Speculation and Wishlist

[Starla]

Weren't the attackers the men who Sandringham sent to kill Claire? I guess they could do it without the rape (though I agree it does have long term effects which eventually results in the conception of Frank's ancestor), but I imagine they'll keep the attack in there since it comes up later at Sandringham's estate that he tried to kill both Jamie and Claire in Paris.

[Athena]

 

Well, she was very sheltered, and also, only 15. Or 16.  What happened was she and Claire were going somewhere, and then, like three or four men grabbed them. Gabaldon had Claire describe them as "spotted shirt" and I forget the descriptions for the others, as they all had masks.  While one was raping Mary, the other, I believe it was Germaine, was getting ready to rape Claire when he saw her face or something, and shouted "La Dame Blanche!" and then he and the rest got out of there, but not before one of them had managed to rape Mary.  The name was started by Jamie, to explain why he wouldn't mess around with prostitutes--because Claire would curse him and shrivel up his man parts or something.  Then Jamie showed up.  I think.

 

Yes, Alex, Jamie & and Fergus follow.

 

Murtagh feels incredibly guilty afterwards because he was with the ladies and he got knocked out from behind. One of the reasons I liked Book 3 less is because I missed Murtagh.

 

ETA: Yes, Sandringham sent the men and Murtagh takes vengeance at the end of the book and brings the guy's head to Claire and Mary.

[GHScorpiosRule]

ETA: Yes, Sandringham sent the men and Murtagh takes vengeance at the end of the book and brings the guy's head to Claire and Mary.

 

If we get to see this next season, then I want it to be Stephen Callow's "head" that Murtagh brings to them.

[Keeta]

I'm not sure if that'd be better or not. It reminds me of the Mary/Pamuk fiasco in Season 1 in Downton Abbey. TWoP was not a fun place to be during that (reminiscent of the non-book readers thread here, which I just try to not read).

 

I don't know how they could do it without Mary's rape. Maybe this would be an opportunity to show a woman's longer-term PTSD trauma, which is a critique I've read regarding Claire's two assaults in Both Sides Now. Maybe it'd give Jamie a chance to be empathetic. 

 

I wish it could be avoided, I'm just not sure how, with all the ramifications involved. 

 

Thanks all for the reminder of this plot line. Sigh. I guess I don't mind plot changes if it means getting rid of rape plotlines. Wishful thinking I suppose!

[GHScorpiosRule]

I think they can easily not show Fergus' rape, and just have Jamie tell it to Claire or Fergus tell it to Claire without showing it. As for Mary's, hers doesn't need to be shown, either. Just hearing her scream, while Claire is fighting off Germaine would be sufficient, I think.

[tcay]

Couldn't they be attacked without a rape taking place, yet Mary is "ruined" regardless because everyone thinks she's been raped? Or, since Mary is matched to a man she doesn't want to marry anyway, she could just spread the rumor herself, freeing herself of the match and giving her some agency in the process.

 

I hardly remember how the marriage got called off, so the only thing I remember the attack affecting was the dinner party Claire and Jamie are having. (And they seemed callous with her about it--basically complaining about her hysterics ruining their party). At which point Mary's hysterics cause a scene and she's found out. What if the sweet but unworldly girl isn't what she seems, and actually is able to take control of her own life by subverting social norms? 

[Dust Bunny]

 

What if the sweet but unworldly girl isn't what she seems, and actually is able to take control of her own life by subverting social norms?

 

That's kind of a cool idea, since she already - sort of - does that with her relationship with Alex anyway. And she well-nigh forces Jamie to take her too when he rescues Claire from Sandringham. She's quiet with a strong inner determination. (Like how she also is able to keep volunteering at the hospital when it proves too challenging for other gals.) It's an interesting thought.

[chocolatetruffle]

Gabaldon was asked about Season 2 during her author signing at Barnes and Noble and also about the potential of a season 3. (She confirms that Season 2 will not be split in two.)

 

Diana Gabaldon on What We’ll See in Season Two of Outlander

http://www.vulture.com/2015/06/outlander-season-two-what-to-expect.html?mid=twitter_vulture

 

The best part of this for me is that they've already filmed (spoilering since this isn't spec)  

the scene when Claire comes home after being waxed: “I have actually already seen it — the scene in which Claire comes home from visiting her friend Louise and Jamie is horrified by what happened there. They did it very well.”

[Nidratime]

New photo of Jamie/Sam on the set of Season 2. Look at his poor hand!

 

https://40.media.tumblr.com/5c98fe4a589cc120f89c90c7280ae422/tumblr_npbw6fayoW1sbre0jo1_1280.jpg

[GHScorpiosRule]

New photo of Jamie/Sam on the set of Season 2. Look at his poor hand!

 

https://40.media.tumblr.com/5c98fe4a589cc120f89c90c7280ae422/tumblr_npbw6fayoW1sbre0jo1_1280.jpg

 

 

OH.MY.GOD. It looks like it's gotten worse! Frost-bitten? Zombieized? {shudder}

[Glaze Crazy]

 

Well, she was very sheltered, and also, only 15. Or 16.  What happened was she and Claire were going somewhere, and then, like three or four men grabbed them. Gabaldon had Claire describe them as "spotted shirt" and I forget the descriptions for the others, as they all had masks.  While one was raping Mary, the other, I believe it was Germaine, was getting ready to rape Claire when he saw her face or something, and shouted "La Dame Blanche!" and then he and the rest got out of there, but not before one of them had managed to rape Mary.  The name was started by Jamie, to explain why he wouldn't mess around with prostitutes--because Claire would curse him and shrivel up his man parts or something.  Then Jamie showed up.  I think.

 

The man turned out to be an employee of Sandringham, who is Mary's godfather. It comes into play later in the book when Claire ends up at Sandringham's villa again.  The folks who wanted all the political intrigue and such will be ecstatic when this season is on.  I get confused a lot of times and think this book needs a concordance.

 

Edit: I must have been on the first page when I replied, so yes, what everyone else up thread said. LOL

Edited June 2, 2015 by Glaze Crazy

[chocolatetruffle]

Pictures taken while they are filming season 2:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3107958/Mwah-Caitriona-Balfe-shares-intimate-moment-star-Sam-Heughan-film-scenes-Outlander-just-days-controversial-male-rape-storyline-aired.htm

 

 

Two things I noticed:  Murtaugh! and Jamie's hand is still bandaged and blue so this scene must take place right after they arrive.  Also, it must still be pretty cold in Scotland because I saw a lot of crew in coats.  I also saw a woman of color among the extras so Hooray for diversity!  

 

O.K. it's really too soon to get excited, but I just can't stop myself!!

[Athena]

Hello. I moved a few posts from other threads on the filming photos into this thread. Since the photos are not official, they can be considered spoilers. Please stick to posting about S2 in here or Books vs Show. Thanks!

[AheadofStraight]

The best part of this for me is that they've already filmed (spoilering since this isn't spec)  

the scene when Claire comes home after being waxed: “I have actually already seen it — the scene in which Claire comes home from visiting her friend Louise and Jamie is horrified by what happened there. They did it very well.”

 

My response I made about that topic in the spoiler thread is that

I love this scene in the book and it will be great but we haven't seen a single hair on Claire's body this entire show!

 

Was also thinking that we probably won't get the dialog about him being glad to still have his hand...because you can see his fingers, so clearly he knows he still has it.  The BLACK of the fingers is a bit disturbing.

Edited June 2, 2015 by AheadofStraight

[lianau]

It's been a while since I read DiA, but couldn't she have some sort of willing sexual experience that gets discovered (e.g. "cheating"), for example, as a way to be "ruined"? Again, I have practically no memory of how all that goes down (hoping to start a re-read soon). But seems like there are ways to change the plot and end up at the same place.

I don't think that's possible . At one point Mary and Claire are at the hospital  and Mary talks about her "knowledge" of the French, male anatomy and what they do with it to their poor wives . Claire then  has to explain  the stuff with the birds and the bees so that Mary wouldn't be completely  scared should she be married off to a French guy . There is no way that girl would go on and willingly experiment with anyone .

[WatchrTina]

 

The BLACK of the fingers is a bit disturbing.

 

I noticed that Jamie's thumb was black on the boat in the last scene of the finale.  It's weird.  I assumed it was a make-up error (supposed to look bruised and purple but the camera and sun-light made it look black) but here it is again in Season 2.  Maybe the Outlander Anatomist will weigh in and tell us that the internal bleeding from 9 broken bones really would make one's hand look blue-black with bruising.

 

Meanwhile, back on topic, there is French word that means ugly-pretty -- someone who is so ugly that s/he is fascinating to look at.  Mother Hildegard is supposed to look somewhat like that and also be really tall.  Claire speculates that that is why she ended up a nun -- just too odd looking for any man to consider taking her to wife. I hope they find someone who fits the bill.  But acting ability is much more important than looks (her appearance makes no difference to the plot) so if they find a fantastic, mature actress who also happens to be short and attractive, I'll get over it. 

 

And here's my not-in-the-book wish for season 2.  Dougal shows up in Paris in the book.  I don't think Dougal should travel alone.  I want to see Angus and Rupert in Paris. Imagine the possibilities.  Maybe Jamie could run into them on one of those occasions when he ends up at a brothel.

 

And speaking of brothels -- the scene where Jamie bursts into one while wielding a fool-long salami as a weapon -- well that just HAS to be there.  That's when he meets Fegus, after all.

[Athena]

Meanwhile, back on topic, there is French word that means ugly-pretty -- someone who is so ugly that s/he is fascinating to look at.  Mother Hildegard is supposed to look somewhat like that and also be really tall.  Claire speculates that that is why she ended up a nun -- just too odd looking for any man to consider taking her to wife. I hope they find someone who fits the bill.  But acting ability is much more important than looks (her appearance makes no difference to the plot) so if they find a fantastic, mature actress who also happens to be short and attractive, I'll get over it.

 

Jolie laide. There's even a Serge Gainsbourg song with it. The French have a lot of interesting words and expressions. I like this one because it usually means the person has an unconventional feature or appearance, but is still remarkable. In literary terms, it's often describing a woman of strong or attractive personality who may not be conventionally good looking.

 

They can do a lot with makeup and costuming. Downton Abbey's downstairs cast look very different in real life e.g. Mrs Hughes is younger and more attractive in modern clothing.

[Pestilentia]

 

Two things I noticed:  Murtaugh!

LOL, we'd recognize that ratty old sweater anywhere.

[tallyrand]

I love Mother Hildergarde (especially because it's so nice that Claire had a female friend/mother figure). I adored their relationship.  I want as much of her as possible.  I'm assuming they will have the red dress scene and I'm curious what costume Terry will come up with.  I also look forward to the reconciliation after Faith and FERGUS!!. I also hope Claire is nicer to Mary in the show than she is in the books. Jamie and Claire basically had no sympathy for that poor girl. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

I think, that we might still get Jamie looking at his healed hand. The pictures we've seen of it, still have the hand wrapped up. And they're still on a boat. I expect to see it when they get to France or when he removes the bandages. Or rather, I should say, I hope to see it happen. It's such an emotional moment.

[Pestilentia]

 

Mother Hildegard is supposed to look somewhat like that and also be really tall.

I would love love love to see Judy Parfitt as Mother Hildegard but worry that she is too associated as Sister Monica Joan in Call the Midwife.

But she would be beyond awesome- one of my favorite older actresses.

[AD55]

My response I made about that topic in the spoiler thread is that

I love this scene in the book and it will be great but we haven't seen a single hair on Claire's body this entire show!

 

Was also thinking that we probably won't get the dialog about him being glad to still have his hand...because you can see his fingers, so clearly he knows he still has it.  The BLACK of the fingers is a bit disturbing.

I didn't take that scene as Jamie just realizing he still had a hand. I think he's moved at how fortunate he is that Claire saved it, while she assumes he's crying because it will never be fully healed.

 

ETA. I bet this will be in season 2, maybe when Jamie uses it for the first time.

Edited June 4, 2015 by AD55

[GHScorpiosRule]

I didn't take that scene as Jamie just realizing he still had a hand. I think he's moved at how fortunate he is that Claire saved it, while she assumes he's crying because it will never be fully healed.

 

ETA. I bet this will be in season 2, maybe when Jamie uses it for the first time.

 

I think it's both. And  I remember him also telling Claire, he thought she might have to cut it off, and he didn't know if could have lived with that. Grateful that he still has a hand and that Claire was able to save it. Because he didn't think it could be saved. That's why he was crying. I don't think he cared about the scars or that the one joint was stiff, and the other finger, crooked.

Edited June 4, 2015 by GHScorpiosRule

[AheadofStraight]

It's been awhile since I read that part but I thought they talked about how they do it differently in her time because he just assumed it would be amputated while she thought he was upset at her work.  I do hope we get that scene. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

It's been awhile since I read that part but I thought they talked about how they do it differently in her time because he just assumed it would be amputated while she thought he was upset at her work.  I do hope we get that scene. 

 

That's pretty much what he said, and what she said. She apologized that she couldn't fix his fingers and did the best she could, because she thought he was crying over that, when in fact, he couldn't believe that she didn't amputate his hand.  I read this like, a month or so ago, but that scene stands out in my mind. He's waving it back and forth at the window, when Claire walks in and sees him. And then his tears.

[peacefrog]

This would be a good scene to have right before the first time they are intimate again! Two hand to love you with...

[chocolatetruffle]

 

That's pretty much what he said, and what she said. She apologized that she couldn't fix his fingers and did the best she could, because she thought he was crying over that, when in fact, he couldn't believe that she didn't amputate his hand.  I read this like, a month or so ago, but that scene stands out in my mind. He's waving it back and forth at the window, when Claire walks in and sees him. And then his tears.

You know, I remember this scene vividly, but for some reason I thought it was in a later book.  I'll have to try and find it because it's definitely worth a re-read.

 

 

This would be a good scene to have right before the first time they are intimate again! Two hand to love you with...

 

Yes, Yes and Yes!!

[GHScorpiosRule]

You know, I remember this scene vividly, but for some reason I thought it was in a later book.  I'll have to try and find it because it's definitely worth a re-read.

chocolatetruffle, it's near the very end. Before the grotto.

[chocolatetruffle]

Thanks!  And I'm sure we'll see this in the first episode of DIA.  Jamie will still be healing emotionally.  

 

Has anyone heard anything about who's writing the first episode??

Edited June 4, 2015 by chocolatetruffle

[Petunia846]

I don't know about writers but I heard they already have like half the season written.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here's something I wish they WON'T do/deviate from the book: Have Jamie be civil to the sadistic rapist after Alex marries Mary to Black Jack. Nope, nuh-uh. I don't want to see that. IF they show the wedding, fine. Don't want Jamie even speaking to the bastard.

[Nidratime]

I think the first episode is probably being written by Ron Moore.

[chocolatetruffle]

More pictures from Season 2...

 

http://sbrownpix.photoshelter.com/gallery/Outlander-S2-Filming-Day-2-in-Dysart/G0000TzNIicTacrw/C0000h7xz_2Td8m8

[GHScorpiosRule]

I can't remember if anyone posted it here, and I can't recall seeing it in the casting thread, but I wonder if they've found someone to play Lord John as a 16 year old? Because he was in Dragonfly. 

[lianau]

They have to put him in this season because otherwise Jamie's dead after Culloden and introducing this all in a flashback  later wouldn't work (at least not for me ). But we haven't had any casting infos /speculation.

[AD55]

As a huge Murtagh fan, I would love to see the writers make a big change from the books and give him a romantic interest who loves him back and isn't dead. I'd also like to see him survive Culloden. I reckon the chance that either of these things will happen is approximately zero.

Edited June 17, 2015 by AD55

[Summer]

 

As a huge Murtagh fan, I would love to see the writers make a big change from the books and give him a romantic interest who loves him back and isn't dead.

LOL "who isn't dead"  Agreed!  I was actually thinking it would be so cool to see the back story of his love for Ellen Mackenzie, maybe told in flashbacks....

[Dust Bunny]

 

I'd also like to see [Murtagh] survive Culloden.

 

I love Murtagh, so part of me would like to see this as well. However, his death becomes a major moment in Jamie's life; Jamie periodically reflects on it as another example of the personal awfulness of Culloden. There are going to be some painful deaths in season 2. (Hugh Munro crushed me.) As messed up as it sounds, I'm actually kind of looking forward to it. It creates very real stakes in both the rising and in Jamie's and Claire's lives. Life includes deaths of loved ones. It sucks, but it's real. Especially in rebellion and war.

[AD55]

I love Murtagh, so part of me would like to see this as well. However, his death becomes a major moment in Jamie's life; Jamie periodically reflects on it as another example of the personal awfulness of Culloden. There are going to be some painful deaths in season 2. (Hugh Munro crushed me.) As messed up as it sounds, I'm actually kind of looking forward to it. It creates very real stakes in both the rising and in Jamie's and Claire's lives. Life includes deaths of loved ones. It sucks, but it's real. Especially in rebellion and war.

 

My hopes and dreams for Murtagh have nothing to do with what's best for the Jamie storyline and everything to do with my fan girl desire to keep Duncan Lacroix around for as long as possible. I'd love to see tender Murtagh -- the one we glimpsed in the brooch scene in The Wedding -- in an episode where he finds love.  In fact, I wouldn't mind a Murtagh spinoff. :)

[chocolatetruffle]

My hopes and dreams for Murtagh have nothing to do with what's best for the Jamie storyline and everything to do with my fan girl desire to keep Duncan Lacroix around for as long as possible. I'd love to see tender Murtagh -- the one we glimpsed in the brooch scene in The Wedding -- in an episode where he finds love.  In fact, I wouldn't mind a Murtagh spinoff. :)

 

This  could easily happen, too, since we learn at the beginning of the book that several of the Fraser men survived.  Jamie could send Murtagh with those men to make sure they get away from the battle safely.  Then

they could combine him with a certain character who turns up later in Voyager

.

[sosmitten]

Bringing this over from the Ask the Bookreaders thread:

 

 

Most of book 2 still takes place in the pre-Culloden years after the end of Outlander (1743-1745), so we won't lose 20 years right away. Claire goes back through the stones at the end of book 2, so the 20 year time jump for her and Jamie in the 18th century doesn't actually happen until book 3. However, the book has flash forwards to the future where Claire tells her daughter about what happened in the past. Those scenes are 20 years in the future in the 20th century, after Frank has died and her daughter is grown. I think Claire is around 50 years old. These future scenes take place over a few chapters at the beginning and ending of book 2, but are not a huge part of the book. It will be interesting to see how they are integrated into Jamie and Claire's regular storyline in Season 2.

 

I too and interested in how the future scenes will be incorporated into the season.  Some of the articles make it sound like both Jamie and Claire will be aged up for season 2, but we don't see a future Jamie in book 2, right?

[tcay]

I foresee the ending of season two doing a flash sideways (back?) to Jamie, after Claire is informed he is/was alive. 

[Athena]

I too and interested in how the future scenes will be incorporated into the season.  Some of the articles make it sound like both Jamie and Claire will be aged up for season 2, but we don't see a future Jamie in book 2, right?

 

I suspect we will see older Claire, but older Jamie does not show up until Book 3: Voyager.

 

At some point, the show will have to speed things up a bit just as Game of Thrones has done. I'm just wondering what they will cut and speed up.

[Petunia846]

I was confused by that too, sosmitten. There shouldn't be any aged up Jamie in season 2 unless they deviate from the book. I can see what tcay suggests though. That would be an interesting ending shot for the season, like just five or ten seconds of Jamie aged up. I really like how DiA ends though, that last scene gives me chills every time I read it.

[chocolatetruffle]

There are some general spoilers that you'd have to be under a rock not to have heard, and then there is also one very huge spoiler just dropped in there that might be for even later than S2, so beware. Regarding that large spoiler:

The interviewer asks Sam about being aged up 20 years...which I still don't understand, because that's in Voyager where Jamie would be aged up. Claire next season, yes, but not Jamie. I wonder what they're doing.

 

Regarding that spoiler, she asked him about it in relation to its happening in S2, but he started his answer by saying we haven't gotten there yet and then went on to answer about what

the aging process would be like for him, but never specifically saying it would happen next season.

.  So I think he and Ron have likely discussed it, but that it's not going to happen until Book 3.  If that's the case, it's good to know that they are already talking about a third season.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

Regarding that spoiler, she asked him about it in relation to its happening in S2, but he started his answer by saying we haven't gotten there yet and then went on to answer about what

the aging process would be like for him, but never specifically saying it would happen next season.

.  So I think he and Ron have likely discussed it, but that it's not going to happen until Book 3.  If that's the case, it's good to know that they are already talking about a third season.  

 

Thanks for that. Haven't been able to watch it yet myself because Boss actually deigned to come into the office today and hasn't left yet. I was basing my opinion in the "Ask a question" thread, on other questions.  I don't know if Claire and Jamie will "look" older because as I recall from the books

Claire still looks young; there is a lot of details about her wonderful soft skin and how she doesn't look like she's aged. As for Jamie, I'm sure that his life in prison has affected him and we'll see those, but he's in the prime of his life, so I don't expect him to look like a decrepit at 45! Maybe more bruises and scars, heh.

 

But we'll see.

[Petunia846]

Yeah, Sam seemed a little thrown off, so I couldn't tell from his answer whether he was trying to humor her without getting into more spoilers or not. And yeah,

I don't think they'll have to do much to Claire or Jamie at first because it's not really that old. Plus, Sam and Cait are playing younger than their ages in S1 anyway. I think the aging will show more in personality and capability. They've both learned a lot of new things and had some tough experiences.

[satrunrose]

I know it isn't likely to happen, (and apologies to Tobias M. because he is wonderful in the role) but I would be really happy to lose a lot of the Mary/Jack/Alex story. I like Mary a lot, and I don't mind Alex (although his line about knowing what his brother is makes me give him the side-eye for the rest of this novel), but I hate, hate HATE the attempted redemption of Randall in the second-half. First there's Wentworth, then the incident with Fergus and in the end it's...all okay because he loves his brother. Hell no! 

 

The duel can stay though. I'm not usually a fan of violence and vengeance but Go Jamie!

[chocolatetruffle]

I know it isn't likely to happen, (and apologies to Tobias M. because he is wonderful in the role) but I would be really happy to lose a lot of the Mary/Jack/Alex story. I like Mary a lot, and I don't mind Alex (although his line about knowing what his brother is makes me give him the side-eye for the rest of this novel), but I hate, hate HATE the attempted redemption of Randall in the second-half. First there's Wentworth, then the incident with Fergus and in the end it's...all okay because he loves his brother. Hell no! 

 

The duel can stay though. I'm not usually a fan of violence and vengeance but Go Jamie!

ICAM. BJR is one-dimensional in Outlander. He's a sadist and although TM gave us a detailed 3-dimensional portrayal of a sadist, he's still just a sadist who's obsessed with Jamie. I do not want to see him given any dimension or back story - especially after what he does to Fergus. I only want to see the horrified expression on his face as he grabs his bleeding crotch.

[chocolatetruffle]

This is very, very curious:

 

Terry Dresbach, Ron's wife, tweeted this 9 hours ago, and be warned this article does have big spoilers for book 3, so don't read if you're trying to remain spoiler free:

 

 

Then she tweeted this 5 hours ago:

 

That article makes me VERY happy!!