Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Kim0820

Member
  • Posts

    930
  • Joined

Everything posted by Kim0820

  1. So do you think she should have gone back and not stayed with him in 1766 over the fact he married Leery? Even though he still loved her and didn't want to stay with Leery?
  2. I hope DG lets him at some point - Claire asked him to go with her at the end of book 2 and making it that he couldn't made that consistent, but it would be easy to change. He couldn't leave his friends, walk away from Culloden like that. His 18th century sense of honor could not allow that. A plot where he had to deal with being in the 20th century for a while just could be interesting. Geillis had some control - she had studied it. She knew when she wanted to go back to. Claire just accidentally went and coincidentally went back to a similar time period - maybe that time period had been warmed up in the stones by Geillis doing it on purpose. I also could buy that the stones are not exact and so while they throw people back to the 1700s, don't always get the year exact. Geillis was doing some complex spell to get to 1948 intentionally, since if she just went back, like Claire, the number of years could have passed and she end up in the 1980s since she'd spent about 20 years in the 18th century. Though I guess she could attack Brianna then, too. And did the book have her look so much like Claire as she did in the show? That was an "excuse" for being willing to be with her too. That's a good point. At the beginning where he appeared to be visiting the brothel, I thought that was what he did as falling in love with a different woman wasn't doable for him. I don't know what the law provided for at that time - the marriage was invalid, so she might not have had a claim to anything. It was a while before the law saw the injustice in a thing like that. Having Jamie arrested for bigamy was possible, too. Just like in Poldark, where Demelza worked with Captain Blamey to reunite him with Verity, who resisted so much at first, and it occurred to Demelza that Verity had no warning she would be seeing Blamey while Blamey did. And this is sort of even bigger since it involves time traveling. At least before getting to Lallybroch where Claire could end up learning it by accident. DG just wanted maximum impact reveal at the worst possible time and in the worst possible way (the girls yelling for Daddy). If a military historian had gone back, they might have been of use in winning at Culloden. If you went back specifically for that, you could take a lot of information. Geillis should have studied more so she could have been more helpful than she was! She'd been there a few years and only helped raise funds, and got herself burned as a witch before the battle. (Or just locked up as it turns out). For such a fanatic, she really lacked a good plan!
  3. I thought it had several points at which they teased you it would end with separation; Claire not being on the deck, Claire not doing anything on the log, the shot going up the hurricane, and the shot of Jamie alone on the beach. At least they were alive and well at the end. You'd think they could have skipped the storm for the start of another season. No way to end happy; another disaster must occur right away! It was good to intersperse the druids. Amazing there is another time travel portal. And it looked like Craig na dun on top of it - maybe that's a wormhole on earth where they are both there. You had to get to 3 books to get a payoff with the Geillis thing. The conversation between Claire and Geillis was a good wrap up of loose ends. Claire being pulled mentally towards the pool was annoying, but I guess it is to show her devoted motherhood that she at least thought about going back to Brianna. It was funny to read on another thread where people were trying to work out how QE2 might be a Scot. LOL. So Claire did change history - the prophecy is true, but Claire killed Geillis before she could get to Brianna. And Brianna is not left in danger as there is not likely to be anyone else crazy enough to follow through. It had also seemed possible they would end it with Geillis out there and Brianna exposed to that danger, and Jamie and Claire having to figure out how to handle it.
  4. It was amazing the extent to which they did not even think about Capt. Leonard. They went all over town without mentioning him or any fear of capture and went to the ball totally focused on what they could find out about Ian, and not the least bit concerned - not even trying to find out if the Porpoise was still there - in fact Jamie opined it must still be there as it could not have done all the things needed to do before sailing again. Capt. Leonard was out of sight and out of mind until they actually saw him!
  5. 20th Century items! Makes me think of Muggle artifacts. I guess Claire could claim to have invented it all and steal credit from someone else in history. I don't think Fergus would have a French accent still after over 20 years in Scotland and having been there from a young age. When his last name came up and there was silence I knew the next thing to be heard would be Jamie saying "Fraser." Perfect. It is a lot livelier and brighter - Jamie is yet again under cloud of warrants and hanging but it seems less intense and he has warning now. The last British authorities needed help and didn't take any of the men. Less menacing than the prior seasons. I never want to see a redcoat again, other than Ross Poldark. 🙂 I really want Jamie to get to meet Brianna in person, so I hope she tries to time travel to make sure about what happened to Claire, figuring she can return as Claire did. I think it was thought Jamie can't, but in honor he could not turn away from Culloden, so maybe it was the stress. We don't know for sure.
  6. Upset, but not to go back through the stones. I guess I was more focused on, Leery or anyone else, she lucked out that he was "available" to her. He could have been involved with someone else. And in the end, she made peace with it and didn't appear to want to go back again, except for a short doubt on the cliffs, which didn't seem to involve Leery. It's been 23 years since the ill wish too and we aren't sure how much Jamie knows about her involvement in the trial. Jamie's life has so many traumas that the trial may not register much by 1766, at least as to details. He just blew in and saved Claire from it (or took her when Geillis confessed).
  7. Funny to watch this during the COVID19 crisis. We need Claire. Jamie's plan was ridiculous. They were going to meet in Jamaica. The 300 men were mostly sick or busy following her orders. The cook was a jerk, but Claire handled him. It was quite amazing how they listened to her. She was telling them to do things they had no experience of and no other ship surgeon would ever have done. Lucky for them that they listened. I cried a small bit when Elias died and Claire told him she was his other. And was his final friend to stitch him through the nose. Only 14 and a short, tough life. And he was a good assistant. The goat lady was so kind, too. Jamie looking at the photos was good.
  8. As soon as Claire came on the boat, it was practically TV law that she would be stuck on it. I was relieved that there was no impressment though. I've had enough of the British military being jerks. I was glad they needed help instead. But they are still jerks for taking her off. "Realism" seems to be considered so necessary these days. And talk about bodily functions/bathroom humor. The people on the ship were mesmerized. He really distracted them. And a good thing, since of the man had been thrown overboard, the wind coincidentally coming up would have made it look justifiable to the superstitious. Overall, there seems little talk about Brianna, and you'd think it would be a major subject. With all those adventures, Jaime and Claire don't have time to talk about what they would normally talk about. I read a romance novel about hand fasting once; I thought it was good enough, so Jamie talking about Marsali's "virtue" seemed ridiculous. A seasick person should stay outside in the fresh air rather than go inside. And eat crackers, I think. I haven't been on a boat in forever, at least not out on the ocean, but I remember that advice as I got seasick and had to take Dramamine, which makes you sleepy. Ginger tea might be worth trying! I suppose you get used to it over time. There are novels mentioning that you get sea legs, and when you hit land, it is hard to walk for awhile, until you walk enough to get your land legs back. Marsali is as obnoxious as Laoghaire. It's pretty sure Laoghaire did not love Jamie, but just thought he was a prized possession.
  9. She'd be justified in going back to the 20th century if he had a wife and kids he loved and the 20 years had been enough for him to get over her (which would have been the most realistic, but this is romantic fantasy). Or even if he'd been conflicted and couldn't just leave a wife with young kids even if he didn't get over Claire. So having no kids of his own, but stepchildre,n and not really liking Leery, and clearly preferring Claire is a lot luckier for her having made the trip across 200 years to see if she could be back with him.
  10. Claire should have told Brianna a location to get them before she left to go back. Brianna would have to ask Roger to pick them up. I thought of Jamie having an injury that would say result in a permanent disability where Claire knew it could be easily solved with 20th century medicine and sending him to the future for that. Or a kid with a club foot that in 1700s would just be and they would be lame. But 20th century surgery could have him walk normally.
  11. They are good at finding doppelgängers. The one for BJR's brother Alex and the one for Geneva who looked just like Claire. Led me to believe he could sleep with her without criticism as she looked so much like Claire. They didn't need the narrative that she sexually assaulted him. Someone said that of Mary McNabb also - so they have to at least look like Claire. These are the first times Claire ever has a complaint with the 18th century. The comments on the board about how they would never stay in the 18th century due to inferior science - maybe, but Claire had no problem with it. I think she is more concerned being a doctor. Being a nurse who could try anything without a license was Claire on her first time trip. Now she has Dr. oath and ethics and seems to worry more - that she can't fix some people though she knows she could with a 1960s "proper hospital." So it's given her some guilt and self doubt rather than making her feel more confident. She took a risk that he was married and perhaps even happy! Finding out about an unhappy marriage to Leoghaire is a lot less bad than it could have been. I was appalled by the things she said in front of her two young daughters - not just that word but the entirety of the things she said. She should have sent them out of the room.
  12. Cute, like in the beginning he would not go anywhere without her. Well he said the brothel was temporary 🙂 Claire need not have used such a photo. Why does she think he could even begin to understand that? I noticed that right off too. That whole thing was his idea. Which was pretty lame. I mean at least make sure he dies at Culloden first. Then go explain to the family that you think you are better off in America and a danger to them as a traitor's wife. But plot points. They had her advice to plant potatoes. I think she even told Jenny there would be hardship. Jenny listened, because Jamie told her she should, even if she didn't understand. So they should have been better off than society generally that didn't have that clue. Yes, I rewound to catch it again, "did she say 'Jamie?'" Also Ian saying "Uncle Jamie." If this is supposed to be a disguise, it's not being used well enough. But then he thinks using two of his own middle names is enough.
  13. Yes: she said when he was suicidal that she couldn't make any sense of why she time traveled except that it must have been meant for them - that they would meet and fall in love, otherwise it made no sense to her. So she would die right there with him. That was a powerful scene. Yes, Culloden pending the whole time. As the story goes on, it is known that they will be slaughtered there. At least Jamie gets to kill BJR there. It was a gut punch at the beginning. Claire crying when she learned for sure she was back (well, the car was enough, but the guy confirmed the year for her that she had not just come back to the same moment she had left) and then that the battle of Culloden had been lost - very effective. Like she had just been told Jamie had died in the battle.
  14. LOL, Leg Haire. He did declare he never fell in love again, which Claire should believe. But of all women to have married, from Claire's view, it would have been better to have been someone she didn't already know and despise. But in this kind of book/show, you have to amp up the drama, so it's a perfect choice from that view. The photos would be overwhelming - they are a thing of the future. They also raised the issue of the change in women's fashions, which would be pretty drastic for him. He says "Christ" when he sees the bikini. Maybe not the best idea, Claire. But they could have made a bigger deal of his seeing her red hair. You could tell he was afraid she would disappear again. He wanted her to go change his trousers, go to the tavern - he didn't trust her not to continue existing until the next morning. Even then he wanted her to stay put. Claire often said how like Jamie Brianna is - she didn't mention that, but she has time to. Claire is consistent in not listening to Jamie's advice not to go places - she went to Geillis, went out the time he ended up spanking her for - that's consistent. Had that thought too - she has to be careful - she knows this time, too. Having a zipper the first time was understandable but this time deliberately risky. Though she could explain that they do this in America now. I thought Jamie would ask her what a bicycle was, but he did a minute later. Like when he broke down in Paris and she said "It's OK," but it was too serious a moment perhaps for him to wonder what that means, and in context and her tone it probably was clear what it meant. But that expression wouldn't have been around yet. It's a romantic fantasy - an escape from reality as it were. Suspending disbelief about their being a lot older. Claire is about 50 and ready to go through menopause. But the story is not about that. You just have to figure of course she's genetically lucky and so is Jamie. Of course they are. And Jamie didn't get another woman and many children - of course he didn't. This is not the real world. They don't have to have babies either. I often notice old men's legs don't look bad at all - they seem to retain a lot of youth in their lower legs for quite a while. No varicose veins, not a lot more flabbiness.
  15. I had thought that being burned at the stake, Geillus could at least know that she would be born in the future. Then the conclusion that time passes in the past and the future at the same rate was questioned, since Geillus traveled back before Claire from a much later year. So the 60s were continuing during Geillus' 1740s sojourn. Geillus existed in the 1960s so when she died in 1744, it could not be that she would never be born. So maybe it is parallel universes, which could be infinite in number and you have infinite sets of bones for dying every different year you died. The stones took Geillis back over 220 years, Claire 202 years. If Claire stays with Jamie for life and dies of old age in 1780s or 90s if she would not be born in 1918, she would not exist, but yet she did exist from 1918-1968 and knows that era and remembers it while in the 18th century. Claire didn't show any signs of an inkling she had lived in the 18th century while she was in the 1940s. In 1968, she is aware she spent time in the 18th century, and she is considering going back at that point. So she knows she will live through later years in the 18th century if she does that (though she could have some doubt the stones will take her there as opposed to some other century) so maybe that kicks the 6th sense into being. It was noticeable that neither husband objects to the other's ring. She wears them both from the wedding night in 1743 on.
  16. It was lucky for Claire and Joe to have each other. Many of the early firsts would have been the only one in the class and subject to that same kind of disapproval. Makes the redcoats look really incompetent. Jamie is hiding on his own estate and they can't find him? And he's so notorious? The British are not very thorough when they search an estate. Murtagh wanted to do that in the first place, in Paris. He was anxious to get back to Scotland. France smelled bad. Nope.
  17. I had not caught that. I could think Frank was newly in America, living there now, so he thought he'd try out some Americanisms. I thought that same way until I noticed his hair - it was Frank's 1940s hairstyle. What a relief! Yes, bottles were the thing. It was the rise of the consumer age. Wall Street wanted you to buy bottles and formula rather than take advantage of the free breast milk! It does seem established that time moves along at the same rate, day for day, if you go through the stones. You won't go back to the same day and minute you left. So Claire spent 1743-1746 and got back to 1948, so the 20th century 3 years passed without her. Being divorced was a huge deal back then, and if she was the one who wanted it, she'd certainly have to give up her baby. He'd get custody. There was no no-fault divorce - he'd have to prove a ground, like adultery or abandonment. We have a cousin who is a redhead and no one in either parent's family knows where it could have come from. Jamie has all the luck. BJR's corpse keeps him from bleeding out. The officer who finds them and executes them happens to be the big brother of John Gray. It seems he was meant to live. I do wish he'd go to BPC and say "I told you so, many times." And then slug him.
  18. Maybe Jamie was right - they should have tried to help the rebellion rather than prevent it. Seems like it might have been easier. They didn't know BPC. But once his religious obsession became apparent, it seems it would have been better to try to help him win. He didn't care about the odds against him since God's will was for him, in his mind. Frank had existed without Claire's help before she time traveled, so she could have trusted to fate. BJR was not subject to anyone wanting him dead; without Claire, Jamie would not have made the deal with BJR and gotten tortured and raped. Thus it was Claire's presence that caused the rape/torture. Come to think of it, the person whose life was most affected by Claire's time travel was Jamie. He wouldn't have been in Paris and wouldn't have been raped by BJR without having met and married Claire.
  19. While they were killing Dougal, I wondered how much muscle power Claire added. But though it might be little, it showed how she was with Jamie on it. Geillis talking to her own descendant. I had wondered about Claire doing that but so far she has none in the 1740s, though her daughter was conceived there. The plot stays so that they don't have to deal with the issue of people not existing. Claire realized she can't talk Geillis into not going, or Roger does not have a necessary ancestor. Does Roger disappear? We teased my nephew, telling him he would not exist if it were not for his parents going to the same university and meeting there. He said, "I'd have found someone else." Maybe that's how it works? If BJR had really been the ancestor and Jamie killed him, then Claire went back to find there was no such person as Frank Randall, that could have been kind of fascinating. I wonder if Frank realized this; what if he didn't want to agree to the name? Yes, I had thought it odd Claire could not find out what happened to him, before she agreed with Frank she would not try anymore. By 1948, he had a headstone in any event. He was a landowner/laird. But then she could have gone back right away. But if you want more books, that happy ever after would have gotten in the way of that. She didn't try to find it in 1968 and went to the Fraser clan stone at Culloden, when she had not been sure whether he had died there or not. Maybe Jamie can only travel on certain days? He was thought to have gone to check on her in the S1Ep01. But so far, no one has gone forward except for those returning to a time they had lived in. That is a problem, I noticed right away - both her parents have blue eyes so their child has to have blue eyes. I wondered if it brought up speculation she was really Frank's. The plot called for catching Geillis just after she went through. I was thinking Claire could find Geillis, tell how little good she did before, and warn her of what happened to her. Like Groundhog Day, she could try again. Tell her not to act so suspiciously witchy, and that she can confide in Claire Fraser when she runs into her. It was good that Claire became a doctor. She had a lot of freedom in the 1740s that the 20th century would not offer her, so she was well prepared to learn surgery. She can be of even more help if she goes back again. I wonder if blood pressure was known back then, and what it was - the nurses under Claire's supervision looked mystified when she mentioned it. Ironic they were down to killing BPC. Murtagh wanted to do that from the beginning. It was so sad seeing Jamie try everything, and BPC never being convinced. The French gold argument was quite compelling, I thought. How like men to value not looking like a coward over practicality. It seems like they had no imagination about how big the British army was and thought it consisted only of those they'd actually seen. We know BJR died on the date of Culloden, so Jamie might have gotten to kill him.
  20. I missed something perhaps, and wondered how they could go back to Scotland. They were forced to leave. Jamie was under sentence of death in prison and escaped with the cows and is thus a fugitive. The original price on Jamie's head and the new death sentence for being with the Watch; where did they go? It was nice BJR is not around. And nice that the beating up on Jamie theme does not continue in Season 2. I noticed that fade to black scene. They may feel they already covered that they have a great sex life. On 21st century terms, too. The waxing and shaving - that's a thing now, but was it then? I suppose there are histories somewhere of sexual practices. But per the show, nothing has changed and sex in the 18th century was just like it is now.
  21. There's a lovely song in Irish Gaelic, "Mo Ghile Mear" which is said to be about BPC. It means "my gallant hero." Hard to think it's about this popinjay! Maybe from a distance he seemed heroic. They waited at least 8 or more episodes to let us know, on the show, that Claire made a choice between Jamie and Frank at the stones. Jamie says "you chose me" too as if no other consideration were there, like not knowing when the stones would take her back to for sure. And I suppose he's thinking you can hold your child as you go through. The wedding rings and clothes come through. Only later does Claire learn that a fetus comes through. And when making this promise, neither knew if you can carry a child through. I wonder if children time travel for free! 🙂 I wonder that he does not think Claire will be OK as his widow, probably have a home at Lallybroch and she does have friends. In fact, she has Dougal ready to marry her. He can't be certain the stones will take her back to her time.
  22. Claire is braveandstrongandloveswithherwholeheart! Claire could have left Mary and Alex alone completely and it looks like Alex is not long for this world anyway. The weird thing is she has Frank's wedding ring. So why would she think it was even possible for him not to exist? She never does think deeply about whether she has the power to change things. Does she consider that she had always been there in the 1740s? And that the child she is going to have could have descendants who she may have run across in the 1940s. Maybe Frank is even descended from her! (There are enough generations that it wouldn't be close enough to be incestuous). On the ship, Jamie said we can only play our part in it. Claire was the one with the bright idea to alter a major part of history. By this point, Claire may have already caused Frank not to exist - maybe another one of Frank's ancestors is a child of Jamie and Leery or some other person who got killed because she's there. Maybe Jamie wouldn't have been alive to be tortured by BJR had Claire not come. Maybe Frank is descended from someone Claire saved who would have died and therefore she is responsible for his ever existing in the first place. It is not like Claire to analyze all this though. It is in her character to jump to conclusions and feel she must do something to save somebody immediately. Claire isn't a person to just trust to fate - but she could have realized maybe Frank's genealogy had some errors, Mary Hawkins is a common name and for all Claire knows, BJR is married already and already has the key child. Frank existed without her meddling before (time travel is strange) so maybe he exists anyway. The way to convince Jamie was that he would get killed or arrested and hung, so if he loved her and the child, why is he going to abandon them in one of those two ways? Claire drinking - they didn't know there was any problem in the 1940s yet, and they smoked on top of it. No one in the 1740s will disapprove. But when Jenny wanted a shot of whiskey to get through the birth, Claire suggested the baby would be born drunk, seeming to discourage that idea.
  23. The hookers needed money - I recall where Ned went into a brothel and 3 of them were all over him very insistently trying to get him as a customer. So that they could be aggressive to Jamie doesn't seem too out there. It was much harder for women, but even so, there were probably not rapes every other day. Probably rape was a capital crime, too. It was probably mostly marital/incestuous or other abusive situations.
  24. Claire said to Jamie, "It's OK" when he imagined Randall in bed with her. I wondered is that something a British person would use in 1945. And Jamie wouldn't know it. But the moment was too serious for him to bring it up.
  25. If she could go beyond that library, surely since Jamie was a laird, there would be a record of him and his death. She might even find his grave - she knew or could find out where Lallybroch was. It would be creepy to find he'd lived past Culloden - but that would mess up the plot since she could then just go back. A previous thread mentioned that Jamie might not have lived past the day he met Claire, without her medical help. It would be creepy for her to find he had died in 1743. Like her going back didn't change anything. It did change things for a lot of people, who would have died sooner had she not been there in 1743. Frank might not believe her - By the 1940s, people are too science based and can't believe it - but then it does happen in the novel's world, and Mrs. Graham is right rather than credulous. When Claire first got there, she had apparently come from a day in 1746 when she did not know who won - I guess the Season will show how far she got or how reasonable it might be for her to think the Jacobites might have. I felt sad for her. She is a widow, emotionally, recently bereaved. And learning the British won Culloden after all made her break down. It is a good twist to have a baby conceived in 1746 but born in 1948. We also learn about the stones. They can take you back, and in addition, the amount of time you spent in the past has passed too. Also raises the question - can Claire find 1968 Geillis in time to tell her what's going to happen to her unless she avoids Craig na Dun? I also hope the "beat up Jamie" theme doesn't continue. From the floggings, the dislocated shoulder, taking Leery's punishment and all the rest of it, that's been done to death.
×
×
  • Create New...