S03.E01: The Battle Joined

[Athena]

Quote

 

After living through the Battle of Culloden, Jamie finds himself at the mercy of unforgiving British victors, until a connection from his past provides his only hope of survival. Meanwhile, a pregnant Claire attempts to adjust to life in the modern world of 1940s Boston – and life with Frank.

 

Reminder: The is the book talk thread. If you wish to remain unspoiled about any of the books, please leave now and head to the No Book Talk episode thread.

[FnkyChkn34]

This episode was very good, but the part where Jamie and BJR see each other on the battlefield for the first time was just too cheesy for words. I understand it was still in Jamie's dream, but the slow motion effects and glow of the golden light really cheapened the sequence, imo.  I don't recall Rupert's role from the book, but I really liked him in this episode and how he faced his fate with dignity after helping others. 

For the first time ever, I found myself agreeing with Frank. Now, I know that won't last because he's a huge a-hole (in the books, and previously in the show, all in my opinion), but if he was actually being genuine to her in the scene where he said "stay or go" then I felt sympathy for him. I didn't understand his resentment to her wanting to pursue citizenship though; that made little sense and he was a jerk there.  Also, is that really how Bree was born...?

I'm excited for next week's episode - I need to see Jamie back alive and not all covered in fake blood. 

[Cramps]

I thought BJR and Jamie seeing each other in the battle was the best part of the episode, because of the way Tobias played it.  The look on his face when he realized it was Jamie,  and the way he reached out and touched him was perfect.  

 

I agee, the Rupert additions at the end were really strong. 

[FnkyChkn34]

11 minutes ago, Cramps said:

I thought BJR and Jamie seeing each other in the battle was the best part of the episode, because of the way Tobias played it.  The look on his face when he realized it was Jamie,  and the way he reached out and touched him was perfect.  

 

I agee, the Rupert additions at the end were really strong. 

That was after the part I'm talking about. When they first see each other across the field; they are still dozens of yards away from each other.  That's when it went all slow and the lighting changed. So ridiculous, imo, I thought they were going to run towards each other like lovers in a field of wildflowers... The speed and lighting changed back to normal as they approached each other. I want to watch it again to confirm, but that's my recollection. 

Also, I remember thinking, "well, Tobias isn't winning any Emmys for BJR's final death scene..." The rest was well acted, but the very final moments? Not so much. 

[annlaw78]

53 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

That was after the part I'm talking about. When they first see each other across the field; they are still dozens of yards away from each other.  That's when it went all slow and the lighting changed. So ridiculous, imo, I thought they were going to run towards each other like lovers in a field of wildflowers... The speed and lighting changed back to normal as they approached each other. I want to watch it again to confirm, but that's my recollection. 

I find it kinda gross how the show continues to try to emphasize a special connection between Jamie and Jack, like they have a "thing," rather than the reality.  I just don't think it's artsy or clever or whatever they're going for to portray rape survivor and rapist in that way.  

[Dust Bunny]

I loved the lack of dialogue with so many of Jamie's scenes. Appropriate for the memories, and it also conveys Jamie's lack of strength.

At the Culloden memorial center, there's a 360 video of the battle. You stand in the middle with the English on one side - eventually 3 sides - and the Scots on the other. I got physically nauseated watching those cannons and muskets do their work. As soon as the English fired in the episode, I felt that same nausea. The battle was really well done.

Did Jamie dream that Claire touched him on the battlefield? That shocked me, because it was her touching his nose that got him to realize she was real, in the print shop. Same thing, after Laoghaire shot him. I know dreaming you are touched isn't the same thing as being touched, but I was still surprised.

It was about 30 seconds, but I think the scene of Frank writing the Reverend confirms to me that book Frank learned everything quickly, and he raised Bree, anticipating she'll go into the past. "Red Jamie" + "Where did she get the red hair?" = Frank is not a dummy. In that moment, I loved Frank. No, he's not Jamie, but he's a good guy, and he got screwed. And he never trapped Claire in the relationship. In fact, since he made her promise not to research anything, only he would know about Bree going back in time. He might have been protecting her - and Claire, as well - by raising her, in prep for her future. When he wanted to take Bree back to the UK, that might have been Frank knowing he didn't have much time left (heart condition), and he wanted to tell Bree about Jamie.

The episode did a great job of making me detest mansplaining. I wanted to slug the dean and the doctor, so Moore's script was quite effective there. It created a great foundation for why Claire would want to gain more agency through being a surgeon.

I'm 75% convinced Murtagh is alive. That was a gaping plot hole. Dammit. 

SOOOO good to have this show back. I squealed several times during the credits. Sláinte!

Edited September 10, 2017 by Dust Bunny
adding Frank stuff

[Petunia846]

32 minutes ago, annlaw78 said:

I find it kinda gross how the show continues to try to emphasize a special connection between Jamie and Jack, like they have a "thing," rather than the reality.  I just don't think it's artsy or clever or whatever they're going for to portray rape survivor and rapist in that way.  

Totally agree. Tobias is a good actor...okay, I get it. I don't need the roles of either BJR or Frank expanded or "deepened" just because they like giving him work. I thought it was super gross the way BJ's body eventually rolled partway off Jamie and then it looked like they were embracing in bed. I know Jamie was really out of it, but I don't see him just lying there with BJ's dead body on top of him or next to him. And wouldn't the British who were walking around have seen BJ's red coat and come collect his body for a respectable funeral? Sam's acting was great in those scenes, but I was distracted by all of those things.

The rest of the episode was excellent, although I did want to punch every man in Boston. Geez. Did they really knock women out for births like that? I'd never heard of that. I thought women had to be awake to push.

I loved Claire giving up on the modern "convenience" of a stove and just cooking dinner in the fireplace. Wish we'd actually seen Frank's reaction to that. The ups and downs of their relationship felt very believable.

Everything in the cottage after the battle was great. Heartbreaking Rupert wasn't there in the books because they kind expanded those characters from what they were in the books. I only thought it was odd because, if I recall correctly, in the book the other men in the cottage were all other officers like Jamie. I'd always assumed that that was why their names were recorded in the ledger and thus, that's why the document was still around for Claire and Bree and Roger to find in the 60s. I didn't think regular Scots like Rupert and whoever the other people were would have their names recorded and that document would be kept safe for so long. But whatever, that's not really important, because it was more emotionally satisfying to have Rupert there and some other people who seemed to know Jamie. (I tried rewatching both seasons but I started too late and only got up to 202, so I hadn't seen the episodes at the end of last season recently, and I didn't recognize any of the other men. Were they folks from Leoch or Lord Fraser's men? Or just random Scots?)

[lianau]

1 hour ago, annlaw78 said:

I find it kinda gross how the show continues to try to emphasize a special connection between Jamie and Jack, like they have a "thing," rather than the reality.  I just don't think it's artsy or clever or whatever they're going for to portray rape survivor and rapist in that way.  

But they have a special connection , it's just a very very negative one for Jamie . Jack wanted Jamie to surrender and submit to him , Jamie specifically , not  a random prisoner simply for sexual gratification . And this was hardest part for Jamie to get through, that Jack wanted him and that for Jack it was an act of love . And Jamie is still thinking about that after Brianna's rape , when he theorizes that Brianna would have an easier time recovering from it if she was just some random body for Bonnet ,which obviously pissed Claire off.

[annlaw78]

2 hours ago, Petunia846 said:

Totally agree. Tobias is a good actor...okay, I get it. I don't need the roles of either BJR or Frank expanded or "deepened" just because they like giving him work. I thought it was super gross the way BJ's body eventually rolled partway off Jamie and then it looked like they were embracing in bed. I know Jamie was really out of it, but I don't see him just lying there with BJ's dead body on top of him or next to him. And wouldn't the British who were walking around have seen BJ's red coat and come collect his body for a respectable funeral? Sam's acting was great in those scenes, but I was distracted by all of those things.

It will be interesting to see how/if the show will keep audience interest by having so much focus on characters and events other than the central Claire-Jamie relationship.  I agree... I don't think the show really needs MORE Frank.  For those of us who haven't read all the books, Frank holds very little interest.  

 

The show seems at times to play what happened between Jamie and Jack as a variant on  coerced/reluctant consent.  That is an awfully hard thing to pull off, and do so in a way that is thoughtful and respectful, rather than exploitative,  dumb, and trashy romance novelish (the maiden kidnapped by pirates! the forced marriage to a hunky, be-kilted Scot because of fake laws!).  I don't see any more "connection" Jamie has for Jack than Mary has for her rapist.  And I bristle at that concept that a rape survivor is forever bonded with his or her rapist.  I'm just glad Jack's  dead now, finally (hopefully), so I can quit having to see him leer and grunt at Jamie, and see the show manufacture reasons why that continues to happen.

Edited September 10, 2017 by annlaw78

[Glaze Crazy]

3 hours ago, annlaw78 said:

I find it kinda gross how the show continues to try to emphasize a special connection between Jamie and Jack, like they have a "thing," rather than the reality.  I just don't think it's artsy or clever or whatever they're going for to portray rape survivor and rapist in that way.  

 

1 hour ago, lianau said:

But they have a special connection , it's just a very very negative one for Jamie . Jack wanted Jamie to surrender and submit to him , Jamie specifically , not  a random prisoner simply for sexual gratification . And this was hardest part for Jamie to get through, that Jack wanted him and that for Jack it was an act of love .

I took this visual as a dual perspective. BJR was seeing Jamie as this object he's been obsessed with, who is now again in front of him, while Jamie saw that he was going to actually get the chance to kill this SOB like he planned and verbalized to Claire. I thought it was quite effective, if lit oddly. I think the commentary at the end mentioned that they had some nice sunsets on that shoot and it was the director's choice to exploit that for the battle scenes.

I'm good with how they are giving equal-ish time to the Boston side of the story. That part of the story as revealed in the books has been mostly random "flashbacks" of Claire's and not necessarily linear to Jamie's journey. That they have to do it differently for a visual medium and even flesh out more of Claire's 20 year experience in the present might turn out to be one of the improvements this show does over the books. (And I love the books!) I thought Claire was going to go all Highlander Charge on that asshole professor though. And that Doctor who kept ignoring her while asking Frank about her contractions and such. Some of our Mothers did suffer these fools back in the day. Thanks Mom, for not committing multiple murders!

Another good change was giving Rupert the role in the farmhouse (and thus closure for his character,) instead of the random book character that we have never seen before, despite the fact that, as mentioned above, the men in the (book) farmhouse were all officers and merited being recorded by name vs. a foot soldier like Rupert. I had tears, in any case.

Glad to see this back, looking forward to how they flesh out (or not) my favorite book of the first half of the series.

[mrsjoe]

I too loved Rupert. It was true to his character to joke around to the end.  That matched the books. I was laughing and crying at his "I mean to keep a quick pace, try to keep up" to the soldier walking him out.  The kids learning they wouldn't be spared was heartbreaking as well. Even Lord Melton managed some sympathy as you saw it was hurting him to follow through on the order that age was no excuse.

 

I still don't quite understand why Black Jack's body was ignored. In the books I always got the impression that he was buried near Colloden because everyone (besides his dead brother) had always hated him and decided he was not worth the effort of shipping home, but they made it seem like he was just missed on the field. Of course someone must figure out who he is at some point to mark the grave, so maybe the hated theory still works. 

 

I am am all in favor of deviating from the books and Murtaugh survived, but I'm not sure how they would pull that off seeing as almost everyone who fought and survived was killed soon after. Can't imagine him not being by Jamie's side if he wasn't greviously injured even if we suppose he's canny enough to hide from the English and head somewhere else. Unless he truly thought Jamie was dead? Maybe they'll just have him taken prisoner for some odd reason. Lord Melton mentioned that Jamie could have been valuable as a token, so may have been left alive. But Murtaugh didn't have that status I think. In the end though, I may be able to suspend disbelief and accept about anything if Murtaugh shows up in the colonies or something! Maybe Murtaugh could replace the Duncan Innes role?

[toolazy]

Did the books ever really explain why Randall was buried in Scotland?  

[DittyDotDot]

Just now, toolazy said:

Did the books ever really explain why Randall was buried in Scotland?  

Yes and no. I mean,

Spoiler

I don't know that Randall is, in fact, buried in Scotland, but I believe Frank put up both Jamie's and Randall's headstones in the book. 

[WatchrTina]

5 hours ago, Dust Bunny said:

The episode did a great job of making me detest mansplaining. I wanted to slug the dean and the doctor, so Moore's script was quite effective there. It created a great foundation for why Claire would want to gain more agency through being a surgeon.

Amen sister.

5 hours ago, Dust Bunny said:

I'm 75% convinced Murtagh is alive. That was a gaping plot hole. Dammit. 

Please let that be true!  Please let that be true!

5 hours ago, Dust Bunny said:

SOOOO good to have this show back. I squealed several times during the credits

I straight-up cheered when Jamie delivered what I thought was the final blow to Black Jack.  I'm a bit angry that they did not conclusively show us he is dead.  I mean we saw a crow eat the eyes of a dead man in S01E14, The Search.  Is it too much to ask them to do the same with Jack's dead carcass?  It happened in the book.  I also got mad when I saw Jack "moving" though I was certain it was Jamie's breath -- his chest moving up and down -- that created the illusion.  Stop messing with our heads show-runners!  I need Black Jack dead.  I need him to be an ex-redcoat.  Bereft of life, he needs to be pushing up the daisies. He needs to be no more. 

Okay I'm calling it.  All those redcoats pillaging from the dead and delivering the coup de grâce to the wounded Jacobites would certainly have checked Jack for a pulse and taken him for medical treatment were he not dead dead dead.  He's dead Jim.  I'm calling it.

Off to watch again!

[Clawdette]

I loved the first 15 minutes and concentrating on Culloden. Beautifully shot and acted. I loved Boston, too.

I don't know whether I can explain clearly what I'm trying to say in the following. For me, the way the Scotland scenes and the Boston scene were cut together gave the impression that they were happing in parallel times. But Jamie's story is taking place over just a few days while Claire's is over about six months.  Once the decision was made to show the battle, there was no way around this.  

I don't know how it could have been done differently and still give one-quarter of the episode to Culloden.  I think the problem will sort itself out in the next episodes because there is 19ish years to cover for Claire and 20ish for Jamie.  

[nodorothyparker]

This episode felt really slow and dragged out at times, but still managed to do a nice job of conveying the terrible carnage of the battle and its aftermath without just being 30 minutes of watching costumed extras slash each other and spray fake blood.  I loved subbing Rupert into the scenes at Culloden House instead of a character we'd never met before and had no investment in.  He conducted himself like a boss and went out that way.  Everything from the handling of the executions to Lord Melton! showed how much soldiers' honor and following accepted rules of that honor still mattered to both sides even after that battle. I like that they kept Jamie's book lines insisting that Melton shoot him and being visibly pissed off that that wasn't happening.

Framing the inevitable Jamie-Black Jack fight in golden light felt like they were trying to make it into this huge epic thing.  By the time they got to the end of last season though, they had so overused and played out the character that I can't bring myself to care.  I just want him to be dead so we don't have to see him pop up to rape every random child, third cousin, or horse for whatever reason they think of to keep him around.

The Claire-Frank stuff was even slower, if effective in filling in the blanks for what happened on her end.  Yes, the misogyny and traditionalism really ramped up after the end of the war on both sides of the Atlantic to force women out of the workforce and back into wife and mother roles to free up jobs for the returning men and you could see Claire really chafing at all the mansplaining in this supposedly more modern more enlightened time.  This is also the point where male doctors and the medical profession took over birth and came up with what would become known as "twilight birth" that was heavily dependent on gas and forceps.  My own father, for example, was born in 1944 still at home with a midwife while his younger brothers were all twilight births at the county hospital because the medical profession had convinced the general public that it was the safer more hygienic option.  I didn't mind all the focus on Frank and Claire's domesticity in this episode in setting the scene, but I can see getting tired of it fairly quickly as we impatiently wait for the inevitable Claire-Jamie reunion.  Still, I know the show is determined to get its money's worth in Tobias Menzies so we'll see.

[Atlanta]

Save Murtaugh! Why is anything 'mansplaining'? I know that's the term du jour, but I'm a woman who has read the books and had to explain some stuff to my husband. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

On 9/10/2017 at 11:47 AM, annlaw78 said:

I find it kinda gross how the show continues to try to emphasize a special connection between Jamie and Jack, like they have a "thing," rather than the reality.  I just don't think it's artsy or clever or whatever they're going for to portray rape survivor and rapist in that way.  

THIS!!!! I DETESTED every single moment that made it look/portrayed Jamie and that motherfuckingmurderingRAPISTarsehole, a.k.a as Black Jack, as lovers.????

If I recall, Black Jack was lying over Jamie's thigh, his body used to staunch and stop Jamie's bleeding-a reason why he didn't bleed out and die on the field.

I am SO HAPPY this show is back, but was BEYOND BUMMED that COMCAST didn't make it available at midnight Saturday night!!? So I had to wait unti tonight to watch.

Sam did a PHENOMENAL job tonight.

Unlike most, I don't think Tobias Menzies is that great or so wonderful, that this show feels it has to find ways to keep him.???Essentially from this point on, it's about Jamie and Claire, as it should be.

Add me to the list that was pissed and didn't need the condescending, smug, superiority of the Dean and doctor. How Claire was able to keep from losing her temper, I'll never know. Wish she had told him just how she helped during the war, and gave him all the bloody and gory details. And then asked what his contribution was. Then I took a deep breath and reminded myself it was 1948.

So, EVERYWOOON!!! '''Tis nice to be back!!! ??

Edited September 11, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[Haleth]

9 hours ago, Dust Bunny said:

I'm 75% convinced Murtagh is alive. That was a gaping plot hole. Dammit. 

There is no reason to not show his death unless he is going to pop up again later. Mark me.  ?

I felt bad for Frank. Not that I blame Claire, but relationships are hard. 

[WatchrTina]

THE GOOD

Yay for the new bits in the opening credits!

I loved the way they presented the battle scenes.  The cutting back and forth from the fragments in Jamie’s memory to him lying on the field after the battle was a wonderful artistic choice.  That doomed Highland Charge  -- which, alas, was historically accurate -- was nevertheless a fucking awesome show of bravery by the Jacobites and an amazing scene.  And then that mutual leap into the air that both Jamie and Jack make as they attack one another:  so bad-ass.  It is so telling that they both chose the same tactic of attack.

The close-up of the snow falling and melting on Jamie’s parched lips was a terrific shot.

The hallucination of Claire was beautiful.  And then I was happy when it segued to . . .

Rupert!  Gosh I’m going to miss that actor – he was wonderful.  I’m so grateful they diverged from the book so that we could have him in this episode.

I remember that I applauded Cait & Tobias for doing such a good job portraying Claire & Frank’s awkwardness with one another as they tried to reconnect at the beginning of their 2nd honeymoon in the very first episode.  They did a good job portraying that same awkwardness again as they try to pick up the pieces in this episode.

I liked how Claire’s modern “conveniences” can be damned inconvenient, what with the stove only working intermittently and icebox being noisy and apparently failing to keep the milk from going off.

I also liked how Claire looks so frumpy and haus-frau-ish in the scene referred to above.  What a contrast to elegant-while-pregnant, Parisian Claire or even the everyday Scottish attire she sported in the 18th century. 

I thought it was clever of the sound department to used the “stones” sound to signal the discord between Frank & Claire during their argument.  It’s a clever way to reinforce how her trip through the stones (and all that followed) is still “haunting” this marriage.  They used that sound again when Frank can’t sleep (following the argument with Claire) and he gets up to write to the Rev. Wakefield.  Clearly Jamie is on his mind.

Yay Hal! (a.k.a. the Lord Melton).  I doubt we’ll see him again but I LOVE that character in the Lord John books so I’m delighted to see him.

I did like the juxtaposition of Jamie’s tortured ride in the wagon and Claire’s being in labor – both painful experiences that promise a joyful meeting with family in the end (if they survive the journey.)

Claire said “Oh you’re so beautiful” to baby Brianna in exactly the same way that she said it to baby Faith.  Tugged at the old heart-strings, that did.

Okay, I don’t believe for a moment that an experienced maternity nurse would be impolitic enough to ask about a baby’s hair-color not matching that of the parents, but I kind of loved the way that statement threw cold water on Claire & Frank's warm moment.  #TeamJamie

 

THE BAD

We did not get a clear and unambiguous confirmation that Black Jack Randall is not only merely dead, he’s also most sincerely dead.  That frustrated me.

OMG the condescending attitudes toward women in the 1940’s was making me CRAZY.  The smug professor, the delivery room doctor, even the pushy neighbor got on my nerves.  I know that was what they were supposed to do but I didn’t much enjoy it.  Also the woman who played the neighbor was a weak actor.  You could “see” her acting. Or maybe it was just the bad dialog they gave her.  I think she was put in the episode to show that the prevailing attitudes about a woman’s role were held by both women and men (the men’s point of view being shown in the extremely annoying scene at the Harvard reception that followed.)  But I found that scene clunky and the neighbor lady not really believable.

I don’t think I like the bit they added with Claire wanting to become an American citizen after only a few months in the States.  I assume the writers wanted it to be a metaphor for her rejecting England – the country that killed the great love of her life (and for Frank to interpret it as a rejection of him.)  But I thought that was a bit forced.

I am downright ANGRY about the quick-cut from Jamie’s anguished face following Rupert’s death to the face of Tobias Menzies.  I don’t say “Frank” because for a moment – a deliberately LONG moment – we the viewers aren’t sure if we’ve gone back to Boston or if Jamie is having a flash-back to Black Jack Randall and I just RESENT that note being introduced into such a lovely, touching moment (Jamie’s grief over Rupert’s fate.)  Not cool, show-runners.  Not cool.

 

THE UGLY

The Jacobites being mowed down by the British muskets was just as awful as it needed to be.

Jamie & Jack’s fight.:  so ugly, so many creep-me-out moments.  At one point I was afraid Jack was going to kiss him. The undercurrent of all that passed between them in the past is so viscerally present in that fight.  And then Jack’s body lying on top of Jamie all through the night – that is just SO upsetting, even though I know that the weight and heat of Jack’s body likely saved Jamie from bleeding out or succumbing to the cold.  That whole thing was really well done but DAMN that was hard to watch.

 

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

What happened to Murtagh?  He didn’t die on camera so as far as I’m concerned that means he survived.  I’ve expressed the hope before that Murtagh turns up at the prison and takes over the story lines of Duncan Innes in this and later books.  Fingers crossed!  #Save Murtagh

What did Jamie say (in Gaelic) after Rupert died?

What was the point of Claire’s moment with the bird?

 

OTHER

Can I just say how grateful I am that I have an iMac and was able to watch this on-demand via Starz.com.  I later watched in on my TV in a too-bright living room (the sun was shining on the blinds) and I just COULD NOT SEE anything that was going on in the night scenes.  The picture quality on my computer did a MUCH better job dealing with the night scenes.  I don’t think I would have realized that it was snowing and that Jamie was trying to quench his thirst with the snowflakes if I had not watched via computer.

At first I was a bit annoyed that they introduced a brand new character who clearly knew Jamie well.  I thought that Ross should have played that role.  But then I recollected that Ross was a Lallybroch man and therefore he was sent home by Jamie before the battle.  I do hope that we see him again as confirmation that Jamie’s men survived (especially since the episode indicated that the British pursued those who fled the battle.)

I missed Roger.  Richard Rankin made a HUGE favorable impression on me in his one episode last season. 

Final thought:  James Fraser, lying on the floor near death, is better-looking than any human has any right to be.  <Sigh>

Edited September 13, 2017 by WatchrTina
Grammer matters

[Thalia]

Count me among those hoping that Murtagh is alive.  I was very excited to see Duncan Lacroix's name in the title sequence.  As long as they don't have him running off and hiding with the Bonnie Prince I'll just be happy to see him move to the colonies with Jamie, Claire, and Young Ian.  The band's back together!

I liked the little talk between Rupert and Jamie.  By the time I read VOY for the first time I'd forgotten who threatened to turn him in for killing Dougal.  I shrugged my shoulders and moved on, assuming that person died, but I would sometimes think of Jamie saying "Claire, I am a dead man," and wonder. I read fast and sometimes the Scottish men in kilts all ran together in my mind.  

[Scarlett45]

@FnkyChkn34 I saw Frank's anger at Claire wanting to become a US citizen as 1. A rejection of their history together and 2. Preparations to leave him when she felt like it. 

I enjoy this thread with book talk, as a show only viewer I did understand where Frank was coming from (but I also understood why Claire was so distant to him). In Frank's mind his wife was missing and presumed dead for 3years, she returns pregnant and mourning another love. Frank understands that intellectually but in his heart he wonders where is the affection and love she had for him (because he still cares for her deeply and loves her). I don't think his comment was about sex, she flinched from him for months after she came home after he spent years missing her. He doesn't know he wears the face of a sadist. In his mind what did he DO that was so awful she would act like she was afraid of him. His letter to the Rev seems like it's an indication that he wants answers to ease Claire's heart.  I am glad Claire apologized (but I understand why she behaved the way she did). 

I think she was so happy her baby was alive and well (the baby they chose was so cute), she realized that trying to make a family with Frank here and now doesn't mean she didn't love Jaime. 

 

I know now it's a deviation from the books but I wish to see Murtagh alive and well. #saveMurtagh. I wonder if we will see child Fergus before adult Fergus. He should be safe and well at Lollybrough. (Spelling). 

 

Edited to add- funniest part of the entire episode was Frank making fun of tea bags calling them paper diapers! Lol. Even in 2017, most of the USA doesn't appreciate tea done well- we are very much a coffee country. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by Scarlett45
The tea line was hilarious.

[dbell1]

I've been trying to rewatch the show leading up to the premiere, but only made it through episode 11 of season 1. Probably a good thing since "mark me" Bonnie Prince Charles makes me want to throat punch him every time he's on screen and I hated most of the Paris storyline.

Loved Claire cooking over the fire and her moment watching the bird was lovely. I know we can't get Claire's missing years without Frank in them, but I'm sick of Tobias. I need him off my screen. If they resurrect BJR from the dead, I will protest, or tweet angrily, or something.

Rupert!! I'll miss you. Go to Angus, sleep with the angels. I don't want Murtagh back if they're making him Duncan. Maybe he'll pop up in Ardsmuir but die tragically? That's me speculating, I've avoided all show spoilers. But Duncan betrayed Jamie, Murtagh never would.

Sam was fabulous in this episode. The battle was just horrifying. Damn, I missed this show.

[spaceghostess]

11 hours ago, Petunia846 said:

 

The rest of the episode was excellent, although I did want to punch every man in Boston. Geez. Did they really knock women out for births like that? I'd never heard of that. I thought women had to be awake to push.

 

My mom gave birth to her first baby in 1956 and they put her in some sort of twilight sleep, which was awful. The doctor kept telling her to push, and she felt like she couldn't feel to push, she was so out of it. It was a horrible experience for her which prompted her to have the rest of us naturally, starting with my older sister in 1961. Even in '61, Mom was getting the side-eye for not wanting gas or anything else.  Her example had a lot to do with my sticking to my guns about having an intervention-free VBAC for my second kid. Thank god for my midwives and the awesome OB-GYN at the hospital (a VBAC veteran herself). I really felt for Claire dealing with Dr. McPatronizing during the delivery. That whole sequence was really well done, especially when she woke up terrified that the baby was dead.

Lost it over Rupert. Heartbreaking and so well acted by all.

Edited September 11, 2017 by spaceghostess

[spaceghostess]

3 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

.  This is also the point where male doctors and the medical profession took over birth and came up with what would become known as "twilight birth" that was heavily dependent on gas and forceps.  My own father, for example, was born in 1944 still at home with a midwife while his younger brothers were all twilight births at the county hospital because the medical profession had convinced the general public that it was the safer more hygienic option.  

Didn't see your post before I wrote mine, but yup, that's what my mom had with her first. I respect her so much for saying "never again" to that. Claire knew exactly what was happening with her body; it was so infuriating to see her put under and to think about the generations of women that had to go through that. The book Birth by Tina Cassidy is a great exploration of the history of childbirth and what led up to the type of experience we see Claire having in this episode.

Edited September 11, 2017 by spaceghostess

[lianau]

When Jamie was send home , I missed the chicken in the wagon with him . I know it's stupid .

[Haleth]

8 hours ago, dbell1 said:

I've been trying to rewatch the show leading up to the premiere, but only made it through episode 11 of season 1. Probably a good thing since "mark me" Bonnie Prince Charles makes me want to throat punch him every time he's on screen and I hated most of the Paris storyline.

I miss the visual beauty of the Paris storyline.  The color!  Everything in Boston was so drab, so gray.  And of course the Scotland portion was dark and dismal, except for the occasional red coat.  (Incidentally, do viewers really have any doubt that BJR is most sincerely dead?  I'll be shocked (and annoyed) if we ever see him again.)

I like that Hal came off as an honorable gentleman, making sure the prisoners were shown respect... well, up until he shot them.  Still, they were given a soldier's execution, rather than being hanged as traitors.  I'm sure it helped that Rupert and the others didn't grovel, they accepted their fate with heads held high.  

[AheadofStraight]

18 hours ago, annlaw78 said:

I don't think the show really needs MORE Frank.  For those of us who haven't read all the books, Frank holds very little interest.  

Many of us who have read all of the books say, "Amen!"

10 hours ago, Haleth said:

There is no reason to not show his death unless he is going to pop up again later. Mark me.  ?

My opinion, which seems to grow more unpopular by the minute, is that I don't want Murtagh to live. I get the love of the character, and I enjoy him as well, but I think I'm a book purist on this one. 

Cait's tweet when someone asked about Murtagh:

Spoiler

Now would we leave you hanging .????? ( okay, yes we probably would but in this case .... you'll hear from him again!!)

 

Other random thoughts:

I didn't get the meaning of the rabbit on the battlefield nor the bird with Claire. Caitriona tweeted that the bird will be explained later. I know they've used bird imagery a lot in past episodes (and the books too?) but it didn't click for me in that moment. 

As someone who had both a hospital birth (just the way I wanted it with no interventions) and a home birth, I felt so violated for Claire during that birth scene. 

Frank didn't like the American version of tea but is okay saying "diaper" instead of "nappy". I know that was for the American audience but it stood out to me. Is "flop sweat" something that would've been said in the 40s?  [ETA: Just read Ron's tweets and he admits that "flop sweat" was anachronistic but felt it worked best.]

I've already watched this episode 3 times. I rarely felt like rewatching most episodes of season 2 and didn't. Feeling very hopeful about where this season is headed!

Edited September 11, 2017 by AheadofStraight

[Scarlett45]

@AheadofStraight I thought the diaper vs nappy usage was because to an American audience "nappy" is a somewhat derogatory word for afro-hair textures....kind of like how "fanny" is slang in the U.K. for vagina. Some slang words don't translate well so the writers use the word the primary audience would understand first. But it's too funny because I feel the same way about bagged tea. ?

[AheadofStraight]

Absolutely agree but I noticed it immediately! And I also prefer loose tea. :)

[WatchrTina]

On September 11, 2017 at 7:17 AM, AheadofStraight said:

I didn't get the meaning of the rabbit on the battlefield nor the bird with Claire. Caitriona tweeted that the bird will be explained later. I know they've used bird imagery a lot in past episodes (and the books too?) but it didn't click for me in that moment. 

I didn't get the bird either but I love that you mentioned the rabbit on the battlefield as a parallel moment in the Jamie story.  I'm going to fan-wank that Jamie & Claire are so connected that there are moments when they can almost feel one another through time and that animals sometimes take on an spooky, mystical role in that connection.  

Edited September 12, 2017 by WatchrTina

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

I'm going to fan-wank that Jamie & Claire are so connected that there are moments when the can almost feel one another through time and that animals sometimes take on an spooky, mystical role in that connection.  

Eh?

[nodorothyparker]

In the beginning of the Faith episode from last season, the child we eventually realize is Brianna is looking at picture books of birds and after identifying the specific kinds of birds for her, Claire tells her she saw them in Scotland a long time ago.  That was the only connection I could think of.

The rabbit?  No idea.  My husband who was only half watching this immediately said a wild animal would steer clear of a place that smelled so much of blood and death.  So maybe a hallucination?  He's amusingly very pro-Frank at this point in the story.

[unlfan03]

I am another one that didn't like the almost "ambiguity" of Black Jack's death. Though the fact that Rupert threw him off Jamie and the corpse did not flinch is a bit soothing. I would have preferred the book death with just the head sitting on Jamie's stomach stanching the blood flow from his leg wound. As for Murtaugh I am on the fence if I want him to be alive or not. A part of me wants him to live as I have at least enjoyed the way that the writers have built upon the original character. But I don't want him taking Ines' place, if I had to choose a book character to be replaced it would be John Quincy (the mountain man from DOA) I could see Murtaugh being shipped to the Colonies right after the battle and after surviving his indenture living in the backwoods of North Carolina.

The meaning of the bird, my sister pointed out during the witch trials that Gellis said sparrows were birds of hope. So she thought it was a call back to that moment. And birds are a big thing in the books, Diana uses birds and bird songs extensively throughout (as pointed out in the departed S&S).

I could have done without the neighbor lady's condensation as Claire was cooking, open fire cooking was not that unusual up through the Depression, which they had only come out of due to the War. But my biggest peeve was Frank's half arsed defending of Claire's opinions at the faculty get together. But I am guessing/hoping that is the first step in the tearing down of the greatness of Frank. Though I did laugh at the fact that all of the faculty were so staunchly Republicans and how things have changed in the last 70 years.

I am looking forward to the rest of the season. This was a promising start hopefully the rest of the season holds up.

[nodorothyparker]

The one amusing thing about that stuffy faculty scene is that Claire is right: Truman will defeat Dewey in the '48 election.  It will be a huge shocker, spawning the famous photo of Truman holding the wrong early headline that Dewey beat him.

[Biggie B]

Quote

Edited to add- funniest part of the entire episode was Frank making fun of tea bags calling them paper diapers!

It was funny, but I think British folks use the word 'nappy' instead of 'diaper,' or at least, my British friends currently. Still a fun moment, regardless.  // I see others above pointed out the same thing, sorry for the duplication.

Edited September 11, 2017 by Biggie B

[cardigirl]

So happy the show is back.  I rewatched most of season 2 before the broadcast of season 3 opener and was reminded of so much I had forgotten over the course of the time between.  I dearly love the show.  

I'm one of those who loves Tobias' portrayal of both Black Jack and Frank. Frank from the books is not nearly fleshed out enough for me, so I'm glad that, in creating the tv show, the decision was made to widen the character.  I think without the tragedy of his and Claire's doomed marriage, the show would lose a lot of what makes it very special. One can love the relationship between Claire and Jaimie, and also have great feelings for Frank and his situation.

This episode was not as pretty as some of the others from season 2, but it was very well done.  A great start to another season.  

[qtpye]

11 hours ago, spaceghostess said:

My mom gave birth to her first baby in 1956 and they put her in some sort of twilight sleep, which was awful. The doctor kept telling her to push, and she felt like she couldn't feel to push, she was so out of it. It was a horrible experience for her which prompted her to have the rest of us naturally, starting with my older sister in 1961. Even in '61, Mom was getting the side-eye for not wanting gas or anything else.  Her example had a lot to do with my sticking to my guns about having an intervention-free VBAC for my second kid. Thank god for my midwives and the awesome OB-GYN at the hospital (a VBAC veteran herself). I really felt for Claire dealing with Dr. McPatronizing during the delivery. That whole sequence was really well done, especially when she woke up terrified that the baby was dead.

Lost it over Rupert. Heartbreaking and so well acted by all.

 

10 hours ago, spaceghostess said:

Didn't see your post before I wrote mine, but yup, that's what my mom had with her first. I respect her so much for saying "never again" to that. Claire knew exactly what was happening with her body; it was so infuriating to see her put under and to think about the generations of women that had to go through that. The book Birth by Tina Cassidy is a great exploration of the history of childbirth and what led up to the type of experience we see Claire having in this episode.

This might be a stupid question on my part, but as a well trained nurse would she not have known that this was the standard procedure of the time?  

[FnkyChkn34]

1 minute ago, qtpye said:

 

This might be a stupid question on my part, but as a well trained nurse would she not have known that this was the standard procedure of the time?  

That's a good question, but maybe as a combat nurse in Europe during a war, she wasn't trained in OB/GYN?  Also, I don't know if maybe it was only an American thing and the UK did it differently?

[Eureka]

13 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

That's a good question, but maybe as a combat nurse in Europe during a war, she wasn't trained in OB/GYN?  Also, I don't know if maybe it was only an American thing and the UK did it differently?

I wondered that too but then thought maybe it's an American thing. The only other time I have seen it portrayed on TV was in Mad Men.

[qtpye]

31 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

That's a good question, but maybe as a combat nurse in Europe during a war, she wasn't trained in OB/GYN?  Also, I don't know if maybe it was only an American thing and the UK did it differently?

I was wondering the same thing.  As horrible as it seems to us today, it was seen as the safest way to handle birth at that time.

That said, as a woman, I felt horrible for Claire in that scene.  I hated that doctor more then the heavy handed Dean.

"Randall, you let your wife read newspapers...next thing you know she will want to go to Harvard Law School."

If they had made that character a touch more nuanced, it would have been more effective...it feels like the 18th century Scottish men were more pogressive.

Edited September 11, 2017 by qtpye

[FnkyChkn34]

2 minutes ago, Eureka said:

I wondered that too but then thought maybe it's an American thing. The only other time I have seen it portrayed on TV was in Mad Men.

I've actually never seen or heard of it before, and I agree with everyone who says it's disturbing.  Until I came here and people clarified, I thought the doctor was putting her under for a c-section.

[Atlanta]

You don't get a whole lot of Claire's modern life in the books, but just snippets here and there. I like seeing her adjust to it and then we'll get to see her as a mom of wee Bree. 

I wanted to slap the dean and the doctor. Grr! And the nosey neighbor.

[Lady Iris]

At least in 18th century Scotland Claire had no problem laying into most any fool that questioned her. You could see she was chomping at the bit and wanted to lay into that pompous ass of a dean.

How is Jamie not dead? He was grey and was on the verge of death before he took that wagon ride.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 minute ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I've actually never seen or heard of it before, and I agree with everyone who says it's disturbing.  Until I came here and people clarified, I thought the doctor was putting her under for a c-section.

Same here! Especially after Claire said this was her second pregnancy and that she miscarried in her first. And the Arrogant condescending doctor said how that revelation complicated things for this pregnancy. I guess we're to assume that though this was done back then, that neither the mother, or rather, the father had any say in this? Considering how all women were treated as people with corn for brains and needed the Big, More Knowledgeable MAN to tell her what to do and what was best for her.

[lovetowrite73]

13 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

I am downright ANGRY about the quick-cut from Jamie’s anguished face following Rupert’s death to the face of Tobias Menzies.  I don’t say “Frank” because for a moment – a deliberately LONG moment – we the viewers aren’t sure if we’ve gone back to Boston or if Jamie is having a flash-back to Black Jack Randall and I just RESENT that note being introduced into such a lovely, touching moment (Jamie’s remorse over Rupert’s fate.)  Not cool, show-runners.  Not cool.

YES to this! I said to my boyfriend, OH, that's Frank, not Black Jack. Grr...

[DittyDotDot]

13 minutes ago, qtpye said:

it feels like the 18th century Scottish men were more pogressive.

Which, when reading the books I kinda felt was the point. For all the "advances" the modern times have, the attitudes and understanding were actually more restrictive. 

13 minutes ago, qtpye said:

As horrible as it seems to us today, it was seen as the safest way to handle birth at that time.

It's interesting to me how almost backward "modern" medicine can be. I remember when I was a kid (1970s) it was unusual to see anyone ever breastfeed a baby. When I asked my mom why she didn't with any of us, she said the doctors told her it was cleaner and safer to bottle feed. 

8 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I guess we're to assume that though this was done back then, that neither the mother, or rather, the father had any say in this? Considering how all women were treated as people with corn for brains and needed the Big, More Knowledgeable MAN to tell her what to do and what was best for her.

Father's actually had a great deal of power when it came to reproduction--more than the women. I have a friend whose family is quite large. When the fourth or fifth child was born, there were complications, so the mother asked the doctor to give her a hysterectomy--figuring they already had enough children and it would do no one any good for her to die in childbirth the next time. The doctor refused saying that it was up to her husband. Apparently, the health of the mother didn't matter as long as her husband wanted more children. This was in the early '70s, mind you. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Nidratime]

Quote

This episode was not as pretty as some of the others from season 2, but it was very well done.  A great start to another season.

I thought everything looked very washed out, not like the vivid colors of 1700's Scotland or France that we were used to from the last two seasons. I recalled that they did the same thing with Claire's 1940 scenes in Scotland before her trip back in time -- made the colors mute and muddy in comparison to the brightness of 18th century Scotland. On the same note, Jamie's scenes on the battlefield and in the hut where the Scots "hid away" also were dark and muted. I wonder if this color palette is going to carry over until the couple are united.

Quote

This might be a stupid question on my part, but as a well trained nurse would she not have known that this was the standard procedure of the time?  

Well, she definitely wasn't a nurse who helped deliver babies and probably wasn't trained to do so. Remember how reticent she initially was in helping Jenny give birth. She didn't know what she was doing and said as much.

Quote

If they had made that character a touch more nuanced, it would have been more effective...it feels like the 18th century Scottish men were more pogressive.

I get the feeling that being "a healer" in the 1700's was not a gender specific job, so Claire was more accepted in her role. Even Geillis put up a shingle and was dispensing herbs and potions. However, "medically trained" doctors were clearly viewed as a man's role, especially once they had to attend universities to get their training and earn degrees. Once it became a profession, it clearly became male only.

[Haleth]

Plus her status as Lady Broch Turoch gave her some authority. 

[Starla]

I love Jamie's line "I willna tell anyone if you don’t" when Hal says they can't shoot him. Poor Jamie, he just wants it to be over and no one will let him die.

Regarding the barbaric twilight birth, it's my understanding that it caused women to be disoriented and hallucinate during the birth, and they had no memory of it afterwords. I can't imagine Claire's panic when she woke up without her baby and not knowing what happened, after what she went through with Faith.