Book 8: Written in My Own Heart’s Blood

[lianau]

My favourite medical instrument by far is her penis syringe.

[DittyDotDot]

Heh, that's by far one of the funnier things she acquired. 

 

I'm also amused by how it seems that no matter where Claire and Jamie intend to go, they--and the entire gang of characters--always end up where they need to be to get embroiled in the fighting of one kind or another, again. How convenient for the story. ;)

 

Anyhoo, I was beginning to wonder if Richardson was another time traveler. When he decided to lay his cards on the table to Claire, I groaned a little and uttered, "Not another one." Maybe he his, but I was pleasantly surprised those weren't the cards he was wanting to lay on the table. I think there's plenty travelers to deal with for right now, as it is.

 

I'm a tad confused about something, though. Shortly before the British took Savannah, the gang was speaking of how Richardson was probably a spy and not sure where his true allegiances laid and it came up that William was looking for him. There seemed like there was some sort of worry over Ian with regards to Richardson. Both Claire and Rachael were watching him as though he might go off half-cocked or something. Did I forget something that happened between Ian and Richardson? Or were they worried over the mentioning of William? Which doesn't make a lot of sense either. I feel like I either missed something or I'm forgetting something important. I hate it when that happens.

 

Side note: Why wouldn't Jamie and Ian know that alligators are rather dangerous? It's not like it was the first one they saw or anything. Sorry, getting caught up with the minutia again.

Edited October 15, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[DittyDotDot]

So, it's done. Not a bad read, in the end, even if it did go out with a whimper. At least it came in with a roar, right? Plus, there seems to be quite a few more loose ends in this book. I don't mean storylines left for another book, but quite a few holes here. Oh well, after eight very long books, it's probably easy to drop a few things here and there.

 

Anyhoo, sad to lose Jane, too. I rather respected her desire to protect her little sister and liked her dynamic with William. I also liked how she knew who she was and wasn't ashamed of it. It did force William to ask for Jamie's help though. Hopefully this will help William get over himself--or maybe I should say, wake up to himself. 

 

However, I a bit confused with how Jane and Fanny came to be in Georgia in the first place. Last I'd heard, they were left with some random Quakers in New Jersey--which I thought a bit silly anyway--but suddenly they were camp followers, once again, and conveniently in Georgia with all the other major players. Maybe I should go back because I felt like I missed something after the battle anyway. With William suddenly resigning his commission and it taking so long for Lord John and Hal to make it Philadelphia when everyone else got there sooner after leaving later and with injured parties, as well. Humm? It's really hard to tell in these books sometimes--one minute your in the middle of some brouhaha and the next it's three months later and they're hundreds of miles away. I don't know how many times I've thought my Kindle skipped a chapter or something because of the sudden lurching forward. It's like Gabaldon is a magician or something, distracting us with calamity so she can change directions without us seeing her do it. 

 

So, the whole gang's back on the Ridge, eh? It should be interesting, no?

Edited October 16, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[Laurie]

I believe Jane and Fanny used the same transporter room that Ian used to get from Fort Ticonderoga to the Great Dismal Swamp in southern Virginia and back in about three weeks...with stops along the way.

I just had to learn to shake my head and then let it go and enjoy the story.

[DittyDotDot]

Heh, I've been trying to work out a wormhole theory for the Outlander universe, Laurie. It has to do with using the stone circles to travel to other stone circles in the same timeline, except on the sun feasts, then you travel in time not space.  My big stumbling block so far is the characters most prone to suddenly appear somewhere for plot purposes are characters known to not hear the stones. Maybe you can come up with a plausible work-around for that one? Together, we could probably solve all that's wrong in the universe...or at least the Outlander universe anyway. ;)

 

BTW, I forgot to mention. I felt like such a dunderhead...when William was talking about getting Miranda out of Savannah before the British took the city, I couldn't figure out for the life of me who this Miranda was. That was another one of those times I was sure I had missed something big...but no, it was his horse. ;)

Edited October 16, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[Keeta]

So, it's done. Not a bad read, in the end, even if it did go out with a whimper. At least it came in with a roar, right? Plus, there seems to be quite a few more loose ends in this book. I don't mean storylines left for another book, but quite a few holes here. Oh well, after eight very long books, it's probably easy to drop a few things here and there.

 

Anyhoo, sad to lose Jane, too. I rather respected her desire to protect her little sister and liked her dynamic with William. I also liked how she knew who she was and wasn't ashamed of it. It did force William to ask for Jamie's help though. Hopefully this will help William get over himself--or maybe I should say, wake up to himself. 

 

I liked the very end (again, emotional beats! my own personal catnip) with the conversation followed by dawning realization and reunion.

 

I found the character of Jane interesting. I wonder if her dynamic with William was almost too good, like she had to die because as a prostitute in the 18th century she couldn't believably end up with William the earl... 

[DittyDotDot]

So, I've now had time to read through the whole thread and just when you guys thought I might shut up...sorry!

 

I finally finished the book this week. I've found most of the books a bit overindulgent and after Voyager, they are all a blur for me. I can't remember which book is which. So much has happened! 

 

[...]

 

I do feel there is padding in these books. I'm actually less interested in some of the characters than I use to be, but on the whole, I am still attached to the Fraser clan. I really enjoyed the ending when they were at the Ridge. I do think this is ultimately a series about marriages, love, and family in extreme circumstances. The ending felt so good that I look forward to the next one which undoubtedly will have upheaval. 

 

This is pretty much what I was thinking when I finished, but you said it much better than I would have. 

 

William's problem is very much the same problem Brianna had in the third and most of the fourth books:  The character is less a fully developed character in his own right than he is a collection of Jamie's traits that we're waiting to see reconcile with his father.  It took several books for Brianna to really move beyond that.  That said, I can appreciate why he spends most of the book righteously pissed off.  Everyone he knows as family has kept it from him while apparently everyone else who's ever laid eyes on him or Jamie already knows.  

 

This is exactly why I had such a hard time getting invested in Bree. I kept saying she was very thin as a character, but your description is much more apt. However, I've never really felt like Willy was just a collection of Jamie's traits. He has some--his appearance sans red hair and his temper and his ability to pick up languages easily--but he also lacks Jamie's experience and instincts and I find him far less athletically gifted than Jamie appears to be and far more impulsive and reckless like his mother was. I always felt like he stood on his own as a character and I totally get why he's having a identity crisis in the guise of a temper tantrum. I actually grew to respect William quite a bit by the end of this book. I look forward to he and Bree exchanging notes in the future. 

 

Beyond needing some trimming, this book had more of the same issue that's plagued the last couple.  We can get pages and pages of medical procedures that seem to not be tied to anything else in the story or a fight over a mule, but then really important conversations are happening off page.  Claire acknowledges all the way back in Voyager that it's a huge thing that Jamie never told his sister or any of the family about Willie or what happened in England, yet here Jennie sails into the Philadelphia house already having been filled in and being just being fine with it all.  John was told off page about Claire and Brianna being time travelers.   In earlier books, we never got to see Jamie acknowledge William to Brianna.  It robs a lot of interactions of their power.

 

 

Hear, hear! You can really see where Gabaldon's own interest lies in her writing style. And you can tell when she's over something and just wants to get on to the next thing that piqued her interest. The sudden shift of focus can be so jarring sometimes.

 

As for Geillis and Buck.  Yeah.  Ew.  I still don't trust Buck.  That man's psyche is a bit . . . damaged.  I'm glad there was only one adult man in the little group that Claire and Jamie see walking towards the house.

 

Yeah, I still don't trust Buck either. Maybe I'm just too cynical in my old age, but it he just felt too conveniently helpful at times. I'm not yet convinced he is a friend. It's the same way I felt about that scientist-guy they met in Haiti we've heard nary a word of since they were shipwrecked in North Carolina. 

 

Geillius and Buck was all sorts of creepy...eeewww...but it also made perfect sense somehow. There was a reason why Jamie had his reservations about Geillius way back in the beginning...or is it the middle?  I did have me a great chuckle at Buck's "Why didn't you tell me my mother was a whore?" Maybe you should've told Roger you had a Oedipus complex, Bucky-boy? ;)

 

I always had the impression that Rachel's Quaker principles weren't as deeply ingrained as Denny's.  She just seemed more conflicted overall, at all the points where other needs opposed the Quaker training.  Including the point about Ian's being comfortable with violence and wolf-like.  I think that there's a part of Rachel that just can't fully accept the pacifist idea that violence is never necessary, and so she rationalizes that if she doesn't commit violence herself, it's good enough.  She lets others take the job of being the sheepdogs for the Quaker flock.

 

I think this is probably true--Rachael's beliefs not being as ingrained as Denny's--but I also think she truly wants to live in a world of nonviolence, but realizes it's not the world she actually lives in, so she adapts to reality as best she can. 

 

It is interesting how WIllie isn't angry with Claire but is with everyone else who knew or suspected, and I'm not talking about John or Jamie. I wonder why she gets a pass from him but Hal, Ian, Rachel et al do not?

 

I think it's because William has spent his whole life idolizing and mourning his two dead mothers that it's hard for him to be angry with anyone who is "mother" to him. It probably didn't hurt that Claire had the chance to have bit of a chat right after the fact and tell him she was very fond of him. With almost everyone else, Willie was left to stew over it without any resolution for days and days and days with no outlet.

 

John is sure that Jamie is going to kill him and it's theorized that he thought that by he telling Jamie, he would prevent Jamie from taking out his anger on Claire. Maybe John actually thought this. My question is, does anyone really think that Jamie would have killed John if they weren't interupted or that he would have physically hurt Claire? I remember thinking that there's no way either of those things happen. Even less likely if John had kept the "we were both fucking you" out of it.

 

I think there's a lot of reasons John may have told Jamie, but I think the main one was he was tired of pretending he didn't love Jamie just so he could be allowed in Jamie's presence. He thought Jamie was dead, but now he wasn't and John wasn't going to tip-toe around the subject anymore. He was going to have an honest relationship with Jamie or none at all.

 

I think Jamie will hold true to his word and never purposely do physical violence to Claire again. So no, I don't think he would've harmed Claire and I don't think he would've actually killed John. I'm thinking, or maybe just hoping, he would've stopped himself short of it on both counts.

 

NO!  Just NO!  Percy is a scoundrel and he's up to no good where Fergus is concerned and he just needs to GO AWAY!

 

Sorry for the shouting.  Feeling a bit protective of John just now.  I just read the scene where Claire tells John what Richardson said -- that he knows what John is.  That is not a good thing for Richardson to know.

 

Ooooh, I've just had a thought for the next book.  I don't want Percy and John back together but I wouldn't mind it at all if Percy's scoundrel-skills allowed him to help John get the upper hand with regard to Richardson.  That would be excellent.

 

Yep, don't trust Percy and I'd like to see John punch him in the eye, myself. Actually, I'd like Fergus to get a few licks in too. 

 

I wonder if Jem tells Jamie about Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader and lightsabers and Jamie's reaction to that!

 

I would LOVE to hear that discussion! Some of my favorite scenes of of Brianna telling Jamie of life in the future.

 

To meet his dad.  And if you get a chance to read "A Leaf on the Wind of all Hallows" you'll find out why it was so important that Roger sent his dad back through the stones.

 

While it's not necessary to read the novellas, they sure do add some interesting wrinkles to the big books.

 

I downloaded this novella this morning and am looking forward to delving in, but it seems it's made clear why it's important for Roger to shove Jerry through the stones only if you read that book. I like the idea of there being more books and all, but where this is kinda a major storyline for An Echo in the Bone, I wonder if it didn't disservice the storyline to not properly develop it in this book? I'm not one to love how she recaps previous plots and books--I understand why she does it and accept them, even if I think they could be better executed--but if there was ever a need for one, I'd say this was it. 

Edited October 16, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[DittyDotDot]

I found the character of Jane interesting. I wonder if her dynamic with William was almost too good, like she had to die because as a prostitute in the 18th century she couldn't believably end up with William the earl... 

 

Oh, I wasn't expecting or even wanting them to end up together. I just liked that William had a friend and I was hoping she'd become someone he could confide in. But, I wanted it to be friendship, not a romantic relationship.

[lianau]

One of my favourite William and Jane scene is the part where William is trying not to have sex with her because John told him the best gift for a prostitute is  a good night's sleep .

[WatchrTina]

 

 

BEARCATFAN, ON 13 AUG 2015 - 10:43 AM, SAID:

It is interesting how WIllie isn't angry with Claire but is with everyone else who knew or suspected, and I'm not talking about John or Jamie. I wonder why she gets a pass from him but Hal, Ian, Rachel et al do not?

 

I think it's because William has spent his whole life idolizing and mourning his two dead mothers that it's hard for him to be angry with anyone who is "mother" to him. It probably didn't hurt that Claire had the chance to have bit of a chat right after the fact and tell him she was very fond of him. With almost everyone else, Willie was left to stew over it without any resolution for days and days and days with no outlet.

I also think Claire gets a pass because William knows how devastated she was by Jamie's "death" and how shell-shocked she must be at his sudden re-appearance.  It would be hard to yell at someone in the state that Claire was in immediately after Jamie's departure.  Buy yeah, I agree that poor, motherless William does have a soft-spot for "Mother" Claire that earns her more leeway than the various men in William's life.

Edited October 17, 2015 by WatchrTina

[Andorra]

Could one of the people who have already read Book 8 please spoil me about Henri-Christian's death? I have a huge problem with children dying in fiction or in movies/TV shows (I couldn't watch Cranford because of it or Poldark) and I think I'm nearing the point in the book when it is going to happen. Now I don't dare to read on. I would really like to skip that part if possible.

 

I'm now at the point where Brianna and Roger's family is reunited in 1738. Claire just had a talk with Marsali, that they think about returning to Fraser's Ridge and they mentioned maybe moving to Savannah. 

 

Can someone tell me the incident that will start the events where Henri-Christian is going to die, please?

[DittyDotDot]

It's Chapter 120: A Crackling of Thorns. I think you still have a little ways to go...it follows after when Claire, at the behest of Benedict Arnold, doctors a man who was tarred and feathered.

 

If you want to know the gist of it without all the details:

the print shop is set afire. Germain and Henri Christian get trapped in the loft and Germain drops Henri Christian when he tries to swing them both out of the loft on a rope.

[Andorra]

Thank you so much, Dottie, now I know where to skip. Poor, poor German. How heartbreaking!

[bearcatfan]

I was sad when Rollo died but he had lived a long life (as was said) plus he died peacefully in his sleep and not from some horrible injury. It was the best I could have hoped for outside of having him live forever.

[Andorra]

I just finished book 8 and I must say, I cried a few times. When Rollo died, when Henri-Christian died (even though I skipped that chapter, but the funeral alone made me cry), then when William came to Jamie for help, then when they got back to the Ridge and Adso appeared and then of course in the very end when they ran down the hill seeing Bree, Roger and the kids.

 

I must say I loved book 8. I think it's one of my favourites! 7 was so very slow, but 8 was wonderful. I think my favourites are 1, 3 and 8 now. 

 

And now I have to wait along with you all for book Number 9!! 

[MsProudSooner]

I finished MOBY last night.  After Outlander & Voyager, I think this one was my favorite book thus far.  There was a lot of action and it moved along nicely.  It was almost impossible to read this one slowly and savor it because I was always turning the page to see what was going to happen next.  I began the series in January and it's going to be very hard to wait 2 or more years to find out how Bree & Roger got from 1739 to 1778 and how William comes to terms with his parentage.  

 

 

[CalamityBoPeep]

 2 or more years  

 

At the rate Diana gets things published, it'll probably be more like 4 or so years.  At least.  She writes faster than George R. R. Martin though. :-)

[Laurie]

Diana recently commented on the CompuServe forum that they've (not sure who) asked her if she can get it done so it can be released in conjunction with season 3 (if there is one). She didn't say no outright but did say it would probably have to be a shorter book.

[Glaze Crazy]

I was wondering if and/or when her writing schedule would be driven by the show.  If it's a shorter book she might be able to get them out sooner.  I'm not sure it it's a good idea though.  Pressure doesn't always result in diamonds, creatively.

[DittyDotDot]

If they really are going to stick to one season per book--which, I can't even fathom how they're going to do S3 with all the stuff going on in Voyager--the show's not gonna catch up to her for another six years, why rush it? It's not likely she'll write less long-winded, anyway. Might as well take her time so things don't get lost in the haste.

 

Gah, four years though? Man, who knew when I started reading these books that I'd care so much?

[MsProudSooner]

I have  memory like a sieve.  Wasn't a Dr. Hunter mentioned in this book?  I took a tour of Westminister Abby and a Dr. Hunter is buried there.

[DittyDotDot]

Dr. Hunter is mentioned a bit in both Echo in the Bone and Written in My Own Heart's Blood, through Denny. He's Denny's uncle or cousin and who Denny trained as a doctor with.

 

Dr. Hunter, as an actual character, shows up in a couple of the Lord John stories though: Custom of the Army and The Scottish Prisoner, I think.

 

What an interesting character he was in real life though. 

[toolazy]

The real-life Hunter was John Hunter, I think.  He was Denny's cousin who Denny studied with in London.  

Edited February 9, 2016 by toolazy

[ulkis]

At the rate Diana gets things published, it'll probably be more like 4 or so years.  At least.  She writes faster than George R. R. Martin though. :-)

 

I don't even think you can compare the two, really, honestly. Gabaldon has moved the characters onto new stories. There are several spots in the whole continuous tale imo where they could credibly end to choose the tv series on if they so chose. Not so with the Game of Thrones book. 5 books later and there are still several plot threads from book 1 (don't even know if this would count as a spoiler but I'll put it under a spoiler cut anyway)

that haven't been close to resolved.

(Can you tell I have Martin issues, heh?) So I gotta give Diana credit for that.

Edited February 15, 2016 by ulkis

[Atlanta]

The end left me thirsty for the next book but not yelling out loud like book 7. Argh! Brianna also finally became a likable character and loved seeing Claire's modern BFF Joe Abernathy again. I so wish Jamie could travel. I'd hoot out loud at his response to modern life. Snort!

[toolazy]

Today I finished what is probably my 5th re-read of this book and I have to admit that as much as I love it, there are entire chapters that I skip.  I don't care about battles and, unlike others here, I didn't like Bree any better in this book than in any of the others.  Which means not really at all.  So I skipped all of the 1980's scenes and this last time I skipped Roger & Buck's adventures in the 1740's.  I also skip the chapter with the print shop burning down.  Poor Germaine.

 

The parts of this book that I just love are the double-wedding "does he have a cock?"; the conversation between Claire & Rachel and Dottie about their wedding nights; Hal's kidnapping and the hijinks that ensue; and the very last scene which causes me to sob hysterically every time. 

Edited April 20, 2016 by toolazy

[Wouldofshouldof]

I've now joined the legions of fans who have reached the end of the finished books and must waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait for book 9.  Sigh.

I LOL'ed at this line in chapter 61, about Lord John: "You musn't hit him again, Grand-Pere," Germain said earnestly, breaking the silence.  "He's a very good man, and I'm sure he won't take Grannie to bed anymore, now that you're home to do it."

Good times.

[katville]

Well, I have finally finished the series (so far) and I have to admit, I am more relieved than I thought I would be. That was exhausting and I did a sizable amount of skimming.

I feel like I shouldn't admit this, because so many of you are still enthusiastic about the series and have cottoned to the new characters ... but I haven't. I feel like it has turned into an ensemble drama and that is not what I signed up for. True, Claire and Jamie are now in their late fifties/early sixties and that limits the storyline somewhat, but when I look back to Book 1, I realize how incredibly different the series is now.

That is not to say that I did not really like/was emotionally affected by different parts of the book. Rollo! Henri-Christian. Claire being shot and the battle (I actually liked the American Revolution scenes a lot). Jenny being awesome and witty. Jamie becoming a general (which I found strangely hot). Jamie and William teaming up to rescue Jane. But I feel like I had to slog through a lot of exposition to get to the heart of it.

I am one who thinks that Lord John does not truly love Jamie. I think he is obsessed with him, but Jamie has never shown him all of himself (or Himself, I suppose) and even when talking or confiding with him, he still is not open and honest like he is with Claire. Claire knows his weaknesses, his fears, his character faults and his secrets. He has treated John like a friend but has always drawn a line. And I think that is why John said what he said to him in the confrontation. Claire and Jamie get to have this emotional, passionate reunion when Jamie is revealed not to be dead. John wants to have that with Jamie too -- express his own desolution at Jamie's death, but knows he will never have it. So he tries to goad and taunt Jamie into an emotional response ... and he got one.

[katville]

Yes, obsessed is probably not quite the right word. I agree that Black Jack was obsessed with Jamie -- and breaking him down. I would say that John has a crush on Jamie, but that doesn't sound quite serious enough. I just don't think he is in love with him, I don't think he knows him well enough to be. I agree with you that idolizing is a good word. I can't help but feel sorry for John because it is so clearly one-sided and while I know they have a great friendship, if Lord John died, I don't think Jamie would be anywhere close to as devastated as John was when he thought Jamie had drowned.

[lianau]

I think John's love for Jamie is  a safety thing for John . He lost Hector at Culloden and that affected him for years , it's only when he meets Jamie in Ardsmuir that he gets sort of over it . Jamie will never reciprocate his feelings so there is no chance of ever hurting like that again (and Jamie's "death" was bad enough) . I also believe that John's strange relationship with Percy is a result of this. Spoilers Lord John books

Spoiler

He ran from too much emotional involvement and hid behind Jamie only to realize  how much he actually cared when Percy cheated .

[toolazy]

It is explained in the book that John provoked Jamie to violence so that it would be directed at John and not at Claire.  He didn't want Claire to have to tell him about what they did and then bear the brunt of his reaction.

Also, I have no trouble believing that John is truly in love with Jamie.  They spent time together at the prison and then off and on for years at Helwater.  I don't have any trouble believing that John got to know Jamie enough to love him.  

[WatchrTina]

6 hours ago, toolazy said:

 I don't have any trouble believing that John got to know Jamie enough to love him.  

Me neither.  They spend quite a lot of time together during their dinners at the prison before the breach happens.  Jamie is the only person at the prison that is as educated as John.  Both of them find it a relief to have someone to talk to about something other than the functioning of the prison.  The play chess and discuss literature and philosophy once a week for months before John makes the pass and the fragile relationship is shattered.  Later, when Jamie is at Helwater, he is taken from there and spends about a month in John's constant company as they go off on the adventure that is the subject of the Lord John novel "The Scottish Prisoner."  The breach between them is a gaping wound at the beginning of that novel but by the end they have pretty much made peace with one another.  That healing process is described in only a sentence or two in Voyager.  Those sentences make a lot more sense when you know what happened in "The Scottish Prisoner."

[Archery]

I think katville and WatchrTina, that you are both correct. John's relationship with Jamie is perpetual courtship, and John will never not be in love with the Jamie he knows.  They have spent substantial time together, have agreed, collaborated, and fought over a period of years.  But Jamie does have this line that he has drawn and has indicated in no uncertain terms that John will never, ever be able to cross it, no matter how much he yearns.  Even when they are all three (John, Jamie, and Claire) getting along, Jamie is always ready with the shutdown, as in when John offers his home for J&C to stay in and Jamie refuses.  Part of the reason is that intimacy is not ever going to be an option for Jamie with John, but there's also the difference in status that defines their relationship. Even at Ardsmuir and later at Helwater, John was always Lord John, warden and, for lack of better term, parole officer, and Jamie was always prisoner and servant.  Even if Jamie could get over the intimacy part (which he will not) and get over Claire (again, no), their relationship is not and can never be equal.   

[katville]

2 hours ago, Archery said:

I think katville and WatchrTina, that you are both correct. John's relationship with Jamie is perpetual courtship, and John will never not be in love with the Jamie he knows.  They have spent substantial time together, have agreed, collaborated, and fought over a period of years.  But Jamie does have this line that he has drawn and has indicated in no uncertain terms that John will never, ever be able to cross it, no matter how much he yearns.  Even when they are all three (John, Jamie, and Claire) getting along, Jamie is always ready with the shutdown, as in when John offers his home for J&C to stay in and Jamie refuses.  Part of the reason is that intimacy is not ever going to be an option for Jamie with John, but there's also the difference in status that defines their relationship. Even at Ardsmuir and later at Helwater, John was always Lord John, warden and, for lack of better term, parole officer, and Jamie was always prisoner and servant.  Even if Jamie could get over the intimacy part (which he will not) and get over Claire (again, no), their relationship is not and can never be equal.   

Very well put. I had not even considered ego in the equation. Even though Jamie was a laird, I can see where he would consider the uneven circumstances that they formed their friendship to always be a wall between them. That is interesting to mull on.

[Dejana]

1 hour ago, Grashka said:

Speaking of Jamie&Lord John, it occured to me that William, who already has enough on his plate, still hasn't heard the half of it:

- he doesn't know that his stepfather is homosexual, and in love with his biological father

- he doesn't know that his biological father is married to a time-traveler, and that his sister, niece and nephew are time-travelers as well.

- he doesn't know that his biological father saved his life very early on, when his official father was trying to throw him out of the window.

And I wonder if William is ever going to learn about any of those things? Personally, I hope he wont learn about 1 and 3, because the former is too intimate for both Lord John and Jamie, and the latter too painful for him. But what about the stones?

I think William is sure to learn about how the 8th Earl really died and that his father is in love with his other father, the latter because Diana seems merciless that way.

There was something about William hearing strange noises in nature sometimes...IDK if he's a time traveler himself, though. That would be rather much but maybe he's inherited Jamie's astral projection thing.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Dejana

[Clawdette]

I think William learning about the circumstances of the Earl's death is key to his understanding how Jamie was there for him from the time he was an infant until it became socially - and legally - dangerous for him to remain in contact.  He is so angry now because of the web of lies but going all the way back to the beginning is a step in understanding and moving forward.

[lianau]

8 hours ago, katville said:

Very well put. I had not even considered ego in the equation. Even though Jamie was a laird, I can see where he would consider the uneven circumstances that they formed their friendship to always be a wall between them. That is interesting to mull on.

 John is thinking about that in the Scottish Prisoner when he's regretting the fact that their adventure is over and Jamie has to go back to being a  groom at Helwater . 

[LMR]

I really enjoyed this book, it might have been one of my favourites of the 'Epics'. After a bit of a lull, I thought both this and EITB picked up the pace again but it wasn't constantly PERIL,  even allowing for what happened to Claire. (at least on the 18th C side of things anyway)

I have to say I've really enjoyed how Jamie's death and subsequent resurrection have changed the dynamic in the Jamie-John-Claire relationship. Despite LJG's higher social standing I always felt like his feelings for Jamie was what made it the relationship of unequals and whilst those feelings might still be there I do feel like the marriage to Claire and the revelation to Jamie has actually freed LJG a bit. Given Jamie's reaction in the aftermath of his revelation I feel like LJG is a bit more 'eh f**k it' about stuff and feels less of a need to dance around the subject (especially given he has no idea why Jamie is actually so appalled by his feelings in the first place). The relationship is definitely strained but I don't get the sense from the book that its irredeemable so I've actually enjoyed a slightly sassier more autonomous Lord John.

 

I enjoyed a lot of the Roger stuff, but I still cannot bring myself to care that much about Bree. I have tried and I have failed. Of all the POV characters we have she is probably the one I find least readable (apart from some of the William stuff, but I still find him more likeable). All the peril she faces in the last two books and I still can't seem to invest in her as a character.

Edited September 28, 2016 by LMR

[buffynut]

Just jumping into this forum as I've finally finished the 8th book. I started Outlander in January and have been reading one right after another, except for a few weeks-long delays when I had to wait for the next e-book to be available at the library. 

Having read one after another, I find so much story blurs together and I can't remember what happened in each book.  

I did enjoy this one though and hated for it to end. I was glad, at least, that Bree and family were back.  And sad when Rollo died.  And poor Henri-Christian. Didn't see that coming at all.

Time travel always hurts my brain when I think about it too much, and my brain's hurting from trying to figure out when Roger's letter appeared in the desk. Was it there all along? Even before Roger went to the past? Or did it literally show up when he put it there. Like Bree could have watched it appear if she'd had the secret compartment open when Roger put it there.  So confusing.

I see there's a "Go Tell the Bees I'm Gone" thread which I can't decide if I want to venture into or not.  I managed to stay spoiler-free throughout all the books except for one thing which I got spoiled on from DG's own website. That was that Raymond was a time traveller. So nothing big, but still a spoiler.  So I'm hesitant to get spoiled for the next book. But since it will be years before it is released, my curiosity may get the better of me.

I plan to read the Lord John and other smaller books.  Any suggestions as to the order I should read them? 

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, buffynut said:

I plan to read the Lord John and other smaller books.  Any suggestions as to the order I should read them? 

Technically, you can read them in any order as they each stand alone, but I'd recommend reading the Lord John series in chronological order--not necessarily the order they were written and published--since they kinda do piggy-back on each other. This is the order I read them in:

• The Hell-Fire Club
• The Private Matter
• The Succubus
• Brotherhood of the Blade
• Haunted Soldier
• Custom of the Army
• The Scottish Prisoner
• The Plague of Zombies

The Hell-Fire Club, The Succubus and The Haunted Soldier are all all collected together in one collection called Lord John and the Hand of Devils. I enjoyed them all to different degrees, but Brotherhood of the Blade is my personal favorite of the Lord John books. It really gets inside John's head and gives us the backstory to Percy and John. The Scottish Prisoner has some great character beats and fills in some of the gaps of John and Jamie's relationship from Voyager--it would be my second favorite--but the driving plot is a bit all over the place.

FYI, though, the Lord John books are about John's life and Jamie only appears in The Scottish Prisoner. Not everyone finds John's life tracking down traitors and spies all that interesting. Like I said, I liked them all, some more than others, but just to give you a heads-up that they aren't more stories of Claire and Jamie.

The other novellas stand all on their own and could be read at any time. I really enjoyed A Leaf of the Wind of all Hallows. It introduces us to Roger's parents and I think it's probably the best-written of all the novellas. The Space Between follows Jamie's nephew Michael and Joan (Marsali's sister) to Paris where they have an adventure together. I wasn't as captivated with this one, but it does explain a big plot-point from Dragonfly in Amber.

Hope that helps.

[WatchrTina]

Quote

FYI, though, the Lord John books are about John's life and Jamie only appears in The Scottish Prisoner.

Jamie also appears (briefly) in "Custom of the Army."  His chapter includes a big, dramatic conflict that sets the stage for what happens in "The Scottish Prisoner", in which Jamie is the point-of-view narrator for about half the chapters.

[lianau]

Isn't that Brotherhood of the Blade? Or am I messing something up?

[DittyDotDot]

Thanks for catching my flub @WatchrTina! You're right, there is a pivotal scene in another book, but I think @lianau is also right, it's in Brotherhood of the Blade, right?

[buffynut]

18 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

FYI, though, the Lord John books are about John's life and Jamie only appears in The Scottish Prisoner. Not everyone finds John's life tracking down traitors and spies all that interesting. Like I said, I liked them all, some more than others, but just to give you a heads-up that they aren't more stories of Claire and Jamie.

The other novellas stand all on their own and could be read at any time. I really enjoyed A Leaf of the Wind of all Hallows. It introduces us to Roger's parents and I think it's probably the best-written of all the novellas. The Space Between follows Jamie's nephew Michael and Joan (Marsali's sister) to Paris where they have an adventure together. I wasn't as captivated with this one, but it does explain a big plot-point from Dragonfly in Amber.

Hope that helps.

Thanks. That helps a lot. I've got a couple other books to read, then I'll start the Lord John books. As I like his character and his family, I think I'll enjoy the books. 

Also looking forward to reading the novellas.

[WatchrTina]

On 9/29/2016 at 1:01 AM, lianau said:

Isn't that Brotherhood of the Blade? Or am I messing something up?

Oh you are probably right.  I always mix those two up when I am talking about them.  Been too long since I read them.

[Dust Bunny]

Under the category of The Battle of Monmouth, I saw Hamilton in Chicago yesterday (flew there, just to see it). Yes, it is THAT good. I've listened to the soundtrack dozens and dozens and dozens of times, but nothing compares to seeing it on stage. 

Anyway, Lee and the Battle of Monmouth always has me recalling MOBY's version.

Hamilton: "Instead of me, he [Washington] promotes General Lee. Makes him second-in-command."

Lee: "I'm a general - whee!"

Hamilton: "Yeah, he's not the choice I would have gone with."

All: "He shits the bed at the Battle of Monmouth."

Washington: "Everyone attack!"

Lee: "Retreat!"

Washington: "Attack!"

Lee: "Retreat!"

Washington: "What are you doing, Lee?! Get back on your feet!"

Lee: "But there's so many of them!"

Washington: "I'm sorry - is this not your speed?! Hamilton!"

Hamilton: "Ready, sir!"

Washington: "Have Lafayette take the lead."

Hamilton: "Yes, sir!"

Laurens: "A thousand soldiers die in a hundred degree heat"

Lafayette: "As we snatch a stalemate from the jaws of defeat."

And so on.

That part always amuses me, thinking about how Diana portrayed it on MOBY.

I love historical fiction. And historical hip hop.

[AheadofStraight]

On 5/14/2017 at 8:51 PM, Dust Bunny said:

Under the category of The Battle of Monmouth, I saw Hamilton in Chicago yesterday (flew there, just to see it). Yes, it is THAT good. I've listened to the soundtrack dozens and dozens and dozens of times, but nothing compares to seeing it on stage. 

Anyway, Lee and the Battle of Monmouth always has me recalling MOBY's version.

 

I flew to Chicago to see it too in April and I also thought of this book during that song when I discovered the cast recording :)

[Thalia]

I've been re-reading this book (started with ECHO, probably my favorite of the later books).  And all of a sudden I started thinking about how the earlier books have emphasized the face that Jenny never wandered far from Lallybroch prior to Ian's death.  She's certainly never been in a city the size of Philadelphia, which was the largest city in the American colonies at the time of the Revolution.  Yet both Jamie and Claire are sending her all over the place on errands.  The one that particularly got me was Jamie sending her out to get a uniform made for him in less than 24 hours.  While if anyone could it would be Jenny, but how did she know where to go?  Was she just wandering around unfamiliar streets looking for tailors?  

[Atlanta]

1 hour ago, Thalia said:

I've been re-reading this book (started with ECHO, probably my favorite of the later books).  And all of a sudden I started thinking about how the earlier books have emphasized the face that Jenny never wandered far from Lallybroch prior to Ian's death.  She's certainly never been in a city the size of Philadelphia, which was the largest city in the American colonies at the time of the Revolution.  Yet both Jamie and Claire are sending her all over the place on errands.  The one that particularly got me was Jamie sending her out to get a uniform made for him in less than 24 hours.  While if anyone could it would be Jenny, but how did she know where to go?  Was she just wandering around unfamiliar streets looking for tailors?  

Wow. Never thought of that. Maybe they gave her directions and they knew she was a woman who could handle herself? I always wondered about Brianna and Roger's marriage being legal in modern times. They were married in the in the late 1700s in the colonies, but would they need a marriage certificate in late 70s/early 80s Scotland? They had dropped off the earth for years and reappeared. I remember Claire making out home birth certificates. IIRC, she mentions that she renewed her medical license before leaving so she was the attending physician and fudged the years.

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, Thalia said:

I've been re-reading this book (started with ECHO, probably my favorite of the later books).  And all of a sudden I started thinking about how the earlier books have emphasized the face that Jenny never wandered far from Lallybroch prior to Ian's death.  She's certainly never been in a city the size of Philadelphia, which was the largest city in the American colonies at the time of the Revolution.  Yet both Jamie and Claire are sending her all over the place on errands.  The one that particularly got me was Jamie sending her out to get a uniform made for him in less than 24 hours.  While if anyone could it would be Jenny, but how did she know where to go?  Was she just wandering around unfamiliar streets looking for tailors?  

Yeah, I remember thinking it was kinda weird they'd send this woman who didn't know the city at all out to run their errands, too. 

30 minutes ago, Atlanta said:

I always wondered about Brianna and Roger's marriage being legal in modern times. They were married in the in the late 1700s in the colonies, but would they need a marriage certificate in late 70s/early 80s Scotland? They had dropped off the earth for years and reappeared. I remember Claire making out home birth certificates. IIRC, she mentions that she renewed her medical license before leaving so she was the attending physician and fudged the years.

With the hippie movement being big at the time, I'm betting they could've just said the kids were born on a commune and provided their dates of birth to get official birth certificates. It probably wasn't all that uncommon...or they just had someone forge ones for them. As to the marriage, they could be considered common law married by the time they went back. Or, again, just had someone forge a marriage license for them.