S07.E03: Death Be Not Proud

[Athena]

Quote

Jamie discovers Arch Bug has been keeping a dangerous secret. In the 20th century, Roger and Brianna find a link to Jamie and Claire.

Reminder: The is the book talk thread. This may include spoilers for ALL the books. If you wish to remain unspoiled for any of the books, please leave now and head to the No Book Talk episode thread.

[SassAndSnacks]

Some Questions - 

Is this season really THIS good, or is it just comparatively good because we've had a long hiatus from the show and Season 6 was pretty meh?

Do you ever wish you could approach this show with a fresh perspective?  Generally, I love knowing the story ahead of time and seeing how it will be adapted and portrayed, but sometimes, I kinda miss that jolt I had during the pilot episode when I knew nothing of Outlander but thought the first sights of it were so compelling that I just HAD to read the books.  Watching this last night early this morning, particularly the confrontation of the Bugs, I found myself feeling that the this all escalated rather quickly!  We've barely seen them and now they've stolen gold, hid it right there in a very conspicuous place, and now they're betraying the Frasers.  It all seemed more plausible in the books because we see it play over time, but I felt kinda slapped with it last night, and I found myself wondering if non-book viewers got all of it and/or if it seemed abrupt to them too. 

Anyway, that's a lot of lead in to simply ask, do you ever wish you hadn't read the books first?

Did you catch Arch's Gaelic to Jamie?  So good.  Did you want him to be a little more choked up over his wife's death, because I did.  I always picture him so incredibly menacing and dangerous.  This Arch has been passive this whole time.  

Was the mini ball in Jem's wooden chest the one that hits Claire in Monmouth or is it one of the golden balls that Jamie, Ian, and Claire melted down?  When we see it early in the show, I immediately thought "Monmouth!" but then they show the "bullet making" so could it be that?  Was that in the buik?  That whole scene was wonderful.  Speaking of Jem's chest, I love how they weave in these storylines.  As soon as the delivery man placed the chest on the Manse's front stoop, I got a little lump in my throat. 

Was it accurate for Roger and Bree to feel that they changed history?  Because they didn't.  Bree went back to her parents because she saw the obituary claiming a fire killed them.  She made the matches that helped cause the fire.  They didn't change history, they helped make history.  The dates are insignificant, but I guess that was just in the buik, because the show smudged the date in the original obituary.  Time travel and its consequences are confusing.  

 

I love Jamie and Claire loving on Jamie and Claire, so I was all in for the entire hour.  The quiet moments in this show have always been so strong.  The flashback of them pounding in the property stake was so good and such a nice addition.  

So far, my $20 STARZ subscription was money well spent!

 

[Quickbeam]

Sophie’s wig was all time bad. I did like the episode and the modern-ish time/revolutionary time contrasts. 

[bluestocking]

What I found surprising was at the end, where Claire was basically handing over the running of the Ridge to Lizzie.  Lizzie!  

But who else was left, with Claire and Jamie, Bree and Roger, Ian, the Christies, and the Bugs all gone?  I guess we're supposed to assume Brown and his gang are not a threat any more.  (I still want to know if Brown is dead.)  

I was tickled to see Fiona again--was not expecting that.  Certainly convenient to have a babysitter so Bree and Roger can go off to Lallybroch without kiddies in tow.  At least they told us Mandy had her surgery off-screen somewhere.  How are they supporting themselves?  Money that Claire left Bree in trust?  

 

 

 

[nodorothyparker]

This was a really gorgeous episode but at the same time I couldn't stop thinking about how next week we're already halfway through this first half season and they haven't even made it off the dock yet for their first attempt at tripping back to Scotland. If I've had a consistent complaint about this show, it's that the first halves of seasons tend to meander quite a bit forcing the back halves to be so overstuffed that big moments never feel like they have room to breathe. I'm even more conscious of it now knowing they've got a very finite number of episodes to try to wrap all of this up and stick the landing  in a satisfying way when the books still don't have one.

I suppose we knew once they very pointedly had Ian off "hunting" when Lord John and Willie visited the Ridge that they'd have to invent some reason for how Ian will later immediately recognize William when their paths inevitably cross but that was some pretty bald retconning. Oh so Ian was there at least part of the time after all, just conveniently off camera, even after the cast had lines about how he's unfortunately away right now in that episode. But then the show really isn't getting the "big secret" about William's secret parentage anyway as pretty much every other person here knows and feels free to discuss it rather openly.

They're speed reading through the French gold story, which is okay as so much of that feels like a half-baked afterthought on the page. After barely being a presence on the show up until now to the point that I couldn't have told you which random background actor was supposed to be him, the actor playing Arch Bug really nails the menace of his curse to Ian and really makes you feel it that you are going to see him again and again.

[ch1]

I don’t remember the gold story in the books.  It seems shoehorned in and out of left field in this episode.   I also don’t get it - Jaime basically stole the gold from the guy who already stole it?  Did he even give any kind of a reason why he wanted it?

I haven’t cried at anything so far this season but Claire saying goodbye to Adso got to me.  

Also why is there no rhyme or reason to Caitriona Balfe’s wigs?  One scene it’s full of gray, the next it’s pretty much all brown.  How hard is it to keep track of it so it’s consistent?

I also may start a drinking game for every time this season someone mentions how William is like Jaime.  I clearly remember Gabaldon banging readers over the heads with that in the books too.

 

[nodorothyparker]

I did have to laugh at Bree and Roger congratulating themselves on "changing history" after learning Jamie and Clair didn't die in a house fire. Apparently they haven't been paying attention at all during their time in the wayback. Jamie and Claire have proved over and over that stuff is pretty much going to happen as it was going to despite all efforts to change it. It may just take a different path to get there when you start tinkering to try to stop it.

[cardigirl]

 

On 6/30/2023 at 10:23 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

Was it accurate for Roger and Bree to feel that they changed history?  Because they didn't.  Bree went back to her parents because she saw the obituary claiming a fire killed them.  She made the matches that helped cause the fire.  They didn't change history, they helped make history.  The dates are insignificant, but I guess that was just in the buik, because the show smudged the date in the original obituary.  Time travel and its consequences are confusing.  

So this was a change from the books, that Roger and Bree think they saved Jamie and Claire from dying in a fire?  They had no other mentions of the Frazers after that obituary to know if it was a fake-out or false news and Jamie and Claire actually survived the fire. And this episode did not set it up like the Frazers were leaving and wanted people to believe they were dead. So ... in my way of thinking, Roger and Bree DID change things enough to alter the time line.  Unless the books say otherwise, and then this is part of the show, and not so much the books. 

I really like when we get scenes from both timelines. The time travel aspect of these stories is what drew me in. The emotional moments that we have been getting this season are superb. 

And I was very very glad to see that the kitty kitty had survived and may have choked up a little when Claire said goodbye. Hopefully the cat will be waiting for them when they get back, if they get back.  

[Eureka]

So, because of the whole stolen gold storyline they showed, I’m guessing they’re going to show the Rob Cameron/Jem 1980 stuff too? Ugh, I did not like that whole thing. It felt convoluted and unrealistic to me in the books. But then again, I don’t need the whole next season to be war scenes either, that gets to be a little much for me in the books too. And the season is almost half over, when are we going to meet Denny and Rachel? I can’t even remember how it happened in the books either actually.

[Cdh20]

On 6/30/2023 at 12:55 PM, Quickbeam said:

Sophie’s wig was all time bad. I did like the episode and the modern-ish time/revolutionary time contrasts. 

Those bangs are pretty good for 1980😉! 

[Cdh20]

On 6/30/2023 at 8:23 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

Some Questions - 

Is this season really THIS good, or is it just comparatively good because we've had a long hiatus from the show and Season 6 was pretty meh?

Do you ever wish you could approach this show with a fresh perspective?  Generally, I love knowing the story ahead of time and seeing how it will be adapted and portrayed, but sometimes, I kinda miss that jolt I had during the pilot episode when I knew nothing of Outlander but thought the first sights of it were so compelling that I just HAD to read the books.  Watching this last night early this morning, particularly the confrontation of the Bugs, I found myself feeling that the this all escalated rather quickly!  We've barely seen them and now they've stolen gold, hid it right there in a very conspicuous place, and now they're betraying the Frasers.  It all seemed more plausible in the books because we see it play over time, but I felt kinda slapped with it last night, and I found myself wondering if non-book viewers got all of it and/or if it seemed abrupt to them too. 

Anyway, that's a lot of lead in to simply ask, do you ever wish you hadn't read the books first?

Did you catch Arch's Gaelic to Jamie?  So good.  Did you want him to be a little more choked up over his wife's death, because I did.  I always picture him so incredibly menacing and dangerous.  This Arch has been passive this whole time.  

Was the mini ball in Jem's wooden chest the one that hits Claire in Monmouth or is it one of the golden balls that Jamie, Ian, and Claire melted down?  When we see it early in the show, I immediately thought "Monmouth!" but then they show the "bullet making" so could it be that?  Was that in the buik?  That whole scene was wonderful.  Speaking of Jem's chest, I love how they weave in these storylines.  As soon as the delivery man placed the chest on the Manse's front stoop, I got a little lump in my throat. 

Was it accurate for Roger and Bree to feel that they changed history?  Because they didn't.  Bree went back to her parents because she saw the obituary claiming a fire killed them.  She made the matches that helped cause the fire.  They didn't change history, they helped make history.  The dates are insignificant, but I guess that was just in the buik, because the show smudged the date in the original obituary.  Time travel and its consequences are confusing.  

 

I love Jamie and Claire loving on Jamie and Claire, so I was all in for the entire hour.  The quiet moments in this show have always been so strong.  The flashback of them pounding in the property stake was so good and such a nice addition.  

So far, my $20 STARZ subscription was money well spent!

 

I loved not having a clue what was coming when I watched the first 3 seasons. Then I was obsessed, & got spoiled on a few things, then I finally read ahead during Covid lockdowns, & long Droughtlanders. Sometimes I regret it, sometimes not. Last week, despite knowing so much, I was teary-eyed for most of the hour- I count that as an amazing episode. Last season, 606 should have been so much more shocking, but fell flat for me, with such knowledge. 
 

This weeks highs:  Jamie losing the house he built, but putting on a smile about building another one.  I was so happy to see him find his kilt, & Claire her medical journal. Claire saying Jamie “ is always enough”. These two never fail to show how much they love each other, & I am here for it. Honorable mention: Roger teasing Bree about the matches. They reminded me of when they first met with the teasing! Of course Sassy is right, & Roger is wrong, Bree went to the past, created the matches, which started the fire, & it all turned out exactly how it was meant to be, even if the details seemed wrong ( because of the newspaper article). 
 

This week’s low: Show onlies probably not understanding the gold storyline. And some of us wishing the show writers gave us Roger & Bree’s return to the 20th century with more details than Diana.

Edited July 3, 2023 by Cdh20
Added a thought

[Clawdette]

I just read that Chris Larkin, who plays Richard Brown, is the son of Maggie Smith.  I knew that Toby Stephens (Black Sails) was her son but Chris was a surprise.

[FnkyChkn34]

So in the books, do they really go back to Scotland?  I thought that they never did...  I only read up to half of Book 5, but I thought that I'd read elsewhere that they never made it back and stayed in America.

[Ziggy]

On 6/30/2023 at 6:04 PM, nodorothyparker said:

I suppose we knew once they very pointedly had Ian off "hunting" when Lord John and Willie visited the Ridge that they'd have to invent some reason for how Ian will later immediately recognize William when their paths inevitably cross but that was some pretty bald retconning. Oh so Ian was there at least part of the time after all, just conveniently off camera, even after the cast had lines about how he's unfortunately away right now in that episode. But then the show really isn't getting the "big secret" about William's secret parentage anyway as pretty much every other person here knows and feels free to discuss it rather openly.

   What???  I completely forgot about that.  I guess I merged the book and show :-)

1 hour ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

So in the books, do they really go back to Scotland?  I thought that they never did...  I only read up to half of Book 5, but I thought that I'd read elsewhere that they never made it back and stayed in America.

Yes, they did go back to Scotland, but they also returned to the Colonies.

[ruby24]

The book skipped over their first year and a half or so living in America in the present day and caught up with them back in Scotland in 1980.

What I thought was weird was why there was so much focus on Roger not knowing what to do with himself for a job, as though he wasn’t a professor before he left? I always wondered why he didn’t go back to that but there was no explanation for it. Like Diana forgot what he did.

Edited July 3, 2023 by ruby24

[ch1]

25 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

The book skipped over their first year and a half or so living in America in the present day and caught up with them back in Scotland in 1980.

What I thought was weird was why there was so much focus on Roger not knowing what to do with himself for a job, as though he wasn’t a professor before he left? I always wondered why he didn’t go back to that but there was no explanation for it. Like Diana forgot what he did.

The whole minister thing was silly when you would think the ridge could have used a teacher.  Hell he could have been both.  

It would have spared us from Briana constantly saying “but you’re not a minister” though.

[Athena]

17 minutes ago, ch1 said:

The whole minister thing was silly when you would think the ridge could have used a teacher.  Hell he could have been both.  

It would have spared us from Briana constantly saying “but you’re not a minister” though.

This character "development" for Roger makes him insufferable in the last couple books because he basically refuses to be anything but answer his calling as a spiritual leader. He can sing and he's not a Fraser in terms of hunting, physical labour, or expertise (Bree as an engineer, Claire as a healer). I think Diana giving him this role would set him apart from the rest of the family except it made him more inconsequential since he doesn't seem to be that good of a minister.

[Salacious Kitty]

59 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

The book skipped over their first year and a half or so living in America in the present day and caught up with them back in Scotland in 1980.

What I thought was weird was why there was so much focus on Roger not knowing what to do with himself for a job, as though he wasn’t a professor before he left? I always wondered why he didn’t go back to that but there was no explanation for it. Like Diana forgot what he did.

I recall there being a problem with Roger getting employment as a professor because there were several years had lapsed since he last taught. 

I believe Brianna supported them in Scotland despite having never worked as an engineer in her time. Did she even graduate college before going to the past? That I don't remember.

[Haleth]

47 minutes ago, Salacious Kitty said:

believe Brianna supported them in Scotland despite having never worked as an engineer in her time. Did she even graduate college before going to the past? That I don't remember.

That’s one (one) reason why I couldn’t stand Mary Sue  Bree. She was put in charge of this huge project (was it like a hydroelectric dam?) despite barely having a bachelor’s degree and is an American. We know our girl can do anything, but this strains credulity. 

[Athena]

1 hour ago, Salacious Kitty said:

I recall there being a problem with Roger getting employment as a professor because there were several years had lapsed since he last taught. 

I believe Brianna supported them in Scotland despite having never worked as an engineer in her time. Did she even graduate college before going to the past? That I don't remember.

 

27 minutes ago, Haleth said:

That’s one (one) reason why I couldn’t stand Mary Sue  Bree. She was put in charge of this huge project (was it like a hydroelectric dam?) despite barely having a bachelor’s degree and is an American. We know our girl can do anything, but this strains credulity. 

Brianna did graduate with a degree in mechanical engineering but I don't remember if she actually had a lot of work experience in it before going back to the past. I agree that it strained credibility that she became such a big shot engineer so quickly especially considering how male dominated and misogynist engineering can be.

[FnkyChkn34]

On 7/3/2023 at 3:49 PM, ruby24 said:

The book skipped over their first year and a half or so living in America in the present day and caught up with them back in Scotland in 1980.

I followed the Bree and Roger storyline.  My question, just to clarify, was about Jamie and Claire returning to Scotland?

[Ziggy]

On 7/1/2023 at 10:08 AM, cardigirl said:

So this was a change from the books, that Roger and Bree think they saved Jamie and Claire from dying in a fire?  They had no other mentions of the Frazers after that obituary to know if it was a fake-out or false news and Jamie and Claire actually survived the fire. And this episode did not set it up like the Frazers were leaving and wanted people to believe they were dead.

It is a change from the books, but it was vague in the book.  Bree did see an article in the paper, but I do not believe we saw it at all.  I think the only information the reader had was that Bree saw an article.

She and Roger returned to the 20th century and saw an article and looked at each other and said, "It changed!"  I don't recall ever knowing exactly what it was that had changed.

There was a short Epilogue in A Breath of Snow and Ashes of two printers (from the 18th century) discussing the article they were about to print.  One said this was old news if it happened in January.  The other said it happened in December, but he didn't have room for the 2.

There was never anything in the book about this being a fake-out or a plan to make people think they were dead.  That was just speculation from nonbook readers.

[nodorothyparker]

12 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

My question, just to clarify, was about Jamie and Claire returning to Scotland?

They do eventually go back to Scotland for a bit, but they'll get waylaid by the war for quite awhile first. It's not a straight there and back. Because this is Outlander, a whole lot of plot is dependent on various travel difficulties.