nara
-
Posts
727 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by nara
-
-
Was this the first confirmation we had that Jamiewas aware of Laoghaire's role in Claire being arrested and tried as a witch? I vaguely remember some discussion on that point last year in this forum.
-
Jenny and Ian could repopulate the world after the apocalypse! Baby number 3 already?! But it was a cutie, and I loved the scene with uncle Jamie.
I wonder if BPC forged Jamie's signature or if Jared did that...either way, what a brilliant and dickish move. Jamie has no choice but to support BPC.
So glad they brought Fergus with them! But was that a donkey he was riding? How will that keep up with the war horses? They'd better not take that child to war!
interesting that Rabbie MacNeil is still with Jenny. I wonder if he will be important.
Lord Lovat is horrible! I hope he dies in the war. So did he rape Jamie's grandmother? I was afraid that he was going to marry teenaged Laoghaire and give her a position of authority over Jamie and Claire.
I missed the credits at the beginning, so the appearance of Colum was a surprise. Glad to see him again! He seems to genuinely care about Jamie--certainly more than Jamie's grandfather. Happy he had Laoghaire beaten. Perhaps if Jamie hadn't prevented her original punishment, a lot of things would be different. I think that, right now, Laoghaire is genuinely sorry for what she did. However, she is still in love with Jamie, so I think she cannot be trusted. Note that her instinct was to give Simon a peek down her dress. At heart, she's promiscuous, which I don't judge in general, but she hasn't given up hope about Jamie.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, taanja said:
With another red-haired girl child?
I like my theory better! ;-)
As they would say in Game of Thrones, Jamie's seed is strong...
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, ganesh said:
Forget about Game of Thrones. J + C = G amirite?!
Having a stressful time right now, and that comment made me literally laugh out loud. Thanks, I needed that!
-
10 minutes ago, riverheightsnancy said:
I also cannot buy that Gellis is the daughter, because hey, wouldn't you recognize your own daughter? If they were separated at birth, sure, but I do not think the show is giving us those types of clues.
It was 1945 Claire who went back in time. She had not yet met her daughter, so she would not recognize her.
I'm not saying that this theory is right, but I don't think we have seen anything to disprove it so far.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, ganesh said:
So daughter number 2 is the red haired woman from the 60s right?
Wow! Interesting! She would know that Claire is her mother, but could not tell her for fear of changing Claire's actions. If would make sacrificing her own life during the trial so that Claire could get away have a completely different significance.
4 minutes ago, riverheightsnancy said:You mean Gellis? I don't think that the math can work out, but maybe. Wouldn't Gellis be in her early 30s when she is in Scotland? She is not portrayed as a young woman (like early 20s).
It depends on how long Geillis has been in the past. The baby was born in 1948/1949, so she would be around 20 years old when Geillis went back through the stones. However, if Geillis arrived in 1933, she would be 30 when she met Claire, so appropriate for the actress that played her.
It would also explain why a woman from the 20th century was so concerned with the Jacobites. Like her parents, she wanted to stop the destruction of the Scottish clans. Claire and Jamie chose to try to stop the Jacobite uprising and, because she knew that approach didn't work, she chose to try to win it by raising money from the people (via Dougal) to support BPC.
I love your theory, Ganesh!
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, ganesh said:
I was surprised that Claire is still around in 1954. I would have thought she would have tried to go back by then. Now I'm wondering if she'll meet the 1960s woman in real time.
I agree with Claire though that keeping the Count alive is a smarter move even though it would have been very easy to say he should die. She played that con really good though. Nice show. Her "oh ffs look when they rolled out the snake" was hilarious. But, sorry, Count, you reap what you sow.
I don't know how historically influential the count was, but I'm assuming we've screwed up history. Again.
I don't get why she didn't tell the straight up tell the king that BJR raped a boy though. She had a reasonable argument.
Claire had me figuratively rolling. I lied back and thought of England. Then: Oh, he's done already. Uh, ok.
Massive credit to Claire for being able to pull it together on her own in only a few weeks too. Also massively wise of Jamie to say, "Frank is your family too." Good call there.
Hey, look at it this way, Jamie! You're eskimo brothers with the king!
Especially making the point that Faith was also red haired. I think that the show has made that quite clear (heh).
Didn't Claire say she wanted to go back to Scotland? Are they bagging the plan to stop the battle? Seems kind of a waste given the enormous effort Jamie made to get into the confidence of Charlie. Not to mention he's leaving his cousin's business while he's absent.
1. I love the idea of Claire meeting Geillis before the latter goes back in time. It would explain why Geillis was always suspicious of Claire. She knew Claire, but Claire didn't know her yet.
2. I was also wondering why Jamie and later Claire did not tell everyone that BJR was raping Fergus. After all, even if they allowed a English officer a pass for rape, which they might do for diplomatic reasons to not create issues with the English, surely the homosexual aspect would have gotten him executed during that period. Perhaps Claire felt that since was not there to witness the rape, the king would not believe her. Or perhaps she knew that pandering to the king's whims was a more certain and faster way to get what she wanted.
3. I hope they explain before they leave how they plan to continue the BPC plan in Scotland. With Murtagh disposing of the stolen wine, the Comte dead, Sandringham out of the picture, and BPC discouraged and depressed (per last episode), perhaps they feel that they have accomplished their task by cutting off his funding. Of course, they would be wrong...Or maybe, they decide they can now focus on poisoning the Scots against BCP.
6 minutes ago, GenieinTX said:And my second take me out of the story was Raymond healing Claire. It seemed so unrealistic, but then I had to remind myself this was a story where multiple people time travel. It's such an odd thing. It's a time travel story, but every other element feels so real and like a normal drama. You sort of forget the mystical elements until they show their head and remind you.
I kinda had the same reaction to the healing. It's funny that we can accept time travel, but then be jarred by other shows of magic/mysticism in the show.
My observations:
- I'm not sure what the point of the heron was. Given the focus on Faith in the episode, it might have made more sense for Claire's 1950's daughter to see a picture of siblings and ask why she doesn't have one. Also, I would have thought that Massachusetts would have herons too, but I'm not claiming to be knowledgeable about that topic.
- I thought the hospital scenes and everyone's sadness at the loss of the baby were very well done. I haven't gotten as attached to the France supporting characters like I did with the Scotland ones, but this episode showed how much the characters in the show had bonded. I was particularly moved by Louise and it was in that scene that I actually cried. In the previous episode, we saw her be a real flake with her callous attitude towards the poor. For her to come to see Claire in a hospital for the poor and then for her to be the one to help Claire let go of the baby showed a maturity in her character that we had not seen before. I like it when characters are shown to have multiple layers.
- What is up with Buton? Is that dog just really well trained or somehow magical?
- I thought Fergus's reveal to Claire was handled well, though at first I yelled to my TV "they're not going to show that, are they?" I felt terrible that he spent weeks suffering alone and blaming himself. I hope at least that one of the servants tended to him, because he was probably injured in the process. Jamie's rage was well done too.
- I loved the trial scene, especially the beautiful room in which it was held. (Does anyone know if it is patterned after a real room in Versailles?) I was not expecting that abrupt end for St. Germain--I really thought he would last longer in the show and do more harm. I liked that Claire tried to save him, but that Raymond sacrificed him to make the trial look legit. The actor did a great job of portraying the fear of knowing he was going to die.
- I wonder if we will hear more about Les Disciples? It did appear that the St. Germain, King Louis, and the executioner were all part of that group. The king didn't seem to particularly enjoy the sex with Claire (as opposed to Jamie, whose first time with Claire was equally brief, but he seemed to really like it!) , so I assume that it was more a power play than anything else. It makes me wonder about the role of Les Disciples and the reason for going about raping women (a maidenhead is the entry ticket to the group). If it's just to show that they can do what they like, I wonder if BJR is part of that group too...If BJR is part of Les Disciples, the king's deliberate humiliation of him would have a different meaning, much like the way he allowed one of his fellow Disciples, St. Germain, to be executed.
- Why is Jame's beard so big, but his hair is actually shorter than when he went to jail?
- Agree with someone above who said this episode is all Claire/Caitriona.
-
2
-
6 hours ago, JapMo said:
I'll throw this in the mix and see what you think. How about Adam is the father of Jane's child...not Doug? Jane was lonely, Doug was gone a lot, Adam has grown up....1+1=3.
That's exactly what I thought. It's the only reason he wouldn't have run from Jane. Also, he seems to have been holding the gun, so he could have easily escaped from her.
11 hours ago, Black Knight said:This was not a good show. It's hard to count the number of things that were wrong with it...and yet, I loved it, mainly because of Willa Warren. I get that if there was a S2 there probably would have been a whole "Who Killed Bridey?" mystery where the strong implication in this episode that it was Willa would have just turned out to be a red herring, but since the show is cancelled I'm fine with just going with that implication and having it be Willa. The way the ep cut between Willa tearing up and Bridey's lifeless body as Claire spoke about the necessity of sacrifice adds another twisted layer of nuance to Willa's character and is a fitting end for her and her story with Bridey. It's so much more interesting for her to be the killer (I doubt she did it with her own two hands - she made a call to her co-conspirators to have it done) than for anyone else, like boring Danny, to be, that I'm just sticking with it as my personal canon.
So, in that light: Bridey really should have listened to herself when she asked why Willa would give up control, the one thing that makes her happy, and packed up and gotten the hell out of there. Willa already knew she couldn't trust Bridey; we saw her constantly lie to and keep secrets from Bridey. But it was still a big deal for Willa to be involved with Bridey at all. She had a soft spot for the woman. Not enough of one to let herself be owned, however. Bridey went from being amusing to being a major inconvenience to Willa and she had to go. Even paying Bridey off with eight years of exclusive access to stories about the governor wasn't enough, because that's only for eight years: Bridey could have still gone with the Adam-is-not-Adam story after that.
That's why I thought it was obviously Willa. If the show continued to season 2, everyone would have had some motive, but since it didn't, they left it with the obvious. In addition to the risk to her mother, Willa had probably been harboring anger against Bridey for years for teasing at the fair.
-
2
-
-
I called Bridey getting whacked, but assumed that it would be next season's mystery, whereas it seems pretty clear that Willa did it. The bunker scene was too long, but I am glad it changed Claire's,mind about Ben. Where has Adam been this whole time? He wasn't in the bunker with the FBI agent, so where did they keep him? And Jane knew this whole time!
Don't do it, Hank! That was my refrain for all his scenes. The collection of kids' stuff was creepy. Since they were all winter clothes, they wee all recently collected.
Shooting Doug in the crotch is pretty much what we all wanted to do, so that was satisfying.
-
6
-
-
14 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:
Interesting that this was the second episode in a row with no nudity. That must be a record for Outlander.
Speculation on what happened to Fergus? It wasn't specifically shown. So, could have been rape. Could have been being beaten or otherwise physically harmed - I mean, I'm guessing from the coat hanging up and the subsequent duel that it was BJR in the room and he did catch Fergus stealing. Was BJ in the act of cutting off Fergus' hand?
Quite a large assembly for a spur of the moment duel, I thought. So much for the gendarmes not patrolling that area of woods, huh? Guess both Jamie and BJR are off to the Bastille.
Where's Murtaugh? Just laying low after the wine heist?
You, I feel sorry for the Comte. He doesn't care about the Jacobite rebellion one way or another, and they are financially ruining him. He's simply collateral damage. You don't win being either a friend or an enemy of Claire's.
Jamie was awfully nice to be rubbing Claire's feet after she made him call off the duel. Hell, he might actually be a Saint.
I'm glad he set her straight on the 'he owed her a life' business though. That part of why he agreed made absolutely no sense to me though. I would never have been able to make the promise Claire did.
What was the point of the executioner detailing how a proper drawing and quartering is done to Claire - a Lady, a woman of noble birth (well, for all he knows)? And a pregnant Lady at that. Highly inappropriate dude. Did they just want to gross us out or is this something we might see in the future on the show? So many of the scenes in this season, not just this episode, Do Not Make Sense. Maybe it's fan service. But, imo, you shouldn't have to read the books, whether it's this show or the Harry Potter movies, for example, to understand what's going on. Otherwise, you're just not telling the story very well.
1. I can definitely live without the nudity, because I like the affection between them more, like when Jamie rubs her feet or kisses her belly.
2. I wonder if BJR would rape Fergus. Yes he's horrible and raped Jamie and would have raped Jenny and Claire, but surely pedophilia is a different mental state of mind...
3. I wonder if someone tipped off the gendarmes, like St. Germain perhaps?
4. The fact that your can feel sympathy for St Germain speaks well to your personality, but keep in mind that he was willing to risk smallpox coming into the harbor and infecting other innocent people and he poisoned a pregnant woman. He might also be behind Mary's rape, though that is not proven.
5. I can understand why Jamie wants Frank alive so that Claire can go back to him, if necessary. From what he's heard of Frank, they guy actually loved Claire and vice versa. He would want Claire to be safe and happy. However, I am not sure why he thinks the child would be able to go with her... Based on Claire's size, the rising would likely happen after she gives birth, so she and the child would be 2 separate bodies.
6. The purpose of the drawing and quartering story was to scare Claire--which it did. I was afraid she would get caught with Maitre Raymond a la Geillis Duncan. I suspect he may be sentenced to that fate later in he season.
My observations:
- Loved this episode! End at the right moment, IMO, because I can't wait for next week!
- I'm glad that Jamie and Claire did not stay angry for long. The show is much better when they are making googly eyes at each other.
- I thought Murtagh's disgust for Jamie "chickening out " of the duel was characteristic and I'm glad they brought him in the loop.
- Interesting that Claire has not learned anything about keeping herself safe, rather than running into danger. It make me bang my head against a wall, but it's also nice that she is consistently courageous.
- I like the relationship between Fergus and Jamie, but I think they take too many risks with his safety-- sending him to poison St. Germain's men and sending him alone through Paris at night to deliver messages.
- I felt a little sad for BPC. Yes, he's a doofus, but he was raised to believe in his family's rights and has put so much pressure on himself to bring them back to England and Scotland. To be thwarted time after time must be depressing. Plus, Louise picked her husband over him, and BPC must at least suspect the child she is carrying was his.
- Loved the scene with ladies discusing the fact that the most awful thing about the poverty of the people was that they had to witness it. Something tells me that those ladies will meet the guillotine in the future.
-
1
-
On 5/9/2016 at 10:57 PM, Madding crowd said:
I meant for the storyline in general. It would be very difficult for her to find out who a foster child had once belonged to and if it was so easy for her, why didn't the mother know where her son was? Bridey doesn't seem all that smart to me so it was a leap for me. A child that was taken away at two years old would have closed records at least until an adoption was made or he was returned to his parent. You cannot just look up the names of fostered kids. Mostly, I just find it too much of a surprise moment which this show has too many of.
Clearly she had sex with someone who had access to the list.
On 5/9/2016 at 6:07 AM, Free said:The Mob Doctor?
Wasn't Zach Gilford also in that show?
1. I guess this episode stops any lingering doubts about whether Hank is really a pedophile or if "he just was caught peeing near a playground".
2. Once again the Willa/Danny scene is my favorite, though I think she should have protested a little before admitting she was gay. I think that would have been more in keeping with the character. IIRC, when confronted about fAdam by Claire she first lied and then came clean.
-
I stopped watching mid season and came back for the finale. How did Alicia know about Kurt cheating? Did Diane confide in her? If so, that's a serious breach of trust.
-
18 minutes ago, Sonja said:
BTW, I love how whenever he says 'I will remember you in my prayers' it sounds like a threat or the CoE version of '**** off'.
LOL. That reminds me of the end of Sister Act when she says "bless you " and it sounds more like FU
-
2
-
-
Every time BPC says, "Mark my words," it sounds like "Mock my words," to me--which I am inclined to do.
-
5
-
-
7 hours ago, HumblePi said:
so... If Black Jack Randall was actually stampeded by a bunch of sheep or cows back at Wentworth, or if Jamie killed him in a duel, would Claire wake up in her brown Army nurse uniform back in 1942 England? (Aye, dinnae nay sense Sassenach)
We don't know where she would wake up, but it might be wherever she was before she met Frank. Time travel is tricky that way!
7 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:Not sure BJR is technically a "gentleman" in English aristocracy of the time. However, completely expected to see blood on Alex's hankerchief when he was coughing in the garden. I think Daisy called it: consumption (which is tuberculosis, right?)
In Castle Leoch, Colum refers to BJR as a gentleman when expressing some disbelief about why he would attack Claire. I assume that he (and Alex) are younger brothers in the family. The protection that BJR has from facing justice for his actions suggests that, in addition to Sandringham's sponsorship, he has important family connections. It was fairly normal for younger brothers to go into the army or clergy, and I believe that officers usually were gentlemen, not people who rose through the ranks.
Unlike some other posters, I don't think that Claire is stupid, but I do think she is a short-term thinker. She addresses one problem at a time. Jamie is a chess player, so I bet he thinks in a more iterative way- if A, then B, if X, then Y. Given her role as a healer, her way of thinking could be and advantage. They make a good combination.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, HumblePi said:
That's a great point you've made. Even after finding out that Jack Randall was still alive and Jamie wanted to kill him in a duel, why not let it happen if she really loves Jamie? Let Jack Randall die and allow Frank never to be born. She loves Jamie so she could then just relax and spend the rest of her life living with a hot red-headed Scot forever. Of course that could have backfired and Jamie could have been shot by Black Jack Randall and died there. Then she would have been stuck in ancient times with only Murtagh to keep her company. (ew)
If Frank wasn't born, Claire wouldn't have come to Scotland and gone through the stones...
-
6
-
-
I loved the way they did the return of Blackjack, with the Frasers forced to be civil. Loving King Louis XV's treatment of BJR. Finally some comeuppance, even slight. I hope that Louis continues to snub him.
When Claire looked like she was going to burn Mary's letter, I actually yelled "Bitch" at my television. Since I don't normally swear, I guess I must feel pretty strongly about her actions. I hate that she is interfering with Alex and Mary. I get that she feels guilty about betraying Frank,but why should they suffer? (BTW, I assume she didn't have time to worry about the future when rescuing Jamie, which is why she had no problem with BJR dying then.) I hope they ignore her and marry. BTW, why would BJR marry a "soiled woman"? He's not a viscount, but he is a gentleman --right? Claire may have just condemned Mary to a single life. Also, they have mentioned Alex being ill a couple of times. I hope they are not setting something up there.
Shouldn't Jamie have slapped BJR with a glove when challenging him to a duel? Or is that a fictional thing?
I thought Murtagh's guilt was appropriate (though unfounded ). I hope he's the one who gets the bad guys. Though it appears that since they were after the prize of a maidenhead, perhaps Claire was not the target.
It's sad that "I love my wife" is insufficient reason for not sleeping with a prostitute and he had to claim she is a witch. That's not going to come back and bite them!
I wonder if Jamie and Claire are going to adopt Fergus?
-
4
-
-
16 hours ago, dcalley said:
Ugh, it still pisses me off so much that he didn't.
Agreed, he was incredibly immature for not apologizing. I got the impression that he was ashamed and in denial, and apologizing would have meant acknowledging that his drinking was excessive.
-
1
-
-
I am definitely pro Sidney/Amanda (please don't throw things at me!) So I'm happy to see them together. However, I thought the build up to that moment was strange because Guy was relatively nice I this episode. On the other hand, perhaps that means she made her decision with a level head, rather than in the heat of the moment. It's ironic that she is giving up more now than if she had just gotten together with Sidney in the first place. We'll see if it lasts between them. At least, this should be the end of Sidney's excessive drinking and inappropriate behavior with young women.
Loved Leonard's arc this season, despite the broken heart. I believe this was his first love--right? I think he learned a lot from it and has really come into his own.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:
Not sure you understood my comment - I wasn't insulting Mary for not fighting at all. But while Claire tried to fight a little bit before Mary actually got raped, she was completely ineffectual: the attackers pretty much threw her off and then were able to restrain her. Until "La Dame Blance" thing, when suddenly she had the strength to throw off the man holding her and push away the man getting ready to rape her and also shove aside Mary's rapist. Conveniently (not for Mary) after Mary had already been raped. It seemed a little contrived to me.
Wasn't it last episode or the one before when Claire had her honeypot waxed in an effort to arouse Jamie? She seemed assertive enough climbing into bed and placing his hand between her legs. But then again, I understand what you mean about the prostitute - she could possibly have been even more aggressive. Then again, last week when a prostitute was hanging over his shoulder at the brothel, Jamie shrugged her off and she left easy enough, so I'm not going to buy that excuse for him either.
I just think it's a double standard. Imagine his reaction if Claire came home with bite marks on her upper inner thighs because Duverney (or someone similar) got a little too personal. Think Jamie would have let it go (or been expected to as I felt the narrative expects the viewer to) as easily as Claire did? She's easily 5-6 months pregnant. I don't think they have had marital relations think entire time. So, 5 or 6 months without her husband touching her. Now add in the fact that she's got to be feeling some self consciousness over her changing body (maybe not feeling as attractive). Then her husband comes home with bite marks on his thighs talking about 69 with a prostitute. And who is the one who ended up having to apologize and go to whom? Jamie storms off to sleep elsewhere and Claire had to go to him. It reminds me of the fight by the roadside after Jamie rescued Claire from almost being raped by Randall, and she had to apologize to him because he was afraid for her. Again, if the situation were reversed, I seriously doubt Jamie would apologize to Claire and go make it up to her. No matter what Claire is going through/has gone through it seems that Jamie's pain is more important.
They didn't even have to mention Mary as the reason for cancelling the dinner party. No one even need know she was there. They didn't know until she woke up and ran out of the room anyway. But "My wife was just attacked" I think would be a valid excuse to which everyone (other than maybe the Comte and Duke) would be sympathetic. She was asleep because Claire gave her poppy juice (opium, basically) and even Claire knew it wouldn't last because she gave Alex instructions to give her more if/when she woke up. Can we talk for a minute of the wisdom of leaving a rape victim in the 18th century in the care of a man not related to her? Even if he did love her and she loved him - it's just not something that ever should have been done. Jamie should have known that. Or the servants. Hell, even Murtaugh should have nixed that idea. But that was convenient so that it would look like Alex was raping her when trying to quiet her down. A female servant wouldn't have served the same plot purpose.
I didn't understand your comment. Thanks for your clarification. You're right, it's a little convenient that Claire suddenly got stronger after it was too late for Mary. Without a rewatch, I cannot be too sure of the exact timing of her increased power. Maybe the attacker's grip on her loosened when he started to think she was La Dame Blanche?
Regarding the bites, perhaps Jamie felt he had to let it go a little farther this time so as to not to arouse suspicion about why he's not partaking in the pleasures of the brothel. He's trying to be part of the Prince Charles crowd and it might be getting harder blend in without allowing the prostitutes to do some stuff to him. Also, we've seen that Jamie is a bit of horn-dog who does let things go too far; most notably his fondling of Laoghaire's breast after they all return to Castle Leoch. Even though Laoghaire put his hand on her breast, he did not take it off immediately, and there was some definite active groping on his part.
And it absolutely is a double standard--something I've come to expect in this show due to the era. Jamie would be furious if she let things get that far with another man. When Duverney was coming on to Claire, he blamed her dress. But I didn't see Claire going to Jamie as an apology, but rather that she was forgiving him. (a matter of perception, I guess.) And IMO, Jamie is still a little immature in the way he handles relationships. Claire has been married before and is several years older than him IIRC. I know a lot of people, particularly book fans, think he is the perfect man. I definitely don't think so, and that makes be able to accept his flaws. In this case, he should have accepted responsibility for allowing the prostitute access to his thighs!
I didn't mean that they would mention Mary specifically, but that it would raise questions and gossip about why the party was canceled, which might lead back to Mary. I may be wrong on this one, but I felt it was natural to try to maintain an outward appearance of normality, until they could think calmly about what to do.
On a different topic, heavy foreshadowing this episode for Claire on her return to Frank-- both in the reading the bones scene and in the discussion with Louise on a man raising another one's child. That got me thinking--is it even called foreshadowing if we've already seen it happen, but the character has not?
-
1
-
-
-
12 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:
- JI guess "La Dame Blanche" (the white lady) thing will be explained next week why they were so afraid they had to run away?
- And suddenly, Claire is so strong that she can push her would be attacker away and throw the rapist off Mary but was flailing pretty uselessly in the fight beforehand. That's convenient. (for the plot, that is.)
- After the distance between Claire and Jamie in the last couple episodes, I was a little underwhelmed by their reconciliation. I wasn't really feeling it. Claire, I guess, let it go, but she had a good point that Jamie had to get himself all stirred up by a whore in order to come home and want to make love to his wife. Wow. Just wow. And ew, jerk.
- about Mary getting raped: maybe Frank isn't related DNA wise to BJR at all. Could be the result of her rape.
- And I know it's the 18th century and all, but the treatment (or lack there of) of Mary in the aftermath left a really bad taste in my mouth. Jamie seemed moderately more concerned -at least about Mary's future. Claire, while righteously indignant about how Mary being "soiled" would prevent any man from wanting her still didn't really seem concerned enough to call off the dinner party and tend to a young girl who'd just been violently raped. Really? The dinner was too important to their cause? Like it couldn't have been rescheduled for the week after next, cause - oh yeah, information travels at the speed of the internet back then or something... give me a break. Two weeks wouldn't have made any difference. But it might have to Mary. And Jamie more worried about her marriageability than maybe the fact that now Mary was naked and trying to hide under a blade of grass... cause he should know how that feels. Massive Fail Claire and Jamie.
In response to a few of your comments...
- Considering the name of the episode, I would have expected a little more detail on La Dame Blanche. Was she wearing that necklace when attacked? Perhaps that's why they were afraid?
- Claire has more experience fighting than Mary, who looks about 15 years old and very sheltered. She has been in a war, has had to fight BJR on a couple of occasions, etc. Plus, Mary is tiny. Jamie carried both Claire and Mary in this episode and I noticed that Mary looked like a doll in his arms and super light to carry. (Not suggesting that Claire is heavy!)
- I think that the fact that he was aroused by the prostitute was just evidence that he was ready to get back to normal. He and Claire had been distant (and she would not have been assertive with him about having sex) so he did not know that he had recovered. However, I bet the prostitute was fairly aggressive with coming on to him (her livelihood depends on it, after all), so when he had a physical reaction, he knew he was back to his old self. Claire's reaction is perfectly reasonable.
- I don't think Frank could be a result of the rape because he looks like Blackjack. He has to be a Randall.
- Mary was asleep. so there was really nothing more (or so they thought) they could do for her at that moment. Cancelling the dinner after everyone had arrive might raise suspicions and bring attention to Mary that she would not want. And Claire thought they left her in the care of the man she loved and who loved her back. It might have been more prudent to leave her in Suzette's care. A woman who has just been raped might reasonably frightened by any man. I did for a second wonder if she was raped by BJR and was frightened by his physical similarity to his brother, but that's far fetched.
My observations:
- At the beginning of the episode, they had the violence, nudity, rape warning (at least in the US airing) and I immediately thought, Oh Dear God, Claire's recklessness is going to get someone raped. Although I cannot blame Claire for the attack, I wonder if she could have borrowed a carriage from one of the doctors in the hospital, rather than immediately deciding to walk home. They didn't even seem to be hurrying--rather, they were strolling home. shouldn't they have been trying harder to get home quickly?
- I don't see how Compte St. Germain could be involved in the attack. Why would they rape Mary if he ordered it? It would make more sense for them to focus on Claire. The birthmark on that guy's hand is going to mean something, I assume. However, he did seem astonished to see Claire arrive home in one piece, so maybe he is involved.
- Apparently her association with Louse has had some sort of impact on Mary for her to be writing letters to Alex Randall while engaged to the Viscount.. By the way, I am glad that her betrothed was fighting for her honor, rather than immediately rejecting her after thinking she was being raped by Alex. I guess we now know a little more about how she becomes Mrs. BJR--at least, how she doesn't marry the VIscount.
- So far, Alex seems significantly nicer than BJR, so that's a plus.
- How is Prince Charles running around Paris without any bodyguards? I thought the idea of him running around the roofs of Paris to be nuts!
- I was astonished at the reveal that Louise's lover is Prince Charles. LOL at the way he made out with her hand when they were introduced. When she changed the subject from politics to opera, I did get the impression that she was trying to help him avoid embarrassing himself.
- Also laughed at Sandringham's comment on how beautiful Jamie and Claire's child will be. He is so into Jamie, it's ridiculous.
- St. Germain leaving with the Prince makes me uneasy.
-
1
-
-
This episode was a bit boring but full of good information.
So re: Mary Hawkins. We saw in the previous episode that she was making googly eyes with Black Jack's younger brother. Could it be that he may actually be direct line ancestor of Frank? Perhaps she does marry Black Jack but has a more passionate love affair with the brother and BJR is none the wiser?
It is very uncomfortable watching this show with Claire and Jamie so distant from one another. I do like Claire explaining her need for a purpose and Jamie being frustrated with that. Obviously Claire being from the 1940's and having a wartime nursing career would find tea time and other ladies' activities boringsville. And Jamie being from the mid-1700's would really have no concept of a woman wanting to feel productive. Jamie is obviously open minded (he is married to at time traveler!) he is still living in his contemporary time.
BJR cuckolded would make me very happy!
Also, even in today's world, a person might want a spouse to have a fulfilling career, but still want him/her to be available when you need to vent/be comforted. We all reserve the right to be selfish and needy at times...as long as it's infrequent.
This episode was a bit boring but full of good information.
So re: Mary Hawkins. We saw in the previous episode that she was making googly eyes with Black Jack's younger brother. Could it be that he may actually be direct line ancestor of Frank? Perhaps she does marry Black Jack but has a more passionate love affair with the brother and BJR is none the wiser?
It is very uncomfortable watching this show with Claire and Jamie so distant from one another. I do like Claire explaining her need for a purpose and Jamie being frustrated with that. Obviously Claire being from the 1940's and having a wartime nursing career would find tea time and other ladies' activities boringsville. And Jamie being from the mid-1700's would really have no concept of a woman wanting to feel productive. Jamie is obviously open minded (he is married to at time traveler!) he is still living in his contemporary time.
BJR cuckolded would make me very happy!
Also, even in today's world, a person might want a spouse to have a fulfilling career, but still want him/her to be available when you need to vent/be comforted. We all reserve the right to be selfish and needy at times...as long as it's infrequent.
-
I like where this season has been going, including all the darkness.
I assume that Sidney will hit rock bottom next episode, most likely due to something terrible happening with Leonard which would make Sidney feel horribly guilty about not paying enough attention. It could also be something bad that happens to Amanda/ her baby, and he would feel guilty for having sent her away.
I think the argument with Amanda had to happen, but I think it's about more than just their relationship. She represents hope to him, which is probably why he's always treated her like some unrealizable dream. The Abigail incident, another example of his not paying attention, and Gary's execution are causing him to lose hope. To a certain extent, this makes him more like Leonard, who has no hope of an openly loving relationship, and Mrs. Maguire, who had accepted a life of loneliness. Both are starting to hope again, so they may be slightly ahead of Sidney on the hope curve, but we'll see if one or bother are quashed. (By the way, is it just me or are we finally seeing Dickens with Sidney after a long time. Is he/she usually with the person who needs the most comfort?)
And then Season 3 will cover his and possibly everyone's redemption/ recovery
-
1
-
-
kat165
No the guy putting the moves on Leonard is completely different.
I believe he was the photographer of the porn pics
-
1
-
S02.E09: Je Suis Prest
in Outlander
Late to this party...
Glad to see Rupert, Angus, and Dougal again. Now if could get Mrs. Fitz back, I would really be happy, but that seems unlikely. :( Does this mean that there is a permanent break between Colum and Dougal and he's no longer war chief of Clan MacKenzie? What does that mean for the safety of Clan MacKenzie with regard to other clans? Or perhpas that's moot at this point.
They need to just adopt Fergus and call it a day! But perhaps they cannot because it has implications for who inherits Lallybroch.
Gotta give a shout out to my boy, the American air force man from Texarkana, Arkansas--my neck of the woods!
Glad that Willie is safe from Culloden by immigrating to the US. I hope he survives the American Revolution!
I really liked the focus on Claire's PTSD. This season, we have seen a few cracks in her superwoman persona. I'm starting to see why Jamie sends her back to the future. Jamie promised her she would never be alone again, and if he's dead, it's better that she be with Frank.
Is it just me or is that 16 year old Englishman another Tobias Menzies lookalike? I kinda wish Claire had not interrupted the interrogation so we could see how far Jamie would go. It's a pity he was saved from having to make the moral decision. I'm assuming that will see young Mr. Grey soon and he will save Jamie's life in some way. I hope he doesn't get whacked by the redcoats for revealing information.
I like that Jamie took the beating and held himself accountable for his mistake. But I actually laughed at that scene, because I immediately thought, "here's the requisite Jamie Shirtless scene." I also laughed at Jamie's "commando raid" because of the double entendre. (For those not familiar with the expression, "going commando" is a colloquialism for not wearing underwear, and I believe they did not wear anything under the kilts.)