Kim0820

I think that's true. It would have been enough. I'm not against what they did, only observing they didn't absolutely need it. Like the sex scenes, they don't fade to black and imply it, they try to make it shown literally. Since I am from the future, when the first scenes with Claire and Frank were on, I thought I knew him from somewhere. I looked him up, and where I had seen him was as the older Philip in The Crown. So it seems it worked out OK! They were together long enough for Claire to think she could not have children.

Life would have more intensity, greater ups and downs in an earlier era, and perhaps Claire felt integrated into 1743 enough that she realizes it might seem too boring to live in the 20th century again. With the earlier comments about not giving up 20th century conveniences, medicine, etc., I came to realize that Claire doesn't have any complaints at all on that score - don't recall any lines like "if only I had a bloody flashlight" or "I wish I could take a real shower." She had the interest in herbs and their healing powers and can feel more useful in the 18th century and more in charge. More able to help, demanding clean cloth and water, knowing they don't get the importance of that, because they don't know the science of bacteria/infection. To me, it's the opposite when it comes to history. I knew little of Culloden Moor or what the Scots problems were. Shows like this get me to look for information about it online or in documentaries, so I don't expect to learn total accuracy from the show, but it inspires me to find out more. The cultural changes that have happened are facts. We don't expect 18th century people to think something we since assigned to barbarism is barbaric. It's not excuses. Here the writing does show that Claire has some adjustment to make on that score, but it's not total; Claire is a person that would have been outspoken no matter what century she was in. There always were such women. They are the ones we owe the improvements to. The human condition always changes. It's hardly sexist to recognize those changes. The time travel is the unrealistic part, but it raises a chance to consider all those changes. Useful, needed and more passionate - yes that might have suited her better. Enough to overcome the other problems, which, again, she did not complain of. That could have been a huge factor, too. Can't explain it to Frank. And he would have a certain admiration for his ancestor, not knowing details about him - the family history most likely would not be detailed enough. Though I think there was a 1945 discussion about how he had a protector and they thought it was the Duke of Sandringham. How to live with Frank now, personally knowing the Duke and BJR? That would be a big problem for future Claire. It is interesting how Claire thinks she might change history, yet she can't, since she was already there. How fascinating it would be to do research in the future, looking for your earlier presence. BJR put the document she signed into the fire, so it wouldn't be around, but you'd look for other mentions in people's letters or writings and see if you could find yourself. I had only read the first book, and so long ago that I do not remember anything, but Jamie calling Claire "Sassanach" as a nickname. I'm interested now in reading them again, especially reading in these threads that she did think long about staying while at the stones after Jamie left her there. The show just left me with an interest in that question and a lot of speculation.

It would be fun to see Claire tell Jamie about the U.S., knowing that in 40 years or so, the English will lose their colonies there. And that they won't always rule the world 🙂 It's very important to the family that the land stay with them - the Frasers have had it for hundreds of years. In English law at least (yes Ned, I know the Scottish laws could be different) but the attitude towards Lallybroch seems similar - there are provisions for the widow to be taken care of, have an income, or a life estate, but the land stays in the family. It could be entailed on the next male heir. It would ultimately go to Claire's son with Jamie if they had one.

I thought that right away too. Claire is a nurse, too, so it should at least occur to her. I dislike that too! All that screaming!

I was wondering why he has to tell her that - she's the time traveler, so you'd think she'd get a clue. However, she is feisty and maybe her 20th century husband wouldn't like it either - in the 1940s, women were not as liberated as now. Recalling the spanking, I think there were mid-20th century men who would have done that (in an episode of I Love Lucy, Ricky puts Lucy over his knee and spanks here, comedic of course) and Claire is a woman who would have fought then too, or in any century. I was wondering why she stayed. Did the stones not work? Or did she think over - looks like she was there all day - that she didn't know what the stones would do and could throw her into another time completely. All she knows is that they put people in the 1740s no matter when they went (Geillis came from 1968, so maybe they throw you back to the 1740s no matter what year it is). Or think how it would be hard to explain to 20th century people without being adjudged insane? Or would it put her back at the exact same time she left, and then she would not have to explain any missing time but would still have the experience on her conscience. She knows she will be born in the future, but will she remember this in any way and if not, is she in an eternal loop living the same life over and over. I found all that to be quite interesting. Seems odd there was no conversation with Jamie about it.

She had the thought before when she decided not to try again, that she didn't know what would happen. The stone might send her further back in time. That could be a time when no one spoke English. So that could have been a factor, figuring in this era she had a good husband and in others that might not happen and/or things could be much worse. And even if Jamie died or left, she knew a bunch of people in this era. And romance novel canon does show Jamie is the one, with his looks and personality. He is intelligent, including emotionally intelligent, believes she is from the future (one thing that struck me right off at the stone is "how do I explain this to Frank?") in case the time had passed for him too. 20th century people might assign her to the loony bin, whereas Jamie is from a century that is still steeped in some superstition and magic and Jamie was able to believe her.

I think we are meant to overlook it. Like any period drama you know they don’t have conveniences but still see it as romantic. In Poldark, you know they don’t have toilet paper but you forget that and think they are beautiful. Here Claire knows the difference, but she has no complaints of that kind. if stuck there, one might appreciate the lack of pollution and the quietness too. You can see the stars. Food is all fresh. You don’t need underwear.

If Frank and Virginia Benson adopted Carly, and Frank is Nelle's bio father, then Nelle is Carly's sister (not by blood, but via adoption). But it seems like Show would have made a bigger deal of that.

True, but doesn't seem to be a huge age difference and they are both professionals. If I were the judge I might well uphold the adoption; and it could make a more interesting story had Brad and Lucas been able to be involved in it, fighting for their rights. There must be some kind of mob mystique there, as he could still threaten people. Victor Newman does. Though I guess not with death. But with Sonny, that has gotten boring. He is always saying someone has to pay, and at this point he looks ridiculous saying it and I automatically side with the one who has to pay.

I completely hate that concept - having seen it for real in domestic relations cases. Family court judges are by now likely to suspect any recent marriage. The best interests of the child don't always include a stepmother (usually it is men who do it). And getting married to bolster a custody case - just don't get me started. Neil and Alexis - it seems like the time period should be shortened the older the couple are. They don't have 2 years at their ages (I'm even older). And should be considered by that time old enough - Alexis is not a person to be taken advantage of anyway.

I don't like to see the idea played out, though I know it's just a soap, that a person should cut a child off from one of their parents. Too many people out there think they can do that. In reality it would take a lot more - even in jail, parents get visitation, because it is in the child's interests. He could buy them subject to their status as unprobated yet, but that would make them worth less, I would imagine. Though surely ELQ shares are extremely valuable! True, and at least Brad told Lucas himself. Carly never told AJ herself. When Robin did so, she got pissed off! Yes, I would have thought Lucas would even be in denial for at least some period of time. Wondering if Brad could be wrong somehow, or arguing that it is best for Wylie to stay with them in spite of it all.

I recall when Kyle left Amy to be with Georgia and felt bad for Amy - hope she doesn't take him back too quickly. That she got with Gary in the meantime is weird. Neil is already in a school uniform. She is getting big. The new guy is good looking - Chloe is sure aggressive when she wants someone! Who is the young girl whose father is so bad but she wants to talk to him?

I really thought it was going to move along at that point! So typical of them to take the chance to NOT move things along!

An Aussie soap used it for a young man recently. It makes me think of Oscar Madison of The Odd Couple, a 70s sitcom. Why does Dr. Terry call her "Biz."

Who was the baby Toadie had? Did Sonya have a baby before she died? Nell has really grown!

Thanks for the update, Nozycat. I remember Imogene, so now she is back, though she is with Daniel, so maybe it is short term. I could not have remembered whether she or Amber ended up with Daniel. When they talked about Josh, I recall how sad the death was. Piper said she was leaving, and so Imogene coming back makes sense, or Therese has no children on screen. Well I am sure a niece or nephew could show up.

I don't see how Kevin could be at all liable as he didn't plan the crimes with Ryan. It's not enough to the a cause of another's person's location. Chase was pretty smart for a soap opera cop. He figured it all out right there.

Jim Jones got people to sign blank sheets of people so he could type in confessions to awful things on the paper later. There has to be a specific crime. As usual the law in PC is strange. Carly Tenney Snyder!

Hey nozycat! I've had trouble finding a location to watch these, after whoever was putting them on dailymotion.com quit. I did find the last three episodes on youtube. It looks like the characters haven't changed a lot and I so I knew most of them. It seems Elly has made a mess of things. And that Sonya has passed away or gone away? Is Therese with Paul or Gary or neither? And David and Aaron are together? I remember Finn was a bad guy, so now he has amnesia and only remembers his life before he went wrong. Susan is only his fellow teacher but making it her business to be big in his story. I assume Bea (new to me) is his girlfriend.

This is like Jason threatening Sam's life. Show just wants you to forget that. And for the most part, JF Franco. My decision is that Carly is not independent because everything she does or has comes from Sonny and his gang money. She spends most her time arguing with people about things that are not even her business and blaming people for doing things she herself did in the past. She might be a good soap villainess. But show wants us to think she is the heroine.

But Carly is the last one to stand for female independence.

I could see paying closer attention to the complicated equipment and less to the food, but that's clever. Citizens of Port Charles should generally understand that dead people can return. I remember laughing when sometime in the late 90s Stefan said to Laura, "We have to consider the possibility that Stavros is alive" and she reacted as if that was a thing that was perfectly reasonable to expect.

In soap opera world there is no such thing as permanent blindness. All blindness is eventually cured (I remember Evangeline's on OLTL and Chloe on GH and surely there are many others) but especially the medically fascinating twin blindness is sure to be curable in the end. In Port Charles World there appears to be no such thing as health insurance. Whenever someone has a big bill, Sonny generously pays it. LOL so true about falling down stairs!

I thought I remembered that. Soaps usually play up the mother angle, too, so you'd think she'd overlook everything because he saved her child.

And Edward Quartermaine's great grandson - Edward was always threatening the PCPD because he was rich and friends with the mayor.