The Books vs. The Show: Comparisons, Speculation, and Snark

[WatchrTina]

Right, so we've had two new non-book characters introduced tonight.  

 

First the new kid, Willie.  Mark my words, Willie is not long for this world.  That kid has the stink of "red shirt" all over him.  You heard it here first.

 

Secondly, lieutenant plot devise redcoat.  I speculate that Claire (who is not always the sharpest knife in the drawer) does actually ask for help from the redcoats and in doing so is responsible for putting herself in Black Jack Randall's office (where he had better punch her in the stomach and deliver that most awful of lines or I will be sorely disappointed.)  If this happens I will applaud the writers for addressing what I always thought was a weakness in the book.  How could Book!Dougal take Claire to Black Jack Randall.? Book!Murtaugh told him what he saw pass between them.  She was being assaulted when Book!Murtaugh rescued/kidnapped Claire the first time around.  What did Book!Dougal really think was going to happen when he returned her to Randall?  If the TV writers have come up with a way for Claire to end up in Randall's clutches without Dougal looking like a fool, I will be very pleased.

[thingamajig]

I need to rewatch tonight's episode and a) not compare it to the book and b) not have to explain what's going on to my husband ;) but I'm not thrilled with some of the changes they made, especially with Claire being so slow to figure out that Dougal is a Jacobite.  Doesn't she figure it out almost immediately in the book? And I loved her line about how "I don't know what the Gaelic for 'to King George's health' is but I doubt it sounds like 'bragh Stuart'" or whatever it was in the book, which they didn't really use in this episode (whatever she actually said was weaker/not as funny).

[Petunia846]

So I have to say, I knew that redcoat guy was an officer because of his gorget, a word I finally looked up about halfway through MOBY thanks to William and his issues holding onto his. Heh. Oh, the many random things we learn from Outlander.

 

I kept thinking during the first scene with the British guy, this scene is an awfully close to what happens later with John Grey during the war. I wonder if they realize that. Surely they do. I guess it's not close enough and it'll be so long from now that we see John that it won't matter.

[mybabyaidan]

Secondly, lieutenant plot devise redcoat.  I speculate that Claire (who is not always the sharpest knife in the drawer) does actually ask for help from the redcoats and in doing so is responsible for putting herself in Black Jack Randall's office (where he had better punch her in the stomach and deliver that most awful of lines or I will be sorely disappointed.)  If this happens I will applaud the writers for addressing what I always thought was a weakness in the book.  How could Book!Dougal take Claire to Black Jack Randall.? Book!Murtaugh told him what he saw pass between them.  She was being assaulted when Book!Murtaugh rescued/kidnapped Claire the first time around.  What did Book!Dougal really think was going to happen when he returned her to Randall?  If the TV writers have come up with a way for Claire to end up in Randall's clutches without Dougal looking like a fool, I will be very pleased.

 

After everything that happened in this episode, I really hope they don't have Claire tell the Redcoats the Highlanders are holding her prisoner.  She saw what they did to the "traitors" I don't think she would willingly put them in jeopardy.   Dougal, maybe, but not Jamie, Ned and the others.   I can see her denying it, but the Redcoats take her to Randall anyway.  Otherwise, how are they going to get her out of it and get her married?  If the Redcoats take her forcibly now, it doesn't make sense that they would allow her to just leave with Dougal after the punch in the stomach.  I just really hope she doesn't screw the Highlanders over after they "bonded", even IF she technically is not there on her own free will.

 

I am not sure how I feel about them changing Dougal's role here.  It seems like they are trying to make him more "likeable".

[WatchrTina]

 

I kept thinking during the first scene with the British guy, this scene is an awfully close to what happens later with John Grey during the war.

I had the same thought.  At first I thought it was to foreshadow a natural inclination by English soldiers to be solicitous towards any English women they come across in the wilds of Scotland in the company of Highlanders (and to assume they are there unwillingly).  That may still be part of the reason but upon further reflection I think it's to show a contract between this soldier's behavior (a decent, rather Jamie-like reaction to a woman in distress) and that of Black Jack next week, which I expect is going to be just as upsetting as it was in the books.

 

It's also in keeping with the show's complexity where no one is all good or all bad.  The English crucified those crofters but here they are riding to the aid of what they think is a woman in distress.  The Watch are the Scots who help keep the peace but they are also extortionists.  They hate anyone who helps the English but they'll sell out Jamie to the Redcoats in heartbeat. Even Angus is shown to be a complex person who's behavior cannot be easily anticipated.

 

 

I really hope they don't have Claire tell the Redcoats the Highlanders are holding her prisoner.  She saw what they did to the "traitors" I don't think she would willingly put them in jeopardy.   <snip>  If the Redcoats take her forcibly now, it doesn't make sense that they would allow her to just leave with Dougal after the punch in the stomach.  I just really hope she doesn't screw the Highlanders over after they "bonded", even IF she technically is not there on her own free will.

Those are really good points.  I'm betting Claire will keep up the pretense of being Colum's honored guest but add his intention to aid her in getting back to Inverness in the hopes that maybe the soldiers will take her there instead.  But I suspect it's all going to back-fire when the soldiers don't believe her and decide to take her to their company commander on the excuse that she needs to make a report about the "outlaws" who robbed her.  That way, Dougal still has some status and the right to be treated with appropriate respect by the English soldiers when he "escorts" her to the commander.

 

Oooh those wicked, tricksy previews.  The unsullied (non-book-readers) are all gonna be thinking Jamie gets flogged next episode. Though after the fake-out with Mrs. Fitz calling Claire a witch, perhaps they will have learned to trust nothing in the previews.

 

So here's a prediction for the next two episodes.  I'll bet next week is all about Dougal taking Claire to meet the company commander, the confrontation with Black Jack, and then Dougal and Claire sitting by the holy well with Dougal telling Claire about the time Jamie was flogged (hence the flash backs) and that it will end with Dougal announcing to Claire that she has to marry Jamie (and we'll be treated to episode ending with close up on Claire's face bearing a look that says "Wait, what?")  I predict we'll go a whole episode without a scene between Claire and Jamie (for the first time!).  Maybe they'll even skip the scene where she asks to speak with him before the wedding so the first time she'll see him again, he'll be in full Fraser wedding regalia.  Oooh I can't wait.

 

Edited because "English" and "British" are not the same thing -- especially in the context of this show.

Edited September 7, 2014 by WatchrTina

[peacefrog]

I am surprised they used the name "Willie" for the young highlander. It is a common name but in a series where there are 2, (3 if you count William John Grey) prominent characters named that seems weird especially for a tv created character.

Edited September 7, 2014 by peacefrog

[mybabyaidan]

I thought the same thing when I saw the preview WatchrTina..I have a feeling next week will be sorely lacking any Jamie/Claire interaction.  I am looking forward to seeing Menzies in those interrogation scenes, I think he'll be amazing.  But the shallow shipper part of me is hoping they manage some in there at the end.  I just hope they keep in the part when Jamie tells Claire he is a virgin.  I can't wait to see Claire's face.

 

I also really hope they keep in the stuff when the men "train" Claire on fighting.  I don't think they'd cut something so important out, since it comes into play a lot later, but the "bonding" this episode made me remember all that stuff from the book.  

[nodorothyparker]

There was a lot to like about this episode (the women wool waulking was particularly lovely) and they did a really nice job of laying out the dangerous politics of the situation they were in.  Dougal's fundraising on the back of well, Jamie's back was also almost exactly how I had it pictured, so that was nice.  The cuts of Frank and Claire on the modern day Culloden field were also a great touch to both remind us as viewers how this particular story turns out and come back around to the time travel element.

 

Claire was pushing right up to the edge of shrill and insufferable at a couple of points though.  In the books, she was thinking a lot of the things she said here but she wasn't coming across as particularly smart by constantly voicing judgment and criticism of everything she saw, particularly when she's already aware they don't trust her and consider her an outsider.  Once again it's up to Jamie to try to reason with her about not shooting her mouth off about every single thing she thinks she knows. 

 

While I generally liked and understood the larger story they were telling with the tavern fight, I'm kind of disappointed that this replaced the book scene where Jamie's finally had enough of being Dougal's traveling exhibit and beats the piss out of the three or four guys who were talking about him at the table.  Jamie was largely passive, if quietly stewing, throughout all this and the book scene gave him his sense of agency back to refuse where here he wasn't even in the room for the fight and ends up looking like Dougal's lapdog.

[Nidratime]

I just hope they keep in the part when Jamie tells Claire he is a virgin.  I can't wait to see Claire's face.

 

 

I hope they keep it in too. It *should* be another one of those moments Ron Moore has to keep in so as not to disappoint loyal fans of the books.

[absnow54]

While I generally liked and understood the larger story they were telling with the tavern fight, I'm kind of disappointed that this replaced the book scene where Jamie's finally had enough of being Dougal's traveling exhibit and beats the piss out of the three or four guys who were talking about him at the table.  Jamie was largely passive, if quietly stewing, throughout all this and the book scene gave him his sense of agency back to refuse where here he wasn't even in the room for the fight and ends up looking like Dougal's lapdog.

I disliked this change too. I also disliked that Jamie was attacking the tree on his own, when in the book, Claire was the one to suggest it to him. He had a lot of pent up frustration that he unleashed at the bar fight, and Claire's advice was a way for him to cool down without getting into trouble. It was a small change, but I thought it really changed the dynamic. I worry that they're painting Jamie as too perfect on the show, when in the book, even before the wedding, he slips up at times. In this episode he was the quiet, stoic hero, when it would have been understandable that he was lashing out.

[Petunia846]

I disliked this change too. I also disliked that Jamie was attacking the tree on his own, when in the book, Claire was the one to suggest it to him. He had a lot of pent up frustration that he unleashed at the bar fight, and Claire's advice was a way for him to cool down without getting into trouble. It was a small change, but I thought it really changed the dynamic. I worry that they're painting Jamie as too perfect on the show, when in the book, even before the wedding, he slips up at times. In this episode he was the quiet, stoic hero, when it would have been understandable that he was lashing out.

That whole scene between Jamie and Claire after Jamie talked to Dougal was pretty disappointing. In the book it was much longer and much more of a bonding moment for them, but here it was almost pointless. They had barely started talking when Jamie was like, "Well, I guess we'd better go to sleep." I don't know why they kept the Jamie and Claire part in if they were going to cut so much out of it. And I agree, it looked kind of dumb to just have Jamie hitting the tree where it was sweet when Claire was the one who suggested it to help him out. I also liked in the book how Claire was already out there trying to sleep and when Dougal left, Jamie was like, "I know you're there, you can come out." Here she just walked up behind him. Oh well. That was the one part of the episode I was disappointed in, so if that's it, I guess they're still doing all right.

[WatchrTina]

I agree that the book did a better job with the scene between Claire & Jamie regarding his frustration at being an exhibit.  But I think I'm okay with it being the crucifixion of the highlanders and not Jamie losing his temper that causes Dougal to leave off displaying Jamie's back.  He doesn't need to show Jamie's 4-year-old scars because he has a fresh example of what they are up against -- one that has happened right in the neighborhood.  You don't need to have the gaelic to tell the difference in the tone of his speech and the manner of his asking for, or rather demanding, donations.  His slamming down the collection plate amps up the tension and raises the stakes.  The fight scene with Book!Jamie taking on 3-4 men was funny and I love it but I'm content to have it replaced with the all-Makenzie cage fight in the pub.

[bluebonnet]

There are some scenes I missed from the books, but I think the new scenes make the loss worth it.  Claire's future interrogation will make so much more sense than it did in the books.  It never made sense that Dougal would willingly take her to Randall after she had learned that he was raising money for the Stuarts.  He didn't know then whether or not she was a spy or even whether she could harm them by telling their secrets, so why the hell would he take her to Randall?  I really like how this time she'll be going because she was seen by an English officer.  Dougal will be able to shit his pants before he sees that she's been beaten.  Him looking back at her with that "what the fuck are you and I going to do now" face was a great way to leave things until next week.  I'm desperate to see it.  The preview does look as though she'll get punched in the stomach since she's seen behind Dougal, leaning in on herself with tears on her face.  

[WatchrTina]

I have a nitpick about the episode.  Why was Claire lying in bed fully clothed?  She has access to a bed and room with a door for the first time in ages so you just know she would sleep in naught but her shift.  I can fan-wank it by saying she was just about to get up and get undressed for bed when she heard the noise.  After all, her candle is still lit.

 

But really, she should have been in her shift in that scene and she was in her shift when she has the talk with Jamie (the tree-punching scene) in the book.  In the book, of course, Jamie can't really see her in the first scene -- they have their discussion in the hall in near pitch darkness -- and in the second scene she's wrapped in a blanket.  That's much more realistic.  In the book, Claire comments about the level of intimacy that she's had to share with the whole MacKenzie crew.  She has no doubt been watched (discretely) whenever she goes off to pee and I'm sure every member of the crew has caught a glimpse of her in her shift since there is no way she is sleeping in a corset and bum roll (though it does make me wonder who does up her corset each morning.)  So, it's a nit.  I wonder if Terry will address it during the next podcast.

Edited September 7, 2014 by WatchrTina

[Glaze Crazy]

When that random new character English officer showed up, before he spoke his name, my first thought was "Let this be a major rewrite and let that guy be Lord John."  I think they missed out on the actor since he's pretty close to how I envision John Grey. YMMV, of course.  No doubt when the time comes to cast, they will find an acceptable actor for the role.

 

That said, I think the additions, changes and some straight from the book dialog continue to be good for the story.  On first watch I was not happy that they had put Claire into a few scenes where she appears kind of shrewish, but I can see with how they played out this whole hour that almost all the major characters had glimpses of wide ranging actions, good or bad. It seems only Jamie kept a pretty even keel with either staying out of it or gently diffusing potentially volatile situations.  The best transition was with Ned, who started off as an amiable companion and his last interaction with her was "eh" as he passed right by her. 

 

The change of the pub brawl from Jamie vs 4 guys to the clan defending their guest's honor was a good change.  They had been emphasizing how the clan conversing in Gaelic has kept Claire out of the camaraiderie at the campfires, so not only did she not know what the other table was saying but the guys still felt it was appropriate to deliver a beatdown in her honor.  I think that change really adds to both the clan getting used to her/starting to like her and her dillema about what she knows of the future and her desire to get back to Frank.

[Athena]

When that random new character English officer showed up, before he spoke his name, my first thought was "Let this be a major rewrite and let that guy be Lord John."  I think they missed out on the actor since he's pretty close to how I envision John Grey. YMMV, of course.  No doubt when the time comes to cast, they will find an acceptable actor for the role.

 

I was confused for a bit since it's been years since I read the book then I wondered briefly if it was suppose to be Lord John except he would be too old. I agree about the actor; I think he was so English upperclass officer that it was perfect. I liked the gallantry and the slight awkwardness as well. I'm glad he's probably going to be one of the good English characters since we haven't really seen many in the past. I wouldn't mind keeping Lt. Foster in some way but he may not be long for this world. 

[peacefrog]

I guess I would say this was my least favorite of the 5 episodes so far. I still liked it and thought there were great parts but I just didn't enjoy it as much as the others. I felt like this episode was stretched out a bit. I would not call it filler though.

Did I see Jamie singing with the others when they were on horseback?!! I haven't rewatched yet. If so that's certainly different.

Oh also the guys were teasing Willie about being a virgin. How come they didn't start on Jamie? I know, plot reveal...

Edited September 7, 2014 by peacefrog

[WatchrTina]

 

Did I see Jamie singing with the others when they were on horseback?!!

Ooooh, good catch.  Jamie can't sing since he got whacked in the head.  I wonder if Sam knows that?  Now I have to watch again to see if Jamie is joining in.

[nodorothyparker]

He was.  But to be fair, Gabaldon couldn't seem to consistently remember that he couldn't sing in the first book either.

[Nidratime]

He can't sing? Is that a side product of being whacked on the head? Don't remember that at all. I feel like I haven't read the books at all, but it's been a decade so....

[WatchrTina]

Nope.  He can't hear differences in pitch anymore.  And yes, he is singing along on the road.  Whoops!  Oh well, maybe he's just mouthing the words like we used to do in choir when we weren't sure of the tune.

 

nodorothyparker do you recall a specific scene in book one where he sings?  I can't think of one.

[bluebonnet]

He wasn't really singing though. It seemed more like a marching tune, like a chant. Whatever he sounded like was drowned out by everyone else's chanting.

I recall him singing in the books right after they returned to Leoch. But it was specifically noted by Claire that he really could't sing. Probably like listening to one of those really bad American Idol auditions.

[nodorothyparker]

I know there's at least one, maybe two separate occasions after they're back at Leoch.  One is where he's singing "Up Among the Heather" as he's leaving for work in the stables for the day.  Claire does comment that he really can't sing, but it's still recognizable as a song.  I'm blanking on the other one at the moment.

 

She's been pretty consistent from the second book on about describing it as weird tuneless chanting.  Her continuity on other details has gotten spottier the further she's gotten in the series though.

[Petunia846]

Just because you "can't sing" doesn't mean you can't sing, it just sounds really bad. Probably in the middle of the group of guys on the road he wouldn't care about that.

[WatchrTina]

I'm wondering about Ned Gowan.  He seemed to have quite "gone off" Claire by the end of episode 105 because of the warnings she gave him.  That's not in the books.  In the books he's always friendly to Claire though she quickly calls him out on his being a spy of sorts for Dougal and Colum, hoping she'll reveal some of her secrets to him.  Book!Ned just loves the law and seems to be tickled to have the opportunity to draw up Claire's marriage contract and use that as a legal loophole to evade handing her over as demanded by the Redcoats.  I wonder if TV!Ned is going to be played as a wee bit more sinister -- using the law and the marriage not only to keep Claire safely out of Black Jack's hands but also binding her to the clan against her will with a slight over-tone of "well now you'd better change your opinion because you're one of us."

[Pestilentia]

I'm wondering about Ned Gowan.  He seemed to have quite "gone off" Claire by the end of episode 105 because of the warnings she gave him.  That's not in the books.  In the books he's always friendly to Claire though she quickly calls him out on his being a spy of sorts for Dougal and Colum, hoping she'll reveal some of her secrets to him. 

I am going to reserve judgment on Ned for the time being.

Perhaps Ned's "mmpmh" (or "eh" or whatever) was put there to convey that he was suspicious of her predictions regarding Culloden and that he wanted to talk to Dougal before going too much further into BFF territory with Claire.

Or maybe he had been told to buddy up to her and had gotten enough information from her that he felt his job was done.

Or maybe the prediction freaked him out, or maybe 10 other things.

 

I don't remember book Ned being all that buddy-buddy with Claire anyway- he was friendly and pleasant but was clearly a MacKenzie man all the way.

I like show Ned much more and I guess I am reluctant to give that up purely on the basis of one small snub, especially when we don't yet know what was in his mind.

[Tif]

I've been hit and miss about some of the deviations from the book.  I wished they would've used Jamie's full speech to Colum at the Gathering.  There's also been snippets of conversation between Claire and Jamie that I wish would've stayed.  As someone mentioned above, the scene after Dougal and Jamie have their "chat" about using Jamie to drum up support.  In the book, I liked that Claire told him he needed to hit something.  I wish they would've kept that intact.  Just like in the book when she asked him "And you'll let him do it?  Let him use you that way."  Jamie's response was so succint, "For now."  

I have to say though, that the deviation that I LOVE with every fiber was the wool waulking scene with the women.  I loved the songs they sing and the camaraderie even though she is a Sassanach.  

[tallyrand]

I have to agree that I thought the changes to the Dougal v. Jamie scene and aftermath confused me.  I did like the line about how a man knows what he has to fight to protect.  But that scene was neutered from the book. Maybe time constraints? I'm glad they didn't have the sword fighting part in though because I dont' think that would translate well to the screen. I think they are showing Jamie to be more passive and less his own man as he was shown in the books because I think they want Claire to learn all this about him when he's married. I also think they want to prolong the Dougal and Jamie relationship and how close they actually are until later (Dougal taught him to fight etc).  Also, in the book I think Dougal sort of implied that Jamie owed him this because of Horrocks which I think will be made into a bigger deal post wedding and post Black Jack. I kinda of like the idea of Claire discovering after they are married who Jamie is and why he has been submitting to Dougal. 

 

On a somewhat different note, one thing that bothered me a lot in the books was that while Jamie and Claire were at Lallybroch, Claire more or less disappeared. She primarily narrated Jamie and Jenny's interactions without participating much. I hope they change that and give Claire more to do. 

 

Show Ned is awesome and I like how in this show Claire deals with the ramifications of her actions. She upset Ned and as such he's angry with her. 

[absnow54]

On a somewhat different note, one thing that bothered me a lot in the books was that while Jamie and Claire were at Lallybroch, Claire more or less disappeared. She primarily narrated Jamie and Jenny's interactions without participating much. I hope they change that and give Claire more to do.

 

That's how I feel about Lallybroch too. Claire loses her POV and is just a passive observer. Even when Jamie challenges her upbringing -- her uncle using reason instead of a good strapping -- she doesn't have much of an opinion of it, which seemed very out of character for her.

 

There are little moments like Claire explaining some of her own time to Jamie that Diana sort of plows through without thought that I hope the show takes the time to explore, even if it's just a quick scene. I think Jamie's complicated dilemma dominates the second half of the book and Claire gets lost in the shuffle. I always felt the "Oh, by the way, you're married to a time traveler" didn't have quite the dramatic impact one would expect.

[tallyrand]

 

 

That's how I feel about Lallybroch too. Claire loses her POV and is just a passive observer. Even when Jamie challenges her upbringing -- her uncle using reason instead of a good strapping -- she doesn't have much of an opinion of it, which seemed very out of character for her.

There are little moments like Claire explaining some of her own time to Jamie that Diana sort of plows through without thought that I hope the show takes the time to explore, even if it's just a quick scene. I think Jamie's complicated dilemma dominates the second half of the book and Claire gets lost in the shuffle. I always felt the "Oh, by the way, you're married to a time traveler" didn't have quite the dramatic impact one would expect.

 

So exactly this! I'm glad I'm not alone in this opinion.  I think the show will do a better job of making Claire's confession dramatic and will include more tidbits of Claire telling Jamie little things about where she comes from even if only for humor's sake.  Although it is clear in the books that Jamie starts to see Claire differently after learning she's from the future, I agree that there wasn't enough especially in that scene you referece.

 

The Lallybroch section of the book is all about Jamie and it's like 5 pages of oh Claire you're from the future? Oh yay you're staying! Ok let's go to Lallybroch where about 20 pages will be spent on my boring reconciliation with my annoying sister who grabs me inappropriately but it's ok because she's so cute and tiny. And then said sister will go on and on being annoying and pushy and will.not.shut.up for the next 100 pages. And Claire, the interesting narrator who's been the center of the story, gets pushed aside and is treated as though she's completely unimportant. I also HATE the scene where Jenny talks about what it's like to carry a baby inside her. I find that she was totally thoughtless in going on and on considering they all must have suspected that Claire was barren. 

 

Conversely, I hope there are more Jenny/Claire interactions than in the book. Jenny is probably my least favorite character, but I enjoy her scenes with Claire and I think Caitriona Balfe has so far shone in scenes with the other female characters. In the books, I feel that Diana has provided Claire with so few female friends that whenever Claire has an opportunity to interact with women I'm always happy. However, I find that Claire gives into Jenny way too much and it annoys me. Especially how Jenny treated her in An Echo in the Bone. Just ugh. But considering the show has managed to even make Laoghaire likable I have hope for Jenny. 

 

All this is partly why I'm glad Jamie's role has been somewhat reduced so far. We will get enough of him in the second half of the season.

[islagirl]

"Not surprisingly, it left me half smothered in the greasy quilts with a knee in my back, being beaten within an inch of my life."  That's not a spanking.  I get why he did it and I'm OK with how things play out (only because he agrees to never do it again), but IMO it's definitely not just a spanking like you'd give a naughty child.

 

 

THIS!!!  I could not agree more with you about this.  In Outlander, it is from Claire's POV and of course she says she's beaten to an inch of her life, but she wasn't.  She was pissed that she was spanked.  Was it right?  In 18th Century standards, I'd agree.  With my 21st century sensibilities, I'd say no.  

In the context of the time, he did not beat her.  

ETA another thought...

I have to say I was more surprised when I was reading the series that Claire wasn't been smacked around given her attitude.  Not that I want her to be, but that would not be out of the realm of possibility of the time.  

 

Claire is the definition of an unreliable narrator in the case of the beating/spanking.  I think that leaves a lot of room for Ron and company to interpret it in a way that fits the context, and they'll need to be careful not to alienate too many viewers (ratings being key in this medium, and all).

[islagirl]

 

There are little moments like Claire explaining some of her own time to Jamie that Diana sort of plows through without thought that I hope the show takes the time to explore, even if it's just a quick scene.

 

This is part of what I'm loving about the way they've handled the show so far.  Diana is a fantastic world builder and writes engaging three dimensional characters.  Sometimes, plot and flow get a little sidetracked in favor of well-researched detail.  She indulges in her strengths as a writer. I'm glad she does, because what she does on those ends is wonderful.  But it's amazing to have Ron Moore take that world she's already built and smooth out some of the plot and narrative issues.  Overall, I think it's a better art for the collaboration.

Edited September 8, 2014 by islagirl

[mybabyaidan]

I hope the fact that they altered Ned and Claire's stuff doesn't indicate that he doesn't come to her aid when she is accused of witchcraft.  I loved the fact that he came from Leoch on his own accord (well Colum knew, but we didn't find that out til later iirc) and stood up for her.

 

I think I am over thinking things.  I know.

[WatchrTina]

 

I loved the fact that he came from Leoch on his own accord (well Colum knew, but we didn't find that out til later iirc) and stood up for her.

Weel, there is more to that story than is revealed in Book 1.  Everything Diana has published is supposed to be fair game in this thread (not considered spoilers) but I'm going to spoiler tag this bit of info from "The Exile", Diana's graphic novel that re-tells the first part of Book 1 from a different perspective.  

It is revealed in "The Exile" that it's Murtaugh who rousts Ned Gowan and sends him down to help Claire. Ned successfully talks for an entire day -- all to give Auld Alec time to reach Jamie who is off hunting with The Duke of Sandringham and it is Murtaugh who sends Alec off to fetch Jamie. Ned intends to go back the next day but is prevented because he is required at the castle due to a behind-the-scenes plot twist that I won't go into here. The bottom line is that Claire really owes her life to Murtaugh!

Edited September 9, 2014 by WatchrTina

[mybabyaidan]

Ah, thanks for that info.  I haven't read the Exile yet.  Interesting.   Guess that's next on my Amazon list.

[MedievalGirl]

I have The Exile but haven't read it. How the characters were rendered put me off but now that I have a whole new layer of images that vie with my preconceived notions I can deal. 

[bluebonnet]

I was delighted to run across Exile at my local library today.  Sat down and read it.  Really glad I hadn't read it previously because I also wasn't at all happy with how the characters were rendered.  I was really disappointed that Claire was basically boobs and ass.  Yes, yes, she's described as quite voluptuous in the books, but it was a bit overdone in the graphic novel.  Simply gratuitous.  

[Petunia846]

I picked it up in a book store to look at it, and that's what turned me off too. That, and that Jamie didn't look like Sam or the Jamie I had in my head.

[WatchrTina]

If Diana does another graphic novel (and I doubt she will since I haven't heard much love for this one) I hope she'll do an original novella instead of re-imagining part of one of the big books. That's what George R R Martin did with the "Dunk and Egg" graphic novels.  They are prequels (of sorts) to the "A Song of Ice and Fire" novels.  They take place well in advance of the action of those books while still shedding light on the world in which ASOIAF takes place. Perhaps a Lord John episode? There'd be less need / opportunity for gratuitous, distorted boobs in Lord John's world.

[Pestilentia]

Perhaps a Lord John episode? There'd be less need / opportunity for gratuitous, distorted boobs in Lord John's world.

Snerk  :)

Lord only knows what might be of a gratuitous nature in his world!!

[Nidratime]

Has anyone been listening to these podcasts? They have one for every episode thus far and plan to do them for the entire season. They're called "The Scot and the Sassenach: An Outlander Podcast," and they are done by a man and a woman. The guy has a slight Scots accent so I'm thinking he's native to Scotland. The woman sounds American. I just started listening and am finding them pretty good and informative. The link to the first one is below and you can find the others by looking to the right of the screen. It's the same title but, of course, different episode numbers.

 

(As I'm listening, I have to say -- although they say there will be no spoilers for events outside of each episode -- the guy does keep asking the woman questions since she's read all the books which does lead to some things being revealed that were definitely not in the episodes. So, be warned. In fact, I'm moving this to the book chat thread from the media thread.)

 

The Scot And The Sassenach: An Outlander Podcast - Episode 1

Edited September 10, 2014 by Nidratime

[absnow54]

With all the Ray Rice controversy right now, I'm wondering if that will effect some of the episodes around the strapping scene. The strapping in itself is a form of justice, and as some people already pointed out, Claire as an unreliable narrator exaggerates the scene. What troubles me is the scenes after where Claire tells him to never raise a hand to her again and his response is basically "LOL, okay, but I still really want to." I get that Jamie and Claire's relationship is very passionate and volatile, but for a show that's mostly targeted towards women and it sends mixed messages about abuse (a very hot button issue,) especially when Claire chooses to stay with Jamie rather than get back to Frank.

 

The scene I really hope they retool is when Jamie goes to get Claire's ring and Claire thinks he's off with Loaghaire and tells him he can see whomever he wants as she has no claim on him. Jamie's reaction where he goes off on a "I am husband, hear me roar!" tirade and basically tells her that he owns her and can do what he wants with her (like rape her, which he plans to do) seemed so incredibly out of character (especially the rape part) and out of place in the scene, because five minutes later he's all sheepish and telling her that she can keep his name and protection, but he won't get in the way of her life is she doesn't want him. The rough sex after is fine, because I think Claire's struggle has more to do with admitting that her feelings for Jamie are more real than she realized, and surrendering herself to that, but I think the earlier part of that scene is dangerous waters for this show to tread in, because it really does a number to Jamie's character, and not in an "ugh, Jamie's character is so perfect, he needs some flaws!" kind of way, but a "ew, Jamie's gross, go back to Frank, at least he respects you" kind of way.

Edited September 12, 2014 by absnow54

[ihartcoffee]

With all the Ray Rice controversy right now, I'm wondering if that will effect some of the episodes around the strapping scene. The strapping in itself is a form of justice, and as some people already pointed out, Claire as an unreliable narrator exaggerates the scene. What troubles me is the scenes after where Claire tells him to never raise a hand to her again and his response is basically "LOL, okay, but I still really want to." I get that Jamie and Claire's relationship is very passionate and volatile, but for a show that's mostly targeted towards women and it sends mixed messages about abuse (a very hot button issue,) especially when Claire chooses to stay with Jamie rather than get back to Frank.

 

The scene I really hope they retool is when Jamie goes to get Claire's ring and Claire thinks he's off with Loaghaire and tells him he can see whomever he wants as she has no claim on him. Jamie's reaction where he goes off on a "I am husband, hear me roar!" tirade and basically tells her that he owns her and can do what he wants with her (like rape her, which he plans to do) seemed so incredibly out of character (especially the rape part) and out of place in the scene, because five minutes later he's all sheepish and telling her that she can keep his name and protection, but he won't get in the way of her life is she doesn't want him. The rough sex after is fine, because I think Claire's struggle has more to do with admitting that her feelings for Jamie are more real than she realized, and surrendering herself to that, but I think the earlier part of that scene is dangerous waters for this show to tread in, because it really does a number to Jamie's character, and not in an "ugh, Jamie's character is so perfect, he needs some flaws!" kind of way, but a "ew, Jamie's gross, go back to Frank, at least he respects you" kind of way.

 

I hear you, those two scenes in the book left me with conflicting feelings.  I'll be very curious to see how they play them out on the show.  

 

We have to keep in mind that this was a different time, men treated women very harshly.  IIRC Jamie struggles with Claire because she doesn't behave like the typical woman of that time and she also makes him reflect on how he treats her over the course of their "falling madly in love".  

 

I'm pretty excited about the next three episodes, but then bummed at the same time because there will be a maddening break!!  

[peacefrog]

I really hope they are able to change those two scenes for the better. The books are far from perfect and they have the chance to improve certain things. I would rather they "miss" getting other scenes right and get these right. What concerns me is Diana Gabaldon has stood by the strapping for over 20 years, which is her right, but she has never really acknowledged why people have such a hard time with it. She has been pretty supportive of any changes so I hope there is a big change in these instances.

Edited September 12, 2014 by peacefrog

[absnow54]

We have to keep in mind that this was a different time, men treated women very harshly.  IIRC Jamie struggles with Claire because she doesn't behave like the typical woman of that time and she also makes him reflect on how he treats her over the course of their "falling madly in love".

I agree that it's a different time, but Claire is coming from a time where feminism is an active movement, and she's married to a man who views her as her equal. I think they have to skate very carefully around how Jamie treats her (which beyond the two instances I mentioned, is also a relationship built on mutual respect) because Claire has a choice between the two worlds, and she chooses the one where men treat women very harshly, to stay with a man who has been physically threatening and harsh towards her (although at this point it all pales in comparison to the whole burning her at the stake thing.) I don't view Jamie and Claire's relationship as abusive, but I question their actions and behavior a lot in those scenes, and I feel like they become almost caricatures in a romance novel script to play up the passion, which is a detriment to the relationship that had been built up so carefully.

 

As for Claire making Jamie reflect on how he treats her, I feel like more time is spent having Jamie force Claire to reflect on how he treats her. Chapters and chapters are dedicated to him and his family glorifying all the beatings they used to get, and Claire's POV against it is essentially scrapped. It's the only form of justice that Jamie understands, and I get that, but I wish Claire had more of an opinion outside of "Don't do it, okay?" because Jamie never takes her stance seriously up until the point he's forced to strap Fergus, and even then it's like "Even though that was terrible, I still get off on that time I had to strap you... I really wish you never made me promise not to hit you again."  Jamie never gets to the point where he understands why it's awful to beat your wife, and that still enrages me to this day because a. it's an awful character trait, and b. it goes against everything else we know about Jamie. 

Edited September 12, 2014 by absnow54

[Nidratime]

Just returning for a moment to the podcast topic I brought up in this thread, I really love -- by the latest episode -- that "Scot and the Sassenach" are calling Claire's voiceovers, "Clairifications," and calling the Flashbackforwards with Frank, "Frankbacks." LOL. Both terms, I believe, were offered to them by fans of their podcast.

 

Now, I'm on to another set of podcasts done by another couple, Mary and Blake. We'll see if they're just as insightful.

[DoughGirl]

I agree that it's a different time, but Claire is coming from a time where feminism is an active movement, and she's married to a man who views her as her equal. I think they have to skate very carefully around how Jamie treats her (which beyond the two instances I mentioned, is also a relationship built on mutual respect) because Claire has a choice between the two worlds, and she chooses the one where men treat women very harshly, to stay with a man who has been physically threatening and harsh towards her (although at this point it all pales in comparison to the whole burning her at the stake thing.) I don't view Jamie and Claire's relationship as abusive, but I question their actions and behavior a lot in those scenes, and I feel like they become almost caricatures in a romance novel script to play up the passion, which is a detriment to the relationship that had been built up so carefully.

 

As for Claire making Jamie reflect on how he treats her, I feel like more time is spent having Jamie force Claire to reflect on how he treats her. Chapters and chapters are dedicated to him and his family glorifying all the beatings they used to get, and Claire's POV against it is essentially scrapped. It's the only form of justice that Jamie understands, and I get that, but I wish Claire had more of an opinion outside of "Don't do it, okay?" because Jamie never takes her stance seriously up until the point he's forced to strap Fergus, and even then it's like "Even though that was terrible, I still get off on that time I had to strap you... I really wish you never made me promise not to hit you again."  Jamie never gets to the point where he understands why it's awful to beat your wife, and that still enrages me to this day because a. it's an awful character trait, and b. it goes against everything else we know about Jamie.

I think we also need to keep in mind that Claire's just post WWII world was very far from viewing things as we do in 2014. Not saying it makes it okay (my parents were married in 1947 and my father wouldn't "let" my mother learn to drive....ugh!) but the forties weren't all that great for women. Better than in the 1740s, but not like today.

[CatMack]

Claire hasn't reached the feminism of the 60s and 70s yet, but the suffragettes had already happened, things were already changing, and we know Claire's views on wife beating are pretty in line with current modern views on wife beating because we're in her head the whole time and her narration is pretty damn appalled. 

 

I really don't think the Ray Rice thing will change anything on the show.  It's possible, I guess, since the strapping won't be until 2015 so there's still time to change things in editing, but I just don't see them doing it.  They've already filmed it, likely have already been editing that ep and possibly even locked it since they're getting close to the end of season 1 filming...and audiences won't see it for months, when most people will have already forgotten.  No, I don't see them changing the show just because of one high profile domestic violence news story. 

 

Anyway, I've already made my views on the strapping and the aftermath clear so I don't want to retread.

 

I've made it to Fiery Cross finally.  It's slow going now and the final book in the Rachel Morgan series just came out so I'm taking a break so I can read that, but I'm getting through it.  I think, if it makes it that far (and I think it will), the TV show could really improve on book 3 and onward, where Gabaldon really starts using multiple POVs (I know they show up in 2 as well, but not to the same extent).  Not only will the switches be less jarring in a visual format automatically (no more switches between first and third person, woo!), but hopefully they will fill in a lot of things she skates over.  Like, I really wanted to see more of Claire's reaction when Jamie and Brianna show up at the cabin together, but instead the chapter quickly ends and we jump forward in time and into a different POV and I really think on screen is going to lend itself to lingering on those emotional moments a bit more (see also: Jamie and Brianna reuniting after rescuing Roger and we only briefly see them hug from Claire's POV instead of actually getting to 'see' their discussion and forgiveness of each other for the terrible fight they had before he left).   

Edited September 12, 2014 by CatMack

[mybabyaidan]

Yeah, I don't think it will change anything.   I just still really think that it will be downplayed a tad to not have people hate Jamie.  And like someone else said, it's not airing until after the break so people will "forget".

 

That reminds me though, I remember one of the panels I watched, where someone asked if Sam and Tobias had to do a chemistry test.  I was a little taken aback my that, to be honest.  It's not like BJR and Jamie had some torrid love affair, the man is obsessed with him and tortures and rapes him.    I don't know, it just kind of made me go...Ummmmm....strange question.  

[peacefrog]

Just to clarify, I wasn't talking about making changes due to current events. We were talking about changes from book to screen.