that unit complete, individual, unique, valued.
And (because I love to read about drinking tea) this:
He put the tray down on a long marble table in front of the fire. The Dean seated himself and lifted an enormous chintz tea cozy from a chipped earthenware teapot, incongruous in the midst of a handsome silver tea service,. There were eggs in china cups, a plate of muffins dripping with butter, and a raisin cake.
December 22, 2022
I think this is the first L'Engle book I've ever read that I didn't love. Honestly, I'm as shocked as you are.
Clearly, I have a lot of time L'Engle, even when her plots get kind of wacky. But this one was a little too wacky for me. Lasers and genies, and the worst ever name of a street gang. Plus, we spent a lot of time with Dave, and I wanted more Austins, especially more Vicky, who was kind of a pill in this book. Usually L'Engle's teen protagonists have a lot more dignity and relatability, but that just didn't come through this time.
I'm glad I finally read this, because I've been wanting to finish the whole Austin series for years, but this was kind of a disappointment at the end of the day.
Clearly, I have a lot of time L'Engle, even when her plots get kind of wacky. But this one was a little too wacky for me. Lasers and genies, and the worst ever name of a street gang. Plus, we spent a lot of time with Dave, and I wanted more Austins, especially more Vicky, who was kind of a pill in this book. Usually L'Engle's teen protagonists have a lot more dignity and relatability, but that just didn't come through this time.
I'm glad I finally read this, because I've been wanting to finish the whole Austin series for years, but this was kind of a disappointment at the end of the day.
June 26, 2020
"I think the closest we ever come in this naughty world to realizing unity in diversity is around a family table. I felt at their table, the wholeness of the family unit, freely able to expand to include friends, to include me even through Austin's and my suspicions of each other, and yet each person in that unit complete, individual, unique, valued."
When I was a youngster, I couldn't really get into this book. I tried and tried and tried. Funny how that is because reading it now, I was so enthralled!
I loved the mystery, the scenes at the Cathedral, the moral lessons, the changing family dynamics -yet- the way the family determined to remain close, and I loved how the Austins once again met cross over characters from the Wrinkle in Time series.
When I was a youngster, I couldn't really get into this book. I tried and tried and tried. Funny how that is because reading it now, I was so enthralled!
I loved the mystery, the scenes at the Cathedral, the moral lessons, the changing family dynamics -yet- the way the family determined to remain close, and I loved how the Austins once again met cross over characters from the Wrinkle in Time series.
April 5, 2024
Omg this book was simply fantastic! While I did like the other books, this is by far the best one. While the other two were more 'slice-if-life-ey', this one had more intrigue and mystery, so yea, it made it fantastic.
May 4, 2020
The sudden shift in tone and narrator was jarring, but worthwhile.
May 4, 2023
Enjoyed this one a ton.
Editing to add: Have been reflecting on how this book has stood out to me since I read it as a kid. Parts were incomprehensible (not just the ecclesiastical parts, but yeah those parts too), but it made a big impression. Maybe I've loved fiction that asks big questions for a long time. Maybe L'Engle's speculative fiction is much better than her realistic fiction.
(Also, please spare a quiet moment for 13-year-old me trying to sort out all the stuff about the Cannon and the Dean with just a dictionary for reference, ha ha.)
Editing to add: Have been reflecting on how this book has stood out to me since I read it as a kid. Parts were incomprehensible (not just the ecclesiastical parts, but yeah those parts too), but it made a big impression. Maybe I've loved fiction that asks big questions for a long time. Maybe L'Engle's speculative fiction is much better than her realistic fiction.
(Also, please spare a quiet moment for 13-year-old me trying to sort out all the stuff about the Cannon and the Dean with just a dictionary for reference, ha ha.)
April 11, 2013
The key to a good epigraph is finding something that sparks interest in the reader at the beginning but knocks him flat with its emotional voltage if he happens to re-read it afterward. L'Engle proved her epigraph-choosing mettle with the use of a sentence and a half referencing the untameability of the unicorn. It's a perfect fit for the story.
At least, it is to the reader like me who fires up with love for the young protagonist. Josiah—no, boy, I'm not just calling you Dave, not when there's so much beauty and dignity in your real name—is the sort to stir motherly impulses as well as sympathetic ones: a surly young introvert, too bitter to ask for help escaping the long-reaching tentacles of a dangerous past, but possessing a gentle heart and a nascent trustworthiness under the resentment and off-putting coldness. The story is of the crux moment of his life, the balance point where he either surrenders backward into the quicksand or accepts the outstretched hand above him and pulls free.
The third person omniscient narrative doesn't separate him from the reader, and I spent the book wanting to plead with him and fight for him and hug him by turns. None of which he'd have been likely to appreciate, but it's the reader's prerogative to feel.
L'Engle's naming choices often carry some symbolic value, and the connection of Josiah Davidson to the Davidic king of Israel is openly remarked on in the book and reinforced by his father's name. Nor is it the only name of interest, as exemplified by Canon Tallis—the surname references the Jewish prayer shawl—and Mr. Theotocopoulos, the latter of which suggests the Theotokos (the ancient Marian name 'God-bearer', usually brought into English as "mother of God"). Whether the common names are hand-picked for meaning is less clear, but there are some curious parallels—notably Emily Gregory, whose name loosely means "watchful rival"; she's the blinded but perceptive angel against the darkness in Josiah/Dave's past. And even the nickname Dave comes from the Hebrew for beloved.
As with most of L'Engle's work, the characters carry the book—which is really why I love her. There's so much back story to the main few that I felt like I'd missed a previous installment. Which, in the Austins' case, I suppose I had, but that feeling came more from Emily and Dave than the others. It's an interesting example of kicking off narrative in the middle of a story, anyway.
The novel attempts to work on several fronts and succeeds better on some than on others. As futuristic tale, it feels rather outdated; lasers were new technology in the sixties when the book was written, but now they're commonly used in surgeries without having gained any notable popularity as an alternative means of getting high. As mystery, the book is startlingly successful; all the clues were present, yet the plot twist still came as a stunner. As character study of an innocent family's brush with deadly evil, it's light but beautiful. As old-school young adult novel, it's saved from being annoyingly preachy only by its moments of unique wisdom. And as a story of redemption, it's sweet and, in its own simple way, astounding.
L'Engle's novels, while nearly always likable, are often a little uneven, especially when submitted to the test of time. This book isn't perfect, but the story caught me very personally and got into my affections. Where that wasn't owing to Josiah Davidson or Emily or the bright-eyed, bright-hearted little Rob, whom I also loved, it was owing to music.
Music got to play its own role in the book, and L'Engle knows her stuff. She makes numerous thoughtful references to great composers and works, such as the moment where Dave picks up his English horn and plays the solo from the prelude to the third act of Tristan and Isolde. And her scenes of Mr. Theo playing the cathedral organ are almost enough to make the reader feel the blast of sound coming from the pipes. The skill behind the art is also treated attentively; Emily's blindness combines with her musical prowess to give her an exceptional ability to listen as well as a powerful kinesthetic sense and memory. For such a short book, it's all spectacularly done.
The ending, if I'm being honest, is a little too much in the lessons-learned order. The groundwork is present, so the resolution itself is believable, but some of the dialogue toward the end is not, really. The final scene or two could certainly have been better handled.
That little flaw bothered me a bit, but love covers over a multitude of wrongs. I loved the story and the characters far too much to fail to forgive.
At least, it is to the reader like me who fires up with love for the young protagonist. Josiah—no, boy, I'm not just calling you Dave, not when there's so much beauty and dignity in your real name—is the sort to stir motherly impulses as well as sympathetic ones: a surly young introvert, too bitter to ask for help escaping the long-reaching tentacles of a dangerous past, but possessing a gentle heart and a nascent trustworthiness under the resentment and off-putting coldness. The story is of the crux moment of his life, the balance point where he either surrenders backward into the quicksand or accepts the outstretched hand above him and pulls free.
The third person omniscient narrative doesn't separate him from the reader, and I spent the book wanting to plead with him and fight for him and hug him by turns. None of which he'd have been likely to appreciate, but it's the reader's prerogative to feel.
L'Engle's naming choices often carry some symbolic value, and the connection of Josiah Davidson to the Davidic king of Israel is openly remarked on in the book and reinforced by his father's name. Nor is it the only name of interest, as exemplified by Canon Tallis—the surname references the Jewish prayer shawl—and Mr. Theotocopoulos, the latter of which suggests the Theotokos (the ancient Marian name 'God-bearer', usually brought into English as "mother of God"). Whether the common names are hand-picked for meaning is less clear, but there are some curious parallels—notably Emily Gregory, whose name loosely means "watchful rival"; she's the blinded but perceptive angel against the darkness in Josiah/Dave's past. And even the nickname Dave comes from the Hebrew for beloved.
As with most of L'Engle's work, the characters carry the book—which is really why I love her. There's so much back story to the main few that I felt like I'd missed a previous installment. Which, in the Austins' case, I suppose I had, but that feeling came more from Emily and Dave than the others. It's an interesting example of kicking off narrative in the middle of a story, anyway.
The novel attempts to work on several fronts and succeeds better on some than on others. As futuristic tale, it feels rather outdated; lasers were new technology in the sixties when the book was written, but now they're commonly used in surgeries without having gained any notable popularity as an alternative means of getting high. As mystery, the book is startlingly successful; all the clues were present, yet the plot twist still came as a stunner. As character study of an innocent family's brush with deadly evil, it's light but beautiful. As old-school young adult novel, it's saved from being annoyingly preachy only by its moments of unique wisdom. And as a story of redemption, it's sweet and, in its own simple way, astounding.
L'Engle's novels, while nearly always likable, are often a little uneven, especially when submitted to the test of time. This book isn't perfect, but the story caught me very personally and got into my affections. Where that wasn't owing to Josiah Davidson or Emily or the bright-eyed, bright-hearted little Rob, whom I also loved, it was owing to music.
Music got to play its own role in the book, and L'Engle knows her stuff. She makes numerous thoughtful references to great composers and works, such as the moment where Dave picks up his English horn and plays the solo from the prelude to the third act of Tristan and Isolde. And her scenes of Mr. Theo playing the cathedral organ are almost enough to make the reader feel the blast of sound coming from the pipes. The skill behind the art is also treated attentively; Emily's blindness combines with her musical prowess to give her an exceptional ability to listen as well as a powerful kinesthetic sense and memory. For such a short book, it's all spectacularly done.
The ending, if I'm being honest, is a little too much in the lessons-learned order. The groundwork is present, so the resolution itself is believable, but some of the dialogue toward the end is not, really. The final scene or two could certainly have been better handled.
That little flaw bothered me a bit, but love covers over a multitude of wrongs. I loved the story and the characters far too much to fail to forgive.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews