Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

S03.E01: The Battle Joined


Athena
  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, kariyaki said:

They did in 1948. That very year, in fact, with the British Nationality Act of 1948. Claire picked a good year to ask for U.S. citizenship.

The USA did not allow dual citizenship until 1967 so Claire would have had to renounce her her British citizenship to get it.

2 hours ago, ali59 said:

I do think BJR is dead because Claire told him the date of his death in one of the previous seasons.  Apparently she had seen it in the papers that Frank and the Vicar were looking at.

It did not matter any more if Jamie killed Black Jack as his brother is Frank's ancestor.

Link to comment
Quote

It did not matter any more if Jamie killed Black Jack as his brother is Frank's ancestor.

I think you're the first person I've seen  mention this.  I've been wondering about it all along.  There wasn't time for Mary to have the brother's baby and then get pregnant by BJR.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, ganesh said:

Claire didn't tell us the date though. If you knew you were going to die in a specific battle, why would you go into battle? 

Wasn't there a scene last season where she did? If only to reassure the viewers that if Mary married Randall they wouldn't be married that long?

I suppose it says something about Black Jack's character that he went into battle anyway, despite knowing the date on his tombstone. Assuming he believed Claire, maybe he thought he deserved to die or else dreamed of meeting Jamie one last time on the field.

I think he has to be dead, Jamie would have noticed otherwise what with laying there so long.

It would be far too unbelievable if he bounced back from that. I hope they say for sure next episode. (And that this season's big bad is more subtly villainous).

Link to comment

I only remember Claire whispering into BJR's ear about when he would die. Of course, like the Doctor, she could have lied and told him another date, so he didn't know. 

TV-wise it just seems like BJR and Jamie need a real SHOWDOWN one final time, and that scene on the battlefield just didn't cut it for me if it was there last fight. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
21 hours ago, ganesh said:

I only remember Claire whispering into BJR's ear about when he would die. Of course, like the Doctor, she could have lied and told him another date, so he didn't know. 

TV-wise it just seems like BJR and Jamie need a real SHOWDOWN one final time, and that scene on the battlefield just didn't cut it for me if it was there last fight. 

I wanted to be sure I was remembering it correctly, so I looked up a recap: https://www.google.com/amp/ew.com/recap/outlander-season-2-episode-12/amp/

In the episode "The Hail Mary" Claire follows Black Jack into a tavern and tries to convice him to go through with a marriage to Mary. The date is brought up since he'd only have to be married to her less than a day.

Considering how he was feeling in that episode, maybe it does make sense he chose to go into battle that day!

The Doctor may be wise and give false dates of death but I think Claire would only give a true date of death. She is intense that way.

I completely agree about the showdown! That scene was not a satisfying conclusion considering everything that had gone down between them and how vile Jack was. A different, less pretty and less oddly loving tone would have been appreciated. 

Edited by Hyla
Correct episode title
Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Hyla said:

I completely agree about the showdown! That scene was not a satisfying conclusion considering everything that had gone down between them and how vile Jack was. A different, less pretty and less oddly loving tone would have been appreciated. 

I agree.  I was actually a bit disturbed at how almost romantic that was.  BJR repeatedly raped Jaime and tortured him.  There should be no romanticizing the relationship between them.  I thought that was a very odd choice, tonally, for that scene. 

  • Love 3
Link to comment
On 9/13/2017 at 11:26 AM, ganesh said:

Claire didn't tell us the date though. If you knew you were going to die in a specific battle, why would you go into battle? 

To see Jamie one last time :D BJR is dead 16 April 1746, the end of Jacobite Rising.

Link to comment

One thing I like about Frank is that he has always known that Claire was more modern than the average woman and he was not just begrudgingly okay with it - he likes her that way. When his boss started talking about women not being qualified for med school and talking down to Claire, Frank proudly pointed out that Claire had been a combat nurses during the war.

On 9/11/2017 at 8:19 PM, nara said:

I didn't get the impression that he prevented her from becoming a US citizen, just that he was hurt and offended that she wanted to do so.

I think he was partly offended that she was so willing to turn her back on England (especially because he pointed out that he just spent years fighting for it), but I also think he was partly afraid that she could somehow use her American citizenship further down the road to leave him. I also think he was also passive aggressively trying to hurt her because she had just cringed when he tried to touch her belly. But he did seem to shut down the idea of her becoming an American citizen.

Claire: I've never really had a strong attachment to England and I want our child to have a real home.
Frank: Our child.
[Frank touches her shoulder and then moves to touch her belly. Claire moves away]
Frank: Since when were you never attached to England? You can walk away from your heritage that easily? Hastings and Magna Carta, Drake, Marlborough, Tudors, Stuarts, Plantagenets - these are things I fought a war for.
Claire: It's just something I want to do.
Frank: Well, there's no need. My employment provides us both with residency indefinitely.
Claire: That's not what this is about.
Frank: No. That's not what this is about.
[Frank tries to hold her hand but Claire snatches it away]
Frank: It's about that - a wife who won't let me touch her. Admit it. You are using this pregnancy to keep me at a distance.
 

  • Love 4
Link to comment

As mentioned, Jamie would probably have known if the man lying on top of him for hours was still alive.  

That strange, intimate and creepy last embrace was probably worth it for BJR.  "If I'm going, I'm taking Jamie with me".  One last soul-stealing act towards the love of BJR's life.  I think that's how he saw Jamie. 

Link to comment
On 9/11/2017 at 3:11 PM, taanja said:

I truly felt Clair's frustration. Before that Claire had mentioned she wanted to become an American citizen and Frank basically dismissed her. Period.  He shot her down and that was the end of that. The "husband" spoke and the wife must listen.

On 9/16/2017 at 6:17 AM, ElectricBoogaloo said:

I think he was partly offended that she was so willing to turn her back on England (especially because he pointed out that he just spent years fighting for it), but I also think he was partly afraid that she could somehow use her American citizenship further down the road to leave him. I also think he was also passive aggressively trying to hurt her because she had just cringed when he tried to touch her belly.

I think "Guess what: while you were sleeping, I've switched sides from England to America" may have been the issue, but it wasn't the point. 

As ElectricBoogaloo points out, that morning, Claire had just repulsed Frank's attempt to touch her and "our baby." She then goes on to raise the idea of changing her nationality, and lightly muses that she'd never really felt all that British. (Three years after the end of a war in which Claire and Frank both experienced Britain hold out against Nazi Germany for 6 years; a war in which Claire and Frank both served in separate British forces, lost many of the young men they had known as classmates, and Claire personally saw thousands of young British soldiers die.)

To me Frank's response was, essentially, "You don't say. Since when have you sided against England with a British-ruled realm that in the middle of the 18th century, declared its independence?" He had reason to feel, I think, that Claire was passive-aggressively finding another way to literally alienate herself from him and their own shared history.

Frank responded in kind: he presented a rational counter-point that pressed Claire to make her case. He knew that by the terms of their understanding, Claire likely had no admissible arguments; in the game they undertook together, he had placed her in check. His actual intent was to force her to see that he still saw her -- that he understood that this impulse to identify with the rebels, not the British, arose from her allegiance to Jamie.

As both said, in the passage quoted by ElectricBoogaloo: "That's not what this is about." "No. That's not what this is about." 

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Well, Frank may look like Black Jack, but he's got the kindness of Alex Randall, his true ancestor. (And bravo to the casting department for making the Randall boys ca. 18th century really look like brothers.) I wonder who raised Mary's baby with her? Because she's a real ninny, even though she managed to kill her rapist and go into the garden and talk to a beggar.

Link to comment

Frank's colleague really was absurdly over-the-top. The stupidest part of the dialogue was when he acted like it would somehow be unnatural for her to keep working as a nurse now that the war was over.

Was he the only old-school sexist in the world who thinks that only men should be nurses?

Link to comment

This time, I'm not taking a two-year break between seasons, so I actually remember what happened, LOL.

I was surprised we were back in the 1940s and not continuing with the 1960s.  I had been curious about Claire and Frank's life upon arrival to the US, so I'm kind of glad.  

I wonder if Claire wanted to gain a new citizenship because she soured on the English after living in 1740s Scotland for three years.

I wanted to see Frank's reaction to Claire cooking in the fireplace.  I was pleasantly surprised that Frank did not shut down Claire in front of his boss.  While I like Frank and wish that he and Claire could get back what they had before her disappearance (though we know from the Season 2 finale that doesn't happen), I just find it unlikely we are spending an entire season with Claire and Jaime apart, with a dual parallel narrative every episode.   Oh well, maybe the show can surprise me.  I personally wouldn't actually mind that much, since I do find Claire and Frank interesting.  And it's kinda nice to see a time period and place where people weren't constantly under threat of murder.

Jaime's disorienting memories of the Battle of Culloden was effective, though I was also curious how the battle went exactly.  I visited Scotland a few years ago and heard about this show when I was on the Culloden historical site (a bus pulled up with Outlander fans, LOL).   The museum was very good, but I think it would be even more interesting now if I got to visit again.  

It was really tough to hear the firing squad.  That type of stuff really gets to me.  I'm sad Rupert is gone now too... I really hope Murtagh survives the series because a big part of the show are the supporting characters.

I'm dreading the English coming to Lallybroch and hunting Jaime down.   I am also dreading another resurrection of Black Jack Randall.  Enough is enough.  He better be dead this time, but the lack of a definitive death makes me wonder (plus it's *this* show).

Edited by Camera One
  • Love 4
Link to comment

Very effective opening!

I have to say I appreciated not having to endure a battle that everyone I care about will lose. Snippets to fill in those pieces of the story I need to know? Hell Yes. 

I noted with a sneer that the British soldiers were ordered to do exactly what Dougal had done at Prestonpans—finish off everyone who moved. I guess I've been spoiled by Jamie's kinder, gentler approach to war. 

Jamie looked as if he were dead—even when he watched the young Scott across from him being finished off. His stare was one of a dead man. Perhaps that's why no one came to finish HIM off? (couldn't be because he's a main character)

 

All the important snippets (to me):

  • Murtagh saves Jamie mid-battle and they exchange their signature pleasantries. Then Murtagh disappears (not literally) and remains so— for the rest of the episode. But no one saw him die, so there is hope for the next episode!
  • Jamie kills BJR—as we knew he would—but it was a real struggle between them. I didn't notice Jamie's last blow, but was impressed that the show decided on depicting BJR's end as though he was leaning in for a hug. Unexpected! But I knew he was dead because that was how they first showed Jamie. With a Red Coat on top of him.
  • Good old Rupert finds Jamie and takes him off the battle field. 
  • Claire arrives (I gave a short gasp) but she was a bit too hazy to be real and I knew my prediction last episode was (another) miss. 

 

I'm getting used to the time jumps. As long as they come at a reasonable time in each century they can stay for as long as they work. 

Lovely new home in Boston. Frank seems to have mellowed! Perhaps losing Claire before they had a chance to be an unhappily married couple gave him much need time for introspection? The study will be where ever the lady of the house decides—indeed! AND talking to the Dean about what his wife accomplishments are! Whoa. Where did all that come from? I had sympathy for Frank before, but he grew on me more this episode. He even had a sense of humour at one point—something about tea wrapped in diapers?!

 

I did take note that Claire has recently come back from the past where women were pigeonholed into roles—but not dismissed as useless and brainless. (From what we've seen of the past so far.) Not a good beginning in Boston for her! But the new, improved Frank might end up being her rock. Stranger things have happened. 

 

Once I knew his fate I was very grateful for the fairwell scenes Rupert got this episode. He was always a lovely supportive, loyal man. Proudly proclaiming his Clan and his alliegences and keeping up the spirits of the survivors. He had hidden leadership qualities. And...he couldn't die hating Jamie. Aw. 

 

The British were such a mixed bag. Lord Melton had no qualms about killing ALL survivors from the battle, but gave them time to send a message to relatives before he had them shot. And he wouldn't even shoot a traitor lying down—which I have to assume is about respect for your adversary?

Still, he risked forsaking his duty to the crown—to follow the order he had been given to kill them all—because he couldn't put aside a debt of honour made by his little brother, John William Grey. I was surprised and happy to learn that Jamie's escape from being shot as a traitor was down to that odd little fellow so far back that I don't remember what episode he appeared in. I know I was looking for him to pay his debt-of-honour to Jamie for a couple of episodes after, but then I forgot about it.

I loved that Jamie remembers the threat John Grey made to kill him—and he quips that it would be OK with him if his brother did it in his stead—but not that JG said he owed Jamie a debt of honour. Made me chuckle. I suppose the concept of an honourable British soldier was an oxymoron to Jamie. I think we were only shown one and I don't think Jamie ever met him. 

 

I was also surprised to see that Claire and Frank's breakfast was one egg, one rasher of bacon and one piece of toast each. Probably better than they would have in England but less than our era would expect. Good thing there wasn't more because I don't think either of them finished that meal. So much for being Claire's "rock".

And poor Claire! Having to give birth the “modern” way where the mother was just an obstacle for the male doctors to overcome—literally. But Frank got a few moments of feeling like he'd finally gotten his heart's desire—until the spector of the red hair came up. 

I was surprised that they were so awkward about it. Both my parents had dark brown hair, but they had a passel of blond and red haired children with only a couple of brunettes thrown in and all they did was trot out the old joke that it must have been the milkman! (They only had 8 children over a 20 year period but I think that counts as a passel.) I suppose the observation came too soon for either of them to have thought of how to respond to it. 

The first redhead in my family was born only a year after Brianna in the show. Guess they're going to need to come up with a good comeback because that question is bound to get asked a lot. 

Although Jamie's homecoming to Lallybroch came before Brianna's birth I'm leaving it to last because Jamie's home! And it can't be long before we see Fergus and Murthagh. Right? RIGHT?

 

 

  • Love 5
Link to comment
(edited)
2 hours ago, Anothermi said:

I noted with a sneer that the British soldiers were ordered to do exactly what Dougal had done at Prestonpans—finish off everyone who moved. I guess I've been spoiled by Jamie's kinder, gentler approach to war. 

The British were such a mixed bag. Lord Melton had no qualms about killing ALL survivors from the battle, but gave them time to send a message to relatives before he had them shot. And he wouldn't even shoot a traitor lying down—which I have to assume is about respect for your adversary?

The Duke of Cumberland in charge of putting down the Jacobite rebellion was nicknamed the Butcher for his cruelty.  There were even more atrocities immediately after the battle than during.  Even Andrew Henderson, who was a pro-Cumberland writer, wrote in his account of the events, "the conduct of the soldiers is not to be defended according to the strict rules of war."

Back then, there were rules to war, the adherence to orders from higher chains of command, but also individual sense of honor and morality, which would all be at play.  In wars across Europe in the 1700s, among the individual generals, officers and soldiers in armies, I would expect almost every group to be a mixed bag, in terms of what they would personally do or not do.  Here was an account described by Jacobite sympathesizer Edward Bourk from the 1700s about the execution of people on the battlefield:

‘The Duke himself (Cumberland) rode over the field and happened to observe a wounded Highlander, a mere youth, resting on his elbow to gaze at him. He turned to one of his staff and ordered him to “shoot that insolent scoundrel.’ The officer, Colonel Wolfe (later General) flatly refused, declaring that his commission was at the service of His Royal Highness, but he would never consent to become an executioner. The other officers of his suite, to their credit, followed the noble example of the future Hero of Louisburg and Quebec, but Cumberland, not to be baulked of his prey, ordered a common soldier to do the odious work, which he did without demur. The young victim was Charles Fraser, younger of Inverallochy, an officer in Lord Lovat’s Regiment.’

Edited by Camera One
  • Useful 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
(edited)
On 5/8/2021 at 7:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I have to say I appreciated not having to endure a battle that everyone I care about will lose. Snippets to fill in those pieces of the story I need to know? Hell Yes. 

I noted with a sneer that the British soldiers were ordered to do exactly what Dougal had done at Prestonpans—finish off everyone who moved. I guess I've been spoiled by Jamie's kinder, gentler approach to war. 

Yes, here here for not having to endure an hour of gorey battle a la GoTs, I too appreciated the flashbacks, though I must say, the battle royale between Jamie and BJR left me very dissatisfied. After all that Jamie endured from that evil bastard, I felt like his killing BJR should have been more, I don't know, painful, awful, demoralizing, something other than what it was. The whole BJR falling on top of Jamie as if in death's embrace, it was as macabre and sick and twisted as BJR is, but it just felt like not enough for a Viewer. I'd rather have had Jamie behead the bastard, or kill him in a way that's awful for him. Maybe how he died was awful but it didn't feel nearly as bad as what he deserved.  And not for nothing but that bastard better be goddamned dead or I'm going to be very pissed off. This has to be IT, finally!

When Claire walks up to Jamie on the battlefield and asks "are you alive?", it felt as if her spirit was really coming to him to see if he survived or not, it didn't feel like a vision, it felt more real to me, because she would be wondering at that moment in Inverness Hospital, "Is he alive? Did he live or did he die?" So it makes sense that someone they are actually connected in that moment since everything has 'just happened' for Claire too.

Rupert dear Rupert...At first I wondered why he was helping Jamie after the Dougal incident, but in the end, their friendship endured. I loved how Rupert took charge of looking out for the men in that house they were hiding out in. Who knew he had leadership qualities? I hate to say this but I think Angus held him down and back and he could have been more on his own because in the end we see what he is capable of. I appreciated his lightening of the moment when he gave his name and told the soldiers, "keep up, I plan on making tracks" or however he said that. And his forgiveness of whatever happened between Jamie and Dougal, 'leaving it to God's will to judge, not his' also was very touching and made me realize just how deep faith was to these people. Religion wasn't necessarily practiced and bandied about, but it was deep within the bones of every Highlander. Jamie's insistence to be married in a church, Jamie's shock and dismay to learn that Colum took his own life because suicide is a mortal sin, and Rupert's ability to forgive Jamie because it's not his place to judge, only God can do that. It breaks my heart that much more to think of this proud, brave, incredibly fascinating culture just wiped out because the British deemed it undesirable. On a happier note, at least the Scots won their first step towards another independence vote this weekend...240+ years on, maybe they'll finally get what their Highland ancestors could not, or they will be doomed to never achieve it...

I loved the 1968 scenes from the last episode and the 1940s scenes this episode, much less so. Is it because poor sod, Frank, is there again? I don't know, but what I do know is that I see the same lackluster Claire that I saw in Inverness before she went through the Stones the first time. I said in S01, that I felt Frank stifled her spirit, but I don't think that way anymore. I think Claire holds back much of herself from Frank, and I don't know why. I mean I know now why, Jamie, but I don't know why she was like this before Jamie too. She just seems like life is black and white with Frank, while it's in full blown technicolor with Jamie. I also noticed when Claire described Frank to that nosy neighbor as being "progressive and open-minded" - I thought, 'yes, so is Jamie!' It's interesting that they both share those traits but I SEE them in Jamie and I OVERLOOK them in Frank. At least Claire sees this, that's something for Frank.

The Americans were painful to watch, nosy, obnoxious, and just came off as so rough compared to the British and the Scottish and Highlanders. And the whole misogynistic boss BS felt a bit poorly done. Would a big shot at Harvard be that obnoxious?

The comment that about tea bags was humorous and true! And the comment about how "Americans like new things" rang so true. That's why I am an unabashed anglophile, I love old things, classic things, things that stand the test of time! I should have been born in Scotland I think....

So that little twerp, John Grey, who tried to stab Jamie at camp, his brother saves Jamie's bacon at the last minute. I'm surprised that wagon trip back to Lallybroch didn't kill Jamie, it looked gut wrenching, literally! Two things can be said about James Alexander Malcomb MacKenzie Fraser: 1. He's always on the wrong side of trouble, and 2. He has more than 9 lives because he seems to always get out of situations where mere mortals would perish. But it's a 5 seasons going on 7 so, yanno, he has to live, I get it! He's charmed for sure though. It was good though to see Jenny and Ian, god knows how they'll help heal Jamie but I'm sure they will. Now we just need to see Fergus already at Lallybroch, which he might not be yet, and Murtagh needs to show up alive or I shall be very upset... BTW, I assume Jamie was speaking Gaelic when Rupert was shot, anyone know what he said?

When Claire and Frank are talking of Claire giving up her British citizenship, when he mentions "Stuarts" you see her entire body stiffen up like a board. It's so subtle but the pain is still there, so fresh, and she's still grappling with leaving Jamie and thinking her soul mate is dead now. It's heartbreaking. And the miscarriage comment at the hospital, you see the anguish on Frank's face, another tidbit he didn't know about. It was so painful to see her flinch away from Frank any time he tried to touch her, and she couldn't say I love you back to him. I'm not a Frank fan but it's just an awful situation to be in for anyone. That said, I felt Claire sincerely trying to move on when she said 'this could be our new beginning' after Brianna was born. She's trying, but there is no way she can stifle her love for Jamie, it's not going to happen and I already know that. I cannot imagine how much anguish she is feeling, and I hope we're not going to have the entire season go by before she goes back through the Stones like we saw at the end of S02. Speaking of, I do appreciate, and like how the showrunners do all this back and forth with differing time periods. That can't be easy to sort out, and I wonder if it's like that in the books to, all the back and forth (Dont tell me, I don't really want to know!), or if that was a device used for the Show version. It keeps things moving at a nice pace I think.

Last comment, for now...I liked the closing credits music, it was so sad and melancholy, it was Claire set to music...

ETA: The whole scene with BPC holding up his silver goblet, boasting about how Lord Cumberland would be drinking out of his cup in defeat just was the period to the sentence ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie is a useless, self obsessed, inept, wanker”

ETA2: When Claire awoke after giving birth and was panicking about where her baby was, nice touch back to the Faith episode...

Edited by gingerella
  • Love 5
Link to comment
On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

Very effective opening!

Yes, this is an incredible episode!  I feel like I shouldn't enjoy this one because of the death, sadness, and helplessness of everyone in involved, but it is so well done.  

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

I felt like his killing BJR should have been more, I don't know, painful, awful, demoralizing, something other than what it was. The whole BJR falling on top of Jamie as if in death's embrace, it was as macabre and sick and twisted as BJR is, but it just felt like not enough for a Viewer.

Me too.  I wanted more.  The death blow was a heave of desperation.  And although having BJR laying on Jamie's leg stopped the blood flow from his wound and also concealed him from the English following the battle, likely saving his life, the "embrace" and laying on him was far too intimate for my liking.  Jamie should not have had to endure the horrors of the actual fight of Culloden and then also have to endure that man's touch, no matter if he was dead or not. 

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

When Claire walks up to Jamie on the battlefield and asks "are you alive?", it felt as if her spirit was really coming to him to see if he survived or not, it didn't feel like a vision, it felt more real to me, because she would be wondering at that moment in Inverness Hospital, "Is he alive? Did he live or did he die?" So it makes sense that someone they are actually connected in that moment since everything has 'just happened' for Claire too.

This is a great take on that scene.  I knew it was coming this time, so it was dulled slightly, but the first time I saw it, I gasped out loud.  What I thought was interesting was that her clothing wasn't quite right for the time period, so it signified that to me that she wasn't really there but that maybe he was seeing her somewhere else. It reminded me of "ghost" Jamie, standing in the town square watching Claire in her window.  

On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I did take note that Claire has recently come back from the past where women were pigeonholed into roles—but not dismissed as useless and brainless.

Where did she have more freedom?  Where was she more respected?  For all her gaffes in the past, it does feel like she'll live a more restrained life in her present.  

On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I was very grateful for the fairwell scenes Rupert got this episode.

Yes, he deserved this send-off.  There was a sensitivity and poignancy to his reconciliation with Jamie that I really appreciated.  It hit me hard, mostly because he was our last link to the tangential Highland characters that we grew to know and love.  

On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

The British were such a mixed bag.

Over the years, I've gone back and forth about the portrayal of the redcoats in this series.  As an American, our country is based upon fighting them and breaking away from them, so they are bad.  Then, they became our allies, so they are good.  I'm an anglophile, so yes, they're still good.  But, what they did to the Scottish people and the Highland culture, very bad.  I'm waaaaaaay over-simplifying these events and feelings for brevity sake, but it does circle back to a recurrent COVID-era theme for me - There are assholes everywhere, but there are good people everywhere, too.  I surely had this epiphany earlier in my life, but it's really taken the last year to truly embed it in my belief system. 

On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I was also surprised to see that Claire and Frank's breakfast was one egg, one rasher of bacon and one piece of toast each.

This actually reminded me so much of grandparents and how they held onto Depression/WWII era habits throughout the remainder of their lives.  

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

I loved the 1968 scenes from the last episode and the 1940s scenes this episode, much less so. Is it because poor sod, Frank, is there again? I don't know, but what I do know is that I see the same lackluster Claire that I saw in Inverness before she went through the Stones the first time. I said in S01, that I felt Frank stifled her spirit, but I don't think that way anymore. I think Claire holds back much of herself from Frank, and I don't know why. I mean I know now why, Jamie, but I don't know why she was like this before Jamie too. She just seems like life is black and white with Frank, while it's in full blown technicolor with Jamie. I also noticed when Claire described Frank to that nosy neighbor as being "progressive and open-minded" - I thought, 'yes, so is Jamie!' It's interesting that they both share those traits but I SEE them in Jamie and I OVERLOOK them in Frank. At least Claire sees this, that's something for Frank.

I do believe that Frank stifles her, but not directly.  He doesn't openly say to her that she can't do this or that, but he does question the things that are important to her and it is clear that what is important to him doesn't always align with who Claire is.  She does hold herself back from him because I think she knows that some of who she is really wouldn't fly with him.  I remind myself a lot that Claire met Frank when she was a teenager and he was much older than she was.  Then, she spent a lot of formative time in her young adult years away from Frank.  She met Jamie as a full-blown adult who had seen and done some things.  There's a confidence and a security with who she is when she is with Jamie that she doesn't have with Frank. 

I also think she feels beholden to Frank.  She is an incredibly loyal person.  Though she gave Frank an out, he didn't take it, and she's going to do what he wishes because he is providing her with a secure life and she promised Jamie she would.  She doesn't like it.  I wonder that if Frank hadn't taken her back and she had to go at it alone, would she be happier and the "brighter" character that we see when she is with Jamie?

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

The Americans were painful to watch, nosy, obnoxious, and just came off as so rough compared to the British and the Scottish and Highlanders. And the whole misogynistic boss BS felt a bit poorly done. Would a big shot at Harvard be that obnoxious?

The comment that about tea bags was humorous and true! And the comment about how "Americans like new things" rang so true. That's why I am an unabashed anglophile, I love old things, classic things, things that stand the test of time! I should have been born in Scotland I think....

Ugh, I wanted to feel like this was such a terrible stereotype, but wait, was it?  Full disclosure, I've decided to embrace my American-ness.  After falling down a Buzzfeed hole of articles related to annoying things Americans do, I got annoyed myself.  We're great.  Americans are great, dammit.  We're friendly, and we'll help anyone.  We believe in people.  We're optimistic, and yes, we're always looking forward, and I freaking love it.  See previous comment about assholes being everywhere, and yes, we have a ton of those too. We do like new things (which admittedly, can be irritating because it can be incredibly wasteful, blah).  <steps off soapbox apologetically>

Personally, I love the old and I'm so passionate about history and learning from it and applying to today.  If we were better at that, we could perhaps actually learn from previous mistakes and oh you know...avoid them.

There is a great line in the Outlander books, and this isn't spoilery.  Frank says, "Americans think 100 years is a long time, and the English think 100 miles is a long distance."  I feel like it so perfectly sums up the different mind-sets and really where we both are in terms of the life-spans of our nations.  

8 hours ago, gingerella said:

When Claire awoke after giving birth and was panicking about where her baby was, nice touch back to the Faith episode...

 

On 5/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Anothermi said:

And poor Claire! Having to give birth the “modern” way where the mother was just an obstacle for the male doctors to overcome—literally. But Frank got a few moments of feeling like he'd finally gotten his heart's desire—until the spector of the red hair came up. 

I was surprised that they were so awkward about it. Both my parents had dark brown hair, but they had a passel of blond and red haired children with only a couple of brunettes thrown in and all they did was trot out the old joke that it must have been the milkman! (They only had 8 children over a 20 year period but I think that counts as a passel.) I suppose the observation came too soon for either of them to have thought of how to respond to it. 

Yes, this was so brilliantly portrayed.  When she awakes and her hands immediately go to her stomach in panic... The doctors were appalling, and I'd like to say that things are dramatically better now, but not so much on the whole.  (Ok, so yes, that is a bad thing about America.)

People have a thing with red heads, particularly when the parent doesn't have red hair.  Hubs and I are both brunettes.  We have a redhead, a blonde, and a brunette.  All have blue eyes.  Not a one of them looks anything like us.  Genetics are crazy.  We field constant comments about our children's looks, especially our redhead.  With us, we laugh obligingly at the comments and make a crack about recessive genes.  Claire and Frank have the recent past weighing on them, so the remark made in passing was certainly a barb for them.  

  • Useful 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
(edited)
9 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

Me too.  I wanted more.  The death blow was a heave of desperation.  And although having BJR laying on Jamie's leg stopped the blood flow from his wound and also concealed him from the English following the battle, likely saving his life, the "embrace" and laying on him was far too intimate for my liking.  Jamie should not have had to endure the horrors of the actual fight of Culloden and then also have to endure that man's touch, no matter if he was dead or not. 

Oh, I didn't even think about this, good call! I was actually expecting the British to collect BJRs body since he was a fallen red coat but I guess they didn't give a shit about their own dead? I mean, we saw some rifling through the pockets of the Highlander dead, and collecting their swords and such, but I thought for sure they'd pull BJRs body to bring him home or something. I never thought about what his body weight did to stop Jamie from bleeding out, great observation!

9 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

This is a great take on that scene.  I knew it was coming this time, so it was dulled slightly, but the first time I saw it, I gasped out loud.  What I thought was interesting was that her clothing wasn't quite right for the time period, so it signified that to me that she wasn't really there but that maybe he was seeing her somewhere else. It reminded me of "ghost" Jamie, standing in the town square watching Claire in her window.  

I actually thought what Claire was wearing was more like the nightgowns she was in at hospital or that time period so yes, you're right, more like the 'ghost' of Jamie who then appears 200 years later in her time but in his time's garb. Nice scene flip and another of what are becoming the ubiquitous mirror scenes we've seen throughout S01 & 02. I appreciate that level of detail because yes, I'm looking for those nuances, it makes the viewing experience so much richer.

9 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:
On 5/8/2021 at 7:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I was very grateful for the fairwell scenes Rupert got this episode.

Yes, he deserved this send-off.  There was a sensitivity and poignancy to his reconciliation with Jamie that I really appreciated.  It hit me hard, mostly because he was our last link to the tangential Highland characters that we grew to know and love.  

I just realized this reading both your posts and it hit me hard. This band of lollygagging Highlanders, always getting into tiffs and getting out of them, but with hearts of gold, more or less, I shall miss them in this story enormously! Rupert, Dougal, Angus, Colum, Geillis, even newcomers like the redheaded Fraser chap who died at Prestonpans, I shall miss them all. But then I remember other newcomers like Ross, who I grew to quickly like so much and he was sent back with the Fraser men to keep off the battle field, so we can hope to see them again, yes? One thing that perplexes me is who will be in charge of Clan MacKenzie now that Dougal is dead, Colum is dead, and Jamie is unlikely to take up his uncle's wish of being a guardian/mentor of young Hamish now. I don't see that happening, and while I understand that the Highlander way of life is all but dead now, they still to this day have clan lairds and chiefs IIRC. Also, and not for nothing, I hope we get to see the evil Grandsire's demise, if only for closure's sake!

9 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

Over the years, I've gone back and forth about the portrayal of the redcoats in this series.  As an American, our country is based upon fighting them and breaking away from them, so they are bad.  Then, they became our allies, so they are good.  I'm an anglophile, so yes, they're still good.  But, what they did to the Scottish people and the Highland culture, very bad.  I'm waaaaaaay over-simplifying these events and feelings for brevity sake, but it does circle back to a recurrent COVID-era theme for me - There are assholes everywhere, but there are good people everywhere, too.  I surely had this epiphany earlier in my life, but it's really taken the last year to truly embed it in my belief system. 

This is certainly true, and while I too am an unabashed anglophile, and I include Scotland in that too probably much to the chagrin of Scotland, we cannot forget that the British Empire did unspeakably awful things to those countries it colonized - a 'nice' word for 'fuck off you peons, we're in charge here now, God Save the King, rah rah rah!' I have worked in many Commonwealth countries and cannot for the life of me understand why the continue to want to be tied to their colonizers, it is a strange phenomenon, which could come to fall by the wayside once the Queen is no more, mainly because Charles - yes another rather inept 'Charles' - is not one who really inspires others in the way his mummy does. But I digress...

9 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

There's a confidence and a security with who she is when she is with Jamie that she doesn't have with Frank. 

Such a great way to put it! I think of my own experiences and I used to use a vendor for work, a connection I was given by a friend, and I always felt like I couldn't quite say what I thought or wanted because they made me feel like they were doing me a favor by taking my business. When I finally found a new vendor, it was my own connection and I built my relationships directly, beholden to nobody else, and I feel much stronger in being able to say what I expect with the new vendor. I see Claire in the same way, maybe she felt beholden to Frank for giving her a 'place', a 'family', something to 'belong to', all those things she never had when living in the field with her uncle. So she doesn't rock the boat because she feels she owes Frank something for all that. But with Jamie, they built a relationship and life together, on equal footing, which is ironic given the status of women in 1740's Scottish Highlands. But then I waffle back and hear Frank speaking proudly about his wife's accomplishments to his peers and I feel like he acknowledges her achievements when it suits him, but when backed into a corner or arguing, a bit of resentment comes out.

Lastly, I was thinking this morning, as much as I didn't want a full blown entire battle episode, they could actually have done a 'real time' enactment of Culloden in a 90 min episode with the full battle plus the after battle scenes and the 1940 scenes. It was a 40 minute battle, imagine seeing it unfold over 40 minutes...that could have been really interesting though I'm glad I was spared it.

ETA: I was thinking today, Frank IS really progressive AND open-minded. His wife disappeara fir 3 years, cones back suddenly and is pregnant with another man's child, and his first instinct is to not only accept this child, but raise it as his own, without any animosity. And from what we've heard from Brianna, he doted on her and loved her unquestionably. And yet. In this episode he tells Claire if she wants to leave and live apart she can do that, but IIRC he doesn't say anything about continuing to be a parent to this unborn child...that was an odd comment to make. Was he just going to let her walk out of his life with this baby that he was so excited about? Just like that?

Edited by gingerella
  • Love 3
Link to comment
(edited)
14 hours ago, gingerella said:

I said in S01, that I felt Frank stifled her spirit, but I don't think that way anymore. I think Claire holds back much of herself from Frank, and I don't know why. I mean I know now why, Jamie, but I don't know why she was like this before Jamie too. She just seems like life is black and white with Frank, while it's in full blown technicolor with Jamie.

Claire became close to Frank before she knew who she was—or who she could be. And he knew her from that time. His "take" on Claire would include her uncertainty about who she was in her own life and her lack of life experience. She was young. I mentioned previously—when Claire told Brianna that she did love Frank—that I understood that to mean that at that time she married him she didn't know what love could feel like and assumed that what she felt for Frank must be love. Sure it may not have lived up to her expectations, but that's all many women had and they were satisfied with that. 

Just as war is said to turn a boy into a man, Claire's war experience turned her into a woman—an adult. She  was challenged during the war and learned a great deal about herself—her ability to be self-reliant, her instincts, her abilities. It was the proving ground for everything she'd absorbed during her unusual upbringing. She parted with Frank unsure of where she fit into the world and came home knowing she was capable and could make a place for herself. That was who Jamie met. And Jamie had yet to complete learning who he was. 

Frank didn't have enough time to revise his initial "take" but he was a man of his time and his actions—and reactions—were led by his inner belief that men deserved their dominant place in the world and didn't need to examine that belief. 

6 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

And although having BJR laying on Jamie's leg stopped the blood flow from his wound and also concealed him from the English following the battle, likely saving his life, the "embrace" and laying on him was far too intimate for my liking.  Jamie should not have had to endure the horrors of the actual fight of Culloden and then also have to endure that man's touch, no matter if he was dead or not. 

I, too, found that battle a little anti-climactic, but after a little thought I believe we were given a reasonable recreation of a one-to-one fight on a battle field. Jamie had been running on foot and fighting for quite a while before he spied BJR. He'd even only narrowly escaped being killed by another British soldier by the timely intervention of MURTAGH!!!!  BJR had been on horseback—so may have been a wee bit less exhausted—but he too was exhausted. 

I think it would only be us—as viewers—who would find the encounter anti-climactic. Not Jamie. Jamie FINALLY had what he wanted: to face BJR and prove that BJR could not take his soul away and Jamie would fight him to the death to prove it—die fighting if it came to it—but never again giving in.  He was laser focused once he saw BJR. He was prepared for this encounter to be the last thing he ever did and he would be proud of himself for facing down his worst demon!  

ETA:

3 hours ago, gingerella said:

I was actually expecting the British to collect BJRs body since he was a fallen red coat but I guess they didn't give a shit about their own dead? I mean, we saw some rifling through the pockets of the Highlander dead, and collecting their swords and such, but I thought for sure they'd pull BJRs body to bring him home or something

I thought we were watching soon after the end of the battle. Where Jamie was, soldiers were either carrying out orders to leave no one alive or straight up looting. Spoils of war being the ordinary soldier's compensation for low wages. I believe you are correct that the bodies of British soldiers would likely have been collected for proper burial, but there was no rush. What we were shown was that the British left the field when it got dark which enabled Rupert and others to come in search of survivors. 

14 hours ago, gingerella said:

BTW, I assume Jamie was speaking Gaelic when Rupert was shot, anyone know what he said?

That site that provides Gaelic translations has it as "Goodbye (or Farewell) Rupert."

image.png

Edited by Anothermi
additions
  • Love 3
Link to comment
7 hours ago, gingerella said:

I include Scotland in that too probably much to the chagrin of Scotland, we cannot forget that the British Empire did unspeakably awful things to those countries it colonized - a 'nice' word for 'fuck off you peons, we're in charge here now, God Save the King, rah rah rah!' I have worked in many Commonwealth countries and cannot for the life of me understand why the continue to want to be tied to their colonizers, it is a strange phenomenon, which could come to fall by the wayside once the Queen is no more, mainly because Charles - yes another rather inept 'Charles' - is not one who really inspires others in the way his mummy does. But I digress...

I was just having a similar conversation with someone last week.  We were musing about our role as a British colony and how it continues to frame political issues happening in our country today, which really led us down a rabbit hole.  

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

But then I waffle back and hear Frank speaking proudly about his wife's accomplishments to his peers and I feel like he acknowledges her achievements when it suits him, but when backed into a corner or arguing, a bit of resentment comes out.

She's the prize, the trophy.  Her accomplishments are only meaningful when they can place him in a positive light.  Interestingly, he never once mentioned what she had done in the war to Reverend Wakefield, that we saw anyway.  Maybe he already knew?  Maybe that trip was all about Frank and so it never came up.  I was surprised he mentioned it here, but I think he was at least trying to show his boss that he didn't marry a stupid woman.  Opinionated, yes (the horror!) but stupid, no.  

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

Was he just going to let her walk out of his life with this baby that he was so excited about? Just like that?

Well, she hadn't been born yet, so was the attachment there?  

4 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Claire became close to Frank before she knew who she was—or who she could be. And he knew her from that time. His "take" on Claire would include her uncertainty about who she was in her own life and her lack of life experience. She was young. I mentioned previously—when Claire told Brianna that she did love Frank—that I understood that to mean that at that time she married him she didn't know what love could feel like and assumed that what she felt for Frank must be love. Sure it may not have lived up to her expectations, but that's all many women had and they were satisfied with that. 

Just as war is said to turn a boy into a man, Claire's war experience turned her into a woman—an adult. She  was challenged during the war and learned a great deal about herself—her ability to be self-reliant, her instincts, her abilities. It was the proving ground for everything she'd absorbed during her unusual upbringing. She parted with Frank unsure of where she fit into the world and came home knowing she was capable and could make a place for herself. That was who Jamie met. And Jamie had yet to complete learning who he was. 

Frank didn't have enough time to revise his initial "take" but he was a man of his time and his actions—and reactions—were led by his inner belief that men deserved their dominant place in the world and didn't need to examine that belief. 

Gah, I appreciate this entire statement, especially the bolded above.  How many of us know our full potential or what we want to do with our lives at 18?  

What is interesting to me, is your statement about Jamie yet to learn who he was.  I agree.  I think there were snippets of the man he would become, but earning Claire's love and fully loving got him there.  He was able to do that with her, whereas Claire was unable to do that with Frank. 

5 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Not Jamie. Jamie FINALLY had what he wanted: to face BJR and prove that BJR could not take his soul away and Jamie would fight him to the death to prove it—die fighting if it came to it—but never again giving in.  He was laser focused once he saw BJR. He was prepared for this encounter to be the last thing he ever did and he would be proud of himself for facing down his worst demon!

Great observation!  I'm going with it! 1. Secure Lallybroch for the family; 2. Get men to safety; 3. Send Claire and child through the stones; 4. Fight for the cause; 5. Kill BJR.  Quite a To-Do List, and he checked it all.  

  • Love 2
Link to comment

To me, Claire did love Frank deeply before she went to the past, and she would have lived a happy life with him.  But he was a guarded person and so was she, and they were in the process of working through what they had each experienced during the war and both were holding it in (plus with the social norms of Britain in the early 20th century), so it would have taken many years before they would have been able to fully open up to each other, if they ever did, but I think they would have been content even without.  They both had their separate interests and enjoyed each other's company.

Jaime's personality and his youth made him very different from Frank.  He was willing to be vulnerable and often put his guard down with Claire.  He was also younger than Claire, so this gave Claire the chance to be more dominant.  During her time in the 1700s, Claire began to open up, so she became a different person by the time she went back to the present, and she had experienced something different that could not be replicated and something she still held onto deeply which did not allow her to move on.

I like both Frank and Jaime in different ways, so while I like Claire and Jaime as a couple, I also think Claire and Frank's relationship was scuttled mid-stream by the time travelling events.  

  • Useful 3
  • Love 2
Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Camera One said:

To me, Claire did love Frank deeply before she went to the past, and she would have lived a happy life with him... They both had their separate interests and enjoyed each other's company.

You made a lot of good points. I saw deep appreciation from Claire to Frank.  She was shown to be comfortable with him—even admire him. And although he wanted to pull strings to keep her safe, away from the front, he accepted and understood that she, too, felt a duty to be part of the fight back. She appreciated that about him. He was progressive in that. But I didn't see deep love from her. Not at that point and not even from the flash-backs. 

27 minutes ago, Camera One said:

But he was a guarded person and so was she, and they were in the process of working through what they had each experienced during the war and both were holding it in (plus with the social norms of Britain in the early 20th century),

^^THIS! ...was very clearly expressed in episode 1 Season 1. She was also very attracted to him. She "voice over-ed" that sex was their one way of connecting—and it was possibly the one means of communication that SHE knew she was equal with him. Those few days in Inverness together—where Frank followed his interest in his genealogy and Claire followed her interest in medicinal plants—showed Claire as being content. But the part I mentioned about Frank accepting and believing that he was innately superior to her was also shown, as was Claire holding herself back in order to support him. I can't see that pair talking about their experiences in the war together. Least of all Frank— due to the oath of secrecy he would have had to swear. 

And right on the heels of the scene showing Claire's contentment—there was the almost immediate introduction of Frank's quick-to-flare-up jealousy. All it took was what appeared to be a man gazing up at her window. That jealousy would always come between them. Claire was blind-sided by it. And Frank was of the—"If I feel it? It must be true."—school of emotions. He believed she'd been with someone else and then processed it in a way that allowed him to rise above it (her) and forgive her.

56 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I also think Claire and Frank's relationship was scuttled mid-stream by the time travelling events.  

I agree whole heartedly with you about this. And I was surprised to find Frank more... open... when she came back. Except for the jealousy. He wanted her back but he put a lot of constraints upon her as his price for constraining his jealousy.

And I concur with everything you said about Jamie. It was not likely that she would have experienced anything like that with Frank—they were very different people. Even if she had made her peace with the bad as well as the good in him and never met Jamie. But nobody is perfect. Still,  Claire did have that experience with Jamie and couldn't forget it. Frank must inevitably be a casualty of that knowledge. Brianna, too, so it seems.

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
On 5/10/2021 at 9:40 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

Yes, this is an incredible episode!  I feel like I shouldn't enjoy this one because of the death, sadness, and helplessness of everyone in involved, but it is so well done.  

Me too.  I wanted more.  The death blow was a heave of desperation.  And although having BJR laying on Jamie's leg stopped the blood flow from his wound and also concealed him from the English following the battle, likely saving his life, the "embrace" and laying on him was far too intimate for my liking.  Jamie should not have had to endure the horrors of the actual fight of Culloden and then also have to endure that man's touch, no matter if he was dead or not. 

This is a great take on that scene.  I knew it was coming this time, so it was dulled slightly, but the first time I saw it, I gasped out loud.  What I thought was interesting was that her clothing wasn't quite right for the time period, so it signified that to me that she wasn't really there but that maybe he was seeing her somewhere else. It reminded me of "ghost" Jamie, standing in the town square watching Claire in her window.  

Where did she have more freedom?  Where was she more respected?  For all her gaffes in the past, it does feel like she'll live a more restrained life in her present.  

Yes, he deserved this send-off.  There was a sensitivity and poignancy to his reconciliation with Jamie that I really appreciated.  It hit me hard, mostly because he was our last link to the tangential Highland characters that we grew to know and love.  

Over the years, I've gone back and forth about the portrayal of the redcoats in this series.  As an American, our country is based upon fighting them and breaking away from them, so they are bad.  Then, they became our allies, so they are good.  I'm an anglophile, so yes, they're still good.  But, what they did to the Scottish people and the Highland culture, very bad.  I'm waaaaaaay over-simplifying these events and feelings for brevity sake, but it does circle back to a recurrent COVID-era theme for me - There are assholes everywhere, but there are good people everywhere, too.  I surely had this epiphany earlier in my life, but it's really taken the last year to truly embed it in my belief system. 

This actually reminded me so much of grandparents and how they held onto Depression/WWII era habits throughout the remainder of their lives.  

I do believe that Frank stifles her, but not directly.  He doesn't openly say to her that she can't do this or that, but he does question the things that are important to her and it is clear that what is important to him doesn't always align with who Claire is.  She does hold herself back from him because I think she knows that some of who she is really wouldn't fly with him.  I remind myself a lot that Claire met Frank when she was a teenager and he was much older than she was.  Then, she spent a lot of formative time in her young adult years away from Frank.  She met Jamie as a full-blown adult who had seen and done some things.  There's a confidence and a security with who she is when she is with Jamie that she doesn't have with Frank. 

I also think she feels beholden to Frank.  She is an incredibly loyal person.  Though she gave Frank an out, he didn't take it, and she's going to do what he wishes because he is providing her with a secure life and she promised Jamie she would.  She doesn't like it.  I wonder that if Frank hadn't taken her back and she had to go at it alone, would she be happier and the "brighter" character that we see when she is with Jamie?

Ugh, I wanted to feel like this was such a terrible stereotype, but wait, was it?  Full disclosure, I've decided to embrace my American-ness.  After falling down a Buzzfeed hole of articles related to annoying things Americans do, I got annoyed myself.  We're great.  Americans are great, dammit.  We're friendly, and we'll help anyone.  We believe in people.  We're optimistic, and yes, we're always looking forward, and I freaking love it.  See previous comment about assholes being everywhere, and yes, we have a ton of those too. We do like new things (which admittedly, can be irritating because it can be incredibly wasteful, blah).  <steps off soapbox apologetically>

Personally, I love the old and I'm so passionate about history and learning from it and applying to today.  If we were better at that, we could perhaps actually learn from previous mistakes and oh you know...avoid them.

There is a great line in the Outlander books, and this isn't spoilery.  Frank says, "Americans think 100 years is a long time, and the English think 100 miles is a long distance."  I feel like it so perfectly sums up the different mind-sets and really where we both are in terms of the life-spans of our nations.  

 

Yes, this was so brilliantly portrayed.  When she awakes and her hands immediately go to her stomach in panic... The doctors were appalling, and I'd like to say that things are dramatically better now, but not so much on the whole.  (Ok, so yes, that is a bad thing about America.)

People have a thing with red heads, particularly when the parent doesn't have red hair.  Hubs and I are both brunettes.  We have a redhead, a blonde, and a brunette.  All have blue eyes.  Not a one of them looks anything like us.  Genetics are crazy.  We field constant comments about our children's looks, especially our redhead.  With us, we laugh obligingly at the comments and make a crack about recessive genes.  Claire and Frank have the recent past weighing on them, so the remark made in passing was certainly a barb for them.  

I felt like most of the scenes from 1948 were to remind us (and Claire) that she “belonged” in 1746! That is where she found her home! 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
(edited)
21 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

I felt like most of the scenes from 1948 were to remind us (and Claire) that she “belonged” in 1746! That is where she found her home! 

Yes!!  

Edited by SassAndSnacks
  • Love 2
Link to comment

Since I started watching this series a year ago in November I have drowned in the fate of these characters.
Amazing tension in every episode of the first season.
Yes I am a sensitive woman, an artist, I have a fondness for Scotland, such atmospheres....

The second season was also surprisingly palatable. The costumes and life of the upper classes of 18th Paris shown was really interesting and, most importantly, everything had a purpose, clear and lucid.
The plot developed fluid threads along the way - parental, social, etc.

The return home and the main event was the finale of the whole story.
I think I cried the most at "Dragonfly in Amber". - transition and those feelings 20 years later just tore me apart and ripped a void in my soul.

After watching that - I was like Claire myself , in my real world kind of absent and nailed down so much it all affected me.

I started watching season 3 and gave it a chance. I wanted to follow the story as it continued. At the beginning I was satisfied, but the very return of Claire disappointed me.
I am not satisfied with this episode. I was missing something more, the return was too quick, making it seem so easy, as if the producers didn't want to spend more time on something so important. The conversation between the main characters alone should have lasted the whole episode - after such a return. I am aware that the emotions had died down, after all, they were more strangers to each other now than before. However, they devoted so little time to them, while already developing new threads, introducing new characters. Too soon, too much for me.
Do you also have this feeling after this return episode ?

I will finish this season, but I think it will be my last.... Unfortunately I don't seem to see any hope for which this series will continue to rekindle the excitement in me.

I guess it's just the way it has to be that all long-running series don't have a good future. Everyone is delaying the ending of a story that has long said: 'enough is enough I'm the best I could be'. I don't like stilted stories, plots that roll the story along just to keep it going. And life seems to be one big game with many problems and events.

Sometimes I've caught myself thinking, as one person wrote on the forum - I'd rather see the end of Jamie on the battlefield and Claire in a rocking chair sipping whisky at 60 and remembering the life she's lost....

I know, a sad ending, but a real one and one that leaves us with a feeling of longing eternal and unsatisfied that we will remember and return to.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...