S05.E02: Between Two Fires

[gingerella]

45 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I definitely agree as a blacksmith, he would meet more people and hear their grievances.  But then again, he knew all about the harsh injustices back in Scotland which were often even more egregious and didn't become radicalized.  Historically, the Regulator leaders were backcountry farmers/had land and they naturally banded together due to their common self interest.

Maybe it's as you or.someone said uptrend, without Jamie as his raison d'etre, he was.looking for a cause. Also, we don't know iw what Murtagh experienced during his forced labor when he was first shipped to the Colonies. I wish we knew more about him he comes to be radicalized.

[Anothermi]

On 2/7/2022 at 5:37 PM, Camera One said:

Murtaugh's personality completely changed.  If they really wanted to do this story, they would have needed to show us a bit of what happened to Murtaugh in the last 20 years and what triggered this change.

You've made a lot of good points in this discussion, @Camera One. I wasn't happy to see such a hard-nosed and heartless Murtagh, and I agree with this quote. It is a weakness of this show—and even of the couple of books I've read. There are large leaps in time in both. That makes it impossible to do anything but speculate on the personality changes. 

On 2/8/2022 at 8:26 PM, Camera One said:

But then again, he knew all about the harsh injustices back in Scotland which were often even more egregious and didn't become radicalized. 

See, I don't think everyone changes their behaviour due to momentary revelation. Certainly not our Murtagh. He had 20 years where he was free from the oath he gave to young Jamie and his deceased mother. Jamie and he were on different continents. Both were prisoners in those different locations, but Murtagh didn't have Jamie to look out for. He's had time to reflect on what happened at Culloden, and the fact that the British attitude towards him and his people had not changed a bit. When his term of indenture was over, he had a better opportunity, in the new world, to make his own way. And the ratio of settlers to British soldiers was far greater—and more diverse—than back in Scotland. Most of them had come to get away from the clutches of the British, so there were fewer of them willing to accept  becoming a clone of the old world.

I think Murtagh grew into becoming his own man by the separation from his oath-to-serve-Jamie.  Because we WEREN'T shown all the incidents that led him to decide that opposing, rather than acceding-to, was the only path to be rid of the British oppression... all we've got is the changed behaviour to go on. I don't find it impossible that he would have grown into this political stance. In the new world he wouldn't have been alone in that. 

He knows that Claire, Brianna and Roger have said that there will be a war that will rid his new land of the British, but Murtagh was never a man to let things happen around him. He knows he has to be part of the change to ensure it happens. The problem is that he is not the strategist that Jamie is. He fights what is in front of him. 

The most poignant part of the Murtagh/ Jamie leave-taking—for me—was Murtagh asking if Claire had told Jamie what happens with the Regulator movement, and Jamie being unable (or unwilling) to tell him. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by Anothermi
clarity... Claire-ity?

[Camera One]

I do agree there is always a possibility, and the storyline is certainly more enjoyable if you can believe in his new motivations.  Murtaugh had around 10 years to build his life in the New World before he saw Jaime again so the new start is definitely a way to explain it.  Jaime was now back in his life but Murtaugh had changed to the point where he was ready and willing to cut his ties with Jaime over his new cause.  I wish I could buy it but since I couldn't, I just wasn't immersed anymore where Murtaugh was concerned.  What disappoints me about losing my immersion is that I can't feel the poignancy of the scenes even though the actors are so good.

[mythoughtis]

There were lots of individuals and groups upset about taxes in the years before the Revolutionary war.  The only ones I was ever taught about were the ones up North.  Not  in the Carolinas.  So I could understand why Claire can’t tell  Murtaugh about the regulators.   It’s possible Frank could have- since he’d located  Jamie and Claire.   
I didn’t like tar and feathering in a movie I saw about Prohibition and competing  moonshiners and I don’t like it here.   
I didn’t need to see that body nor did  I need to see Bonnett and whatever he inflicted on that poor man.  
 

I understand why Roger wants to go back to his own time.  Other than being worried about  whether the child can go, I don’t understand why Bree doesn’t.     She  supposedly only came back to warn about the fire.  She did that.  She knows life in this time is hard and dangerous.   She was raped, and now she knows her rapist is alive in this time.  Why not go back home where he’s been dead for 200 years? 
 

Edited August 29, 2022 by mythoughtis

[Cdh20]

7 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

 

I understand why Roger wants to go back to his own time.  Other than being worried about  whether the child can go, I don’t understand why Bree doesn’t.     She  supposedly only came back to warn about the fire.  She did that.  She knows life in this time is hard and dangerous.   She was raped, and now she knows her rapist is alive in this time.  Why not go back home where he’s been dead for 200 years? 
 

I have an ongoing struggle over where Roger & Bree belong. There is no doubt for me that Claire belongs in the past with Jamie, but just because Roger & Bree can travel doesn’t mean they belong there. I think Bree wants to spend more time with her mom, & newfound dad, but she would be better off in her own time, imo.

[DoctorAtomic]

I'm in agreement there, but recall that their whole motivation for going back was the fire. They don't really know when it happens, so I can buy that they want to stick around to be there. Of course, being there could actually be the result of the fire, but timey-whimey. 

[gingerella]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I'm in agreement there, but recall that their whole motivation for going back was the fire. They don't really know when it happens, so I can buy that they want to stick around to be there. Of course, being there could actually be the result of the fire, but timey-whimey. 

I agree with this, including the timey-whimey shite, since Gabs doesn't do a very good job remembering OR explaining the time travel parts of the story we are left wondering and making up our own conclusions, alas. They both did go back to warn J&C about the fire, but once there I'm sure the pull of getting to know her bio dad and to spend more time with her mother in the world where her mother felt most 'at home' was a strong pull, and Roger wanted to be with Brianna so...I also think, on some level, despite all the horrors that Roger faced in the 1700's, he may have felt more of a man in the traditional sense, than he did in the 1900's where he had what would be considered old fashioned notions about a woman's place.

[DoctorAtomic]

I wish the characters were just more inquisitive in general about time travel. I wasn't expecting whole episodes devoted to it, but the lack of general curiosity would be interesting.