S01.E11: The Devil's Mark

[Athena]

Episode Synopsis:

 

Claire and Geillis are on trial for witchcraft. Jamie manages to rescue Claire, but not before she discovers a secret about Geillis' past.

Reminder: There is open air book talk here. If you are just watching the TV show and you don't want to stumble into a potential spoiler you should leave now. There is another episode topic for you. Book Talk assumes you have read all the books to date. Any information from unpublished books, such as preview chapters should be in spoiler tags.

[bluebonnet]

I'm not sure I cared for this one.  There were moments when I felt like they made our beloved Claire a bit stupid.  Sure, she's headstrong but being headstrong doesn't necessarily equal dumb.  I was cringing every time she started screaming.  Then every clue Geillis dropped that Claire did catch was making me crazy.  Everything from Geillis seeming to understand a certain quote, Geillis asking why she was there in Scotland and whether or not she wanted to change things, Geillis saying fucking (Claire had just explained to Jamie what this word meant), Geillis saying 1968.  Yet somehow a tiny mark from across the room was totally the neon sign she needed.  Ugh.  I didn't care for it in the books either, but on screen it made me very annoyed for Claire.  

 

I'm also not sure I bought Sam's performance when Jamie said he believed Claire.  

 

Ok episode, not sure it will be in my rewatch rotation.  

 

Also, I'm never again going to watch the show right when it shoes up on the website or on demand.  It sucked not talking about it all day.  

Edited April 19, 2015 by bluebonnet

[Primetimer]

On Outlander, Claire and Geillis are on trial for witchcraft! Will Claire be burned at the stake? (Probably not.)

Read the story

[Petunia846]

Well this is my favorite part of the book (specifically the stuff with Jamie and Claire after the trial, her confession and all that), and I wasn't too disappointed.

 

I liked the changes they made to the trial. It flowed better and it felt more tense. We maybe could have cut a little of that for more time later with Claire and Jamie, but...whatever, it was good. Ned is the man, giving Claire whisky and being the best lawyer ever, but I'm not sure why he was waving that gun around. I can see Claire not understanding about Geilis after using that quote, the questions about why she was in Scotland, okay...but I really thought the line about a "fucking BBQ" would have registered with her. Just a few episodes ago, she was explaining what fucking meant to Jamie. I'm going to go with her being too wrapped up in the trial to process the information. Loved Geilis being carted away in her red shoes.

 

My only real complaint for the episode is that I wish Cat had played Claire more hysterical during her confession to Jamie, but still. It worked fine. Ron said on Twitter that he wanted to cut the love scene by the fire, and that is why I don't trust him with this story as far as I can throw him. Does he smoke crack or something? How could you want to cut that? It was breathtaking and, at least in my opinion, the best love scene to date.

 

I think non-book readers are going to be confused by the smash to black as Claire walked towards the stone. They way they cut it, it looks like she touched the stone and went back to the 40s, THEN changed her mind and went back through the stones and down the hill to Jamie. It was a bit of an odd choice.

 

Oh, and did you all catch Ned's comment about how witch trials are outlawed so what they were doing was illegal. That made me laugh, since everyone who discusses the book always talks about how technically at that time there were no more witch trials. His comment cleared up a nitpick people have always had with the book...nice touch, guys.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Petunia846

[Keeta]

This episode solidified for me that the best part of the show, like the books, is Jamie and Claire together. And I could not be happier about that. They got the most important thing so right.

 

On a related note: after these last two episodes, can we all agree that Sam Heughan saying “no” is officially the sexiest thing ever?

 

I did have a few issues with the witch trial (did we need the changeling line verbatim again?), and I would have liked a liiiittle bit more time spent on Claire’s decision at the stones & reuniting with Jamie (not to mention more time on their marriage in general before this point), but again, emotionally I thought the episode succeeded where it counts the most. 

 

Also: loved Geillis' "fucking BBQ" line.

 

 

Ron said on Twitter that he wanted to cut the love scene by the fire, and that is why I don't trust him with this story as far as I can throw him. Does he smoke crack or something? How could you want to cut that? It was breathtaking and, at least in my opinion, the best love scene to date.

 

Petunia846 I saw that on Twitter as well, thank god they kept that scene in! 

[Dust Bunny]

I liked it, with reservations. It's one of those episodes I want to talk myself into loving, because I love it in the book so much.

 

I'm hoping there are some deleted scenes between Claire and Jamie. I'm hoping the "happy birthday" bit was done, since she did explicitly say "October 20". I also we wish we would have seen Claire start to disappear in front of Jamie. I'd like to know why the writer/director made that decision.  

 

I think I'm going to stop listing what was missing and think happy thoughts. The fire scene before Jamie took Claire up to the stones was verra nice. It makes me think of the times in the books when Jamie takes snapshots of memories when he's with his loved ones. 

[Petunia846]

It makes me think of the times in the books when Jamie takes snapshots of memories when he's with his loved ones.

The way Sam/Jamie was looking at her was so different from how we've ever seen him look at her before. He was looking at her like she was some magical creature, truly a fairy or something, that he had been entrusted to care for and he was going to perform his duties to the absolute best of his abilities. It was breathtaking and I loved it.

[tcay]

Yes that fire scene was definitely marked to me as one of his mental snapshots of her. 

 

Laoghaire was just vile. She was bad enough in the book but man. I take back everything I said about Jamie possibly knowing about her involvement. It'd be unforgivable! 

[Archery]

Aside from a few missing lines, that was very nearly exactly as I'd pictured that trial scene when I read the book all those years ago. The frustration of Claire with these simple superstitious people frothing themselves up into frenzy. Her mounting hysteria. Her wait, what? delay in catching the snap from Geillis. I don't think she was dumb; I think she was overwhelmed, and not able to connect the dots because they resembled, Oh, yeah, I'm from the future, too.

I did miss the flying jet necklace, and the "jet will burn a witch's skin" mic drop, though they kept in that beautiful detail of the tears on Jamie's face as he slept.

[AheadofStraight]

 

I think I'm going to stop listing what was missing and think happy thoughts. The fire scene before Jamie took Claire up to the stones was verra nice. It makes me think of the times in the books when Jamie takes snapshots of memories when he's with his loved ones.

 

On Twitter, Ron Moore said: I didn't want to see her "fade" or go transparent. Felt like the show would be "scifi" and take you out of the story.

 

IMO, I would've liked to see something because that was an important point in the book and why Jamie really believed her but I understand that they didn't want it to look cheesy. As for being "too scifi", ummm she's a time traveler, lol!

[tcay]

Here's a tidbit from Ron's Twitter about Jamie's arrival at the trial, but I can't tell if this is an actual semi-spoiler or just him attempting to be funny:

 

Edited to put this under a spoiler tag:

"Jamie is actually here looking for Laoghaire... but we'll talk about that in season two..."

https://twitter.com/RonDMoore/status/589603633773162496

 

I have no idea what to make of that.

Edited April 19, 2015 by tcay

[maraleia]

I absolutely loved that Jamie apologized to Claire for beating her when she told him why she ran off. That fingering scene was something else (so damn sexy). I adore the fact that Jamie thinks of Claire's sexual needs first. So unlike other hetero relationships on TV and especially movies.

[Squirrely]

I'm trying so hard not to make comparisons, but along the way I've been baffled by the things they spend so much time on, while glossing over others. If they had to end this episode with her choosing Jamie, why not cut even one minute of the trial to give us more punch at the end? I shed a few tears, but I'm bawling and blubbering at this point in the book.

And I guess Ron has read DiA since her knows 1968. I am bummed that he jumped the gun there. And had the anvils dropping for anyone who hasn't read. The scar reveal about knocks you down in the book.

On the plus side, Sam was hot as ever. Otherwise, I'm not sure this show is for me. I doubt I can stop watching, but I can't fully enjoy it either. DG does such a marvelous job of weaving a story, and I know TV has to be different. I really do know this. But the heart of the story is always Claire and Jamie. So I'm hoping their true connection is really shown at Lallybroch. Because if I wasn't a reader, I'm not sure I'd understand why she chose Jamie at this point. I don't feel their insanely strong connection (other than sex) is getting what it deserves.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Squirrely

[miss carousel]

Being thrown in a hole and the possibility of being burned at the stake can make you a little shrieky. It was frustrating though that she couldn't put it together about Geillis faster. I love Ned the character and the actor who plays him. I thought the stone scene should have been longer and they should have shown her fading a bit. I don't think that would have taken viewers out of the show. She's a time traveler this isn't pure historical fiction.

[miss carousel]

To accept the premise of the story you have to believe Claire would willingly stay in the past because of her great love for Jamie and the strong connection they have. I'm not sure the show has established that fully. Strong attraction, hot sex and indications they are falling in love, yes. But a love where you forgo antibiotics, no witch burnings, electricity and a husband you cared about, not so much. The book at this point had me willingly suspending belief on that score because I felt the intensity of Claire's bond to Jamie.

[chocolatetruffle]

“Looks like I’m going to a fucking barbecue.”  Geillis is my bitch!  I don’t care if she murdered her husband.  I love her and her red shoes and I am not ashamed. 

 

Lotte Verbeek owned the first part of this episode for me.  Her performance was so riveting I could not take my eyes off of her.  It was fascinating watching her go from cocky to disbelieving to vulnerable in a matter of seconds.  Her face was luminous, especially in the scenes in the thieves hole.  And my heart broke for her when she realized it was “all for nothing,” yet she goes on to save Claire’s ass anyway.  By the bye, when Geillis mentions a barbecue I would think that would register with Claire that she is likely a time traveler and certainly when she says 1968 (perhaps she did realize, but the gunshot shocked her out of it).  The vaccination scar should have just confirmed it.  So to have Claire say it hit her when she saw it just makes her look kinda slow.

 

Ned was awesome as usual and Jamie’s line “First man forward will be the first man down” made me cheer.  I didn’t think the Alexander Duffy testimony was necessary as it didn’t go anywhere.  They should have just cut to friggin’ Laoghaire…

 

Laoghaire’s just straight up loathsome.  That is all.  I thought she might have made herself scarce when Jamie showed up, but I caught a glimpse of her walking with Father Bain behind a prostrate Geillis.  Speaking of Bain, I had no idea what he was up to, but his smile to Geillis revealed his duplicity.

 

The opening with the flock of birds in “murmuration” as Claire called it was beautiful – the best one yet.  I have seen this phenomenon before but can’t imagine how they managed to capture it on film – was likely CGI, but I still liked it. 

 

I thought the scenes between Claire and Jamie leading up to the stones were well done.  I especially liked watching Jamie come to grips with Claire’s fantastical tale.  The I believe you scene was brilliant. Sam was awesome in those scenes.  And the fireside lovemaking was beautiful.  The false ending made me yell at my TV, but the real ending was very satisfying.  I was crying right along with Jaime.

 

Now the part that made me ragey: when Claire just sauntered up to the stone with her hands out.  If Jamie hadn’t stopped her she would have left without so much as a backward glance.  It makes it seem like she changed her mind on whim. That moment was handled much better in the book as she was pulled in by the magic of the stones.  I also don't understand why they didn't show her fade. I also sorely missed her begging Jamie not to be at Culloden field, to promise her he would leave Scotland before that battle.  And finally I missed her saying “is there really nothing for me here?” in response to Jamie’s lines.

 

I agree the show has done a disservice to the Claire & Jamie story, because as others have said, we aren't seeing the depth of the bond and love she feels for him.

Edited April 19, 2015 by chocolatetruffle

[nodorothyparker]

I think I'm going to need a rewatch or two to fully digest, but this one definitely felt like a rush job.

 

The trial required everyone involved to look like complete blooming idiots.  Yeah, I get it.  Superstitious uneducated villagers.  But Claire's not new here anymore.  She's been in this time and place long enough to know that marching around and shouting at people rarely works out for her.  You could just feel Ned Gowan trying to get her to shut up shut up shut up so he could figure out how to play things.  Lotte Verbeek was luminous and amazing to watch though.

 

Claire's confession should have been so much bigger than it was.  Both actors did extremely well for what they had to work with but it felt really truncated and underplayed, like they just needed to keep things moving so they could get to the "choice" at the end.  If I hadn't read the books, I'm honestly not sure what I would have thought happened at the stones with the fade to black.  Did it not work for her this time?  Or what made her decide to stay and forgo all the safety and convenience of her own time for this place where she'd nearly been burned for witchcraft a day or so before?  Especially when we were nearly beat over the head in the first half the season with gotta get to the stones, gotta get to the stones.  And count me among those who were underwhelmed with the way the scene at the stones was shown.  

 

Look, I love the chemistry between these actors as much as anybody.  It's obvious that the characters have something wonderful happening between them beyond really great sex.  But the choice doesn't feel nearly as organic here.  The meandering pacing of the first half and the rushed pacing of the second half of the season have really muddled things to hamper my suspension of disbelief that Claire could really be at the point to make the choice she does.

[theschnauzers]

RDM did not show any "fading" when Claire went through the stones the first time, so I can understand why he'd avoid any illustration of how it looks from the outside now or ever. I have no problem with that choice.

They had a lot of ground to cover in this episode in comparison to book 1, but I thought it was handled well. IIRC, wasn't Ned also sent off by Colum with Dougal and Jamie last episode? I wass under the impression no one at Leoch knew wzcept for Laighaire (who I couldn't stand as a character in the books and Nell is nailing why I dislike her on screen) but I am sure Jamie will know soon enough who put Claire at risk.

Edited April 19, 2015 by theschnauzers

[CalamityBoPeep]

 

Claire's confession should have been so much bigger than it was.  Both actors did extremely well for what they had to work with but it felt really truncated and underplayed, like they just needed to keep things moving so they could get to the "choice" at the end.  If I hadn't read the books, I'm honestly not sure what I would have thought happened at the stones with the fade to black.  Did it not work for her this time?  Or what made her decide to stay and forgo all the safety and convenience of her own time for this place where she'd nearly been burned for witchcraft a day or so before?  Especially when we were nearly beat over the head in the first half the season with gotta get to the stones, gotta get to the stones.  And count me among those who were underwhelmed with the way the scene at the stones was shown.  

 

Look, I love the chemistry between these actors as much as anybody.  It's obvious that the characters have something wonderful happening between them beyond really great sex.  But the choice doesn't feel nearly as organic here.  The meandering pacing of the first half and the rushed pacing of the second half of the season have really muddled things to hamper my suspension of disbelief that Claire could really be at the point to make the choice she does.

 

I agree with this so much.  I would have loved to see the hysteria that she experiences in the book, the realization that it must sound like cackling to Jamie, the way the story pours out of her, uncontrolled, as she tries to rein it in.  I did appreciate the loveliness of the scene as they wrote it, but it just didn't quite pack the emotional punch of her response and his in the book.  His initial response wasn't just automatically "I believe you."  He got there intellectually, yes, but the hair on his arms standing on end showed his primal instinct wasn't "hey, man, believe her."  He overrides his instinctive response and his emotions, because he needs to, in order to address hers to help bring her some peace.  She needs him to help her contain the trauma of all that she's been through, so he puts his own reactions aside at that moment, to help her steady herself and to keep her from losing herself to her own despair.  So much more meaningful, relationship-wise, than simple belief.

 

Gah.  Feel like I'm not doing the idea justice.  I guess I just needed more in this part... more of his reaction, more of her dithering at the stones, (if ever there was a time for internal monologue, this was it...), more of her pacing back and forth, then the trying by instinct... a few steps toward the stones, then flying down the hill.

 

I wish I wasn't as hard on this show as I am at times... the actors are doing an amazing job.  I just feel like a few of the really important beats are getting missed in the scripts, and I'd like to see the real emotional complexity highlighted more.

[bluebonnet]

RDM did not show any "fading" when Claire went through the stones the first time, so I can understand why he'd avoid any illustration of how it looks from the outside now or ever. I have no problem with that choice.

 

I wouldn't have a problem with that choice if they had made it more clear why Jamie believes her.  He's an educated man.  He should require some sort of proof no matter if he says he believes her or not.  I just wish there had been something to show us that Jamie struggled with this outrageous story until something tangible revealed the validity of Claire's wild claims.  

[peacefrog]

One quick issue before I forget and go to bed.

 

Jamie never touched the stone or at least it didn't look like it.  How will they know that he can't go through? I only ask because my husband thought Jamie might go.

 

I just don't get Ron Moore's avoiding sci-fi here. There must be a way to show or tell the mythology without it being cheesy. I don't need special effects. It's what drew me to the book, it's what I like the most in the series.

[chocolatetruffle]

A simple way to handle the sci fi element is to show it from Claire's POV.  She hears the buzzing and suddenly everything goes white. Cut to Claire gazing up disoriented and we pull back to see her lying on the ground with Jamie kneeling over her explaining that she started to fade and he grabbed her and pulled her back. Not cheesy and we see that Claire can go back, but she chooses to stay.  Also Jaime has proof that she was telling the truth.  The way they did it left the door open to interpret that maybe she couldn't get through so she accepted that her fate was to stay.

[Glaze Crazy]

This was a well done episode overall.  I'm really trying to separate the show from the books and go with it, no matter what, but I'm now wondering what the end game for the Laoghaire character is.  If they are going with her publicly accusing Claire of witchcraft and Jamie saw her there, how does that play out  2 seasons from now?  If I was blessedly unspoiled by the books I wouldn't care and just hate her now, but I don't.  BookClaire never really blames BookLaoghaire since it's never clear to her how much of a hand Book-L had in what happened in Cranesmuir.

 

I think this episode did really well in establishing how much Jamie loves Claire unconditionally, and I'm glad they kept in his realizing the reason why Claire left the glade 3 episodes ago and his remorse over his actions afterwards.  I think this is a solid bit of ground for how their continuing relationship develops.  Although he did make the fealty vow I've always felt this was the place in the story where Jamie really understands how different Claire is and why her attitude and actions are so different than what he's known of women from his time.

 

I liked it, with reservations. It's one of those episodes I want to talk myself into loving, because I love it in the book so much.

 

I'm hoping there are some deleted scenes between Claire and Jamie. I'm hoping the "happy birthday" bit was done, since she did explicitly say "October 20".

 

They have switched up the timeline in the book by 6 months, when TVClaire goes through the stones its Samhain (October 31). I'm guessing we are at Beltane (May 1) in Outlander-verse. They were coming up on Christmas when they got back to the castle, so it's at least spring in the TV story now.  I was wondering if they would clarify the characters' age difference at this point like the book did, but it looks like not.

 

“Looks like I’m going to a fucking barbecue.”  Geillis is my bitch!  I don’t care if she murdered her husband.  I love her and her red shoes and I am not ashamed. 

 

Lotte Verbeek owned the first part of this episode for me.  Her performance was so riveting I could not take my eyes off of her.  It was fascinating watching her go from cocky to disbelieving to vulnerable in a matter of seconds.  Her face was luminous, especially in the scenes in the thieves hole.  And my heart broke for her when she realized it was “all for nothing,” yet she goes on to save Claire’s ass anyway.  By the bye, when Geillis mentions a barbecue I would think that would register with Claire that she is likely a time traveler and certainly when she says 1968 (perhaps she did realize, but the gunshot shocked her out of it).  The vaccination scar should have just confirmed it.  So to have Claire say it hit her when she saw it just makes her look kinda slow.

 

I agree that the first half of this episode belonged to the women.  Both Lotte Verbeek and Caitronia Balfe were excellent in their scenes but Geillis giving herself up to save Claire was so well done!  I'm thinking that use of the "one life for my country" line was out of place for a couple of Brits to recognize, since it comes more from American history and I wouldn't expect a 1940's or 1960's era British person to immediately recognize it.  Same for the barbecue line, IMO, but it was funny and a very modern comment to hear from my perspective.

[ulkis]

I agree that the first half of this episode belonged to the women. Both Lotte Verbeek and Caitronia Balfe were excellent in their scenes but Geillis giving herself up to save Claire was so well done! I'm thinking that use of the "one life for my country" line was out of place for a couple of Brits to recognize, since it comes more from American history and I wouldn't expect a 1940's or 1960's era British person to immediately recognize it.

I don't know about Geillis but I can buy Claire knowing it. She traveled all over with her uncle and met a lot of Americans during the war.

I think I'm going to need a rewatch or two to fully digest, but this one definitely felt like a rush job.

The trial required everyone involved to look like complete blooming idiots. Yeah, I get it. Superstitious uneducated villagers. But Claire's not new here anymore.

Yeah, it bugged me when Claire said, yeah I gave her the potion but it was fake. Lie, woman! That wasn't honorable, just dumb. I guess you could say she was panicking, but still.

[justmehere]

I do wish that they had spent a little less time on the trial and a bit more at the stones, but that said, I thought it was well done.

 

I loved/hated most of the trial. I was fully engaged in the scenes, but I can't stand witch-trail stuff in general (the subject makes me crazy). I can buy that Claire, afraid for her life, would shout at the absurdity of the proceedings and be a little slow on the uptake re: Geillis. I loved Geillis' sacrifice, seeing the futility of her own situation and realizing that Dougal didn't come for her while Jamie did come for Claire. She was glorious and tragic.

 

I fully believed Jamie's emotion throughout. He's very perceptive -- e.g. deducing that Claire came from an "easier" life -- and I can see him believing her story because of the way she told him and the fact that she had no reason to fabricate anything at that point. He rather broke my heart with his sacrifice. I was OK with Claire's consideration of her decision -- nice call back to The Wedding with looking at both rings -- but I thought the moment of decision could have been a little more dramatic and emotional. I liked Claire's voice waking Jamie -- going back to what she said the night they met -- but it did feel a little anticlimactic. I wish they hadn't faded out quite so quickly. Surely a few more seconds -- not just kissing  but of them together -- wouldn't have hurt.

 

Unmet expectations are a bitch.

 

---

P.S. I hope they'll explain how Jamie knew to come back. That was a big omission.

P.P.S. I didn't like Claire's line that she'd rather burn than freeze to death. No Claire, you really wouldn't.

Edited April 19, 2015 by justmehere

[Kiwi]

Hmm so I had been looking forward to the big reveal since the start of this show and it was ok. I think reading the books after the first half of the season might have ruined this show a little bit for me. It just didn't quite get there emotionally for me.

 

The trial was good and I loved Lotte in this episode, for a character who I know is all kinds of shady (not to mention what she does to Young Ian) she made me feel sorry for her. Her sacrifice for Claire was well handled, I liked that part far better than the books. I also liked the change of Gellis being the one to tell Claire she was from 1968 as opposed to Dougal doing it later on, a good one. I can buy that Claire would not put all the dots together  until she saw the small pox vaccine scar too, that was one emotionally charged court room, I feel she was starting to get it when the gun went off (what was that about anyway?).

 

Laoghaire I hate more on screen than I ever did in the books, the writers and actress are doing an awesome job making me despise her. Not sure how they will sell Jamie's marriage to her further down the road but we are a ways away from that point.

 

Claire finally telling Jamie the truth I liked. Its not a stretch for Jamie not to need proof from Claire, I think he has seen enough of her manner and ways to know there is something odd about her, and for him to trust her implicitly no matter what, shows how much he cares for her. The scene at the stones on the other hand I am not sure of. It was ok, but if any scene could have benefited from a voice over it was this one. Claire's face told a great story in her deciding what to do but I felt it needed more. And that fade to black on the stones was just dumb, it made out like she touched the stones, and I know from the books she did not. That was an odd choice.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Kiwi

[bluebonnet]

 

I agree that the first half of this episode belonged to the women.  Both Lotte Verbeek and Caitronia Balfe were excellent in their scenes but Geillis giving herself up to save Claire was so well done!  I'm thinking that use of the "one life for my country" line was out of place for a couple of Brits to recognize, since it comes more from American history and I wouldn't expect a 1940's or 1960's era British person to immediately recognize it.  Same for the barbecue line, IMO, but it was funny and a very modern comment to hear from my perspective.

The quote would have been in any child's basic world history lessons.  Plus, it was said during the American Revolution, a period of time that's fairly relevant to the British.  Barbecue has been in use in the English language since the 1600s.  

[ihartcoffee]

I'm so glad we didn't have to see any of the burning alive of Gellis.

Such a great episode. Jamie was particularly handsome and the scene by the fire was hot hot hot!

I hate Laoghaire with a passion!

[absnow54]

P.S. I hope they'll explain how Jamie knew to come back. That was a big omission.

I thought Ned mentioned that word was sent to Jamie, but it would take several days for him to get there, but I think I made that up.

 

I could have done with a lot less of the witch trial. Extras shouting "Witch!" for 30 minutes just isn't compelling to me. I did love Ned and his "win the townspeople over with corny English jokes" strategy, and Lotte was wonderful as Gellis. Gellis and Claire's friendship is so interesting to me because they're constantly straddling that line between friends and enemies.

 

I loved every second after Jamie showed up. Sam Heughan has mastered the hopeless devotion of a love struck man. Since the moment Claire popped his shoulder back into place, he's been looking at her like she's hung the moon, and the realization that he had to let her go in this episode. Ugh. Unf. I could watch 6 minutes of just his face.

 

As for the Stones Redux, I thought it was sort of lost in the shuffle. This moment should have been huge. It's been Claire's main objective since the first episode, and it completely fizzled, and that's been my issue with this second half of the season. They've shifted the focus too much from Claire's journey. Sure, these other stories they're telling are important, but Claire and the stones is the story, and it doesn't feel like that anymore. 

[Tatler]

Agreeing with most of the comments from other book readers. The trial was too long and far too melodramatic for my liking -didn't work for me at all. What follows Jamie's rescue is probably the single most important section, not only of the book, but the entire series. Fully buying into Clare's decision to stay with Jamie is what makes the romance so compelling (dare I say epic *g*). <br /><br />As someone who's loved the book for nearly 20 years, I was worried about the series (and I still think they shouldn't have attempted to do the whole book in Series 1 and have huge concerns about the start of S2....) anyway - I've loved the cast and overall I think Moore has done a good job with it. However this was, imo, too rushed and it's huge significance for the story brushed past. We're fairly clear about Jamie's feelings for Clare, but this is the point at which we understand her feelings: her willingness to sacrifice everything she's ever known for this man. It's not an easy decision, she agonises over it, but in the end she has to follow her heart ... Follow Jamie. I don't think that element was given nearly enough emphasis or time ......

[AheadofStraight]

tcay - Ron said later that he was just joking! (Thank goodness!)

 

 

The opening with the flock of birds in “murmuration” as Claire called it was beautiful – the best one yet.  I have seen this phenomenon before but can’t imagine how they managed to capture it on film – was likely CGI, but I still liked it.

 

Ron said on a twitter Q&A last night that it was stock footage they had to search to find. Lots of really good questions/answers in the Q&A on his timeline.

 

 

I'm thinking that use of the "one life for my country" line was out of place for a couple of Brits to recognize, since it comes more from American history and I wouldn't expect a 1940's or 1960's era British person to immediately recognize it.

 

I just re-read this part of the book this morning and that line was in there! I totally thought it was made up for the show and forgot.

Edited April 19, 2015 by AheadofStraight

[CatMack]

I'm so glad they had Jamie apologize for beating her.  He doesn't, in the book.  He very specifically doesn't, and then several books down the line we have to endure him throwing it in her face that he never said he was sorry and how he still remembers beating her fondly.  I really, really hope this means that entire conversation will be removed, because it made me stop reading for awhile.  Moments like that, where Gabaldon wants to drive home how edgy she is without any consideration for what it does to the characters, are some of the worst parts of the series, and I've been really hoping the show will clean a lot of that up.  Mixed bag so far on that front, but this was a good change.  

 

The pacing has been odd since the show came back, but I kind of expected it.  It's not that it's bad necessarily, it's just..off.  Knowing everything that they had to fit in from book one, even just focusing on the big 'they probably can't cut this this is definitely going to be in the show' stuff, it worried me how slowly the first half of season 1 was paced.  It seems a bit like they were stuck with a midseason break and therefore needed some kind of big midseason ender, and they settled on Claire in Randall's clutches, and then everything else had to be fit in around that, whether or not that really worked for the pacing of the story as a whole.  We had to stretch to that point for half a season, and now we have to shove everything else in behind it.  It's not like there wasn't enough stuff to fill the first half, I actually have relatively few complaints taken by itself.  But there's a lot in the second half, and it's frankly a lot more interesting and emotionally charged than most of what happened in the first half.  So not having more time to spend on the things happening now, because we had to spend so much time dawdling in the first half, it's frustrating.  I didn't like episode 9, but 10 and 11 were good.  The problem is nothing has time to breath.  It's a bit like we're hitting a checklist at this point.   Hearing that Ron Moore apparently wanted to cut the fireside sex scene just kind of drives home that point for me.  That was an important moment, not because it was sexy, though it was, but because of the emotional impact.  What that scene means for Jamie, once you know what he's planning the next morning, is important for his character, even though it's not immediately obvious as anything other than sexyfuntimes.  We need more of those kinds of emotional beats, whether sex is involved or not.  Too little plot is bad, but too much is also not good.  There needs to be a balance, and we're falling short on focusing on the emotional journey of the characters since coming back from the break.  

 

Ha, I actually sat down intending to write a positive post about this episode, because I really did enjoy it.  

 

I didn't have a problem with Claire's attitude throughout the trial, for 2 reasons.  1 - as she said in her narration at the start, witch trials pretty damn rarely ended well for the accused, no matter what the facts (at least in the realm of fiction, I'm not an expert on historically accurate witch trials).  Claire being belligerent or Claire being a meek little mouse, it probably really didn't matter much.  So why not, honestly.  Rage against the dying of the light, all that jazz.  2 - My roommate and I, who work together, worked a 10 hour shift yesterday, which was full of frustration and annoyance.  Our state of mind after that was...well, we ended the night drunk and (consensually) beating a tied up man in our dining room.  Which is to say that when you're stressed, brains do odd things sometimes.  So I had no issues with Claire just being fucking done with everyone and everything and also not making the connections to everything Geillis was saying.

 

I think some of my lingering issues, like not delving enough into Claire's emotional journey or her decision to stay, could still be explored more in the coming episodes.  We've got 5 episodes left and Wentworth is the last huge plot point from the books.  There's lead up to it for sure, but I think we might have at least a little bit of time in the next episode or 2 to get some quieter character moments before the shit hits of the fan.  Lallybroch in the books is mostly character driven stuff, so fingers crossed the show manages to fit some of that in as well.  

 

TV has different pacing rules as a whole than books, and you should be able to view a TV show week to week and still get good pacing.  But with them trying to stick to the structure of the book fairly closely, it might be this show really works better binge watching all at once, where it flows more as one story, and it's less apparent if emotional beats don't show up until the next episode.

[absnow54]

I'm so glad they had Jamie apologize for beating her.  He doesn't, in the book.

While he doesn't explicitly apologize, he is regretful at the realization in the book. That scene was verbatim except for his "I'm very, very, sorry" line. 

[chocolatetruffle]

So after a good night's sleep and a reread of the stones scene, I now know why the depiction on the show made me so angry.  The show has given us a Claire that has wanted to get home throughout her journey, even after she tells the truth to Jamie, she still can't accept that she belongs in 1743.  When she arrived at the stones, she doesn't hesitate.  She walks to the stones to touch them, which tells me that she was ready to go home.  Jamie stops her and tells her that he wasn't ready and that she should not stay because there is nothing for her here (um, dude she wasn't planning on staying, she was on her way when you stopped her).  It undercuts his speech (although very well done), making it irrelevant in light of her actions.  

 

In the book, Claire says the stones are the last place she wants to be, is reluctant to touch them and frets about Jamie getting too close to them.  He takes her hand and puts it on the stone.  This accomplishes three things, it shows him that she was telling the truth, it confirms that the stones work and she can, indeed, get back and most importantly, it motivates his speech to her that she must leave.  The stakes are so much greater because we see, right from the beginning that Claire is unsure about what to do.  

 

Ultimately, she makes a purely emotional decision as she says she could not live without him.  The show just didn't get there for me and I am very disappointed.  As others have said, not enough time was devoted to this moment, and although I loved the witch trial story, there was a lot of chaff in the trial scenes that could have been cut.

 

Oh and one last thing, despite the writing and direction, the actors were great, especially Sam.  I thought he just knocked it out of the park showing us all of Jamie's inner agony. 

[CatMack]

While he doesn't explicitly apologize, he is regretful at the realization in the book. That scene was verbatim except for his "I'm very, very, sorry" line.

I'm aware. But that's an important change. As I said, later books have Jamie specifically say he wasn't sorry and never apologized, basically completely undoing his "regretful" tone in this scene by speaking of it fondly. So the actual apology, while a very small line addition, has IMO big implications about how they're going to handle things long term. Jamie in the books never really regrets the beating outside of that one line after the reveal. They've already done a better job of showing actual growth from him, this was a continuation of it.

[nodorothyparker]

So after a good night's sleep and a reread of the stones scene, I now know why the depiction on the show made me so angry.  The show has given us a Claire that has wanted to get home throughout her journey, even after she tells the truth to Jamie, she still can't accept that she belongs in 1743.  When she arrived at the stones, she doesn't hesitate.  She walks to the stones to touch them, which tells me that she was ready to go home.  Jamie stops her and tells her that he wasn't ready and that she should not stay because there is nothing for her here (um, dude she wasn't planning on staying, she was on her way when you stopped her).  It undercuts his speech (although very well done), making it irrelevant in light of her actions.  

 

In the book, Claire says the stones are the last place she wants to be, is reluctant to touch them and frets about Jamie getting too close to them.  He takes her hand and puts it on the stone.  This accomplishes three things, it shows him that she was telling the truth, it confirms that the stones work and she can, indeed, get back and most importantly, it motivates his speech to her that she must leave.  The stakes are so much greater because we see, right from the beginning that Claire is unsure about what to do.  

 

You've perfectly captured where the bulk of my disappointment lies.  Book Claire really struggled to know what to do when they finally got to the stones.  We saw Jamie walking around smacking at them so we knew without a doubt that they didn't work for him but she could hear them and was fearful for him to even go near them.  She nearly got sucked back before she could make a conscious choice.  After he finally leaves her, she's making everything short of a damn pro-con list to try to decide.  We see her struggle.

 

Here.  If Jamie hadn't yanked her back because he wasn't ready, she would have been gone.  No hesitation.  No apparent regret about what she would be leaving behind.  No goodbye.  No nothing.  Whether she was heading back because that's what she truly wanted or because it's what she felt she was supposed to do, we have no idea.  Yet we're supposed to buy that she then made the monumental choice to stay without any further discussion.    This show at times has nearly drowned the viewing audience in voiceovers about things we really could have figured out on our own, but the one time we really could have used a clue or three about what was going on in Claire's head, radio silence.

[chocolatetruffle]

 

This show at times has nearly drowned the viewing audience in voiceovers about things we really could have figured out on our own, but the one time we really could have used a clue or three about what was going on in Claire's head, radio silence.

 

AMEN!

[Keeta]

Very interesting to read everyone’s takes. I completely understand the disappointment, and I agree about certain small changes that could have made the scene at the stones more coherent in terms of character development and motivation, namely a) somehow “proving” to Jamie that the stones work so the audience doesn’t have to question his acceptance; b) not having Claire go right up to the stones as if about to walk through; and c) knowing more about the details of Claire’s internal struggle/debate.

 

That being said, I came into this episode accepting certain things that helped me enjoy it nonetheless (and this is mainly about the second half of the episode):

 

1) I came into this whole thing fully invested in Jamie & Claire. I know I’m not alone in that, of course. What I’m saying is, personally, I’m willing to “go there” in the show with less than we got in the books (basically because I want to, ha).

 

2) By the time we got to this episode, it was clear that we had seen all of the Jamie & Claire relationship development we were going to get before Claire’s confession and choice at the stones. So while I agree with others who have mentioned these recent episodes being rushed, since last week I moved past disbelief/anger and on to acceptance of the fact that the show hadn’t done as much as I would have liked on the relationship development front.

 

3) Ultimately, even in the books, Claire’s choice to stay is not logical. Book and show both, I think we are asked to suspend our disbelief on that point. In the book for example, yes she goes through the whole “Pros and Cons” list, but if I recall correctly she never considers the 800 pound gorilla in the room of Culloden and the Rising. I think it’s harder to understand her choice in the show because we got less of Jamie and Claire’s relationship development and less of Claire’s internal debate, but also because SEEING all the trauma she’s subjected to, rather than just reading about it, makes all the drawbacks of the era even more obvious. We also saw more Frank, making that relationship more real than it was in the books.

 

I also thought the actors totally killed it, so despite some weaknesses in plot and character development, it was largely the performances that sold me on this episode.

 

One last thought about that moment when Claire almost goes through before Jamie pulls her back. While I don’t agree with that choice since I think it ended up muddling her intentions, in the show’s universe, we don’t know as much about how Claire reacts to the stones. It could be that they are pulling her, not that she’s just ready to go without any second thoughts. Just another way to look at it.

 

P.S. To the mods: shouldn't the thread title be "S01" not "S02"?

Edited April 19, 2015 by Keeta

[absnow54]

I also thought the actors totally killed it, so despite some weaknesses in plot and character development, it was largely the performances that sold me on this episode.

I agree with your entire post, but especially this. The actors spark together in a way that makes me ignore logic and root for them full steam. From all we've seen in the show world, Claire had a perfectly happy life and marriage in 1940's (the book highlighted some more negative aspects, I think) and has seen nothing but violence and horror in the 1740's. It makes no sense for her to stay, but the actors sold it. Kudos to them!

[mybabyaidan]

All I know is this quote BETTER be in next week's episode:

 

“I prayed all the way up that hill yesterday,” he said softly. “Not for you to stay; I didna think that would be right. I prayed I’d be strong enough to send ye away.” He shook his head, still gazing up the hill, a faraway look in his eyes.
“I said ‘Lord, if I’ve never had courage in my life before, let me have it now. Let me be brave enough not to fall on my knees and beg her to stay. He pulled his eyes away from the cottage and smiled briefly at me.
"Hardest thing I ever did, Sassenach.”

 

 

 

I was disappointed as well with how the choice was dealt with.  I really don't understand the reasoning of making the trial over 3/4 of the episode, and leaving this monumental moment as the tail end.  This was the choice that changes everything, IMO and sets the course for the entire rest of the series.  I didn't feel it got the service it deserved.

[ulkis]

I fully believed Jamie's emotion throughout. He's very perceptive -- e.g. deducing that Claire came from an "easier" life

 

 

When Jamie said that to her I wanted her to respond, "hey! Let me tell you about this war I just finished participating in!" (But I guess she couldn't since that would reveal she a time-traveler.) Which brings me to:

 

From all we've seen in the show world, Claire had a perfectly happy life and marriage in 1940's (the book highlighted some more negative aspects, I think) and has seen nothing but violence and horror in the 1740's.

 

 

I do think the book highlighted the more negative aspects, but I also think the show has done a good job of highlighting that Claire has grand passionate love with Jamie and meanwhile Claire and Frank were only just getting to know each other again.

 

But also, the war had just finished. Maybe she didn't personally experience it like she does in the 1740s, but she's also personally seen how the violence affected the people she nursed. Claire had just come from a world of extreme violence as well.

[Helena Dax]

 

 

But also, the war had just finished. Maybe she didn't personally experience it like she does in the 1740s, but she's also personally seen how the violence affected the people she nursed. Claire had just come from a world of extreme violence as well.

 I was thinking the same thing, She knows the modern world isn't as safe as Jamie believes.

 

Also, penicilin was still something new in the 40s so I think she's  used to live in a world where a scratch can kill you. And maybe she's thinking that she can help him to survive Culloden,  that she owes  him that. It's possible fanwank why she chooses to stay,  but it's a very huge moment and I think it deserved more time.

 

I've seen people complaing that Jamie  believes her too fast, but I think  it makes sense. What she's telling him isn't something he's never heard, it's something he already knows it can happen; he's been told it can  happen. The tales about people disappearing in  circles of stones are probably almost as old as the circles themselves. So he was surprised, of course, but he didn't think  "that's  impossible". Time  travelers are part of  his world, just like fairies, witches and devil's marks.

 

And damn, he was hot!

[Keeta]

Regarding lack of Claire's internal debate, Ron Moore posted the following on Twitter during his live-tweeting of the episode:

 

There used to be a long voiceover here, but decided it was more effective to just go with silence in the editing room.

 

 

Maybe we'll get it on the dvd. I can understand that choice, but it does seem a bit odd considering how much voiceover the rest of the series has had.

[tcay]

I was looking through the comments on the non-book thread for the episode, and people seem pretty mixed in their believing that Claire would stay. Many are bringing up Claire's nice life in the 1940s, which reminds me of something the show didn't establish enough: that Claire feels very useful in the 18th century doing healing work, and that in the 1940s she was about to become a housewife supporting Frank's career, a role she was never going to be happy doing. And not only does Claire feel useful, but Jamie supports her decision to do that kind of work. 

 

I know it's not the only reason Claire stays, but it's definitely a piece that strongly colors her choice. We got a little bit of her working in the first half, but since they skipped the "happy times" at Castle Leoch, we never got to see Claire having a routine and enjoying it, and essentially forgetting about the stones.

[justmehere]

One last thought about that moment when Claire almost goes through before Jamie pulls her back. While I don’t agree with that choice since I think it ended up muddling her intentions, in the show’s universe, we don’t know as much about how Claire reacts to the stones. It could be that they are pulling her, not that she’s just ready to go without any second thoughts. Just another way to look at it.

 

 

I distinctly felt like she was out of it in that first approach. Her voice was kind of dreamy and she didn't seem to know what she was doing. Jamie pulling her back visibly shocked her, as if the stones had been pulling at her. It's subtle, and a fading visual effect might have helped, but I think there still would have been some room for debate as to whether she was pulled or walked up voluntarily. IMO, some comment beyond "buzzing and blackness" would have helped more. For instance, as she's reaching out, just saying, "It seemed to pull me in." Then Jamie grabbing her back makes a little more sense. Not that his own feelings aren't enough, it's just that the circumstances of her possibly leaving are very different from the last attempt, and I don't believe they've shown her to be so unfeeling as to just walk away without a thought. She would want the time to consider, and pulling her back gives her that. I'm personally filling in the blanks that Jamie saw the "out of it" state and stopped her -- he watches her so closely all the time -- except he took the blame on himself as part of trying not to influence her decision.

 

Another thing: After pulling her back, Jamie then says he wasn't ready for her to go, and when she says "I know", I interpreted it as her saying she wasn't really ready either. The way she says it, with a slight yes nod, and the way she looks at him afterward felt, to me, like she actually wasn't ready.

 

I think the clues were there, but they weren't terribly clear -- or maybe I'm fanwanking altogether. I'm looking forward to Ron Moore's commentary on this one. They've done so much so well; it's unfortunate that such a pivotal moment was something of a misstep.

 

I missed her saying “is there really nothing for me here?” in response to Jamie’s lines.

 

 

Agreed. I thought it was there in the way she looked at him when he steps away, but again, interpretation where there needed to be a bit more clarity.

 

One bit I did love was that Jamie draws his sword as they're walking into the circle, as if there might be something literally to fight there. He's not completely beyond superstition.

Edited April 19, 2015 by justmehere

[Meredith Quill]

The quote would have been in any child's basic world history lessons.  Plus, it was said during the American Revolution, a period of time that's fairly relevant to the British.  Barbecue has been in use in the English language since the 1600s.  

 

The American Revolution and therefore, that quote was not part of the school curriculum during the 70/80's, nor was it during my 2 eldest children's schooling either that I'm aware of. It may have changed since then, but with my youngest about to begin her school life later this year, I guess I will find out. 

[Petunia846]

I definitely understood Claire's approach to the stones as her being pulled towards them involuntarily. There was a bit of a buzz or wind sound, not as loud as in the first episode, but I noticed it because I was waiting for it. Then her face kind of goes blank and she just starts walking like a zombie towards the stone. I know, even if she wasn't in love with Jamie she would have at least said bye to him...she's polite like that. It was a little subtle without any voice over or a little fade, but that's how I read it.

 

I really, really hope we get more of the reunion scene at the start of the next episode. If that's it, I'm going to kick something.

[bluebonnet]

The American Revolution and therefore, that quote was not part of the school curriculum during the 70/80's, nor was it during my 2 eldest children's schooling either that I'm aware of. It may have changed since then, but with my youngest about to begin her school life later this year, I guess I will find out. 

I find it completely unbelievable that people in the U.K. did not learn their own history. I'd have to see actual proof of this, sorry.  The quote could have been learned anywhere.  Said on tv, in a conversation, on a radio show.  It's one of those quotes that is just part of the lexicon regardless of which country it originated from.  Sort of like how Americans are very aware of a number of Churchill quotes.  

 

Basically, even if students in the UK did not learn history (though the idea seems almost outrageous), hearing a well known quote is still something that one has reason to be aware of.  They can even be aware of the quote without knowing who said it.  

[Meredith Quill]

I find it completely unbelievable that people in the U.K. did not learn their own history. I'd have to see actual proof of this, sorry.  The quote could have been learned anywhere.  Said on tv, in a conversation, on a radio show.  It's one of those quotes that is just part of the lexicon regardless of which country it originated from.  Sort of like how Americans are very aware of a number of Churchill quotes.  

 

Basically, even if students in the UK did not learn history (though the idea seems almost outrageous), hearing a well known quote is still something that one has reason to be aware of.  They can even be aware of the quote without knowing who said it.  

 

No worries from me, feel free to check it out for yourself.  I have heard the quote as an adult, I was specifically addressing that it wasn't taught to me in school as per the quote in my original post.

Also, please allow me to enlighten you with regards to children being taught UK history; as you know UK history goes back a VERY long time, therefore, to imagine that any child would not learn the entirety of all UK history during their school years is not so astonishing. I know for an absolute fact that my eldest 2 did not learn about Oliver Cromwell/The English Civil War or The Wars of The Roses because I found that quite unbelievable myself.

[doesntworkonwood]

I find it completely unbelievable that people in the U.K. did not learn their own history. I'd have to see actual proof of this, sorry.  The quote could have been learned anywhere.  Said on tv, in a conversation, on a radio show.  It's one of those quotes that is just part of the lexicon regardless of which country it originated from.  Sort of like how Americans are very aware of a number of Churchill quotes.  

 

Basically, even if students in the UK did not learn history (though the idea seems almost outrageous), hearing a well known quote is still something that one has reason to be aware of.  They can even be aware of the quote without knowing who said it.  

The UK's national history curriculum. The only time it mentions the American revolution is in Key Stage 3 where this is a list of things that schools can pick from. 

 

 

ideas, political power, industry and empire: Britain, 1745-1901

Examples (non-statutory)

the Enlightenment in Europe and Britain, with links back to 17th-century thinkers and scientists and the founding of the Royal Society

Britain’s transatlantic slave trade: its effects and its eventual abolition

the Seven Years War and The American War of Independence

the French Revolutionary wars

Britain as the first industrial nation – the impact on society

party politics, extension of the franchise and social reform

the development of the British Empire with a depth study (for example, of India)

Ireland and Home Rule

Darwin’s ‘On The Origin of Species’

Quite frankly, IMO learning about The Slave Trade, as I was able to, is far more important than learning about The American Revolution because it has a far greater impact on British life today. 

 

American quotes aren't really a popular thing here, unless pertaining to various pop culture references (of which the American Revolution isn't one). I think stating that its just part of the lexicon is a really big stretch, especially as I thought it was a Churchill quote at first. In fact, using a Churchill quote would have been a hell of a lot more effective as Claire had just got out of WW2 and Geillis would obviously be aware. 

 

 

Edit: Oh and if you think that the British Government is going to put stuff on the national curriculum that paints the British Government in a negative light, you're kidding yourself. Again, the only thing that I think doesn't count in this would be The Slave Trade (and even then we didn't learn much about the British Government when we learnt about it)

Edited April 19, 2015 by doesntworkonwood