S02.E12: The Hail Mary

Athena · June 21, 2016

Quote

As Jamie puts all of his efforts into turning the Jacobite army away from the impending slaughter at Culloden Moor, Claire attempts to comfort the sick Alex Randall. She is stunned when Alex reveals an outrageous plan to save the mother of his child.

Note: This is the No Book Talk thread. No book talk including "It was different in the books." Bookwalkers are strongly discouraged from posting and liking in this thread.

ElectricBoogaloo · June 25, 2016

Damn, two dramatic brotherly deaths in one episode. Poor Mary. If Claire had any faith that BJR could control his violence, I think that's gone now. It really takes a certain kind of guy to punch his dead brother. I loathe BJR but I give him a lot of credit for resisting Alex's request to marry Mary because he didn't want to hurt the woman his brother loves. If he truly wants to avoid hurting her, why doesn't he just send her to live somewhere else?

Dougal's reaction to Colum's death was more subdued but he made it all about himself. Why are you ignoring me? Why did you abandon me? Why have you left me all alone? Now all the things I wanted to say to you are stuck in my head forever! Ugh. I had a few brief moments of sympathy for Dougal right after Colum died and he put his head on his chest, but then he went back to the dickish, jealous Dougal who sees himself as the victim in this relationship.

Primetimer · June 26, 2016

On the eve of the season's climactic battle, two sets of siblings are forced to find closure.

View the full article

ganesh · June 26, 2016

So Claire knows the exact date of the battle (which, great, really), but tells Jamie in France she doesn't know anything about it? All I expected was basically that. Why say otherwise then?

I'm still laughing whenever Claire or Jamie say, "all that massive amount of work we did in France." Because, no.

Daisy · June 26, 2016

18 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

Damn, two dramatic brotherly deaths in one episode. Poor Mary. If Claire had any faith that BJR could control his violence, I think that's gone now. It really takes a certain kind of guy to punch his dead brother. I loathe BJR but I give him a lot of credit for resisting Alex's request to marry Mary because he didn't want to hurt the woman his brother loves. If he truly wants to avoid hurting her, why doesn't he just send her to live somewhere else?

Dougal's reaction to Colum's death was more subdued but he made it all about himself. Why are you ignoring me? Why did you abandon me? Why have you left me all alone? Now all the things I wanted to say to you are stuck in my head forever! Ugh. I had a few brief moments of sympathy for Dougal right after Colum died and he put his head on his chest, but then he went back to the dickish, jealous Dougal who sees himself as the victim in this relationship.

Was he punching him? or was he doing CPR? (i was kind of verklempt). Also. how much time went by that Mary got knocked up by Jonathan? We left the Duke's house, reached Inverness, and poof, Mary is pregnant?

So Colum's leg infirmity happened because he fell off a horse? I do agree with you Dougal's "it's all about me, how dare you." even after death was very eye-rolling-inducing.

Before we pour out a drink for Gellis, let's toast to her baby.

I adore Murtagh. Like I don't think I was keen on him in season 1, but he truly made his way into my heart now, and If he dies, I will be so mad. the way he stepped up and was all I"ll marry the girl, I never thought she'd be the type i'd want but it's okay." to protect her from BJR was touching, and while I cracked a "hah" about the mythical bastard Frank - at this point, I do get his point.

Who gives a flip about Frank at this point? I know we went all Doctor-Who-y and what not, but the entire plan was to change the future. Ideally (especially if we call back on the first episode of the season - still strange that we got 1/2 an episode and an intro out of the entire 1940's ... like we were firmly stuck in the past this entire season) - Claire is devastated in leaving Scotland, Jamie, the lost battle everything. so just.. hell I don't know. take a boat and go to ireland or something (well go back to Lallybroch) live out the rest of your days, screw the stones, screw Frank. because it's so evident at this point - Frank is so not important until the plot says he is. (ie: we need more BJR).

and it's breaking my heart that Scotland lost because BPC is an idiot.

Andorra · June 26, 2016

6 hours ago, ganesh said:

So Claire knows the exact date of the battle (which, great, really), but tells Jamie in France she doesn't know anything about it? All I expected was basically that. Why say otherwise then?

I'm still laughing whenever Claire or Jamie say, "all that massive amount of work we did in France." Because, no.

I'm sorry, I'm probably getting in trouble for posting in this thread, but I have to: she says she doesn't know the "strategy". She knows of course, what every English subject knows, because they learn it in school. Which would be the date when Bonni Prince Charles came over from France, she would know that the Jacobites won Prestonpans and when Culloden happened. That doesn't mean though she knows how the war was lead and what caused the outcome.

ElectricBoogaloo · June 26, 2016

6 hours ago, Daisy said:

Was he punching him? or was he doing CPR?

It looked like he was punching the everloving shit out of Alex's face. Either that or CPR was a lot more violent back then.

Quote

Before we pour out a drink for Gellis, let's toast to her baby.

I was kind of cracking up that besides the dying brothers theme of this week, we also had the theme of bastard babies being brought up as someone else's. Aside from Mary and BJR marrying so that Alex's baby will be taken care of, we also had Gellis and Dougal's baby being raised by another relative (I know Colum told Claire their names but I've forgotten) and then we had Dougal and Colum coming right out and admitting that Hamish was Dougal's son even though he was being raised as Colum's heir. And of course from the first episode of the season, we also have Frank agreeing to be the father of Claire and Jamie's child. Make you wonder if there are any babies that are actually being raised by both their biological parents. Okay, Jenny's are so there's that.

Edited June 26, 2016 by ElectricBoogaloo
CPR is not the same as CPS

Pixel · June 26, 2016

Well, I guess that answers my question of how in the hell a sweet, perpetually terrified girl like Mary ended up married to a serial sadistic rapist. I could not figure out how that was going to happen. And we know she's pregnant from that family line because her descendant looks exactly like Black Jack, so the baby isn't from the rape.

I wonder if Black Jack can even get it up anymore after being stabbed in the babymaker (which I don't even know how he survived, because it sure looked like that sword tip went right into where his bladder would be located, which would surely mean he should have died from urosepsis in that day and age), or if he can't and that's made him even more rage fueled than ever. I guess we'll never know since he's going to die in two days.

nara · June 26, 2016

7 hours ago, Daisy said:

Was he punching him? or was he doing CPR? (i was kind of verklempt). Also. how much time went by that Mary got knocked up by Jonathan? We left the Duke's house, reached Inverness, and poof, Mary is pregnant?

So Colum's leg infirmity happened because he fell off a horse? I do agree with you Dougal's "it's all about me, how dare you." even after death was very eye-rolling-inducing.

I adore Murtagh. Like I don't think I was keen on him in season 1, but he truly made his way into my heart now, and If he dies, I will be so mad. the way he stepped up and was all I"ll marry the girl, I never thought she'd be the type i'd want but it's okay." to protect her from BJR was touching, and while I cracked a "hah" about the mythical bastard Frank - at this point, I do get his point.

I initially thought he might be doing CPR too, but it became clearer that he was not punching his chest to restart his heart. In any case, how would he know to do CPR?

Colum has Toulouse Lautrec Syndrome (a genetic disorder), which may have caused him to fall off the horse. It definitely would have prevented him from healing from the fall.

I was hoping that Murtagh or Rupert might be willing to marry Mary Hawkins and raise her child with her. I thought it fitting that Murtagh offered--he's already given her the head of Sandingham. His speech about Mary and being Jamie's godfather reeks terribly of "last great speech before I die". I hope I'm wrong...But Claire is also right--Mary would be better positioned as Blackjack's widow. The thing is, Claire's belief is predicated on the fact that Blackjack will die at Culloden. Something tells me that the one thing that Claire WILL manage to change is the death of Blackjack Randall. That would be hugely ironic. However, since Tobias Menzies has been so freaking brilliant on this show, I wouldn't mind keeping him longer.

*******************

Mary Hawkins telling Claire off for coming between her and Alex was satisfying. (And it was good that Claire admitted what she'd done wrong.) I'm glad she's grown up. But sister cannot catch a break! First the rape, then Alex dies, then she's married to Blackjack. She might be the most unfortunate person in the entire show.

I thought for sure that Jamie and the others were being led into a trap by Blackjack. I'm glad they gave the evil sadist some redeeming value--his love for his brother. It helps to flesh him out a little. I thought it was interesting that Alex knew about his brother's dark soul but still cared for him. I think that Colum and Dougal also genuinely love each other. However, unlike the Randalls--where Blackjack is clearly the alpha dog-- both the Mackenzies are strong-willed, so they have had a sibling rivalry for most of their lives. I felt bad for Dougal--he never told his brother while he was alive how much he looked up to him and loved him, and now he will not be able to do so. Even Blackjack got to do one final, major favor for his brother to show his love.

This was a slower episode, but I think it it wrapped up a couple of things well. The fate of Geillis Duncan--she's burnt, but her child is alive. (Good to know that they were not completely barbaric with the witch trial and allowed the innocent child to be born.) Frank's ancestry is resolved and he is safe. By the way, isn't it odd that the priest officiating Mary and Blackjack's wedding didn't think it strange that the bride was crying the whole time? Surely he should have some qualms about performing a wedding that way?

However, I'm not sure that Dougal will accept Colum's decision about inheritance and guardianship of Hamish. Assuming he survives the war, he may make a claim for Leoch. In any case, I don't see how Jamie could be Hamish's guardian. There is documented evidence that he is a traitor and I'm sure King George will strip him of his title and lands. He wouldn't be allowed to live peacefully at Leoch or Lallybroch.

I half expected Laoghaire to show up again as Colum's washerwoman.

As Jamie was trying to persuade Prince Charles to attack the English before Culloden, I was thinking, "Jamie, this is the time you should be claiming your wife has special powers of seeing into the future and has seen that a great disaster would befall them if they don't do the surprise attack!" After all, he's used the witch thing a couple of times. What's one more time?

I laughed at Prince Charles thinking he was so clever with taking his best bottle of wine to serve Cumberland for his birthday. You can see the look on the general's and Jamie's faces that they realize they are dealing with an idiot! LOL. He would get lost in the woods!

10 hours ago, ganesh said:

So Claire knows the exact date of the battle (which, great, really), but tells Jamie in France she doesn't know anything about it? All I expected was basically that. Why say otherwise then?

It's a common device in TV adaptations to only share what people know right when it becomes relevant for the plot. It's annoying, but I can live with it, because it works for the medium and helps with the pacing.

ganesh · June 26, 2016

5 hours ago, Andorra said:

I'm sorry, I'm probably getting in trouble for posting in this thread, but I have to: she says she doesn't know the "strategy". She knows of course, what every English subject knows, because they learn it in school.

We got into a huge to-do about this, and I got run up one side and down the other. On the show, Claire specifically says to Jamie when they were in France "I know nothing about it other than we (you) lost and it wiped out everything." I was incredulous that she didn't know anything. Especially because Frank was talking about it *literally on the day she went through*.

We (here) went on this big thing about how she may/may not have learned it in school because she was traveling a lot with her uncle. Why should she know? What should she know? I was called out very unfairly and highly insulted for being sexist (by only one, the rest of the discussion was fine; I don't think arguing is a bad thing as long as you aren't insulting people) because I expected the female protagonist to know everything about everything when I merely was questioning why she didn't know *something* about it. Handwaving it and frankly, I find it rather condescending to me with this "of course she knows from school" is just way way way unfair given the time and length of the prior discussion and the fact that there's an actual scene in the show contradicting it.

I don't mind inferring things on a show by carefully paying attention to the episodes. I don't need to be spoonfed. But making assumptions to fill in logical gaps is fanwanking and that's just shoddy. I'm not calling BS on the show, and now it's ruined or anything. TPTBs just made an error. On a high quality show like this, it stood out.

So if you know the date you die, can you avoid it? I'm not expecting the Scots to win, and we know they don't based on the first episode with Claire's return. The whole fact of Claire just being there has to affect the timeline in some way. I'm not saying she's meddling around or anything, but it's an observer affecting the experiment by observing, essentially. If Claire isn't currently pregnant, then Jamie has to survive. Was he even alive at this point originally? I've said before, I know this isn't a time travel show, but I would love it if there were some effects. That's why I'm hoping there's the Gellis connection.

SoTheresThat · June 26, 2016

4 hours ago, nara said:

snip

This was a slower episode, but I think it it wrapped up a couple of things well. The fate of Geillis Duncan--she's burnt, but her child is alive. (Good to know that they were not completely barbaric with the witch trial and allowed the innocent child to be born.) Frank's ancestry is resolved and he is safe. By the way, isn't it odd that the priest officiating Mary and Blackjack's wedding didn't think it strange that the bride was crying the whole time? Surely he should have some qualms about performing a wedding that way?

snip

There were many arranged marriages in that time. I'm sure priests married lots of crying brides and thought nothing of it.

cryptaknight · June 26, 2016

13 hours ago, Daisy said:

13 hours ago, Daisy said:

Was he punching him? or was he doing CPR? (i was kind of verklempt). Also. how much time went by that Mary got knocked up by Jonathan? We left the Duke's house, reached Inverness, and poof, Mary is pregnant?

In the voiceover, Claire said it had been several months of retreat. So there was enough time for Mary to reconnect with Alex (who is the father of her baby, not Jonathan, as Jonathan is BJR), get pregnant, and for her to know about it before she ran into Claire again at Inverness.

Edited June 26, 2016 by cryptaknight

Andorra · June 26, 2016

3 hours ago, ganesh said:

On the show, Claire specifically says to Jamie when they were in France "I know nothing about it other than we (you) lost and it wiped out everything." I was incredulous that she didn't know anything. Especially because Frank was talking about it *literally on the day she went through*.

Here's the scene in Episode 1, taken from the script. You can read it here: http://www.outlandercommunity.com/

Quote

JAMIE:

If there's going to be a war against the British, shouldn't we be trying to find a way to win it, instead of stopping it?

CLAIRE:

I don't know enough details about the war to tell you how to do that.

JAMIE:

What do you know exactly?

CLAIRE:

Only the general outlines of history I'm afraid. I know that Bonni Prince Charlie arrives in Scotland next year and raises a Jacobite army. At first they have several victories.

JAMIE:

Well then that is a start is it not?

CLAIRE:

I don't know the tactics. I don't know the strategy. I don't know where the armies were or why they won or why they lost. All I know is that eventually both sides end up on Culloden Moor, and the Jacobites are wiped out. And then the British destroy the Highland Culture in retibution. That is my sum total of my knowledge of the war.

Glade · June 26, 2016

So Gellis really is dead, how sad! And apparently Dougal made no effort to rescue her and their child during the repreive she was granted. Unlike Claire, she actually came back in time in order to change history and bring the Jacobite uprising to victory. I'd be very interested to see how prepared she was and what her strategy would have been. I find it perfectly understandable (albeit heartbreaking now) that Claire and Jamie, despite their significant efforts, were unable to substantially change things. There is only so much that common people (or Scottish lords with limited power) could accomplish, which I guess is why Gellis chose this moment in particular, and not trying to go back to say prevent queen Elizabeth from uniting the kingdoms in the first place, though if she gets some cosmic second chance hopefully she will/would have taken the Murtaugh route and just assassinate some people and see what happens.

Let's hope Mary starts collecting her pension ASAP. I also wondered about BJR's injury, but you don't need a penis to sexually assault/abuse someone, so I'm sure he could/would still hurt people with or without it, the compulsions are so deeply imprinted on his mind by this point. His brutally attacking his dead brother's body shows his psychopathy will never be changed or redeemed. I still hope Jamie is the one to kill him, at Colluden or not.

ganesh · June 26, 2016

I think this supports my argument. Now she knows specific dates, including victory in the battle prior where the Scots surprised them on the secret trail. Which would make sense because Frank was talking about it. So there's a discrepancy, and saying she would have learned this information in school "of course" isn't a valid assumption, was my initial point in this thread. I wouldn't have expected her to know tactics and strategy, and it's unfair to accuse her on that point.

I guess it's based in my interpretation of 'general outlines of history'. I would have figured she could at least have known they were outnumbered and outgunned. Which could affect how Jamie et al., plans their strategy. That's valuable intel even if it is fairly broad.

I think that kind of closes it, and it doesn't seem like this is a widely interesting issue to anyone else. The show still rocks afaic, and I was thoroughly engrossed in this season. This is appointment tv for me over GOT.

TaurusRose · June 26, 2016

10 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

It looked like he was punching the everloving shit out of Alex's face. Either that or CPR was a lot more violent back then.

I was kind of cracking up that besides the dying brothers theme of this week, we also had the theme of bastard babies being brought up as someone else's. Aside from Mary and BJR marrying so that Alex's baby will be taken care of, we also had Gellis and Dougal's baby being raised by another relative (I know Colum told Claire their names but I've forgotten) and then we had Dougal and Colum coming right out and admitting that Hamish was Dougal's son even though he was being raised as Colum's heir. And of course from the first episode of the season, we also have Frank agreeing to be the father of Claire and Jamie's child. Make you wonder if there are any babies that are actually being raised by both their biological parents. Okay, Jenny's are so there's that.

Two quibbles because...that's just the way I roll. LOL

(1) Not sure why CPR was even a consideration since no one knew anything about CPR in the 18th century. So BJR was being true to form, a FSB. (2) Bastard babies being raised by others...not sure what the point of this observation is since the same thing is true today; and just for clarification purposes, Frank offered to raise a child conceived in wedlock, whose father is/was (presumed) dead. This time travel stuff is confusing.

Edited June 26, 2016 by taurusrose
Formatting. Yes, I'm that anal.

nara · June 26, 2016

2 hours ago, taurusrose said:

Two quibbles because...that's just the way I roll. LOL

(1) Not sure why CPR was even a consideration since no one knew anything about CPR in the 18th century. So BJR was being true to form, a FSB.

I think it depends on what the viewer knows about the history of medicine, specifically CPR.

TaurusRose · June 26, 2016

11 minutes ago, nara said:

I think it depends on what the viewer knows about the history of medicine, specifically CPR.

Ooookay. This begs the question: exactly what are they teaching in schools these days?

Edited June 26, 2016 by taurusrose

nara · June 27, 2016

28 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

Ooookay. This begs the question: exactly what are they teaching in schools these days?

Based in that post, it would appear that civility is not one of the things being taught.

However, I did a quick wikipedia search on the history of CPR to educate myself. It discusses that modern CPR was established in the mid 20th century, but here's the passage I thought might be of interest to Outlander viewers. Of course, this is not to say that BJR would be familiar with these techniques, and they seem to have been related initially to drowning victims, rather than generally to people who stopped breathing. Also, I think most of us would agree (after a few seconds of doubt) that he was punching Alex in his grief, not trying to revive him.

"First attempts at resuscitation in the 18th century

In August 1767 a few wealthy and civic-minded citizens in Amsterdam gathered to form the Society for Recovery of Drowned Persons.[2] This society was the first organised effort to respond to sudden death.

The society's techniques involved a range of methods to stimulate the body. The members of the society recommended:[3]

warming the victim; removing swallowed or aspirated water by positioning the victim's head lower than feet; applying manual pressure to the abdomen; respirations into the victim's mouth, either using a bellows or with a mouth-to-mouth method; tickling the victim's throat; 'stimulating' the victim by such means as rectal and oral fumigation with tobacco smoke; bellows were used to drive tobacco smoke, a known irritant, into the intestine through the anus, as this was thought to be enough of a stimulant to engender a response in the "almost" dead; and bloodletting.

The society in Amsterdam claimed to have saved 150 persons, within four years of their founding, with their recommendations.[4]

The first four of these techniques, or variations of them, are in use today.

Following successes of this first society, rescue societies soon sprang up in most European capitals, all with the goal to find a way of successfully resuscitating victims of sudden death. This theory proved so popular that Hamburg, Germany passed anordinance in 1769 providing notices to be read in churches describing assistance for drowned, strangled, and frozen persons and those overcome by noxious gases, probably the first example of mass medical training. The Royal Humane Society inLondon, founded in 1774, served as the model for societies in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. These rescue societies of the 18th century were the precursors of today’s emergency medical services.[citation needed]"

TaurusRose · June 27, 2016

9 minutes ago, nara said:

Based in that post, it would appear that civility is not one of the things being taught.

Ooooookay. It wasn't my intent to be snarky, I am genuinely curious because it seems like a lot of knowledge I take for granted from my school years isn't being imparted these days. I'm curious about a lot of things and had the Internet and Google been around when I was in school, I probably would have been considered a Rhodes scholar. LOL BTW, you've shared some information that I did not know, so...thanks.

Edited June 27, 2016 by taurusrose

ganesh · June 27, 2016

I don't think Gellis had control over to when she could go back. Claire didn't.

So if Gellis prepared herself to affect the jacobite revolution, she would have to know a lot about history. Since she came from the 60s, that's not too hard. She had to know there was a means to go back. What are the odds she finds out by chance versus someone who already had done the same passing that knowledge to her. She would also have to have incredible motivation to give up her life to travel back. What possibly could have motivated her that strongly. She also curiously knows a lot about plants and herbs. Like Claire.

I so want to be right about this!

Daisy · June 27, 2016

5 hours ago, cryptaknight said:

In the voiceover, Claire said it had been several months of retreat. So there was enough time for Mary to reconnect with Alex (who is the father of her baby, not Jonathan, as Jonathan is BJR), get pregnant, and for her to know about it before she ran into Claire again at Inverness.

Oh thanks for that. I am going to be doing a re-watch of a season because i am missing small little bits (like that)

(I shouldn't post when i am all insomniacy. LOL) i did mean Alex not BJR

nara · June 27, 2016

28 minutes ago, ganesh said:

I so want to be right about this!

I kinda want you to be right too--except for the fact that I would have been spoiled on a major twist!

Off topic, but did you know that you're quoted on the home page of this site? :)

terrymct · June 27, 2016

I wish the series had given more time to Dougal and Colum's relationship and division of power. It's one of the more interesting parts of the show. They sort of represent two parts of a man. Colum's the rational(-ish) side of a person's brain and Dougal's the more visceral side. Their talk was fascinating and set up some potentially good conflict for future episodes. I wish, however, that the ground work had been better laid for it. Colum said that the MacKenzie men wouldn't follow him, essentially that he's not liked or respected. We didn't see that on the trip he took to collect rents in the first season. The local people seemed to have some genuine affection and respect for him and he interacted with them with sense and a bit of compassion. Showing people's unhappiness with him back in those episodes would have helped Colum's statement in this current episode make sense. That said, I really like the two actors who play Colum and Dougal and wish they'd had more to work with in this show.

Rilla-my-Rilla · June 27, 2016

17 hours ago, ganesh said:

I guess it's based in my interpretation of 'general outlines of history'. I would have figured she could at least have known they were outnumbered and outgunned. Which could affect how Jamie et al., plans their strategy. That's valuable intel even if it is fairly broad.

I think that kind of closes it, and it doesn't seem like this is a widely interesting issue to anyone else. The show still rocks afaic, and I was thoroughly engrossed in this season. This is appointment tv for me over GOT.

She did know they were outgunned and outnumbered though. She tells Ned that back in season 1 when they're out collecting rents. I don't remember exactly what she says to him, but it was basically you can't beat the British because they have more men and cannons.

So my guess is they were having Claire say, I don't know the strategy for how a pitchfork-wielding army with less men beats the British with cannons and whatnot when all she said was I don't know the strategy.

ganesh · June 27, 2016

That's a new piece of info because I don't think it's been brought up before. So if Claire said that to Ned, then great, though I don't recall, but nbd. Then why didn't she say the same thing to Jamie when he specifically wanted to address how they were going to move in Paris? "Oh, yeah, I said to Ned, blah blah cannons." My main point about the scene was that I shouldn't have to make assumptions and paraphrase for Claire.

RulerofallIsurvey · June 27, 2016

I've been waiting to comment, because I had to process. I wasn't sure how I felt about this episode. Then I realized, I really don't have that much to process in this ep. Randomly random thoughts:

Way, WAY too much BlackJackAsshole. I really don't care about him. AT ALL. And by association, I couldn't garner much interest in the Alex/BJA/Mary story line, except for poor Mary. That would thing could have been condensed by half.
Good for Mary calling Claire out on her interference.
Her good points about widow's pension notwithstanding, Claire better hope this is one time she doesn't change the future - cause if BJAsshole doesn't die at Culloden, like he is apparently supposed to - I will go through the tv myself and beat the snot out of Claire for her part in arranging the marriage between Mary and that sadist bastard.
I know the voiceover in the beginning said it had been five (?) months that the Jacobites had been in retreat (really? It took 5 months to get from Prestonpans to Inverness? I realize that foot soldiers can't cover as much ground as mounted, but that still seems like an awfully long time...) but Alex was already sick in Paris - and here he's on his deathbed. He and Mary must have got busy right away in order for him to even have the strength to father a child.
AWWWW on Murtaugh offering to marry Mary himself. Bet he'd have treated her like a queen.
Too bad Murtaugh's probably going to die. Don't get me wrong, I don't want him to die, but he's going to be one of those characters who 'have' to be killed off so the audience really understands the 'cost of war', blah blah blah. (Which is all BS, because if the showrunners wanted to, they could find another way to do it without killing him off. But I don't think that will happen.)
Jamie, of course, will not die. With Seasons 3 and 4 already confirmed, we cannot have the romantic lead killed off, now can we? Yes, I'm feeling very cynical right now. Why? Probably because:
we got one, ONE tiny, measly, little scrappy scene between Jamie and Claire. Regardless of what others might think, I'm not a pervert. And I'm not even talking about seeing them in bed together here, but Claire spent more time this ep with BJASShole than she did with her own husband! Am I the only one who sees something wrong with that? Obviously, she's going to go back through the stones next episode - we already know that from ep.1. So once again, like I said last week, why should I feel bad or sad about that? Heck, at least in the 20th centruy, she's got indoor plumbing, electricity, and penicillin, for Pete's sake. Oh, and no one is trying to rape or kill her at every turn. Stay in the 20th century, Claire. You'll be much happier there even without the Scottish beefcake.

Edited June 27, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey
tense!

RulerofallIsurvey · June 27, 2016

18 hours ago, taurusrose said:

(1) Not sure why CPR was even a consideration since no one knew anything about CPR in the 18th century. So BJR was being true to form, a FSB.

I also at first (for maybe 3 seconds) thought BJAsshole was attempting some sort of CPR on Alex. It was a consideration, imo, because even though the scene is set in the 18th century, we are watching in the 21st century and that makes sense to us. Also. Claire was from the 20th century, so - without knowing certainly otherwise - it could be possible that she'd taught basic CPR techniques to someone somewhere along the way and it had spread. Hey, don't laugh! If I hadn't written that, and the showrunners had decided they wanted it, that would have been the excuse.

RulerofallIsurvey · June 27, 2016

On 6/26/2016 at 9:24 AM, nara said:

As Jamie was trying to persuade Prince Charles to attack the English before Culloden, I was thinking, "Jamie, this is the time you should be claiming your wife has special powers of seeing into the future and has seen that a great disaster would befall them if they don't do the surprise attack!" After all, he's used the witch thing a couple of times. What's one more time?

Dang good call! And BPC would be familiar with Claire's 'powers' since he knew back in Paris that she was La Dame Blanche. Of all the times not to play the witch card...what? Was he afraid that she'd get burned at the stake this time and not all the others?

On 6/26/2016 at 9:24 AM, nara said:

You can see the look on the general's and Jamie's faces that they realize they are dealing with an idiot!

I can't believe it took them this long to figure it out.

I know this is my modern thinking (and probably essentially American thinking at that, since we were the first to do away with Kings and Princes and such) but I really have to wonder about the mindset of men - some very smart military men also - who would blindly follow BPC wishes and orders after surely having witnessed his idiocy over and over again at this point? (Letting Charles lead the second column for one thing.) Why didn't they have someone else tag along who knew what they were doing so when BPC got lost they could keep them on the right trail?

On 6/26/2016 at 11:30 AM, ganesh said:

So if you know the date you die, can you avoid it?

Or is Final Destination: 18th Century?

Finally, I agree with @ganesh that Claire's knowledge of the war seems to come and go as the plot demands.

On 6/26/2016 at 11:30 AM, ganesh said:

I don't mind inferring things on a show by carefully paying attention to the episodes. I don't need to be spoonfed. But making assumptions to fill in logical gaps is fanwanking and that's just shoddy. I'm not calling BS on the show, and now it's ruined or anything. TPTBs just made an error. On a high quality show like this, it stood out.

I don't need - or want - to be spoonfed either. And I am calling BS on the show. No, it's not ruined, but it is shoddy work.

Athena · June 27, 2016

Please do not a beat a horse about this "What Claire knows about Culloden" topic. This has been retreaded several times this season. I think everyone (including some book talkers) have expressed their own opinion on it now. Please take a break and move on for now. Thank you.

RulerofallIsurvey · June 27, 2016

13 minutes ago, Andorra said:

We know from Claire's talk to Ned Gowan, that the Scottish had no chance against canons

We know from her telling Jamie after the Witch trial, that she knows the Scots were outnumbered. We hear her say: "The Scots didn't have a chance. Thousands were killed at Culloden."

I'd forgotten that Claire had already made some of these points. Why on earth then would Jamie think they could go from trying to stop the war from happening to trying to win, when Claire had already told him they were outnumbered and out-gunned? The English had more cannons. Nothing Jamie did - nothing - changed that. Even stealing the cotter pins last ep disabled a few, but that was a drop in the bucket compared to how many the English had compared to the Scots. To continue trying to fight and win with that knowledge seems like sheer lunacy to me.

nara · June 27, 2016

23 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I'd forgotten that Claire had already made some of these points. Why on earth then would Jamie think they could go from trying to stop the war from happening to trying to win, when Claire had already told him they were outnumbered and out-gunned? The English had more cannons. Nothing Jamie did - nothing - changed that. Even stealing the cotter pins last ep disabled a few, but that was a drop in the bucket compared to how many the English had compared to the Scots. To continue trying to fight and win with that knowledge seems like sheer lunacy to me.

He had no choice once his name was forged on the declaration supporting BPC. He had to do something to try to win. He has pushed for "element of surprise" as differentiator in the presence of superior British forces.

RulerofallIsurvey · June 28, 2016

2 hours ago, nara said:

He had no choice once his name was forged on the declaration supporting BPC. He had to do something to try to win. He has pushed for "element of surprise" as differentiator in the presence of superior British forces.

Eh, I disagree with the "he had no choice" justification - whether it be Jamie in this instance or Claire in Season 1, when he reminded her that she had a choice to marry him or not. And she chose to marry Jamie instead of be handed over to BJR. So, imo, there is always a choice. It may not be a good choice, but there is one.

Therefore, Jamie had a choice. And Murtaugh (WWMD) even offered a Very viable alternative several times: cut BPC's throat. That would have had a greater chance in avoiding the whole mess more than "element of surprise" against a superior military force - which Jamie, with his military experience, should well know would only go so far.

nara · June 28, 2016

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Eh, I disagree with the "he had no choice" justification - whether it be Jamie in this instance or Claire in Season 1, when he reminded her that she had a choice to marry him or not. And she chose to marry Jamie instead of be handed over to BJR. So, imo, there is always a choice. It may not be a good choice, but there is one.

Therefore, Jamie had a choice. And Murtaugh (WWMD) even offered a Very viable alternative several times: cut BPC's throat. That would have had a greater chance in avoiding the whole mess more than "element of surprise" against a superior military force - which Jamie, with his military experience, should well know would only go so far.

You're right. There is always a choice. However, after the letter was written, the good choices were limited.

Killing BPC might still have been an option, but he would either be a traitor in the eyes of the Jacobites or the English. While Jamie and Claire could have either faced the music or run off to America, there might have been implications for Jenny and family or the other Lallybroch people if he killed BPC or was known as a traitor. Also, killing BPC would have been dishonorable. What is honor in the face of saving thousands of people? Probably nothing to us, but it might have meant more in the 18th century. Theoretically, it makes sense to kill BPC, but I can't imagine that it's easy to kill someone you know., whereas you might be able to get some emotional distance in a battle.

Perhaps they could have been more strategic in their approach, but I get the impression that they were just going from 1 thing to another to see what worked.

piequinn35 · July 4, 2016

I thought that BJR was punching Alex in the face not CPR coz he really did not want to get married hehe

and it is good to know that BJR was not really the ancestor of Frank but Alex. :)

ulkis · July 7, 2016

Just wanted to say, great username @Rilla my Rilla :)

paramitch · August 8, 2016

I thought this was a powerful episode that definitely helped to restore some of the complexity to BJR as a villain, and fleshed out Dougal's relationship to Colum, even if I felt that had been slightly retconned this season.

Last season, Dougal was painted as a powerful and adept chieftain who was able to keep his ego and emotions in check (for the most part), as the right-hand of his ruling brother. This season, he's constantly unable to contain himself, to the extent that his brother passes him over both as guardian and as future chieftain of their clan. Honestly, I found this egregious and unnecessarily cruel. While I don't think Dougal is a great leader with the necessary point of view to rule a kingdom, I do think he's fully capable of ruling a clan. And while Jamie would undoubtedly and visibly be a better leader, and steadier than Dougal, what bothered me is that he doesn't have the actual birthright or leadership within Clan Mackenzie.

I also felt like the final scene with Colum and Dougal was oddly written. Could Dougal really not think of anything positive to say to the brother who had protected his secrets and his lineage at the very end, beyond insulting him? To the extent that during a gentle reminiscence by Dougal, he kills himself without saying a kind word of farewell, or by hearing him out? Colum had control of that situation to a degree, and Colum chose to end his life without giving Dougal the simple chance to express affection and farewell. I thought it was disappointing of Colum and needlessly cruel.

The acting by all in those scenes -- BJR with Alex and Dougal with Colum -- was as usual on this show just wonderful and nuanced.

On 6/26/2016 at 2:07 PM, ganesh said:

I think this supports my argument. Now she knows specific dates, including victory in the battle prior where the Scots surprised them on the secret trail. Which would make sense because Frank was talking about it. So there's a discrepancy, and saying she would have learned this information in school "of course" isn't a valid assumption, was my initial point in this thread. I wouldn't have expected her to know tactics and strategy, and it's unfair to accuse her on that point.

I guess it's based in my interpretation of 'general outlines of history'. I would have figured she could at least have known they were outnumbered and outgunned. Which could affect how Jamie et al., plans their strategy. That's valuable intel even if it is fairly broad.

I think this may be an overly literal take, however.

I trust the show enough that they simply did not show us every single little thing Claire told Jamie about what she did recall. We don't hear every conversation, see every moment, and I actually like that, because it adds complexity of the moments that are chosen for us to witness.

But on the plus side, Claire was the wife of a historian -- I'm certain she had a few, however unhelpful, specifics, including dates. For instance, I'm an American yet I could not begin to tell you the specifics or logistics of the Battle of Gettysburg. But I do know the dates and some quotes from Lincoln's famed speech after the battle. But ask me about numbers or guns? Heck, no. No idea.

On 6/27/2016 at 5:37 AM, terrymct said:

I wish the series had given more time to Dougal and Colum's relationship and division of power. It's one of the more interesting parts of the show. They sort of represent two parts of a man. Colum's the rational(-ish) side of a person's brain and Dougal's the more visceral side. Their talk was fascinating and set up some potentially good conflict for future episodes. I wish, however, that the ground work had been better laid for it. Colum said that the MacKenzie men wouldn't follow him, essentially that he's not liked or respected. We didn't see that on the trip he took to collect rents in the first season. The local people seemed to have some genuine affection and respect for him and he interacted with them with sense and a bit of compassion. Showing people's unhappiness with him back in those episodes would have helped Colum's statement in this current episode make sense. That said, I really like the two actors who play Colum and Dougal and wish they'd had more to work with in this show.

I agree with this a lot, and it's why I loved the final scenes with Colum and Dougal, and why I have also been frustrated with the faint sense of retcon on Dougal this season. He is consistently painted as inept, and a fuckup, this season, when that is not really how we met him last season at all. He was by most accounts a formidable leader and commander, smart and respected, and capable of coolly strategic decisions when necessary.

So I wish his final conversation with Colum had been richer and more interesting. Less about how Colum disappointed him through injury and illness and more about how much he had loved and looked up to him (or even better, and more surprising, vice versa). I mean, Dougal by every account we've seen did a lot for Colum, yet Colum treated him with thinly veiled contempt here. It was a shame and I felt a missed opportunity for a richer conversation.

On 6/27/2016 at 8:01 AM, Rilla-my-Rilla said:

She did know they were outgunned and outnumbered though. She tells Ned that back in season 1 when they're out collecting rents. I don't remember exactly what she says to him, but it was basically you can't beat the British because they have more men and cannons.

So my guess is they were having Claire say, I don't know the strategy for how a pitchfork-wielding army with less men beats the British with cannons and whatnot when all she said was I don't know the strategy.

This.

On 6/27/2016 at 8:06 AM, ganesh said:

That's a new piece of info because I don't think it's been brought up before. So if Claire said that to Ned, then great, though I don't recall, but nbd. Then why didn't she say the same thing to Jamie when he specifically wanted to address how they were going to move in Paris? "Oh, yeah, I said to Ned, blah blah cannons." My main point about the scene was that I shouldn't have to make assumptions and paraphrase for Claire.

I don't agree. Beyond multiple conversations, we've visibly seen hints that Claire and Jamie have discussed the potentialities of Culloden over and over again, and that they have done their best to try to amass what little knowledge Claire could remember as ammunition as they made their plans. Just because the show hasn't specifically shown us Claire reciting the date to Jamie, doesn't at all mean that she didn't know it. (In fact, the fact that she specifically remembered Culloden and the generalities of the battle and its decimation of the Highland clans, made it highly believable to me that she would remember the date, if little else. The tragedy of it had obviously moved her.)

Meanwhile, to me, Rilla-my-Rilla's viewpoint makes sense, and goes with my perception of how most people address specific battles in their country's history. They know dates and maybe (maybe) a few generalities, but ask them about strategy and it's much rarer for anyone to be able to rattle off numbers, conditions, hazards, strategy or weaponry, no way.

Edited August 9, 2016 by paramitch
Typo fix! (Because Colum was cruel to DOUGAL not himself, gah...)

Camera One · March 17, 2021

When this show isn't all about gore and violence, it can be very good. This was one of the better episodes this season by far because it slowed down a bit (looking back, this might have been the second episode this season that I actually liked?). The acting was great all-round, and the character dynamics involved with both deaths were very engaging and moving.

The time jump from the last episode was another weird choice. It was nice to see Mary so strong in that first scene at the herbalist when Claire bumps into her, but I wish we saw a bit more of her and Alex together before his illness went full force.

Why didn't Jaime ensure there were some people with the Prince's group who knew the way? Who didn't see this coming. One of the reasons why this latter half of the season didn't work was that it was obvious all roads led to Culloden, both from the flashforward and the impossibility of Jaime somehow changing enough such that the Jacobites wouldn't be overpowered by the English. Even if Jaime could win a battle through his wits, he couldn't possibly have won the war without more support from the French. It would have worked better if Jaime and Claire was securing more support form the French in the first half of the season which they were confident would change the tide, but something happens and it doesn't materialize.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Camera One

gingerella · April 29, 2021

Wow, so...again a lot happening this episode. When I saw 'Culloden' on the map in the opening scene, I felt sick...It's as if this season started as a meandering brook that with each episode, it picked up more steam and force with the brook turning into a stream, turning into a river, which got wider, deeper, rapids started appearing, and now we are headed to the waterfalls with no way to stop the flow of this story current. It's making me so bummed out when I see gorgeous Scottish highland scenes, knowing that carnage is right around the corner.

Highlights for me:

Fergus falling asleep on Murtagh's back as they rode into camp was beyond sweet. Murtagh reaching around to make sure the lad is secure and doesn't fall off the horse...he'd make a good father that one would. Did we know Murtagh was Jamie's godfather or did I forget that? And when he volunteers to marry Mary because he would rather that then see her marry an evil scum like BJR? And his "she wouldn't be my choice, but you can grow to love one another..." was just soooo Murtagh! I want him to find love and happiness, but maybe Murtagh wouldn't be Murtagh if he had that...I don't know, but I do know I love him as he is, truly! In any case, I hope Murtagh is around for a good long while because his character is just absolutely golden! What a wonderful story line he has.

The burgeoning friendship blossoming between Ross and Rupert is so bittersweet. Rupert & Angus were like an old married couple, and Rupert has found his new Angus in Ross, which was a surprisingly tender moment between men that don't show emotions. Loved Jamie telling Claire, " Remind me to never get on your bad side, Sassanach!" Too true...

Things that annoyed the hell out of me:

BPC is such a poncy asshole, I find it difficult to comprehend that anyone would put their life on the line for such a dolt. In every scene he is the only one eating, drinking, and warming himself by the fire, then he fires off a few "Mark me's!" and they all fall in line, WTeverlovingF?! I mean, this idiot complains that an ambush isn't sportsmanlike - in a war! - and then brags about bringing wine to a fucking battle, to impress his future prisoners. I hate to say it because I feel for the Scottish but if this is halfway true in terms of real history, and BPC was like this, then it's no wonder they lost at Culloden.

How is it that Claire can just sashay herself into Inverness and dally about with buying medicines, helping Alex and Mary, etc.? It seems she can safely ride alone from the Jacobite army encampment into Inverness without any safety issues... I don't understand how they are all on the precipice of war and folks are lollygagging about in Inverness. Wouldn't folks be getting the hell out of dodge? It seems odd to me but then again what do I know about war in the mid 1700's?

Just when I think BJR cannot get any lower, he manages to limbo down another few notches into hell. I loathe that piece of shite and I wanted to reach into my TV screen and kill him myself. He is not worth the air he breathes and yet, as soon as I saw the three of them there I yelled in my head, "BINGO! You were right!" I thought this is how Mary marries this piece of shite, and I was so glad to know that Frank isn't a direct descendant of BJR's, even if I really don't give a rat's ass about Frank at all at this point - if we never saw him again I'd be A-okay about it. Also, I got my answer that Claire DID in fact tell BJR he dies in Culloden on that date, when she tells him his birth and death dates at Wentworth. I always wondered if she just made up a date or what. And now I am firmly in the camp that hopes Jamie is the one to end his miserable existence at Culloden because I don't want to see this character again on my screen, I really don't. I want to be done with the whole BJR/Frank thing because I can't stand the sight of the actor, seriously.

The Brothers MacKenzie:

Firstly, I guess 'yeah' that Geillis' son lives, but I wasn't clear if Dougal knew or not, it seems like not. I wonder if Claire will tell him... And yeah that we got word that Ned lives!

When Colum asks to speak with Claire alone, I thought he was going to ask her to persuade Jamie to become Laird of Clan MacKenzie and was going to tell her she was good enough to be Lady now. He partly said he was wrong about her, but I didn't expect him to ask her for some potion to kill himself.

Then when Colum asks Jamie to be Hamish's guardian, I felt the gut punch that Dougal felt, even though I knew it was coming. I get why Colum would rather Jamie be the boy's guardian but fuck, Dougal is his bio dad, maybe being a father would soften him a wee bit.

I thought it was shitty of Colum when he said to Jamie alone, "you know how to manage Dougal, give him just enough to make him feel like he's important, but don't let him get any real power", or however he said that. I felt for Dougal, the very thing, the ONLY thing he's been living his life for was to one day become Laird of the clan and that's been taken from him. It's like everything he values has been stripped from him. When Colum was telling him that basically he wasn't half as revered and respected as he thought he was, and if he was why weren't more MacKenzie men fighting with him - I mean shit, the Laird said no war, and then sent the war chief away, banished. So why would Colum think he men would disobey their Laird and join the Jacobite army? On top of that, when he infers that Dougal isn't well-liked in the clan and nobody will follow him, that is not what we saw during the rent collecting episodes in S01. Dougal collected rents but was fair overall, and compassionate most of the time, and the men and women didn't seem to dislike him, so that just didn't ring true to what we've been shown in a Show. Maybe the books are different but the Show hasn't shown us people disliking Dougal, not as far as I can remember.

When Colum says his, "I've been crippled in body, and you've been crippled in mind", that was heavy. And then we learn what has Dougal's panties in a twist all these years - his big brother fell off a horse, mangled his body and never recovered to be the big brother Dougal wanted and needed. I mean, I get that it might have been traumatic as a child to, in a sense, lose your big brother, but come on man, get it together! It's been decades, you could have made things better, mended bridges, had a heart to heart with your brother...but nope, Dougal just rages inside himself all these years, not knowing what to do with his darkest feelings. And Colum not caring enough, or wanting enough to ask him about it either. It was a bit heartbreaking when Dougal said, "You turn your back on me a final time, leaving me in this darkness" (paraphrasing), there is anguish there, not jealousy, this man will never heal, and it's just sad because he's just had the carpet ripped out from under him and the life he thought he knew is no more. Overall, I feel the Show has short-shrifted us on delving deeper into the relationship between these two brothers, both of whom played such a huge role in S01, and deserved more background, IMO. I dinnae ken if the books explore that for the Reader, but for the Viewer, I don't ken much about their upbringing and I think that was a missed opportunity in fleshing out these two characters.

At the end of the episode, I just knew that BPC's group would eff things up and they surely did that. The desperation in Jamie's voice, begging his team not turn back to Inverness, that was painful to hear. And when Murtagh said to Jamie as they turned to head back, "tomorrow we have our battle", I just felt sick to my stomach....

Edited April 29, 2021 by gingerella

SassAndSnacks · April 30, 2021

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

It's as if this season started as a meandering brook that with each episode, it picked up more steam and force with the brook turning into a stream, turning into a river, which got wider, deeper, rapids started appearing, and now we are headed to the waterfalls with no way to stop the flow of this story current. It's making me so bummed out when I see gorgeous Scottish highland scenes, knowing that carnage is right around the corner.

This is a great analogy.

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

I thought this is how Mary marries this piece of shite

You called it episodes ago!! Bravo!

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

I mean shit, the Laird said no war, and then sent the war chief away, banished. So why would Colum think he men would disobey their Laird and join the Jacobite army? On top of that, when he infers that Dougal isn't well-liked in the clan and nobody will follow him, that is not what we saw during the rent collecting episodes in S01. Dougal collected rents but was fair overall, and compassionate most of the time, and the men and women didn't seem to dislike him, so that just didn't ring true to what we've been shown in a Show. Maybe the books are different but the Show hasn't shown us people disliking Dougal, not as far as I can remember.

These are all really strong points, and I agree the show could have/should have done more here with these two. I do think we've seen from last season until now that they've been setting up and proving that Jamie is the better and preferred future leader of the Clan. For Colum to throw it right out there like that in front of Dougal, that Jamie should be the leader and that Jamie should be Hamish's guardian, that was cold. And the look on Jamie's face like "Shit, we don't have time for this..."

The exchange between Dougal and Colum was really powerful and heartbreaking, and you could really feel Dougal losing whatever pieces of internal control he had left. The disappoint he's dealing with right now - he's starving, the war isn't looking so good, BPC is a disappointment, he's questioning his beliefs, he can't be his own child's guardian, Colum rubbed his nose in his shortcomings yet again, Jamie is still better, and so on and so on. I feel for him.

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

It was a bit heartbreaking when Dougal said, "You turn your back on me a final time, leaving me in this darkness" (paraphrasing), there is anguish there, not jealousy, this man will never heal, and it's just sad because he's just had the carpet ripped out from under him and the life he thought he knew is no more.

Oh yes, you said it better than I did.

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

The desperation in Jamie's voice, begging his team not turn back to Inverness, that was painful to hear. And when Murtagh said to Jamie as they turned to head back, "tomorrow we have our battle", I just felt sick to my stomach....

My heart hurt for Jamie throughout this entire episode. The weight on him is just growing heavier and heavier, and no matter what he does, there is no stopping what is about to happen. Murtaugh's words, yes...hard to swallow.

gingerella · April 30, 2021

1 hour ago, SassAndSnacks said:

These are all really strong points, and I agree the show could have/should have done more here with these two. I do think we've seen from last season until now that they've been setting up and proving that Jamie is the better and preferred future leader of the Clan. For Colum to throw it right out there like that in front of Dougal, that Jamie should be the leader and that Jamie should be Hamish's guardian, that was cold. And the look on Jamie's face like "Shit, we don't have time for this..."

The exchange between Dougal and Colum was really powerful and heartbreaking, and you could really feel Dougal losing whatever pieces of internal control he had left. The disappoint he's dealing with right now - he's starving, the war isn't looking so good, BPC is a disappointment, he's questioning his beliefs, he can't be his own child's guardian, Colum rubbed his nose in his shortcomings yet again, Jamie is still better, and so on and so on. I feel for him.

You know, I was thinking about this today, and really, this season we see Dougal so emotionally brittle, and it is so unsettling to see because in S01 he is such a dynamic force to be reckoned with, and this second half of S02 he's just getting knocked down at every turn. You see it in his face every time Jamie tells him 'No', it's like he deflates just a little bit more, and you can see him struggling to find not just 'his' place, but any place that feels like he belongs. I don't know how he can survive at this point. If Dougal lives through Culloden, and we know Jamie must because hello, six seasons, I honestly don't see Jamie going to Leoch to become Hamish's mentor/guardian, so perhaps there is redemption for Dougal after all? And maybe Claire will tell him about his child before she goes back through the Stones to give him something to live for if he doesn't go back to Leoch. I mean, nobody would know that Colum didn't change his mind and make Dougal the guardian, right? I don't how Dougal can survive without that. At this point I wouldn't be surprised at all if he runs head long into a charge during the battle, almost trying to kill himself because he's got nothing left to live for. It's sad for such a charismatic character to fall so low.

Oh, and I meant to say last night, when BJR begged Claire to help Alec, I kept yelling in my head, "Tell him you will help Alec if he, BJR, goes to Jamie for a duel, and he just lets Jamie kill him once and for all." That's what I wanted her to say to that freak show.

Quote

1 hour ago, SassAndSnacks said:

And the look on Jamie's face like "Shit, we don't have time for this..."

I know, right?!? If we could read Jamie's thought bubble during that scene, it surely was something like, "Are you fucking kidding me? Do ye two ken what we're doing here? We're all about to die horrible deaths tomorrow in a colossal fuck up of a battle and you two are whinging like a couple of little bairns! To quote my wife, 'Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ'!"

Edited April 30, 2021 by gingerella

SassAndSnacks · April 30, 2021

13 hours ago, gingerella said:

this season we see Dougal so emotionally brittle

Yes and actually, this season has given us a glimpse at everyone's emotional breaking points, Dougal included.

I awoke this morning thinking of Outlander, as one does. There were times in Paris where we "lost" our favorites. Who were those people? And if you doubted your love for them in Paris, surely the back half of this season has swung them back into your favor. For me, Jamie has grown so much in the previous 3 episodes, which I believe is why those 3 are among my favorites of the entire series. He's dynamic, caring, fearless, a leader, cunning, empathetic, determined...seriously, we're just scratching the surface. Over this few episode arc, he has been endeared to me in a different way than in Season 1. I absolutely feel for him and hurt for him. His desperation and his resolve really settle into me, and it sticks with me long after I get off the treadmill, turn off the show, and go about my day.

And not to keep harping on this, but I believe that sentiment is due, in large part, to the fact that we know his efforts to prevent Culloden don't work. Claire goes back. Culloden is lost. They failed. Instead of rooting for him, I hurt for him, and I wonder how that feeling would be different had the season not opened up the way it did.

gingerella · April 30, 2021

5 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

I awoke this morning thinking of Outlander, as one does. There were times in Paris where we "lost" our favorites. Who were those people? And if you doubted your love for them in Paris, surely the back half of this season has swung them back into your favor. For me, Jamie has grown so much in the previous 3 episodes, which I believe is why those 3 are among my favorites of the entire series. He's dynamic, caring, fearless, a leader, cunning, empathetic, determined...seriously, we're just scratching the surface. Over this few episode arc, he has been endeared to me in a different way than in Season 1. I absolutely feel for him and hurt for him. His desperation and his resolve really settle into me, and it sticks with me long after I get off the treadmill, turn off the show, and go about my day.

Your comment made me harken back to S01, the episode where they are all at a dinner banquet and Claire is teasing Jamie across the table about seeing him suck face with Leery, making fun of him and asking if a filly has bit him or something, and she finds it all quite amusing yet we also suspect there is a hint of jealousy there as well. Then after a flustered Jamie gets up and leaves the table, Murtagh gets in Claire's face and tells her very pointedly, "...that lass will be a lass when she's 50. Jamie needs a woman!" He stares down Claire and in that moment I remember thinking, "so...do you want Claire to get together with Jamie because you're not going about this the right way!" Murtagh knows what Jamie needs more than Jamie does at times, and in hindsight, that scene is like a morse code to Claire from Murtagh, "Sister, go for it because he needs a real woman, not a girl, please for the love of god take him and make a man of him!" And honestly, as we near the end of S02 and I look back at that scene from your above comment, it is Claire who has helped Jamie to grow into the man we now see. Claire...and Murtagh of course! Jamie has had to do so much growing up to protect the woman he loves because she has this propensity to get herself into hot water rather often. He has opened himself up to her, emotionally, and in doing so has also grown in very significant ways. He understands what it is to truly love a partner deeply and selflessly. He knows what others need in a leader and he understands how to motivate others. He has the communication skills of a man that others look up to - most of the time, unless he's with the sycophantic BPC Club of old geezers. He can experience real fear and push through it to get to the other side. There is so much growth in his character, from a rough and tumble lad to the leader of the Rebellion (let's be honest, aint nobody in BPC's old geezer's club who's leading a charge at Culloden, it'll be Jamie and his men, not the fancy boys in their finery.

And because it cannot be said enough, Ellen and Brian Fraser were very smart to make Murtagh Jamie's godfather. He has stood that decision in good stead for sure!

Quote

5 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

And not to keep harping on this, but I believe that sentiment is due, in large part, to the fact that we know his efforts to prevent Culloden don't work. Claire goes back. Culloden is lost. They failed. Instead of rooting for him, I hurt for him, and I wonder how that feeling would be different had the season not opened up the way it did.

I was one who felt at the top of S02, why did they ruin it and tell me what's going to happen at the end of this season?! What's the point of that, now I'll spend all of S02 being anxious about what's to come because I know what will happen! I mean yes, of course we know what happened at Culloden and this Show doesn't seem to change real historic facts so what is coming is inevitable. But knowing Claire will be sent back, it's made me feel a sense of foreboding and dread all season long. But when I read your above comment I also felt like, okay yes, the story tellers are skilled enough to know that by flipping the script, literally, and showing us where Claire ends up at the end of this season, creates a sense of anxiety and dread that is akin to what Jamie, Claire and Murtagh are all feeling right now. Tomorrow is the day. Shit is real. People will die en masse. And Claire will be sent back to her time to save her life no doubt. I get it now. Well done Show, well done!

Edited April 30, 2021 by gingerella

SassAndSnacks · May 2, 2021

Just popping in to say Happy 300th Birthday to our JAMMF!!

Pallas · May 2, 2021

On 4/30/2021 at 7:42 PM, gingerella said:

But when I read your above comment I also felt like, okay yes, the story tellers are skilled enough to know that by flipping the script, literally, and showing us where Claire ends up at the end of this season, creates a sense of anxiety and dread that is akin to what Jamie, Claire and Murtagh are all feeling right now.

And I think that our knowledge raised the stakes in every decision that the couple made, and sharpens the poignancy of their time together before Culloden. It enabled us to see their child who survives in the 20th century. And pragmatically, for the storytellers, it avoids our ending the season and entering the hiatus with shock and dashed hopes adding too much grievance, too much sense of betrayal, to the pain from the loss and parting that we've long known is in the winds.

Cdh20 · May 2, 2021

1 hour ago, Pallas said:

And I think that our knowledge raised the stakes in every decision that the couple made, and sharpens the poignancy of their time together before Culloden. It enabled us to see their child who survives in the 20th century. And pragmatically, for the storytellers, it avoids our ending the season and entering the hiatus with shock and dashed hopes adding too much grievance, too much sense of betrayal, to the pain from the loss and parting that we've long known is in the winds.

I wish somehow it was less painful!

SassAndSnacks · May 3, 2021

On 4/30/2021 at 7:42 PM, gingerella said:

Claire who has helped Jamie to grow into the man we now see.

Love that you said this. I've read people ogling over Jamie, about his character, the man that he is and so on, but Claire is so seldom mentioned as a contributing factor in making that man. She is. There's no way around that. She doesn't go through the stones, Jamie isn't Jamie. Her impact on him is profound and multi-faceted. Without her, he is either captured by the British or dies in the ensuing ambush from his gunshot wound in Episode 1. That's the first glimpse, but it's other things too from thinking about his future more clearly, making plans, or even dental hygiene and germs. She takes care of this man and he her. Jamie is Jamie because Claire is Claire. If not for Claire, would he still be crashing in the Leoch stables?

Didn't that snit Annaliese say something to the effect of "He was a boy when I knew him, but you have made him a man"?? Well, yes, and it was a good thing.

On 4/30/2021 at 7:42 PM, gingerella said:

okay yes, the story tellers are skilled enough to know that by flipping the script, literally, and showing us where Claire ends up at the end of this season, creates a sense of anxiety and dread that is akin to what Jamie, Claire and Murtagh are all feeling right now. Tomorrow is the day. Shit is real. People will die en masse. And Claire will be sent back to her time to save her life no doubt. I get it now. Well done Show, well done!

On 5/2/2021 at 7:46 AM, Pallas said:

And I think that our knowledge raised the stakes in every decision that the couple made, and sharpens the poignancy of their time together before Culloden. It enabled us to see their child who survives in the 20th century. And pragmatically, for the storytellers, it avoids our ending the season and entering the hiatus with shock and dashed hopes adding too much grievance, too much sense of betrayal, to the pain from the loss and parting that we've long known is in the winds.

I agree with both of you. It had to be done this way. Doesn't mean I have to fully like it (but really, I wouldn't have liked the inevitable separation either way so...) It does create a greater attachment to their story.

Cdh20 · May 4, 2021

12 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

Love that you said this. I've read people ogling over Jamie, about his character, the man that he is and so on, but Claire is so seldom mentioned as a contributing factor in making that man. She is. There's no way around that. She doesn't go through the stones, Jamie isn't Jamie. Her impact on him is profound and multi-faceted. Without her, he is either captured by the British or dies in the ensuing ambush from his gunshot wound in Episode 1. That's the first glimpse, but it's other things too from thinking about his future more clearly, making plans, or even dental hygiene and germs. She takes care of this man and he her. Jamie is Jamie because Claire is Claire. If not for Claire, would he still be crashing in the Leoch stables?

Didn't that snit Annaliese say something to the effect of "He was a boy when I knew him, but you have made him a man"?? Well, yes, and it was a good thing.

Claire did indeed make Jamie into the man he becomes!

Anothermi · May 4, 2021

There was one more thing about this episode that I don't think anyone has touched on—at least since I started watching—and that was the parallel stories of "Brotherly Love".

Colum and Dougal vs. Alex and Jonathan (BJR).

They appear to me as almost mirror opposites—except the part when one brother harbours deep hatred towards the other brother. The Hatred, of course, is of their own making—but neither hater sees that.

Colum is to blame for Dougal's bitterness because he didn't stay on the pedestal that the young Dougal put him on. At least not in the way Dougal wanted him. Colum was weak when Dougal needed him to be strong, not smart, just strong. It appears that Dougal resented that Colum had a fall-back position of a different kind of strength when the physical kind deserted him.

Colum—on the other hand—seems to have been blithely unaware of Dougal's early idolization. As the older son, Colum may have just found Dougal to be annoying. He certainly had no deep emotional obligation to his brother—just the obligation of the blood tie—which was deep in and of itself. And we were shown that Dougal received Colum's “special” attention only when he did something that undermined Colum.

Also, I don't believe Colum drank the poison while Dougal was with him (if he did it worked awfully fast!) but that he had no expectation that Dougal would come to him for a final word and took it when he was ready—which was before Dougal showed up. I believe Dougal just left his “confession”—and possibly his offer of peace—too late. I also doubt that he would have experienced the reconciliation he craved even if Colum had given his forgiveness. What is the saying? Too little, too late.

Dougal's relationship with Colum was all about himself.

But it was BJR who seemed to cherish his little brother—as seen in this exchange he has with Claire... BJR:“Do not take your animus for me out on my brother. Alex has not drawn an easy breath in weeks. His youth and vigor are drowning in blood and phlegm. Cure him.”—but also appears to deeply hate him. We don't know how either of those conflicting emotions came to be!

What I recall is that BJR wrote to his brother—kept in touch so to speak— and found Alex work and paid his bills when needed. Nothing ostensibly from the heart. Was Alex the kind of person who deeply appreciated anything his brother gave him?

It is so hard to imagine BJR knowingly being kind. What we did get to see was that there was something in BJR that insisted that he act as though he loved his brother. Perhaps that behavior was his one point of Honour? and it may have been drilled into him at a young age? Or maybe he really did care for the little boy who thought the world of him? I'm speculating, of course.

It looked like BJR felt a strong obligation to meet Alex's expectation of him regarding marrying Mary. (Although Claire did encourage him, I don't believe he felt any obligation to meet HER expectations.)

But what we saw—when Alex died–was that BJR deeply resented Alex's final request. And, like Dougal, he blamed his brother because—although he didn't want to do it, had actually refused to do it—he HATED Alex for asking it of him while knowing that he couldn't/wouldn't refuse in the end.

BJR told Claire that he liked being the sadist that he had become—yet Alex's belief in him seemed to “force” him to continue to divide himself and carry a portion of the caring person he might have been (at one point) beyond the life of the one person who knew that about him. I really want to think that BJR once was a caring person. I really do.

Still there is a parallel between BJR and Dougal. BJR's relationship with Alex ultimately seems to be all about himself as well.

In one sibling relationship the younger brother loved conditionally and when his condition was not met, he turned that disapointment into hate. In the other, the older sibling nurtured hatred for the unconditional love his brother gave him—perhaps because he felt he had to live up to his brothers view of him?

But—as all good shows seem to know—two takes on similar situations makes for good viewing.

ETA: Of course I would be foolish enough to review the scene when Alex asks BJR to marry Mary. How could I have missed this:

Alex: You think I am unaware of the density of the dark wall you have built to protect your better self from the world? But I have borne witness to your tenderness. I've been the beneficiary of your generous soul. That inner man is the one whom I entrust my love... and my child.

It still relies on telling us rather than showing us, but it shines a new light on BJR. Given that he's supposed to die soon I don't have much hope of learning more next episode.

I believe I might have to revisit my thoughts on BJR in light of this. But not in this post—and not tonight.

Edited May 4, 2021 by Anothermi
Additional food for thought

gingerella · May 4, 2021

17 hours ago, Anothermi said:

There was one more thing about this episode that I don't think anyone has touched on—at least since I started watching—and that was the parallel stories of "Brotherly Love".

Colum and Dougal vs. Alex and Jonathan (BJR).

@Anothermi, this was a masterful post, thank you for writing it as it does bring to light a 'thing' that nobody's mentioned in this episode! So many great comments are within your post so I just wanted to say that re:

17 hours ago, Anothermi said:

They appear to me as almost mirror opposites—except the part when one brother harbours deep hatred towards the other brother. The Hatred, of course, is of their own making—but neither hater sees that.

This is so interesting and I'm stumped that I didn't see it! You are right, it's sort of a mirror but opposite situation with Dougal the Younger hating his older brother...for what exactly? For having an accident and becoming physically impaired but not mentally impaired? And BJR the Older hates his younger brother...for what exactly? For knowing the darkness that BJR inhabits, and for knowing that he once showed some glimmer of decency? For me - and perhaps this is because I hate the BJR character with the fire of a thousand suns - I find the Colum/Dougal relationship so much more interesting because they can spar with one another and are, in a sense, equals, though that thought would never cross Dougal's mind because to him the physicality of a 'real man' supersedes mental acumen. Where Colum is more careful, diplomatic, and strategic, even cunning, Dougal is brave, fearless, and a little crazy. Both have shown capacity for love though - Colum with his wife and Hamish, and Dougal with his lover and Hamish. I cannot give the same due and interest to the BJR/Alex relationship. We have a sweet and gentle young man who wears his heart on his sleeve and is an honorable man, though not very manly in the physical sense. And his brother is a rotting, evil monster who will say and do unspeakable things to other human beings, and takes pleasure in breaking a person's very soul. I know that Alex's comment leads us to think, even if for a moment, that there might be a reason for BJRs horrible torturous deeds, but when I remember all the things he's done, I cannot give him even one iota of benefit of the doubt that maybe something made him this evil. The truth is, for this Viewer I just don't give a damn. I don't know if the books tell a deeper story of his 'why', but I can say that I am happier knowing he will die at Culloden, if what Claire says is true, and I only hope Jamie is the one to do the deed. Other than that, I cannot wait for him to stop gracing my story!

BTW, I keep meaning to say, I realized this episode that Claire always calls Jamie 'soldier' when she's in difficult situations with him. I believe she first says this to him when she bandages him up after he falls off his horse in S01E01, and she says, "On your feet/horse soldier". She says this pretty much every time Jamie has to go off to a potentially dangerous situation. And I realized, DUH, it's from her own war days. But I never see Jamie ask her about it, or react to it. He isn't really a 'soldier', not by British Army standards, and it's curious to me that she says this a lot but he never seems to question it. Maybe it's just seen as a verbal token of affection or something, but it's something I keep noticing...

Edited May 4, 2021 by gingerella

Sign In

S02.E12: The Hail Mary

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment