History Headscratchers / ASwiftlyTiltingPlanet

** As stated above, Charles Wallace’s change was to prevent an innocent child from being traumatized by witnessing a murder, not to keep an entire tribe in the dark about the world around them. And Gaudior’s objective was twofold: First, as he indicated in the story, this was a trial run for Charles Wallace going Within, allowing him to make a change in a low-stakes situation to prepare him for making the necessary changes to avert a nuclear war. Second, low stakes doesn’t mean no stakes. In L’Engle’s stories, every little decision can have an impact on the cosmos as a whole; thus, protecting an innocent child from being traumatized served a greater cosmic purpose, even if we, the reader, can’t see it. It may even serve as a stealth Aesop to the readers that every little decision counts, teaching us that while we may not be able to travel to other worlds or times and perform heroic acts to save the cosmos, we too can do our part, even if it’s just by keeping a child from seeing something inappropriate or traumatizing.

** As stated above, Charles Wallace’s change was to prevent an innocent child from being traumatized by witnessing a murder, not to keep an entire tribe in the dark about the world around them. And Gaudior’s objective was twofold: First, as he indicated in the story, this was a trial run for Charles Wallace going Within, allowing him to make a change in a low-stakes situation to prepare him for making the necessary changes to avert a nuclear war. Second, low stakes doesn’t mean no stakes. In L’Engle’s stories, every little decision can have an impact on the cosmos as a whole; thus, protecting an innocent child from being traumatized served a greater cosmic purpose, even if we, the reader, can’t see it.

*** OP here. As for Zillie, although the book does not discuss her ultimate fate, there is some indication that a LLewelyn Pugh was interested in her, only to be thwarted by Gedder. With Gedder out of the way, that relationship might have been successful. As for Matthew marrying Zillah, I read the Tor.com article too, and might have been persuaded but for the following. In my reading of the story, I noted that Matthew was considered, even by Zillah, as an ineligible marriage partner because of his injury. When I was younger, I simply assumed that this was due to prejudice regarding his disability; however, as an adult, I am aware that spinal injuries such as Matthew's are often associated with impotence, meaning that he could not have married Zillah, let alone fathered any children.

**** To be clear, we're not talking about a tribe learning to defend itself (or not), we're talking about a child witnessing (or not witnessing) a violent act, and possibly being traumatized or corrupted by it. It is implied later in the story (and in AnAcceptableTime) that the People of the Wind are capable of defending themselves.

*** But Gedder and Zillie were adopted by a perfectly normal farmer. They have very little connection with their biological parents, and Gedder ''still'' turns out to be a power-hungry bastard, who mustn't be allowed to marry Gwen, and Zillie... is still a pretty girl who mustn't be allowed to marry Richard.

**** But Gedder and Zillie were adopted by a perfectly normal farmer. They have very little connection with their biological parents, and Gedder ''still'' turns out to be a power-hungry bastard, who mustn't be allowed to marry Gwen, and Zillie... is still a pretty girl who mustn't be allowed to marry Richard.

*** Having children is more than passing on blood or DNA. It's also passing on ideals, beliefs, and other intangibles. By changing the ancestry of a genocidal madman, Charles Wallace ensures that, in the corrected timeline, Branzillo is raised to respect life rather than to seek destruction. The warmongering Branzillo, raised by his violent ancestry, sought to impose his will militarily. However, when he is changed to the more moral and peaceful "El Zarco," raised by his more peace-loving ancestry, in the end he seeks to instead prevent a war that would cost millions of lives.

*** Except that everything that sets things right involves making sure that the right person went on to have children. One of the pseudo-psychic characters even states at one point that it's 'wrong' for the people of one bloodline to mix with the people of another bloodline. We are effectively being told that if only a certain men had married the love interest instead of the other bad person hundreds or thousands of years ago the world would have avoided nuclear war in the late 20th century.

** Seems to be more of a SetRightWhatOnceWentWrong, as Gaudior implies that the book actually starts in a timeline caused by a Might Have Been that the Echthros almost made come true.

* So by making sure that certain people win or survive Charles Wallace is helping alter a man from a military dictator into a peace activist. Is this book encouraging eugenics?

** There seems to be some heavy InSpiteOfANail going on with respect to specific people, in that even if you change who someone's great-great-great-grandparents are, they still end up being basically the same person (unless they're not, like Madog Branzillo, although it's hard to tell what the extent of the change there was. He could be an entirely different person who coincidentally has the same name and office, or he could be the same person with a different temperament). There might also be some form of YouAlreadyChangedThePast although obviously that can't be applied to every part of the plot.