This was my umpteenth time reading H.G. Wells The Time Machine and I must say that this reading was the most enjoyable and I discovered much that I had not seen before when reading it just as entertainment.
I have 4 questions that I am left with after the reading:
1) Why if the time traveler promised to come back with proof "up to the hilt" has he never returned? Was it because he could not or would not?
2) The future that the time traveler ended up looking at was a future that did not include him in the process, i.e. when the time traveler went into the future he took himself out of the time line that lead there from the past. This could be taken to mean that what is really important is that we stay focused on the present, the here and now. But I do not think this is what Wells intended or even thought of, for if he did then the time traveler would have returned to his time and remained there and he did not. Which ties back into the first question why then has he not returned.
3) Which direction did the time traveler go into? The past? Or The Future? And how far? Unless I missed it in the reading Wells did not answer this for us. The movie versions both have. In them the time traveler goes boldly back into the future for love and to save humanity from itself. But I do not see anything in the reading were Wells points us in this direction.
And finally 4) If technology is bad for us how is it that the time traveler thinks that he can save the world using technology (i.e. the time machine) to save us? Wells does not give an answer but I do not think that the answer lies in more, better or even more complex machines. The answer rather has to rest with us or in us. Our morals, our politics, our economics et cetera. Machines are like weapons or tools it is how they are used that determines their value.