Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

S01.E08: Both Sides Now


Athena
  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

After watching this episode all I can say is, that if I hadn't read the books I would be Team Frank. And that's really really awful in my book.

 

Coming from someone who has NOT read the books, I am 1,000% Team Jamie.  All the Frank stuff is a bit grating, especially since I know that they are straying from the books with this part of the series.  It fees like they are trying to purposefully make the audience pull for Frank when this was not the original intent of the story.  I get the need to show some portion of what he is going through but it comes across in a heavy handed way at times.  That being said, the scene at the stones was powerful.  Maybe Frank leaving them behind means that we won't see him much going forward.  I do also feel that they may be trying to showcase the acting talents of TM. He truly makes Frank and BJR into 2 vastly different people. 

 

My issue is that we are not seeing enough of how Claire feels about Jamie nor are we seeing anything other than her desire to get back to Frank. I know it has been a short time but, clearly Jamie is already falling in love with her.  It's different for Claire given her situation but I'd like to see her start to fall for Jamie and then be really conflicted about what she wants to do (stay or go).   Also, no one, not even Claire, brings up her other wedding ring or her "dead" husband.  I would think this would be a bigger topic of conversation, at least between Claire and Jamie. 

 

One thing I will say is when the show portrays Claire in the 1940's, I'm not sure if it's the lighting, clothing, make-up, or what but she looks 10 years older than she does in the 1700's.  The 1700's Claire (now that she has her bearings) is young, fresh, beautiful. 

 

I am getting distracted by how much the lengths of both Claire's and Jamie's hair changes.  For example, Jamie's hair during the wedding episode was so long and fluffy but it was considerably shorter during the flashbacks (which were supposed to be earlier the same day or the day before) and it was back to being shorter in this last episode.  If we're taking votes, I much prefer the shorter, non-wedding hair. The same with Claire, when she was trying to escape from BJR, her hair was so long, about midway down her back in one or two shots. But in scenes that were supposed to be earlier that day or a day or two prior, it was basically shoulder length.  I am sure this is just because they filmed these scenes at different times but it's still distracting.

 

I am debating whether or not to read the books over the hiatus.  I prefer to  not know what is going to happen when I watch a movie or show  but I don't think I can wait until April 4th -- ugh!! I know from an article with the creator that they have already filmed some, if not all, of the upcoming episodes so why on earth is there such a long wait?????

  • Love 5
Link to comment

Isn't that tagline of the show. "What if you future was the past?"

 

So maybe Claire being a special one was destined to travel back in time to meet the man she's supposed to be with. She obviously feels something for Jamie that is stronger with him than with Frank. I think Frank is the wrong one in this case, she's not supposed to be with him.

Edited by Sakura12
Link to comment
Claire should send a message to her (or Frank's) future self.

 

I have no idea what the books are about, nor do I care to, so I don't know if this will be addressed or not. I've made mention that the legend of the stones might be something we learn more about. I'd like to, but it's not going to ruin the show for me if they don't.

 

I'm watching because the Highlander way of life is ending, violently, and it's kind of tragic because the main character is privy to actual future events. Will we see that it could actually have been avoidable? I really don't think the show is solely about Jamie or Frank, and to distill down to a "Team" misses a lot of what the show is about. Not for anything, but the near-constant threat of rape, and being legally considered property doesn't sound that appealing to me, regardless if Jamie is the hottest person on earth. Not to mention that most of the people Claire knows right now could literally be slaughtered within 3 years. Where's that going to leave her? There's a hell of a lot more going on. 

 

To be fair to Claire, a lot has happened in a fairly short period of time, so I don't think she's had the time to think about sending a message into the future. I do think it should cross her mind at some point. 

  • Love 2
Link to comment

I just want to say I've really enjoyed reading the past few 7or 6 comments from those that haven't read the books. It's so hard to stay out of this discussion but I have to! You all have really good points and questions that I had when reading.

  • Love 9
Link to comment

SNIP

 

When BJR saw Jamie in the window, the look on his face was weird.  A parody of joy or something.  Like a caricature vs. trying to actually play someone surprised.

 

He was ecstatic and giddy with joy. His greatest artistic achievement that got away and has alluded him and all his men just appeared in his window. AND his favorite piece of art just announced he's married to his new favorite person to beat and torture. Alls good in Black Jack World. I thought his reaction was perfect and made him more scary than if he was shocked or fearful.

  • Love 17
Link to comment

 

To be fair to Claire, a lot has happened in a fairly short period of time, so I don't think she's had the time to think about sending a message into the future. I do think it should cross her mind at some point.

 

Well she spent at least a week in that dungeon room at Castle Leoch. She had been in that very room just a day or two before in 1945 with Frank. She knows that room for the most part survives intact. Instead of spending her time doing whatever it was that she was doing ---she should have carved hints all over the place! Haha! ( I have seen too many time travel shows.) I have no clue what happens in the book(s) but if it was me? damn! I would be spending my time trying to send my future self all sorts of hints!

 

Has it occurred to Claire that her presence in the past could affect the future? Like a paradox? Does she have the power to change history by either being the catalyst that causes the battle of Culloden? or being the one to stop that battle or change it course? Is such a thing possible?

 

Link to comment

Black Jack isn't a character I love to hate. He's just so irredeemable after the last two episodes. I get the idea that we're supposed to see how he resembles Claire's modern day hubby but be so evil, but he's just so awful I don't even think he's entertaining. (and I come in as a book reader, so I know how he's supposed to be. I just find him kind of one-note)

Edited by LVmom
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Well she spent at least a week in that dungeon room at Castle Leoch. She had been in that very room just a day or two before in 1945 with Frank. She knows that room for the most part survives intact.

 

She was planning her elaborate escape in that time period though, then they had the Gathering, and then they left. I don't think it's unreasonable that it didn't occur to her so far, but I think it has to cross her mind at some point. She was just at the stones, and it seemed like she heard Frank calling out.

Link to comment

Ganesh,

 I need it to happen at some time or I will begin to think Claire is really dumb. I'll giver her a pass for not thinking logically those first few days. But seriously. it sounds all romantic to go back in time and yadda yadda ... but the day to day reality of coming from a time when modern conveniences are the norm to a time when simply going to the bathroom/having a period/changing your freakin' cloths is a chore ---who choses to stay in the past?

 

Does she have no family? No friends? In her whole entire life there isn't a soul beside her husband who will miss her and she will miss them?

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I have the feeling that the show runners decided that Jamie rushing in to save Claire was a great place to break. That was the end game but it seems like we are missing an episode in between. Things were too muddled and especially left the non book readers like me confused. I think on the third day of the marriage we have the maybe rape, Claire kills the dude, she pissed and runs off to the stones, kidnapped, another rape thing with BJR? All on same day?

Too much. Claire and the audience need time to process each one. Forget there are books but if you were writing this story would you shove all that into just one chapter? I have a million questions and I don't think I should have to read the books to fill in the blanks. I'm so disappointed. I wanted a beautiful love story set against this incredible backdrop of Scotland but I wasn't expecting all the violent against women stuff.

  • Love 3
Link to comment

I don't think I can wait until April 4th -- ugh!! I know from an article with the creator that they have already filmed some, if not all, of the upcoming episodes so why on earth is there such a long wait?????

They finished filming 1B last week but they need time for all the post production stuff (editing, scoring, etc.). It is normal for a show to finish filming episodes long before they actually air. When fans leak photos of location shooting, it is usually at least two months before that particular episode airs (which is more identifiable for other shows because of the costumes).

Link to comment
But seriously. it sounds all romantic to go back in time and yadda yadda ... but the day to day reality of coming from a time when modern conveniences are the norm to a time when simply going to the bathroom/having a period/changing your freakin' cloths is a chore ---who choses to stay in the past?

 

I think reality might be setting in for her sooner than later after two rapes/near rapes/assaults. After her escape plan got torpedoed, she basically left the castle immediately, and events piled on quickly from that point. Finding the stones again in this episode right on the tail of all of this, and then getting caught again might hammer this home. I'm pretty demanding of television, but I'm ok with what I've seen over 8 hours of show. I think she needs to get away from Black Jack first before she thinks about the big picture. The show has been pretty consistent with Claire being hot headed and impulsive. So taking a little longer before, "oh shit, I need to get out of here" is ok for me so far. 

 

I wanted a beautiful love story set against this incredible backdrop of Scotland but I wasn't expecting all the violent against women stuff.

 

To be fair, the show has been pretty good at showing the politics and clan life, as well as setting it 3 years before the end of highland life, right from the get go. So I don't think TPTBs ever intended this would just be a love story in the past and have a larger story to unfold. 

  • Love 5
Link to comment

I was distracted by the sign for Craigh Na Dun right as Frank turned the car.  5 Miles with an arrow pointing to the side?  Wouldn't Scotland's signage be in km ?

I know this was answered in that in 1945, the sign would be in miles but I wanted to add that even now, the UK still uses miles for their signs. I was thoroughly surprised by this when I went there this past winter. Basically, they use metric for temperature, volume and weight, but distance and length measurement is still in the imperial format of miles and feet. They're hybrids.

  • Love 3
Link to comment

 

To be fair to Claire, a lot has happened in a fairly short period of time, so I don't think she's had the time to think about sending a message into the future. I do think it should cross her mind at some point.

I get what you are saying. I am just being nit-picky. So far I have loved every ep of this series. I am just questioning Claire's motivation. But I went and spoiled myself by reading an article written (maybe it was twitter?) by the author and it answered some of my questions about the character Claire. So I will just let the episodes unfold and enjoy them as they are. maybe I will begin to "see" the epic love of Jamie and Claire?

 

Link to comment

Seeing how it's the premise of the book --- it is something the audience is supposed to accept.. I get that. But what I see is that Jamie is in love with THE IDEA of Claire --- not Claire herself. I say this because he doesn't know a thing about her. He doesn't even know her real name.

 

And for Claire? She is in the wrong place. The wrong time. Any relationships established  in that time and place are based on lies.

 

Quick edit because I kept thinking about this last night while I watched: Claire should send a message to her  (or Frank's) future self. Like a letter or a carving or something to let him know what happened. She knows that she and Frank will be staying at so and so Inn  right before she disappears through the stones -- at some point during her time in the 18th century ---she could warn her future self of what was going to happen. Or at least a letter to Frank from the past.

I totally agree that Jamie loves the idea of Claire, not the real woman. And he has a big crush on her. She is his first sexual relationship and that also probably heightens everything for him. He just comes across as at least 10 years younger than her. As for Claire's feelings for him - I think she likes him and she is in lust with him.

 

I'll believe she feels something more for Jamie if/when she tells Jamie the truth about being a time traveler and about having a husband in her own time.

 

I am debating too whether I should read the books over this long hiatus. I am conflicted as to whether I should. I am  a SOIAF books reader watching the HBO Game of Thrones adaptation and quite frankly it's been a frustrating and teeth gnashing experience watching that show spoiled.

 

I have watched this last episode 4 times over the weekend. I guess that means I am obsessed, ha.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

magdalene I've read all the books, some more than once, and I couldn't stop myself from re-reading book 1 up to the wedding while waiting for the second episode (no self control at all.)  But now I'm making a conscious decision to NOT read any more.  I can't help knowing what I know but I'm going to let the little details fade so that I can enjoy at least some of the delight and surprise that the unsullied are experiencing (and also to stop some of my lamenting little details from the book that are left out of the show.)

 

On the other hand -- I dove right in and read all of A Game of Thrones concurrent with the show because I COULD NOT WAIT (see above, no self control).  Enjoy whichever path you choose.

 

And since this is the episode thread, here's something to ponder.  During the teach-Claire-to-fight scene Claire stabs Willie in the back (almost literally) and when she runs away from the glade she stabs him in the back figuratively.  I like that bit of symmetry.  I am, however, very concerned for Willie's future health.  Retribution may be coming for his getting caught with his pants down (literally and figuratively.)

Edited by WatchrTina
  • Love 6
Link to comment

To be fair, the show has been pretty good at showing the politics and clan life, as well as setting it 3 years before the end of highland life, right from the get go. So I don't think TPTBs ever intended this would just be a love story in the past and have a larger story to unfold.

I get that. I wasn't expecting some Nicholas Sparks adaptation. I was trying to explain that maybe if it had been spread over a couple of episodes it wouldn't have felt so gratuitous. I think it was a very poor decision to end the way that it did. I don't remember TPTB promoting the heroine of the show being sexual assaulted, beaten and raped in just the first block of eight.

If they had ended on episode seven which I thought was lovely and intimate and something I hadn't seen before I'd be back in April. Kind of like those first seven glasses of wine tasted pretty damn good but that eighth? Not good. Head meet toilet. I don't have Claire's tolerance for alcohol.

Edited by Sasha
  • Love 1
Link to comment

 

I get that. I wasn't expecting some Nicholas Sparks adaptation. This episode was just too over the top nasty. I was trying to explain that maybe if it had been spread over a couple of episodes it wouldn't have felt so gratuitous. I think it was a very poor decision to end the way that it did. I don't remember TPTB promoting the heroine of the show being sexual assaulted, beaten and raped in just the first block of eight.

I agree -- this is a show that dedicated an entire episode to the developing sexual/romantic relationship between the two leads (ostensible leads -- poor Jamie is still mostly a side character) over the course of their wedding night.  A forced wedding night, no less, because of Reasons and Plot, I mean, because of totally internally consistent legal and political reasons that weren't proven to be completely fallacious the very next episode.  

 

I like the show, but I like it as what it is.  It doesn't need to throw in rapes, assaults, etc. to be "Game of Thrones"-lite.  I can't for the life of me understand the change in tone from The Wedding, which was leisurely, lovely, and charming, to Both Sides Now, which was disjointed, rushed, distracted, and nasty.  As one poster noted, Jamie-Claire scenes were few, and each interrupted with violence, and then an abrupt cut to Frank.  

Edited by annlaw78
  • Love 2
Link to comment

it sounds all romantic to go back in time and yadda yadda ... but the day to day reality of coming from a time when modern conveniences are the norm to a time when simply going to the bathroom/having a period/changing your freakin' cloths is a chore ---who choses to stay in the past?

 

Does she have no family? No friends? In her whole entire life there isn't a soul beside her husband who will miss her and she will miss them?

 

Yeah, well, this isn't a documentary, or a show depicting that time travel does happen, etc., etc.  This is a show that is a romance story, and from the previews before this even aired, you knew whose love story it was...throw in Scottish History, the politics, the dying of the Highlanders, and I'm not going to sit and nitpick what would happen or go through a modern woman's mind in real life.

 

I absolutely believe Jamie is in love with Claire. I don't really believe that Claire and Frank's was this amazing, deep, soul-filled love when all this happened, either. I'm pretty sure in the pilot, in one of Claire's voice overs, that she said though she and Frank had been married five years? They only spent like 10 hours? days? together, and that when the war was over, they were learning to know each other again; hence the second honeymoon in Scotland. Based on that, and what I've seen, I take the position that both Jaime and Frank are even, with Frank just a wee bit ahead.

 

I enjoyed this finale, and I don't think one can compare the rape scene that was shown in Game of Thrones to the attempted rape scene with Claire. With the former, we heard and saw what was happening.  Here? Yeah, the soldier, managed to take his pants off, got between Claire's legs, but before he could fulfill the act, she stabbed the motherfucker, based on how Angus told her what to do. I suppose there is confusion because of it not happening in real time, but a mixture of real time and slow motion. That's my take on it anyway.

 

And though rape, most times is shown to be in a sexual manner, it is not about sex, but about power and violence.  And I'm just going to leave it at that, because this is not the place to debate it. I'll take the rest of my thoughts about how I fucking loved the ending, with Jamie at the window and his line "I'll thank ye tae take your hands of my wife." Loved it. Perfect.

 

And this is coming from someone who might as well be unsullied because I read the first two and a third books over a dozen years ago, and barely remembers anything. Except how much I couldn't get through the books, I did love Jamie, and I recall only tidbits.

Edited by GHScorpiosRule
  • Love 7
Link to comment

I've been rewatching bits and pieces the last few days.  I have to say, before the deserters show up, I think that Jamie and Claire sex scene is actually my favorite moment of theirs so far.  It's just so...coupley?  Like, when Murtaugh was talking about her smile warming you?  That's true, but so does her laugh.  It was just so genuine and free.  I do think we need to see more between them, need to see more talking and forming a bond beyond sex, but I absolutely believe there's something there beyond lust.  They're married friends with benefits, basically, now they just have take it to the next level, to fall back on an old cliche. 

  • Love 4
Link to comment

I guess the redcoats arrested Claire for disturbing the peace?  You can't run around screaming in a national park, people are trying to have picnics and enjoy the weekend...  It looked as if those flowers from the pilot weren't blooming by the stone, so does that mean she wouldn't have been able to time travel anyway? 

 

The beginning of this episode (pre-attack) was so gorgeous, Jaime and Claire looking ethereal up in the mountains.  I like the disorienting effect of the rest of the episode, after Claire kills her potential attacker.  At first I was expecting her to be upset because she had taken the hippocratic oath and was now stabbing people to death, but no, it went much farther then that.  I wish she and Jaime had a chance to reconnect before he went off to obtain his innocence. 

  • Love 2
Link to comment

They finished filming 1B last week but they need time for all the post production stuff (editing, scoring, etc.). It is normal for a show to finish filming episodes long before they actually air. When fans leak photos of location shooting, it is usually at least two months before that particular episode airs (which is more identifiable for other shows because of the costumes).

I was thinking the same, but this would indicate that they easily could bring the show back sooner since they just finished the last of 8 episodes, not the first.  So you'd think they would be ready to start airing sooner even if they had more work to do on later episodes.

 

Even as I say the above, I am not as excited about new episodes as I was after the wedding.  I am not a book reader (although I have read plenty of spoilers now), and I couldn't wait to watch the wedding episode.  I have had to watch on the starz site once it is posted.  I stayed up that night/morning waiting for it to be up.  Since I couldn't watch the finale live either, I read about it before watching.  I watched late yesterday in between commercials of other shows.  I also fast-forwarded through parts.  It definitely was way too much Frank and not enough else forwarding the actual narrative along, both romantically between Jamie/Claire and otherwise.  As others have already said, it was the Frank stuff and several scenes of horror.  

Link to comment

The other issue is that it's October in a few days. Most shows go on hiatus around late November/early December because of the holidays. The only way to finish the second half of S1 before then would have been for them to havr no break at all. I am fine waiting so that the ratings don't suffer from the holidays and they have enough to do all the post stuff necessary to edit the show so it looks good.

Link to comment

I wasn't privy to any previews. I read a small article about RDM, time travel, and the highlands. Taking in the show over its past 8 hours, I don't think this was intended to be primarily a love story. I don't think TPTBs intended that either since they made a point to have Frank tell us all about the impact of Collodoen. The romance part might be the framing device to draw us into this world, but I think they're attempting a more epic story here. 

 

They've spent a lot of time with the world building and getting to know all these characters beyond just Jamie and Claire. I think the intent to contrast E7 with the harshness of E8 was deliberate in what TPTBs are trying to do with this show. They clearly aren't avoiding Collodoen, and these people are going to be slaughtered. I don't see how much of a love story this can be unless they just end it with everyone dying, which seems weird to me. 

Link to comment

I don't know, a reference to Culloden-- which is going to happen years from the events of the show-- doesn't mean it's not a love story. Stories take place in a world, after all. There are love stories set in the civil war, and it's still a love story.

If this were really going to be about politics and justice, I think we'd be seeing more of it. there are plenty of historical romances that desperately care about history. This one seems to use it primarily as dressing, but I'm hoping I'm wrong.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

I'm not saying it's not a love story. I'm saying to strictly call the show a love story misses the scope of what I think the show is about. I think the love story is the framing device to draw us into this world to tell a larger story since the main characters are each from the different time periods. It's not necessarily the main focus of the show. 

  • Love 3
Link to comment
Does she have no family? No friends? In her whole entire life there isn't a soul beside her husband who will miss her and she will miss them?

Claire doesn't have any family and she's said so. Her parents are dead and she had no siblings, just her Uncle Lamb who is also dead. As for friends, I suppose she could, but when we met her she had just gotten out of service and presumably those woman she served with went back home and she moved on to Scotland to rekindle her relationship with Frank.

 

He doesn't even know her real name. And for Claire? She is in the wrong place. The wrong time. Any relationships established  in that time and place are based on lies.

I think this is only partially true, her name really is Claire Beauchamp, she's just left the Randall part out. I understand what you're saying about her relationships in that time being a lie... but she can still tell people or even just Jamie and then she is no longer lying.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

Seeing how it's the premise of the book --- it is something the audience is supposed to accept.. I get that. But what I see is that Jamie is in love with THE IDEA of Claire --- not Claire herself. I say this because he doesn't know a thing about her. He doesn't even know her real name.

 

And for Claire? She is in the wrong place. The wrong time. Any relationships established  in that time and place are based on lies.

I don't think I agree that Jamie is only in love with the idea of Claire.  While I agree that there are some very basic pieces of information that Jamie does not know about Claire, I think he has gotten to see a lot about her essential character.  He's seen the good stuff: the way she defied everyone to help the "possessed" boy, her compassion for the boy nailed to the pillory, her willingness to work with the other women even though it included "warm piss", etc..  He's also seen the bad stuff:  drinking too much, jumping to conclusions, sulking when the others don't include her, etc.  I think he's seen enough to be actually in love with the woman herself.

  • Love 9
Link to comment

Why so many rape attempts in the show?  In my opinion, the first attempted rape is the catalyst for Claire being angry with Jamie and herself.  Jamie, because in her mind, he promised to protect her and they only got out of that fix because she killed the Redcoat, and at herself because she let herself get carried away with a man who is totally besotted with her.  When she sees the stones, her anger helps her refocus on her original "mission" - to return to her time. 

 

When the Recoats capture Claire at the stones and take her to BJR, of course he's going to rape her because rape is not about sex but about exerting power over someone.  You control them physically and mentally and they are powerless and we know by now that his favourite hobby is brutalizing people.

 

In the book these two scenes actually occur a few days apart, but nothing of any real importance happens in those days, so I think that RDM and Co, decided to compress them in the interest of moving things along, which is why Claire had such a bad day as opposed to a bad week.

 

Because up to this point, Claire really didn't get it.  The 1700's are very different times.  It was not safe for women, it really wasn't safe for anyone.  Bad things happened all the time.  I think that these two instances of sexual assault will really drive home in her head that "she REALLY isn't in Kansas anymore."  She has to start thinking and behaving differently in order to survive in this time.

Edited by AEMom
  • Love 4
Link to comment

 

Because up to this point, Claire really didn't get it.  The 1700's are very different times.  It was not safe for women, it really wasn't safe for anyone.  Bad things happened all the time.  I think that these two instances of sexual assault will really drive home in her head that "she REALLY isn't in Kansas anymore."  She has to start thinking and behaving differently in order to survive in this time.

 

Very well said. I like this. I watched The Wedding and Both Sides Now back to back last night. And YES! Claire is sort of oblivious to the dangers that lurk around every corner. Until she is almost raped (and maybe killed).  And then she saw the stones and bam! She knew she had to get the hell out! I didn't fault her at all for running like hell to try to escape back to the relative safety of her own time.

 

I have been pondering Claire's "predicament" (AS ONE DOES) and OK. It has been established that she has no one she is close to in her present day life except Frank ---and even that relationship is somewhat cold. No parents. No family. No friends. Plus in many places in 1945 they still didn't have running water or electricity (rural areas especially) so living in 1743 wasn't that much different. I guess I get why she is conflicted about returning to modern times. (though I like the theory that she is suffering from PTSD) and I am starting to see the relationship with not only Jamie but the rest of the group developing into one of mutual affection and trust. (Though I fear for her after that "escape attempt")

 

  • Love 2
Link to comment

Also, we need to remember that Claire was brought up a lot differently than other "proper" women in her time.  She spent most of her time with her Uncle traveling around dig sites.  She knows and understands how to live the nomadic, low maintenance sort of life.   In fact, maybe she is MORE at home in those type of environments.

Edited by mybabyaidan
  • Love 4
Link to comment

And she's just spent 5 years serving in the war, which included sleeping "on a cot in the mud" so she's no stranger to roughing it.  She's better suited than most would be to making the transition to 1743 life.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
Because up to this point, Claire really didn't get it.  The 1700's are very different times.  It was not safe for women, it really wasn't safe for anyone.  Bad things happened all the time.  I think that these two instances of sexual assault will really drive home in her head that "she REALLY isn't in Kansas anymore."  She has to start thinking and behaving differently in order to survive in this time.

 

Yes, her earlier escape plans do seem very naive now.   It's not safe for anyone to travel around solo, even understanding the complexities of that world and being in a group is perilous in such a brutal and indifferent environment.    And now that she is wanted by a sadist in the occupying army, it's even more essential for her to utilize the protection of the clan.

Link to comment

 

And now that she is wanted by a sadist in the occupying army, it's even more essential for her to utilize the protection of the clan.

That's why I thought it was clever of the writers to have Claire stumble upon the stones while still overwrought from having been attacked.  There was no plotting a trip to the stones, no conscious decision to abandon the protection of the clan or Jamie -- just a spontaneous decision to run toward what may be a door back to her old life.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

Also, we need to remember that Claire was brought up a lot differently than other "proper" women in her time.  She spent most of her time with her Uncle traveling around dig sites.  She knows and understands how to live the nomadic, low maintenance sort of life.   In fact, maybe she is MORE at home in those type of environments.

And she's just spent 5 years serving in the war, which included sleeping "on a cot in the mud" so she's no stranger to roughing it.  She's better suited than most would be to making the transition to 1743 life.

I don't doubt that Claire has qualities that make her better suited than many to switch to 1743 -- though her penchant for speaking her mind in total disregard of her audience isn't one of them -- but I think it's also possible to overstate it.

Archaeologists generally didn't, and don't, dig all year round, but only during part of the year; the so-called "digging season" that can vary depending on the local climate, one's academic duties and quantity of funding. Off season might be spent back at home or in one of the local cities, or split between them. Also, given the time period, even middle-class Claire and her uncle likely had local servants, both on-site and in the city, whose presence would make life easier.

Another consideration is that Claire the WWII nurse and Claire the teen-aged archaeologist weren't living under an assumed identity, and didn't have to worry about how people would react if people found out the truth. I'm told that can be quite stressful (she already had one nightmare about this when she dreamt that she told Mrs Fitz the truth, who responded by calling her a witch).

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Oh

My

Gosh

 

What a completely INTENSE episode.

 

Good thing Claire learned out to use a knife because it sure came in handy.  I cannot imagine that there was enough time for her to get raped by that Redcoat because things just happened way too fast (albeit in slow motion), so in my head that was a near miss.  She played SHOCK very well.  This actress is amazing.

 

Too much time was spent on the little boy to make me believe he is important to the story somehow.  Looking forward to whatever comes of that.  Cute kid.

 

The whole thing with BJR and Claire, I was loving how she had him in her clutches, in a screwing the mind sort of way, but then about blew up because I saw the Dutchess thing coming a mile away.  First lesson in spy work, NEVER let them know how much you know.  Claire had that rule down, to a point.  BJR seems like a master manipulator.

 

AND OH MY GOD.  I thank ye to get your hands off my wife. 

 

I.about.died.  I want a Jamie for my verra verra own.

 

Don't.like.Frank.  Sorry, but I am so not on the Frank train.  Obviously, those violent tendencies were past down from generations past.  He beat that guy past the point of making a point.

 

Stay in 1743 Claire. 

 

Hands down, a GREAT but INTENSE episode.

  • Love 10
Link to comment

Great episode, especially after *The Wedding* which I yawned all the way through. I just can't get behind Jaime& Claire, and if I'd known how much of the show was going to be their romance, I'd have stayed far far away. 

 

I was very happy to see Frank back. He's a tortured soul with some darkness in him, which makes him really interesting to me. And he loves her and didn't deserve this. The last two episodes really brought to life the title song, and especially the line "all that was good, all that was fair, all that was me is gone." It's such a sad line and so definite. I'm taking it to mean that 20th century Claire is really gone now, and the severing of the link with Frank has to be a big reason why. 

 

It's just such a sad line- I hope Claire at least has it in her to feel some sadness for what was abruptly taken away from her without warning. The most unexpected thing for me the last two episodes was that her memories of Frank got so foggy so quickly. I thought her longing for him and for her past self would go on a little bit longer and she wouldn't succumb so quickly. It was good to see her old loyalties return even if they didn't change anything.

 

Frank and Claire calling out to each other across the centuries and almost almost breaking through was a terrific scene. I wondered if they intended a ref to Jane Eyre...except there it was a spatial and not a temporal severing: when Rochester calls out Jane's name in his despair, and she hears him mysteriously across miles and miles. She does hear him and she goes to him. This was so much sadder.

 

I'm bummed because, as someone said upthread, this is likely to be his last appearance for a long long time. Apparently the producers pushed to give him even this much screen time on the show.

 

Just learned from a friend on another board that there's a fangroup of the character called Friends of Frank which tickles me no end. I'm glad to find I'm not the only one. While their numbers have to be a tiny tiny fraction of the Caitriots and the Heughanians, at least they exist. (BTW then she was asked about the Caitriots, Caitriona said, "like of the Caitriona nation"? hee)

Edited by nyxy
  • Love 4
Link to comment

I was listening to one of the non-Ron and Terry podcasts -- Mary and Blake's -- and they made an interesting reference comparing Frank and Black Jack Randall to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Thought that was clever.

Link to comment

Violent tendencies aren't hereditary. Frank was at his wit's end and someone tried to set him up for a mugging and got more than they bargained for. Obviously, one can't help but think of BJR, but there's been no other scenes in the show that indicate Frank was prone to violence iirc. 

  • Love 5
Link to comment

I can't really blame Frank, he's pretty much a grieving widow and those idiots were trying to rob him, they deserved that. BJR on the other hand is a sadistic psycho that doesn't even need a reason. However I do think Frank has a darkness in him. Wasn't he an interrogator or something during the war? I could see him being as cunning and cruel as his ancestor to get the answers he needed.

Edited by Sakura12
Link to comment

Violent tendencies aren't hereditary. Frank was at his wit's end and someone tried to set him up for a mugging and got more than they bargained for. Obviously, one can't help but think of BJR, but there's been no other scenes in the show that indicate Frank was prone to violence iirc.

Maybe not violence, but he could be a snotty, condescending bastard. I've never been a big Frank fan and when he let his inner ancestor out my dislike intensified.

I loved that Rev. Wakefield flat out told him that he'd given himself over to evil, if only briefly. The seriousness of his warning to Frank not to let it happen again told me that maybe he saw things in him that Frank normally keeps hidden. I'm not saying he's unremittingly evil like BJR, but there is a smug arrogance about him. His superior attitude has always rubbed me the wrong way.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

 

Wasn't he an interrogator or something during the war?

During episode 1 Claire says that he worked for MI6, which is the British version of the USA's CIA.  She notes that he sent many men on overseas assignments during the war from which they did not return -- and that the memory of his war-time duties "preys on him."  They never said he was an interrogator but he could have been.

 

I think James Bond works for MI6 but I don't think Frank was a field agent like Bond.  He laments in the train station scene the fact that he is staying in London while Claire is going to the front.  As a historian, it's most likely that he worked in the head office,  analyzing intelligence and helping formulate strategies that sent agents on missions.  That being said, it seems likely that anyone who serves in MI6 goes through a certain amount of agent-like training.  He told Claire about having been trained to resist interrogation.  He might also have been trained how to coerce people into divulging information and clearly he knows a thing or two about self-defense.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

It's kind of funny, everyone is obsessed with finding out who Claire is a spy for when she's essentially one of Frank's agents. Frank has been heavily researching the region and the time period, and most of the things Claire has used in the field is the information that he's passed onto her. If she ever makes it back, and if they make it past the whole adultery/pseudo bigamy thing, she'll have tons of intel to pass on.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

My dislike of Frank came from the very first episode.  It was obvious that he strayed during his time away from Claire.  And yeah, that is probably a little bit of transference from my personal life reflected on any character that strays.  ::giggle::

 

It intensified when I saw who he was related to.  I still feel the smack down of the people that led him on about the reward in this episode was a little too over the top, but that is just me. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment

My dislike of Frank came from the very first episode.  It was obvious that he strayed during his time away from Claire.  And yeah, that is probably a little bit of transference from my personal life reflected on any character that strays.

 

That's how I felt too, Biz. When Frank said something like "It's understandable that in the circumstances one would stray" or whatever, when asking Claire about it, I was like, "yup, he cheated." What I thought was weird is that Claire never asked him if he cheated.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
My dislike of Frank came from the very first episode.  It was obvious that he strayed during his time away from Claire.  And yeah, that is probably a little bit of transference from my personal life reflected on any character that strays.  ::giggle::

I kind of don't like the fact that they've left this ambiguous. A lot of the juxtaposition of this episode with Frank searching for Claire while Claire settled into her new marriage seemed to draw undeserved sympathy towards Frank, when Frank has implied that he was with other women the last time they were separated. Yes, Claire going missing is a horrible thing, but the whole "SHE RAN OFF WITH ANOTHER MAN!" angle without Frank admitting his own possible past indiscretions in some form, painted this imbalance between Frank and Claire that rubbed me the wrong way.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

I was very happy to see Frank back. He's a tortured soul with some darkness in him, which makes him really interesting to me. And he loves her and didn't deserve this. The last two episodes really brought to life the title song, and especially the line "all that was good, all that was fair, all that was me is gone." It's such a sad line and so definite. I'm taking it to mean that 20th century Claire is really gone now, and the severing of the link with Frank has to be a big reason why. 

 

I do kind of think that a spin off with Frank alone might be something I would watch. I suppose I would feel better about the whole deal if they largely went on their own ways.  What I think would bother me would be for him to show up in side backs like this episode. It is distracting to the story.  The actor is a real find so I think he should be featured in something ASAP.  And I am growing rapidly sick of BJR.

  • Love 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...