S06.E08: I Am Not Alone

[gingerella]

On 5/6/2022 at 9:19 PM, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Cherokee. The Cherokee led by Chief Bird Who Sings in the Morning live close to Fraser's Ridge. The Mohawk live much farther north, in New York. Although there was one Mohawk there, if Young Ian counts.

They presumably didn't use the actor they'll ultimately use in the previous episode either, hence not showing his face.

🤣 Sorry we keep making g you correct us on Mohawk vs. Cherokee! But it's another indication of shoddy story telling this season. We should remember that since the Cherokee have been in several episodes, and yet we don't. Because there has been something lacking in the story telling and they've treated the Cherokee like unimportant characters when in fact they saved Jamie's ass at the end if the season. I hope we see more of them and Native peoples in general, in the coming season because I love Ian's story, its compelling and interesting and shows incredible character growth. And I enjoy how Jamie and Claire interact with them as well.

[Scarlett45]

Glad I’m not the only one who thought the Bree & Roger love scene went on a little long (and I don’t dislike them). I think Sophie is one of the weaker actors in the cast but given her scene partners are always amazing she doesn’t bring the scene down. 
 

I assumed they didn’t shave Jemmy’s head, simply because they didn’t want to shave the actor’s hair if he/his twin had other roles coming up. 
 

This season was kinda “blah” but it felt more like filler between “big action”. The first half was better. At least there we had character development and storytelling with Fergus, the birth of Henri-Christian, and the expansion of The Ridge settlement. 

[taanja]

On 5/6/2022 at 8:06 PM, Pallas said:

There's no other reason for the brother to exist as a character, than to be the father of the child and the murderer. No reason to cast him, costume him or pay him. He had the one early scene with Ian in order to deliver exposition about Malva and their mother (and get seen with the stolen powder horn), immediately followed by the whipping scene in order to further his grudge against the Frasers. After that he only appeared -- again and again -- in relation to Malva. 

So... by that rational characters like Mr. and Mrs. Bug or hell! one of those twins that knocked up Lizzie could be considered a suspect.

As a viewer (and NOT a book reader) the brother just seemed to come along with the family. Sure--he seemed weird but not incest weird or murderous weird. 

So ether I am blind -- or the show did a piss poor job of making me suspect the brother. In fact - it seemed to go out of the way to implicate the father. Or even that sketchy dude the Roger found Malva with in the church. 

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't think I'm alone, but the brother was the one of the first suspects on my list for many of the previously discussed reasons over the board. They established that Malva was sexually active (not a big deal, but back then not the same), so, yes, it could very well be Young Ian or the guy from the church that Roger found. tbh, if they never solved the parentage, I don't think it's that big a deal. Clearly, who killed her is because the show has to clear Claire.

The family treated Malva as even less than a second class citizen. Given the fisherfolk never really integrated into Ridge society and remained rather insular, Allan being the father isn't ooc. He's not a bad looking guy; he could have 'courted' any of the young Ridge women but he never really was around. What did it for me was 1 - he was way distraught at the murder scene so I think he didn't kill her, and 2 - same at the church for the funeral ceremony. 

I personally think Tom killed her because she wasn't his daughter anyway, and he never struck me that he thought Jamie was the dad for real. I think he gambled on Jamie taking responsibility to save face all around, and when that fell through, he didn't want the 'family shame' of her being around with the baby out of wedlock.

Now, that doesn't necessitate he knows who the father is. Given his protectiveness to Claire in this episode, he knows she didn't do it, and I don't even think he called the safety committee. 

I mean, just tv-wise, it's either we'll never know, or it's Allan. I think the show played fair on this that I wouldn't call out on either outcome. The murderer has to be either him or Tom though. 

[Scarlett45]

4 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't think I'm alone, but the brother was the one of the first suspects on my list for many of the previously discussed reasons over the board. They established that Malva was sexually active (not a big deal, but back then not the same), so, yes, it could very well be Young Ian or the guy from the church that Roger found. tbh, if they never solved the parentage, I don't think it's that big a deal. Clearly, who killed her is because the show has to clear Claire.

The family treated Malva as even less than a second class citizen. Given the fisherfolk never really integrated into Ridge society and remained rather insular, Allan being the father isn't ooc. He's not a bad looking guy; he could have 'courted' any of the young Ridge women but he never really was around. What did it for me was 1 - he was way distraught at the murder scene so I think he didn't kill her, and 2 - same at the church for the funeral ceremony. 

I personally think Tom killed her because she wasn't his daughter anyway, and he never struck me that he thought Jamie was the dad for real. I think he gambled on Jamie taking responsibility to save face all around, and when that fell through, he didn't want the 'family shame' of her being around with the baby out of wedlock.

Now, that doesn't necessitate he knows who the father is. Given his protectiveness to Claire in this episode, he knows she didn't do it, and I don't even think he called the safety committee. 

I mean, just tv-wise, it's either we'll never know, or it's Allan. I think the show played fair on this that I wouldn't call out on either outcome. The murderer has to be either him or Tom though. 

I don't think Tom killed her- he was certainly evil towards her, and dismissive towards her murder, but if was cold enough to murder a pregnant woman in cold blood, I don't think he would be so concerned about someone else (Claire) taking the fall for it. Malva's throat was slit- this wasn't a case of a fight (he beat her and she fought back) or a tumble or even an accident, her throat was slit likely from behind, that was COLD.

What has always pinged my radar, is that Malva named a man she had NEVER had sex with as the father of her baby- who does that? My Mom was an Ob/Gyn of 47yrs and her rule was "If a young girl won't name the father of her baby, look at her family/teachers/coaches etc- if the father is a peer, even if she hates little Timmy, she will name Timmy. If an adult woman won't name the father of her baby, she doesn't know or he is married." Malva may not have known who the father was (before the age of home pregnancy tests, if you were having sex with more than one man it was always a rough guess) but she KNEW it wasn't Jamie, and Jamie was also MARRIED, so who would be a worst option socially and practically??

[DoctorAtomic]

The murder was definitely cold and had to have been premeditated, not like a fight or heat of the moment like you said for sure. 

However, this is the 1770s. This is a totally different paradigm, and a modern lens doesn't apply. She named Jamie because he was in the highest position to care for the baby who she also peeped starkers in the barn, so she could describe what he looked like. Naming a peer, who? Young Ian? He's an 'Indian'. The church guy? He didn't look like much. Some rando she did down at the river doesn't work tv-wise because it would have to be someone we knew to have any dramatic impact. 

I would think naming a peer would force marriage, as Young Ian was willing to do. That's not really great if the alleged dad is some schmuck living in a shack. Additionally, no way Tom would want her marrying an 'outsider' even if everything was above board. 

It's plausible that she told Tom and Allan she really didn't know who the father was (which probably resulted in a beating) and Tom came up with naming Jamie, gambling that Jamie's 'honor' would just kick in and he'd play along. Besides, at the time, no one would really blink too much that Jamie had a sidepiece and a resulting baby. They said as much on the show. She names Jamie, she doesn't have to worry about marrying and she's taken care of. The baby is also legally protected as Jamie's. 

If it's not Tom who murdered her, then who did it? We know it's not Claire or Jamie, both of whom are reasonable suspects. The whole current drama is that Claire is in jail for it. Tom clearly knows she didn't do it based on his behavior. I don't think it's Allan especially if he's the father. Anyone else would have to suspect they're the father. It's not Young Ian. The church guy? That's plausible, but lacks and dramatic payoff. Tom is the judgiest of the lot. Remember he was making a huge deal about whether Malva had time to pray for absolution because he didn't want her to in comparison to flying off the handle accusing Claire. Allan was accusing her and all emotional.   

I think Tom was hoping the whole thing would just end up being ignored because it's so distasteful, but the other busybody called the 'committee' and now he's like, 'uh oh'. 

 

[Noneofyourbusiness]

I find Allan always being the loudest with the accusations suspicious. And he may well have convinced himself that Jaime and Claire are responsible because Malva was going to tell them and so they "made" him do it. And if Tom is going along to falsely confess as I suspected, then Allan is someone he would cover for.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Noneofyourbusiness

[Scarlett45]

5 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

And if Tom is going along to falsely confess as I suspected, then Allan is someone he would cover for.

Tom is someone he would cover for. He beat Allan for stealing, but that was a socially appropriate punishment given the time- Allan DID steal the horn. Tom never seemed to have such a disdain for him the way he did Malva.

[DoctorAtomic]

However it shakes out, they both have to be complicit to some degree, else the show isn't playing fair. I'd have a hard time buying Allan did the slicing because that just isn't an emotional way to murder, and he's been nothing if not emotional. I won't complain though if they explain it well enough. I mean, we've been paying careful attention and discussing this at length. We've done our part as viewers. 

Although it's funny because there's all this drama from Jamie basically just going 'You're saying I did what now? Noooooope!' If he actually just took the deal, none of this happens. 

It would be great if they did an entire flashback and we get to see what actually happened. I have to say, I'm impressed with the show that I do have some anticipation for the show again that I hadn't had in a while. 

43 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

Tom never seemed to have such a disdain for him the way he did Malva.

Didn't he even say 'you have the devil in you like your mother.'?

[Scarlett45]

10 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Didn't he even say 'you have the devil in you like your mother.'?

To Allan or to Malva? He often compared Malva to her mother who was hanged for witchcraft, and he seemed strict with Allan but he never acted like he hated him. 

[DoctorAtomic]

To Malva. iirc he said it when he wanted his precious milk and she forgot to churn it or whatever because she was helping out Claire. He went to beat her but couldn't because of his hand, and that's when he went back to Claire to ask about getting the surgery. 

[Sheikh Yerbouti]

[Channeling The Amazing Race] One month, six seasons, two hundred years of drama…binge complete and I now officially can join the ranks of people suffering through Droughtlander.

Agree that I would have liked to see Claire reacting to the whistling of the time traveller the next cell over. Although I realize she would have been put in the women’s part of the jail, not a cell near a man. Minor detail in the land of time travel, nine lives, and Colonel Bogey.

Who else can’t hear that song without singing, “Bobos, they make your feet feel fine. Bobos, they cost a dollar twenty-nine….”?

Regarding how few Ridge settlers showed up to help the Frasers, it must have been terribly slow to comb through 10,000 acres of land (15.6 square miles or about four miles square) on horseback or foot to rally up the troops. Might have been more efficient to light the Celtic cross up high. But also wondering why eviction notices weren’t handed out to people who turned against their landlords in the months of shunning leading up to the homestead siege in the first place. I know previously a great deal was made about Jamie not being able to afford the taxes on the land without settlers, but at this point in history (dawn of the American Revolution), surely he would have known he’d have space to sort out his own traitors.

I have so many impressions (not coherent enough to be called thoughts) about life in the 18th century North Carolina backcountry as depicted on the show. The layers upon layers of clothing worn in southern / mid-Atlantic heat and humidity. The citizen patrols dedicated more to vigilantism and rounding up escaped slaves (the latter not depicted this season but historically accurate) than true justice, believed by many to be the origins and ethos of modern day police forces in America. The uneducated small-mindedness and hypocrisy that still plague communities today. Still thinking the whole lot of time travelers are crazy for choosing to stay in that era, Jamie Fraser or not.

I think Allan is the father, but Tom is the murderer, and his insistence on accompanying Claire isn’t so much to protect her until she can receive a “fair” trial as it is to be able to confess during said trial.

[DoctorAtomic]

There's no way Mr. Chrisie would let an innocent person be convicted of he had irrefutable proof. In this case, him. 

I don't think Jamie would evict his countrymen, justified as he may be though. 

[gingerella]

18 hours ago, Sheikh Yerbouti said:

I think Allan is the father, but Tom is the murderer, and his insistence on accompanying Claire isn’t so much to protect her until she can receive a “fair” trial as it is to be able to confess during said trial.

18 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

There's no way Mr. Chrisie would let an innocent person be convicted of he had irrefutable proof. In this case, him. 

l think you're both on to something with this, that would explain his dour demeanor and determined attitude to remain close to Claire until the trial. But it's curious he didn't kill Allan too, assuming Mulva IS his bio-daughter. You'd think if he knew his son impregnated his daughter and he was angry enough to kill said daughter, he'd likely do the same to said son, no?

18 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't think Jamie would evict his countrymen, justified as he may be though.

This is Jamie's biggest fault, the trait that has gotten him in so many bad situations over and over and over again - his sense of Scottish pride and honor. We have seen him give others the benefit of the doubt, or honor his word to men whom we viewers know will do him wrong or harm him. But JAMMF never seems to learn a damn thing in this regard. But then again, his beloved Claire is also the same in that she always shoots her mouth off and acts superior with her 'women's lib' stuff in 1700's feudal Scotland, and now in the wild back country of pre-America North Carolina. She still does the same thing and never learns from her mistakes. So in that regard Jamie and Claire are exactly the same. I hadn't thought of this before but it seems to obvious to me now. And Brianna is the same as Claire. The only one of the four main characters is that Roger seems to know when to keep his trap shut. Then again, the kiss on the head to his great, great gran got him into a whole heap of trouble so there's that...

[Scarlett45]

7 minutes ago, gingerella said:

l think you're both on to something with this, that would explain his dour demeanor and determined attitude to remain close to Claire until the trial. But it's curious he didn't kill Allan too, assuming Mulva IS his bio-daughter. You'd think if he knew his son impregnated his daughter and he was angry enough to kill said daughter, he'd likely do the same to said son, no?

Not necessarily. Misogyny- its always the woman's fault dontcha know. Especially if said woman had a witch for a mother. He was already beating Malva for not doing anything at all, we only saw him hit Alan for stealing an actual criminal offense, where by a beat down by your Dad wouldn't have been an odd punishment in the time period. A whipping for spilled milk? Mulva was the recipient of his anger for quite a while- for whatever reason. 

[DoctorAtomic]

51 minutes ago, gingerella said:

But it's curious he didn't kill Allan too, assuming Mulva IS his bio-daughter. You'd think if he knew his son impregnated his daughter and he was angry enough to kill said daughter, he'd likely do the same to said son, no?

I don't think she's his bio daughter anyway. Allan can still go have kids. If she's preggo with a demon baby and unmarried, as their gambit with Jamie went over like a lead balloon, she's 'damaged goods'. 

The kill was clinical indicating cold calculation. That's got to be Mr. Christie all the way. 

Jamie's in a tough spot though. These are the people who barely made it out of Culloden and suffered together in prison for years. He's just not going to boot them unless it's egregiously egregious; like Mr. Christie confessing to killing Malva. I think he has to send them away. 

[SassAndSnacks]

On 7/18/2022 at 3:19 PM, gingerella said:

his sense of Scottish pride and honor.

Side note - I'm reading "Born Fighting" which is a book about the Scots Irish and how their way of life and settling of America impacts our culture today.  As an Outlander fan, it is freaking fascinating, and so often, I catch myself nodding my head and picturing Jamie Fraser. 

Edited July 26, 2022 by SassAndSnacks

[gingerella]

4 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

Side note - I'm reading "Born Fighting" which is a book about the Scots Irish and how their way of life and settling of America impacts our culture today.  As an Outlander fan, it is freaking fascinating, and so often, I catch myself nodding my head and picturing Jamie Fraser. 

If you want to listen to some really fascinating stuff about Scottish 'honor culture', which is akin to what you're referring to above I think, check out this podcast on the Hidden Brain. I think I referred to it in one of these Outlander epi threads - it sums up Jamie Fraser to a T.

https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/made-of-honor/

[Camera One]

A better title for this episode would have been "Are We There Yet?"  Seriously, longest journey ever.  Are they ever going to arrive in Wilmington?  Is the Christie family-fisher folk story ever going to end?

I agree the actor who plays Tom Christie is very good, even though his character was irritating for most of the season.  He seemed very morose through the entire journey, so I kept assuming he was finally going to reveal something by the end, but nope.  If he were the murderer, why didn't he just admit it on Fraser's Ridge.  I still think he's protecting his son.  Though I can't really see him raping or killing Malva either.

I don't mind Brianna and Roger, but their journey wasn't very interesting.  The paternity reveal wasn't that satisfying either.  The opening title card with the burgers in 1970s got me hoping we would see some interesting timey wimey stuff, but nope.

Like others, I was happy to see Claire being bold and active again.  Hopefully, that Brown brother will get his comeuppance.  What an insufferable jerk.  Even if he died, I think his men would still have tried to kill Jamie, given their crowing about Claire being a murderer which led to the stoning.  

I'm glad I didn't watch the 'Previously's since it was a surprise when the Cherokee chief came to the rescue with Ian.

I guess we're back to the good ol' days with Jamie and Claire being separated.  I was surprised Jamie didn't end up back in Scotland so we could spend another half a season for a reunion.

[DoctorAtomic]

8 hours ago, Camera One said:

I'm glad I didn't watch the 'Previously's since it was a surprise when the Cherokee chief came to the rescue with Ian.

They certainly stuck the landing on the ending though. So do we, uncle.

8 hours ago, Camera One said:

He seemed very morose through the entire journey, so I kept assuming he was finally going to reveal something by the end, but nope.  If he were the murderer, why didn't he just admit it on Fraser's Ridge.  I still think he's protecting his son.  Though I can't really see him raping or killing Malva either.

For sure, he knows that it's not Claire. I think he's protecting both. Don't forget though, it was heavily implied that he wasn't Malva's biological father, so, given the way he's treated her over the season, finding out that she's pregnant with the brother's baby, he most certainly would blame it on her. Flying into a rage, he could have killed her easy. Maybe he's still in some kind of shock that he did it and hasn't said anything. He beat her for leaving the milk out. 

I mean, you know there's going to be some big courtroom drama. That's why. 

[gingerella]

On 3/28/2023 at 7:32 AM, DoctorAtomic said:

On 3/27/2023 at 11:02 PM, Camera One said:

I'm glad I didn't watch the 'Previously's since it was a surprise when the Cherokee chief came to the rescue with Ian.

They certainly stuck the landing on the ending though. So do we, uncle.

This was the only satisfying bit of this episode for me as well. Ian always brings it!

I'm sad that the show has sunk so low in rehashing the same old tired tropes over and over and over again. Like, we have nothing right now so let's separate J&C again, weee! Just, STOP. It makes me wonder if there's anyone actually running this show's ship anymore or are they coasting on fumes?

[Paloma]

On 5/6/2022 at 1:12 PM, gingerella said:

I think most of us here feel that Allan was raping her and she got pregnant from him, so it's he who killed her to keep her from confessing to Claire.

But we know that she had consensual sex with at least two other men (Ian plus the one in the church), so we don't know if Allan was the father. The question is whether Allan knew she was having sex with others. It's possible that he was not raping her but killed her because she brought shame to him and his father by getting pregnant by means of sex outside of marriage. 

[Paloma]

On 7/17/2022 at 8:33 PM, Sheikh Yerbouti said:

I think Allan is the father, but Tom is the murderer, and his insistence on accompanying Claire isn’t so much to protect her until she can receive a “fair” trial as it is to be able to confess during said trial.

But why couldn't Tom confess to this when Brown and his gang came to the Ridge to take C&J away? I know, then it would be a very short episode, but it doesn't really make sense that he would wait to confess at a trial--why make Claire go through a farce of a trial?

[areca]

On 5/24/2024 at 3:38 PM, Paloma said:

But we know that she had consensual sex with at least two other men (Ian plus the one in the church), so we don't know if Allan was the father. 

She was trying to babytrap someone into marriage or responsibility who wasn't her brother, based on her actions with Jamie.