nara

The judge made her pay the price for not cooperating. He charged or taxed her for her behavior.

I think it's her sad eyes and aloofness that make her attractive. (10 years ago, I think Ellen Pompeo would have been well cast in this role. Meredith Grey has a similar sadness about her.) Also, the very fact that she is a natural beauty, and doesn't wear a ton of makeup any fancy clothes, could be appealing to men looking for an escape from their lives to something "simpler".

1. Now that you mention it, didn't the same thing happen in Season 1? IIRC Cole and Allison were having (somewhat rough) sex on the hood of some car and she saw Noah watching them--right? And she didn't tell Cole to stop. Maybe she has a thing for that. 2. Regarding the money issue, I'm not sure what the poster meant by that comment, but I think Noah was unhappy living off of Helen's money. Doing the same with Allison's money might be equally emasculating for him and might lead him down the same path again. Perhaps that is what the poster meant--as opposed to, a man should not live off of his wife's money.

Lots of good stuff in your post, but I wanted to specifically say that I think you're spot on in thinking that Whitney is the guilty party and Helen knows it.

I think that the book is a fictionalized account of Noah and Allison's relationship, not necessarily a completely true reflection of how he sees her. However, everyone who has read it has assumed it to be true, including Yvonne, Robert, and the editor in NYC, and they all assume that Allison is sex personified because of it. But it's actually her vulnerability that seems to be attractive to men. Even Cole sleeps with her after she expresses doubts about herself. I think she's right--people don't see her for herself, just the vulnerable girl. I wonder if Noah will still be as attracted to her once they are settled and she's happy. And I think the baby is Cole's...because that will give us some angst fodder for the future. The baby did take to him quite quickly...

I hope we learn more about why the kids are so screwed up. This was true before the affair too. Wasn't it Martin who pretended to kill himself in the first episode? Is it just that they inherited their father's dramatic writer's mind? Or was there something bad before that trip to the beach? Either way, they seem particularly disturbed, more than the divorce would cause. She couldn't bring herself to work as a nurse because she hadn't come to terms with her son's death at that time. As evidenced by her ability to go swimming, she has started to deal with it, so perhaps she will be able to return to her old profession.

I thought it might eventually to Caspar's kinky interests. I was feeling bad for Ray potentially losing his son...until that scene in which he yells at the boy. Thanks for the many ideas on Athena, goddess of love. That was bugging me, but I am willing to buy that it's the sister's mistake, not the writers'.

Can you please clarify to which scene and or dialogue you are referring? I don't remember this (and frankly, this is not an episode I want to re-watch looking for stuff!). Thanks!

Re: Jack's reaction to finding out that Phryne slept with Warwick (I think that was his name)--was it 1) just jealousy or 2) frustration with her foolishness in hooking up with a suspect or 3) annoyance with her hooking up instead of being in a real relationship?

Aunt Prudence is the biggest kiss-blocker in history, between the last two episodes! I was hoping to finally get something from Jack and Phryne, even if they would later blame it on mistletoe and tradition.

I actually like Jack's ex because she creates some competition for Phryne for Jack's attention. I hope she makes a play to get back with him. Something needs to spur our heroine into action! Right now, it's not clear whether Phryne has any real interest in Jack. She obviously likes him, but it's hard to tell whether she wants a romantic relationship with him or a fling or just enjoys the flirty friendship and partnership they have. It's interesting, because she has no trouble conveying to other men what she wants from them.

I was unspoiled for the first few episodes. Then I read something about the male lead being sexually assaulted, but I did not know if it happened prior to the start of the series timeline (for example, when Jamie was first flogged ) or would happen at some point in the 8 books. Obviously, I now know the answer to that question. I was also spoiled on a future event because I made the mistake of looking at the book spoilers thread. What I read annoyed me, so I really try to avoid spoilers now. That's difficult, because it means I cannot read many articles and have to try to skip comment sections. However, I learned from Game of Thrones that the show started pissing me off once I read the books and realized some of the idiotic changes that were being made for the show. I enjoy shows so much more when the unfold without any expectations on my part, so I'm trying to avoid any other spoilers.

Episode: I thought this was a very good episode, though I can understand the strongly negative reactions some people had to it. I liked the way this episode’s structure paralleled “The Wedding” with multiple flashbacks. Whereas the Wedding portrayed increasing love and passion, this episode portrayed the destruction of Jamie’s spirit. This episode structure did cause there to be more rape scenes than there might have been if the flow had been purely chronological. I doubt they would have shown a 20 min straight BJR/Jamie scene! The structure and the multiple BJR/Jamie scenes allowed us to see the evolution of Jamie’s struggle—though I would have preferred those scenes to be shorter and less graphic. I would also have liked them to show more of the rescue and recovery. I don’t think this show has earned a reputation of showing nudity for its own sake (a la Game of Thrones sexposition), so I was better able to tolerate the graphic nature of these scenes. I did not feel like anything portrayed in this episode was meant to be sexually arousing or done for its own sake, so I disagree with the “porn” comments. I do think they did an excellent job of showing why Jamie is so devastated and ready to end his own life—something very different for this strong, resilient man. Jenny and Claire have both had near-rape situations (yes, I know it’s not the same as actual rape) and recovered rather quickly. Also, Jamie has risked his life for Jenny and Claire before—so he is willing to sacrifice his life for love. So why then was he so shattered? 1) He was raped not once, but repeatedly. 2) He experienced “pleasure” in the process and that would have come as quite a shock to him. Naturally, Jamie would not be very knowledgeable about the body’s automatic reactions that have nothing to do with one’s will, emotions, or intellect. 3) He stopped fighting. He expected to die fighting and he ultimately gave up in order to stop the pain. For a soldier, that would be particularly disheartening, because he would have felt like a coward. 4) BJR was able to control him. First, forcing him to scream, forcing his arousal, and finally forcing him to “enjoy it”. I’m not sure that they could have shown all this without the multiple scenes of the attack, though perhaps they could have focused more on their expressions than their bodies. I think the transition from despair to cracking jokes on the boat was a little too sudden. Maybe some discussion about the passage of time (weeks, perhaps) would have helped. I appreciated the moments of levity from the men, especially the au revoir scene. Of course, Angus would be the one to try to kiss Claire! Very well in keeping with him showing her what’s under his kilt (The Gathering), trying to see her naked (The Wedding), and his all around degenerate nature (Castle Leoch). ETA: I'm glad Willie remembered that Claire was supposed to have relatives in France. I like it when loose ends are tied up! I liked Claire’s confession, especially the part about her acknowledging the negative impact she’s had on the lives of her 2 husbands. I don’t blame her for her choices, but they have inadvertently hurt 2 good men. 1) Abandoning Frank without any further communication due to her choice to stay with Jamie and 2) disobeying Jamie and forcing him to risk himself to rescue her from BJR and later leave the safety of Leoch. Again, she did what she thought was right at each step, and made a lot of positive difference, but also caused some harm. BTW, I don't think it's all that surprising that the monk was not shocked by her confession. we know that everyone can tell if she's lying--and she plainly was not. Also, even religious folks were more superstitious then (e.g., Father Bain) so he might well be willing to believe in time travel. The pregnancy is a little cliché, but I like it anyway!!! Season: Now that the 2nd half of the season is over, I have a few thoughts about it. I think that the 2nd half of the season required one more episode. The pace of this half was VERY fast, which is not unexpected and probably necessary. However, one more episode would have allowed more detail around married life at Leoch (and possibly Lallybroch), which would have 1) shown Laoghaire the true nature of their relationship and allowed her resentment to build and 2) balanced out the violence of the later episodes and 3) been fun to watch and 4) given us more time with the side characters I had come to love: Mrs. Fitz, Hamish, Rupert, Angus, Willie, etc. More discussion of why she decided to stay in the 18th century was needed throughout the season. Frank pretty much vanished and that was a miss. Even some discussion of the differences between BJR and Frank would have been good.

Part of the challenge of this story appears to be the repetitive nature of Blackjack's brutality towards one family--Jenny, Jamie, and Claire. His obsession with this group of people forces us to see over and over again his sadistic behavior. If it were just a matter of characterization, we would just have needed a couple of instances to get the point, "yes, Blackjack is pure evil" and they could stop showing it. However, it appears to be an essential part of the story that he is drawn to this group of people. I think it's no coincidence that Frank married Claire--perhaps the point of the story is that this connection continues over generations and time (like in the movie Dead Again, but over a broader span of time). (I think I've mentioned this theory before, so sorry if it seems repetitive.) I wonder if we'll see marriages or other interaction between the Randalls and the Frasers, MacKenzies, Beauchamps in future generations. (Whether or not this is a "thing" in the books, it might be a fun way to keep Frank in the story--researching these repeated interactions.) If the point of the story is, in fact, this eternal bond, then I'm afraid we'll continue to see Blackjack doing monstrous things. However, I would be very okay if they choose to show it in a less graphic fashion.

It makes me sad that people are giving up on the series. At least, come back to the forum to see if we are still liking the show. It might entice you back Mind=blown. That idea never occurred to me, even though we had a discussion in a previous episode thread about whether Jamie would have made it to Leoch without Claire's help. However, I don't blame Claire for not thinking about it. She's been in survival mode since she arrived "in time", so hasn't had a lot of time to think about the impact of her actions. (Seriously, it would be nice to have an episode of them enjoying married life and herding sheep or something, without the threat of being captured or killed. But that would probably be boring TV, so there you have it...) Also, Jamie and Mrs. Fitz have been her only consistent friends since she arrived, so even if she did consider that perhaps his fate was to die, I doubt she would sit by and allow it.

Maybe they want him to attract all the negative press so that the real candidates emerge relatively unscathed by the media attention. He's the decoy candidate.

Since Jamie is still captive, I'm afraid more will be coming up, but I cannot imagine that the books would be so popular with women if this torture were the main part of the story.

1 -- Ganesh, my dear, I'm determined to make you a believer in the idea that Claire chose to stay vs. the stones not working. Thinking of starting a write in campaign so they include a deleted scene in the DVD or a kickstarter so they actually film that scene. 2 -- Interesting. Can you share any examples of scenes filmed that way in other show, so I can visualize what you mean? 3 -- That was a fun wink from the writers to us in very brutal episode. 4 -- As much as I want Blackjack to die, I would miss Tobias. I doubt we'll see much of Frank anymore, since Claire seems to not be thinking about him at all.

Wow, I guess I reacted very differently toward this episode than everyone else. I thought it was a very good episode, although I wish they hadn’t dragged out saving Jamie (I’m assuming that will eventually happen) over this and the next episode. The hangings were very brutal to watch, especially McQuarrie strangling instead of having his neck broken. At first, I was wondering what that redcoat was doing, but then I realized he was trying to break McQuarrie’s neck—which I guess is an act of mercy vs. letting him strangle to death. I felt a little like I was watching Game Of Thrones, in which they regularly introduce interesting characters like McQuarrie, only to kill them off almost immediately! ;) It did make me wonder if men like Jamie, who seem to attract trouble, are better off as loners. McQuarrie was much more at peace during his brief tenure on the show than Jamie has ever been. It also worked well to help me understand the seriousness of Jamie’s situation. Blackjack coming to the rescue was a little contrived, but I also see that getting Jamie to surrender to him has become an obsession, so I can see him being concerned that Jamie will be snatched away from him. I loved the interaction between Jamie and Blackjack (Emmys all around, please). I know that others feel like it was torture porn, but I felt like it was mostly the natural culmination of what we’ve seen all season between them. Did we think Blackjack wouldn’t try to have sex with Jamie again, given what we learned in the Garrison Commander and Lallybroch? I’m just grateful that they didn’t show a graphic rape. Since there was a nudity warning at the beginning of the show, I was afraid that we’d get a visit from Blackjack junior again. I like how Jamie didn’t break, even when Blackjack hurt his hand. However, when he had to choose between giving in/saving Claire and being defiant/seeing Claire hurt or raped, he chose to sacrifice himself. Sad, but perfectly appropriate for Jamie. I did like how it gave him some peace to sacrifice himself for her. He also saw that she was willing to risk herself for him—which he hasn’t seen her do before—and that put aside any lingering doubts he might have about whether she loves him. Not sure why he had to nail Jamie’s hand—that seemed excessive—but I guess it proved that Jamie would not fight him off (he’s a man of his word) and it would make it hard for Jamie to attack Blackjack when the latter was trying to have sex with him. The rescue was a little slower than I expected, but it isn’t easy to find a way into the prison. Breaking in was not an option, but I liked the way Rupert and Angus found a way to get useful information, and Claire and Murtagh used their wits to get in—first unsuccessfully and then successfully. Claire is a pretty woman and English –something that the Redcoats have likely not seen in a while—so it’s not surprising that she is somewhat able to manipulate them. It was a little weird that Claire met the very person who gave Ellen the pearls, but maybe not, since Murtagh chose his house in which to hide due to his loyalty. It isn’t as though they conveniently met someone who was willing to sacrifice everything for Jamie. Also, it appears that Jamie and his mother are both the type of people who attract a lot of admirers—people immediately love them. We saw that with Jamie at Leoch, when he won supporters by stepping up and taking Laoghaire’s beating and later with his boldness at the Gathering. Jenny is not like that at all. In fact, she’s rather prickly and hard to get to know. Perhaps he takes after mom and she takes after dad.

That might actually liven up the show.

It's nice to see this law firm supporting the local printing and signing businesses by updating their name so frequently. ;) Seriously, though, they need to stop with the musical partners, though I do like the idea of Canning dying and leaving his company to Alicia. Celebrating Kalinda's departure/freedom by watching Archie Panjabi in Bend It Like Beckham. Small role, but hilariously unlike Kalinda.

Please don't presume to know what does or does not bother me. I will acknowledge, however, that what I'm fine with in real life might be different from what I want to pay money to see on television.

Been meaning to ask, why is this called Wolf Hall, given the relatively lesser importance of the Seymour family?

I'm not sure who you think is upset about seeing her release her breast milk, but there is a difference between not caring to see something on TV and being upset about seeing what happens. The posters in this thread who have mentioned it haven't expressed any anger that is was shown--we're just stating a preference. I don't care for seeing bodily functions--and I could certainly have done without seeing blackjack's penis. I don't believe anyone has said the rape scenes are okay, but this is not. In fact, several have expressed a belief that those were unnecessarily graphic. And I'm sure many of us turned our heads during the flogging scenes too. That being said, I do think it's plot-relevant to address the struggles Jenny faced going off on this trek so soon after her delivery. The fact that several people have mentioned it in comments means that if they didn't address it on screen, people would be skeptical about the episode. She could have made a reference to her bottom and her breasts being sore and the need to release some of her milk, without actually showing her doing so. The director made a choice to show it instead.

I agree. Anne was guilty of many things, especially cruelty and arrogance. I get that while Wolsey, More, and Catherine were around she was in a very precarious position, but I wonder if keeping quiet and letting the king deal with these folks in his own way would have served her better. Henry ended up blaming her for the loss of key friends (esp. More), which I believe helped turn him against her. However, it still annoys me that she was executed on trumped up charges, rather than being held accountable for her actual faults.