S03.E03: All Debts Paid

[RulerofallIsurvey]

6 hours ago, WInterfalls said:

I don't think Claire cared about the financial security, though sure it's nice.

I think it's more than just 'nice'.  I would think it would have had to have been a big consideration for Claire to accept Frank's conditions in the first place.  When she got back to the 20th century, she's pregnant with another man's child and has no financial resources of her own.  Sure, she could have gotten a job as a nurse (probably) - but a divorced pregnant woman in the 1940's was not terribly employable.  Maybe later, after she'd been with Frank a few years, she just didn't think about the financial security Frank provided, or rather she took it for granted, but I'll bet she would have cared about it a great deal had it been suddenly taken away from her.  

6 hours ago, WInterfalls said:

The way he shot down going to the movies, the fact that he skipped his graduation dinner to go out with his mistress (even if the time mix up was a mistake he could have padded his timeline a bit or prevented Claire from opening the door and she certainly shouldn't have come in in front of all of Claire's friends and colleagues) he should have been at her dinner in the first place.

I do think Frank could have gone to the movies with Claire and kept his mouth shut about having already seen them.  And he probably should have gone to her graduation dinner.  But then I recall that he told her she wasn't fooling anyone and everyone at Harvard already knew they didn't have a happy marriage, so on the other hand - why should he pretend either?

Yes he was quite the passive aggressive guy.  Both were at fault, by their own choices and somewhat stuck in the social mandates of the times.

I feel like Claire is also quite passive aggressive sometimes.  But yes, both of their faults and somewhat due to the times.  

[nara]

11 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Given that I don't think Frank believed Claire's story about the stones, I highly doubt the move was to specifically stop her from going back through them.  Ditto about not looking up Jamie.  I think Frank thought Claire was suffering from a delusion and he was trying to not feed into that delusion by having her not talk about it.  

This is interesting.  I always took it for granted that Frank believed Claire's story.  He had encountered the ghost of the highlander in the first episode, so he would have been predisposed to believe her.  Also, based on her story, he stopped revering BJR, which suggested that he believed what she said about him.  Of course, he could believe that the highlander was not a ghost but her real, modern-day lover Jamie and could have stopped researching BJR because she was so paranoid about him and he didn't want to feed it.  I'm going to have to think about this...

[mjwm44]

On 9/25/2017 at 4:43 PM, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I don't understand how Frank could possibly "take Bree away from Claire" when Bree was 18 - an adult - and could go wherever she pleased at that point. 

She actually would not have been an adult, at that time, until she was 21 in Massachusetts.  It was the lengthy Vietnam War, drafting 18 year-old boys, that brought about pressure to lower the age of majority to 18.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, nara said:

Also, based on her story, he stopped revering BJR,

Did he stop revering BJR?  I don't remember that.   I remember that he encountered the ghost of the highlander, but I don't think he thought it was a ghost - at least at the time.  Maybe later he did, but I don't recall him believing it was a ghost in S1E1.  

51 minutes ago, mjwm44 said:

She actually would not have been an adult, at that time, until she was 21 in Massachusetts.  It was the lengthy Vietnam War, drafting 18 year-old boys, that brought about pressure to lower the age of majority to 18.

Hm.  That's interesting.  If that's true, that certainly changes Frank wanting to take Brianna to England, imo.    Then again, I'm not sure the show was going for that, as I think there would have been (or at least should have been) a line of dialogue to make it clear that Brianna was not a legal adult yet.  

[WInterfalls]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Did he stop revering BJR?  I don't remember that.   I remember that he encountered the ghost of the highlander, but I don't think he thought it was a ghost - at least at the time.  Maybe later he did, but I don't recall him believing it was a ghost in S1E1.  

I'm the season 2 finale Bree and Roger find a letter from Frank to the Reverend saying to stop looking in Jonathan Randal "he's not the man I thought he was" 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

6 hours ago, WInterfalls said:

I'm the season 2 finale Bree and Roger find a letter from Frank to the Reverend saying to stop looking in Jonathan Randal "he's not the man I thought he was" 

I'd forgotten about that.  That could mean either that Frank stopped revering BJR, or he discovered that he wasn't his direct biological ancestor.  The "not the man I thought he was" would fit either one, I think.  

Thinking more about the Age of Majority in 1966 Massachusetts, I really would like some clarification from Ron on the show about whether or not they meant for Brianna to be a legal adult.  The actual date of the Battle of Culloden aside, I think the show has a pretty abysmal history with historical accuracy on some of these things, given the witchcraft trial in S1 among other problems with the Scottish legal system.   And since they didn't actually even film in Boston, I wouldn't doubt that this is just one of those discrepancies between now and then that got overlooked.  I don't usually listen to them, but does anyone know if this is addressed in one of the podcasts?

Edited September 27, 2017 by RulerofallIsurvey
podcast question

[WInterfalls]

2 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

That could mean either that Frank stopped revering BJR, or he discovered that he wasn't his direct biological ancestor

Both would point to him believing Claire though.  There is literally no documentation that Alex Randal was actually the father that's why they got married in the first place.  The only people who would know would be the ones who were there and Claire is the only one still around. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by WInterfalls

[nara]

10 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Did he stop revering BJR?  I don't remember that.   I remember that he encountered the ghost of the highlander, but I don't think he thought it was a ghost - at least at the time.  Maybe later he did, but I don't recall him believing it was a ghost in S1E1.  

 

In S1E1, he definitely thought the highlander was human, which led to that awkward conversation with Claire which pissed her off. However he did seem to feel that there was something odd about how quickly the man disappeared. I meant after she told him what happened. I have to rewatch and see if he makes a specific reference to highlander after her return. BTW, I think that Frank was correct in that conversation, and nothing she did make him love her less.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

2 hours ago, WInterfalls said:

Both would point to him believing Claire though.  There is literally no documentation that Alex Randal was actually the father that's why they got married in the first place.  The only people who would know would be the ones who were there and Claire is the only one still around. 

There could be documentation of some sort about BJR's 'injury' that he received in a duel in France - which, I believe, rendered him incapable of conceiving.   BJR was an English officer involved in an illegal duel - I'm sure there would be a record of that somewhere.  Jamie got sent to jail, and, iir, BJR got sent back to England because of it, so it could have been noted in his official military records.  I might be wrong about the timeline, but I think that was before Alex died and BJR married Mary.  There probably also would have been parish/priest records of the marriage and there well could have been a note in a journal of the whoever performed the ceremony that BJR married the girl at the request of his brother.  Personally, I don't think that would have been uncommon for a priest to write, but ymmv.  Put two and two together and there you go.  Frank didn't necessarily have to find out about it because he believed Claire.  The reverend - can't remember his name - who was helping Frank with the research could have found it.  Maybe if he did, it helped corroborate Claire's story and then Frank started believing a little bit - but so far I don't think there's any evidence that Frank believed Claire's story.  Of course, I'll probably be proven wrong in the very next episode.  :)

[Juliegirlj]

I'm on the fence on this episode- the story seems uneven : rushed in parts, and lagging in others. 

At one point Jamie answers " fine", as in ok, I will do it. Not realistic dialog at all. 

Loved seeing Murtagh, and my heart broke when he and Jamie were separated- not knowing what would happen to the other and if they would meet again was so sad. The actor that portrays Murtagh was listed in the credits as Featured, making me think we may not see him again this season. 

I felt sad for Frank. He did nothing to deserve the life he ended up with, and that tragic end was disquieting. 

[piequinn35]

David Berry looks like Luke Eastwood cross Chris Evans. He is pretty. :) Is he gay in this show?

I felt sad when Frank died, yes not his fault they were in that state, if they didn't travel to Scotland then no Jamie and Frank and Claire would still be happy.

I don't know if I like or hate Claire, I only watch this show because of Jamie and now Lord Grey :P

[RulerofallIsurvey]

17 hours ago, piequinn35 said:

David Berry looks like Luke Eastwood cross Chris Evans. He is pretty. :) Is he gay in this show?

Yes, Lord Grey is homosexual.  He is pretty though.  :)

[vavera4ka]

I wish they'd showed more of med school. it would have been nice to see "a woman and a negro" be top of the class and show those preppy white boys that good students and doctors know no race  or sex.

I needed something good about Claire, because she honestly annoys me. I felt for Frank last episode when it was implied that he stayed true to his marriage all that time. When he hinted at having a lover I was happy for him. I normally don't like infidelity arcs, but here I did a cheer. Good for you, Frank. You are a good decent man and deserve love in your life. I rolled my eyes at the morgue "I did love you". Whatever, Claire, go run off to chase a ghost.

I do like Jamie's story though, and I like John Grey. Such a handsome and lovely guy. Come on Jamie, throw him a bone! lol ( jk ) I did like and felt awful at the same time when Jamie realized what kind of feelings Lord Grey had and how his old trauma manifested.

[Blakeston]

Frank definitely crossed the line into outright cruelty. After Sandy showed up at Claire's graduation party, Claire accused Frank of engineering the situation, and Frank didn't deny it.

But I also think it's understandable that he would be vindictive. She never made any effort to be more than roommates with him. Refusing to open your eyes during sex? Get over it, Claire. You agreed to move forward with Frank, and you're not even trying.

Also, I have to say I'm actually glad that the show (at this point, at least) didn't devote a lot of time to Claire's friendship with Joe. I don't trust the writers to have a very deep understanding of racial dynamics in mid-20th century America, considering the way they introduced Joe. (A black man in his situation would not have approached and attempted to befriend the one white woman in the room.)

And we already saw the writers' attempt to depict how a Harvard professor of that era would think about gender, and the results were fairly ridiculous. All that guy was missing was a monocle, and an evil mustache to twirl. Keeping that in mind, I don't think I want to see how they'd handle the topic of race in the Ivy League

[Camera One]

On 9/25/2017 at 4:23 AM, Chyna said:

My hearing isn't always the best so sometimes I have a little trouble understanding the characters in the Scotland flashbacks, so forgive me if this was obvious to everyone else: Why did Jamie return to the prison after escaping during the hunting party?

I thought he escaped to investigate the "White Witch" aka Claire, found nothing.  Dejected, he came back so John Grey could kill him like he promised.  Since he didn't learn his lesson from the last episode that there were reasons to live.

On 9/25/2017 at 6:17 AM, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Episode two had SO much misogyny - from Frank's boss toward Claire and then her first Med school professor.  Then suddenly it's all gone this episode.  Claire is "Dr. Randall" and having a graduation party in her house (attended by a black man in the 1950's - no matter that he was also a Dr. - "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?" anyone?) and NONE of that is addressed.

I too was disappointed at yet another time jump and skipping the potentially interesting exploration of Claire and her African American classmate overcoming adversity in med school.  But look, all those sexist and racist young men from med school came for her graduation party... I had to laugh.

Frank said a lot of harsh words when he was (clearly) drunk, but overall, I still felt more for him than Claire.  Frank thought the graduation dinner was at 6pm when it was supposed to be 7pm, so I doubt the arrival of Candy, uh... Sandy, was planned.  

Springing both plans of moving back to England plus getting a divorce was probably a result of pent-up anger, but it is true that Breanna was 18-years-old, so she could very well have chosen to get a degree at another university entirely, far from Claire and Frank.   Claire decided they should have separate lives, so I don't get why she was so surprised either.

I know they said Frank died in the season premiere, but during this episode, I was thinking maybe Frank disappeared in an accident, but he went to Scotland and touched the stones and ended up travelling back in time himself, and he would end up meeting Jaime and get kidnapped and sexually assaulted and fall in love with the time period.  It would have been more fun if Frank had been curious about Claire's experiences and they grew to the point where they *could* talk about it.  As a historian, he would have been fascinated.  This whole unhappy marriage business felt like a dead-end, story-wise and character-wise.

I am worried for Murtagh.  He looked so much weaker, and I hardly recognized him in the prison.  It's strange that they executed so many Jacobites immediately after, but those captured years later weren't killed?  Well, I'm glad we didn't need to see more of Jaime being on the run.  

I kept thinking that John Grey was going to torture or try to kill/poison Jaime and/or Murtagh at any time, so I couldn't fully enjoy their interactions.  I like the character, though, so I hope we will get to see him again.  I kept waiting for it, but no gore, so overall, this episode is an overall win.

Edited March 23, 2021 by Camera One

[gingerella]

So...every time Jamie is in prison now, I'm on pins and needles with my own Viewer's PTSD from Wentworth. The entire time I was watching the scenes with John Grey, I kept hoping that he wasn't going to be another villian a la GoTs when we finally got rid of one villain only to be replaced by another one that was even more awful. So all that is to say, I need to re watch this episode in its entirety so I can relax through it and really appreciate what is unfolding. The other beef I have with this episode it that while I appreciated the back and forth from 1700's Scotland to 1950's-60's Boston, the Boston clips were for the most part way too fast and I felt like I was getting whiplash! I hope that at some point soon we all end up in the 1700's and just stay there because the pace is getting dizzying. Okay, now on to the episode!

Boston 1950's/60's:

This episode started me out actually liking Frank a wee bit more than I had been, and I honestly haven't liked him since S01E01, so that's saying something. I smirked at his comment about Brianna, "She needs more English in her life." But then, in a moment of what seems to be marital harmony, we have OPEN MARRIAGE! Frank is schtupping other women, whoa! Didn't see that coming, I mean I get why and all, but wow.

And just as I'm coming to grips with understanding WHY Frank needed an open marriage, he shits on Claire's med school graduation by inviting his side piece over to their marital home. Annnnnd, Frank is a dickhead once again! I feel better disliking him for some reason. First of all, there's no reason he couldn't have accompanied his wife to her graduation celebration, to do otherwise was just a dick move. Then to invite his fuck buddy to come by their home, again, dick move. And stupid. I mean, if I'm the side piece, I'm not going near the marital home FFS, which tells me Candy or Sandy or whatever her name is, is a moron too. The argument that ensues later on at home, when Frank spits out at Claire, "Our bedroom is far too crowded already", made me want to slap him. But then I'm wondering the entire episode IF Claire told Frank she really wanted to try to make their marriage work, would he still want to be with her or is it too late for them? I think he might still want to...I don't know. Anyway, from the bits and pieces that Frank throws at her, I think he's jealous of her becoming a doctor. It's something he cannot control, he has no part to play in, it's another way for Claire to separate her life from his and I think he hates that she's gone and done that. He's not proud of her, he's jealous. It makes me wonder if, in the books (and no, I don't want to know) they show Claire talking to Frank about her healing work while she was 'away'. I'm guessing not since she's not allowed to talk about that time at all. So I assume Frank doesn't know what a huge role healing played in her life with Jamie.

Tobias Menzies has these very strange vertical lines going down the sides of his face, from below his eyes all the way to the jowl and I cannot not look at them, and it's very distracting to me. Anyone else?

Fast forward to the 1960's and Brianna's high school graduation, annnnd Frank is now a super deluxe supreme dickhead! So all along he's been biding his time so he can steal Brianna away from Claire once she turns 18 and can make her own decisions. What a fucking asshole. I feel vindicated that he isn't the nice guy some thought he was at the beginning. He might not be as demented as his relative, but he's a vindictive bastard. To begin with, Brianna isn't his biological daughter and to be honest, Claire gave him a gift by allowing him to co-raise Brianna because otherwise Frank would not have had any child at all given he was sterile, and suspected as much but never gave Claire the truth about that before she went through the Stones in the first place. So he got a child to raise because of Jamie and Claire, and in my mind he ought to be damned grateful about that, so to try to take Claire's child away from her? And after he knows she lost her first child? Major dick. MAJOR.DICK. To me, this is Franks coup de grâce, he's been biding his time, making strong bonds with Brianna in the hopes that one day he can rip her from Claire in one final act of anger and spitefulness. The last living vestige of Claire's one true love, and he can rip that away from her in one fell swoop, and let her emotionally bleed out over it. I fucking hate Frank now. Car accident? Too bad so sad. Buh bye Frank, karma, she's a real bitch, aint she?!? When Claire is sitting with Frank in the morgue and says, "If you're close enough to still hear me, I did love you, very much. You were my first love", I'm not sure Frank deserved that, but I think Claire deserved the moment for her own closure. Could they have done more to be happier together? Sure, for one maybe if Frank had allowed Claire to grieve the loss of Jamie and that life and had helped her through that, they might have grown closer again. But no, Frank forbade any mention ever, and and the emotional wounds festered and really were his own doing, IMO.

Ardsmuir Prison, Scotland 1755:

It was interesting that the Prison warden, did they call them governors or did I imagine that, dined with Jamie as the head of the prisoners. At least that was a civil relationship as opposed to a torturous one. I didn't get who the new guy was until the said his name because he's a new actor playing that role, isn't he? So once I realized who it was I spent the rest of the episode dreading him trying to kill Jamie and fulfill his promise. Not sure what MacDoo means but it must mean something, right? No matter where Jamie goes now, he is held up as the leader of mean, he cannot escape his leadership qualities I guess.

As soon as I heard the voice I shouted, MURTAGH!!!, but to see him so sick and weak was sad. The scene where Jamie tells him to put away the little piece of Fraser tartan because it's not allowed, and the way Murtagh lovingly folded it up and stuck it in that crack in the wall was also incredibly sad to me. They've been stripped of everything that made them the proud Highlanders that they were. It felt a lot like the rules some countries are trying to enforce about women not being allowed to wear the hijab. Forcing a culture to not wear what makes them unique and 'them', is just a step beyond. The misguided British could not extinguish the Scottishness and the pride of the Highlanders simply be making it illegal to wear their tartans, grabbing at straws if you ask me.

I absolutely loved watching Jamie try to make potions to heal Murtagh, using what he had seen Claire do in her healing. He's channeling Claire, but has he told Murtagh what happened to her? It seems not clear, and I don't remember him saying he was sending her through the Stones for her own safety so maybe even Murtagh doesn't know what happened to Claire.

When the old man is babbling in Gaelic and French about the gold, he says something about 'it happened...to Colum, Dougal, the MacKenzies...' then he mentions the white witch is coming for Jamie. I wondered if the MacKenzies were laying blame for Colum and Dougal on Claire's witchcraft and that's why the old man is saying such things? And poor Jamie, escaping to see if Claire's returned and he cannot even get John Grey to kill him, he just is destined to not die no matter how much he'd like to. I was hoping that John would give Jamie back the sapphire, so he'd have something to cash in at some point in the future but it didn't seem like that was happening.

The entire scene by the fire, with John and Jamie talking was funny one moment, and not so much the next. The conversation about how Jamie and Claire tricked John into giving up the troops information was funny, "A man who dinnae shit himself with a knife to his throat has no bowels or no brains." Once John was telling the story about losing a love on the battlefield at Culloden, I realized he was gay. The ensuing conversation was bittersweet but when Jamie said "Claire...my wife's name was Claire...", his smile lit up his soul in that moment and we saw that her presence, even uttering her name, could still fill something within Jamie that he could not fill within himself alone. So heartbreaking, yet so nice to see him smile and hear him say her name once again. But as soon as John caressed his hand, you could see all the pain from Wentworth and BJR come rushing to the surface of his being again, there was no way he was going to ever let that happen to him again, and the viciousness in his voice was both understandable to us, the Viewer, but also damning to John. It was as if they'd been having a beautiful sharing of memories of loves lost, and Jamie had not made any mention of thinking less of John for loving another man, and then he tells him to take his hand off him or he will kill him, and the look in John's eyes was complete despair. He'd just bared his soul to this fellow human being, thinking he would understand, and he is being shamed once again, but the one person he seems to like in this godforsaken place.

The last bit, with Jamie being taken to that manor house to work as a servant or whatever (maybe he'll work in the stables where he is at least in his element), seems odd because on the one hand, John is removing him from the prisoners being sent to the Colonies, but he's also placing Jamie at risk yet again because he'll be seen as having escaped won't he? And then he'll be hunted down yet again, so it makes no sense to me. Plus all the guards saw John take him off alone so what's he going to say, "oh Red Jamie escaped yet again..." I think John thinks he's doing a good deed for Jamie, but it just seems like more of the same 'on the run' again stuff. Which to be honest is getting old now...is it just me?

ETA: When John was talking about the man who he looked up to, whom he lost at Culloden, I kept thinking in my head, PLEASE DON'T LET HIM SAY IT WAS BJR, PLEASE NOOOOO! But then he said he'd found this chap dead and he would have seen Jamie underneath him, or maybe not if he found him after Jamie was rescued by Rupert... Oh god, I hope that's not the guy John's talking about, now I'm not sure...!

And where does the big dog who we see in the opener, where is that dog? Use the openers all relate to a scene in the episode but there was no dog.was there?

Edited May 16, 2021 by gingerella

[Camera One]

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

The last bit, with Jamie being taken to that manor house to work as a servant or whatever (maybe he'll work in the stables where he is at least in his element), seems odd because on the one hand, John is removing him from the prisoners being sent to the Colonies, but he's also placing Jamie at risk yet again because he'll be seen as having escaped won't he? And then he'll be hunted down yet again, so it makes no sense to me. Plus all the guards saw John take him off alone so what's he going to say, "oh Red Jamie escaped yet again..." I think John thinks he's doing a good deed for Jamie, but it just seems like more of the same 'on the run' again stuff. 

I found it confusing too.  John Grey explained that Jaime was not allowed to be sent to the colonies because that was a commuted sentence and Jaime was considered a convicted traitor.  I think John Grey arranged for Jaime to become indentured to this noble, so the government knows about it.  They won't think he escaped.  Not sure why he had to transport Jaime that way, though.  Maybe to make a show for the other officers?  But then they were just out in the countryside, so that aspect didn't make sense to me.  Ditto for not telling Jaime where he was going... seems like a clunky way to make it more suspenseful for the viewer.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Camera One

[Anothermi]

THAT was an odd horse race I just watched! The finish line was 1968 and everyone seemed to be trying arrive there as fast as possible. 

The first two seasons covered 3 years in the past. Then the last episode of season two jumps forward 20 years in Claire's present! This season we spent more time on the aftermath of Culloden than the twenty years that flew by in this 3rd episode of S03! I realize now that this is the modus operandi of this show, but it made this episode unfulfilling to me. There were many, many things I wanted to know more about. Relationships nodded-at but never explained. (looking at Claire and Joe Abernathy for one)

This seemed like a "Coles Notes" episode.

The modern era sections showed just the highlights:

• Frank realizing Claire would never forget Jamie—despite the hopefulness they both felt after Brianna's birth—and giving up.
• after-the-fact revelation that F & C had discussed the above and decided to have an open relationship
• Claire facing crass discrimination as she started her Medical training. OK that was last episode. But all we got was that and...
• Claire graduating. 
• Claire being less than OK with said "open relationship"
• Brianna going from baby to 18 years old in the blink of an eye! I know it feels like that afterward, but not during the growing up. Geez.
• Frank on the brink of starting a relationship that would be what he really wanted but not before he'd become a bitter, angry man on the inside. Then kicking the bucket. 

I have to assume— from how S02 unfolded—that some of the untold parts will be revealed in coming episodes. 

The 1700s highlights since S03E01: (he had less highlights otherwise)

• Jamie healed from the physical wounds he received at Culloden and is back to skulking around as a wanted man—albeit a known traitor into the bargain—for 6 years. His mental wounds have made him into an almost mute recluse. Fergus is alive and lost without his lord and master. Jamie finds something to live for, but not with. Buh bye Fergus, my son. His sister and brother-in-law are as amazing as ever and having another child—which should make 3 unless the girl died in one of the years we didn't see. Jamie makes a plan to get into a worse jail that he was currently in, but hey, a change is as good as a rest they say.
• S03 starts with Jamie having been in the new prison for 3 years (1755)
• Murtagh makes the most underwhelming appearance of his life. At least he's alive, but I preferred that viewer-proposed narrative where he escaped prison.
• Jamie wins over another Red Coat who is gay—but not a sadistic bastard. 
• Winter comes and everyone but Jamie is shipped off to the Colonies. (same year?)
• Jamie is still a convicted traitor so he couldn't be shipped away. He's going to work with for some Lord "Lah-ti-dah" who doesn't like Scots—especially Highlanders. 

Less boxes ticked off, but more revealed about the characters. I preferred this era's story because of that. 

I don't feel I can make judgments about the modern era characters because we've only been given the broad strokes. No nuances. Nobody is looking that interesting to me by the end of the episode. 

Can't say I'm a fan of more starting-at-the-end, leaping back to the starting post and weaving our way back to the end. But I guess it will keep my brain cells active. It's the nuanced bits I'm here for. (Does the forum had a bookmark feature? Thinking that might come in handy.)

Edited May 17, 2021 by Anothermi
Accuracy

[Anothermi]

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

has he told Murtagh what happened to her? It seems not clear, and I don't remember him saying he was sending her through the Stones for her own safety so maybe even Murtagh doesn't know what happened to Claire.

I lean towards Jamie not telling him.  Jamie had figured out his plan and the last thing he needed was others chiming in trying to dissuade him. Knowing Murtagh—as we do—he would have insisted that HE would look after Claire. 

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

The ensuing conversation was bittersweet but when Jamie said "Claire...my wife's name was Claire...", his smile lit up his soul in that moment and we saw that her presence, even uttering her name, could still fill something within Jamie that he could not fill within himself alone.

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

I absolutely loved watching Jamie try to make potions to heal Murtagh, using what he had seen Claire do in her healing.

We saw the value of Jamie being able to speak openly about her with this young British Officer—whom he'd had a bit of history with and who had actually seen Claire and stepped up to save her virtue.

Per the second quote—with Murtagh who knew her well—he wasn't able to own her—to call her his wife or say her name.  He refers to her as "a lass who knew about healing". Perhaps it would have been too painful? Or perhaps he was protecting himself from the crowd of other Scots in jail with him who could easily overhear the conversation. Murtagh would have known he meant Claire.

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

When John was talking about the man who he looked up to, whom he lost at Culloden, I kept thinking in my head, PLEASE DON'T LET HIM SAY IT WAS BJR, PLEASE NOOOOO!

SAME HERE! But from what we learned about Major(?) John Grey in this episode I can't see him ever looking up to BJR. Thank Goodness.

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

And where does the big dog who we see in the opener, where is that dog? Use the openers all relate to a scene in the episode but there was no dog.was there?

I wondered about that scene too. It was in the current era because the dog was the bait to get us to look waaaaay up to the table laid for a birthday. I didn't count the candles so I don't know whose birthday It might have been, but possibly Brianna's 18th. But why no dog again? Doggoneit. I am reminding myself that NO DOG went out with Frank for his final drive.  I sensed—when he picked up his keys while so angry— that it would be curtains for Frank and I gave him a wave goodbye. Still—flashbacks!

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

When the old man is babbling in Gaelic and French about the gold, he says something about 'it happened...to Colum, Dougal, the MacKenzies...' then he mentions the white witch is coming for Jamie. I wondered if the MacKenzies were laying blame for Colum and Dougal on Claire's witchcraft and that's why the old man is saying such things? And poor Jamie, escaping to see if Claire's returned and he cannot even get John Grey to kill him, he just is destined to not die no matter how much he'd like to. I was hoping that John would give Jamie back the sapphire, so he'd have something to cash in at some point in the future but it didn't seem like that was happening.

MY 1st thought was that Geillis hadn't been burned and was using the fear of witchcraft to keep everyone away from her. She had been helping Dougal gather the money for the big battle to come. I wondered if that was what the story was about. But when it became clear that Jamie was struggling against the hope that it was Claire come back—well, that made more sense.

But Jamie outright told Major Grey that there WAS no French gold. Although he didn't say it, we knew it was just BPC lying to his followers. Jamie even confronted him about that lie at the meeting where the decision was taken to fight at Culloden. If anyone knew if the French had provided gold it would be Jamie who had been charged with trying to get it.

Lastly—the bolded part—I assumed that John did not keep it for himself but used the sapphire to pay for the Doctor who came to treat Murtagh. John had already said that the prison didn't have funds or other resources to treat all the ill prisoners or he would agree to do it. Jamie then bargained for just Murtagh. (as he should) However, I don't know if the sapphire was used for the payment as a fact.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Anothermi
clarity

[SassAndSnacks]

17 hours ago, gingerella said:

Annnnnd, Frank is a dickhead once again!

I feel validated.  I know there are a lot of Frank sympathizers in the world, and I respect their opinions.  To Frank-o-philes, you do you.  For me, I don't care how acrimonious the relationship, how "open" Claire told him he could be (side note, I don't think that conversation actually happened but I've been wrong before), or just how f-ing petty someone is - you don't NOT go to your wife's med school graduation dinner OR OR OR invite your side-piece to your house when your daughter is there.  Like ever.  EVER. 

He did it intentionally to humiliate Claire because he is a petty piece of shit wretched man.  Tell me I'm wrong.  I've had three cups of coffee, and I'm ready to die on this hill, if necessary.  

17 hours ago, gingerella said:

Tobias Menzies has these very strange vertical lines going down the sides of his face, from below his eyes all the way to the jowl and I cannot not look at them, and it's very distracting to me. Anyone else?

YEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!  Maybe it's because his portrayal of BJR has ruined him for me for all eternity, but I struggle to actually look at his face and/or enjoy anything he does on screen.  That's not to say that I don't think he's a brilliant actor, because obviously he is to make me feel this way.  I also struggle to watch him in anything else that he is in.  

17 hours ago, gingerella said:

He might not be as demented as his relative, but he's a vindictive bastard. ... To me, this is Franks coup de grâce, he's been biding his time, making strong bonds with Brianna in the hopes that one day he can rip her from Claire in one final act of anger and spitefulness. The last living vestige of Claire's one true love, and he can rip that away from her in one fell swoop, and let her emotionally bleed out over it. I fucking hate Frank now.

Claire gave him an out multiple times, and he refused to take it.  The side note they threw out there about their neighbors' divorce and the father not seeing the children was eye-roll inducing.  Claire is not vindictive, and Frank could have had visitations with Brianna. Claire has always held firm that Frank is Brianna's father.  She wasn't about to take that away from him.  

His jealousy has been an issue from the beginning.  He yells at her that she was never able to let Jamie go, but really, he wasn't able to let Jamie go either.  

18 hours ago, gingerella said:

Not sure what MacDoo means but it must mean something, right?

Mac Dubh.  Do you want to know what it means?

15 hours ago, Camera One said:

I think John Grey arranged for Jaime to become indentured to this noble, so the government knows about it.  They won't think he escaped.

Yes.  He was a high profile criminal, so there was no way he would/could be transported to the colonies.  They had to keep him close and watched. 

[gingerella]

On 5/17/2021 at 7:52 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

I feel validated.  I know there are a lot of Frank sympathizers in the world, and I respect their opinions.  To Frank-o-philes, you do you.  For me, I don't care how acrimonious the relationship, how "open" Claire told him he could be (side note, I don't think that conversation actually happened but I've been wrong before), or just how f-ing petty someone is - you don't NOT go to your wife's med school graduation dinner OR OR OR invite your side-piece to your house when your daughter is there.  Like ever.  EVER. 

He did it intentionally to humiliate Claire because he is a petty piece of shit wretched man.  Tell me I'm wrong.  I've had three cups of coffee, and I'm ready to die on this hill, if necessary.  

Lass, I will die on that hill right next to you, but let's not die on top of each other m'kay?! A Mhor-fhaiche!

On 5/17/2021 at 7:52 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

YEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!  Maybe it's because his portrayal of BJR has ruined him for me for all eternity, but I struggle to actually look at his face and/or enjoy anything he does on screen.  That's not to say that I don't think he's a brilliant actor, because obviously he is to make me feel this way.  I also struggle to watch him in anything else that he is in.  

Same girl. His BJR has ruined watching the Crown for me right now. I cannot get past BJR flashbacks whenever he's on screen.

On 5/17/2021 at 7:52 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

His jealousy has been an issue from the beginning.  He yells at her that she was never able to let Jamie go, but really, he wasn't able to let Jamie go either.  

God, this is such a great observation! We saw Frank's jealousy that very first episode when he accuses Claire of cheating on him with a Highlander, all because he sees Jamie's ghost looking up at her from the street. I mean, he doesn't even SEE the guy when he turns around but he's sure it's some Scottish soldier she's slept with during the war. That was an ugly side of him for sure. But you're right, HE hasn't ever let go of Jamie either. HE was the one writing to the Reverend for more information, until he finally called it off. HE was the one who made Claire swear to never speak of or think of Jamie ever again. Trouble with that is, you can't control someone else's thoughts. That and when the baby daddy has red hair and you don't well, who really saw Jamie in Brianna every single day? I'd wager it was Frank just as much as Claire did. Maybe if Frank had allowed her to grieve properly things could have been different but he felt he had the upper hand and Claire had to acquiesce to his demands at the time. One thing that makes me feel better in a petty way is that everything Frank looked at Brianna he knew she was the product of Claire and Jamie's love. So suck on that Frank.

On 5/17/2021 at 7:52 AM, SassAndSnacks said:

Mac Dubh.  Do you want to know what it means?

Sure, I don't think it's a spoiler but you can put tags on it just in case? Is it like 'uncle' or 'chief' or something like that? I mean, since he's their self-elected leader and all...

On 5/16/2021 at 8:56 PM, Anothermi said:

But Jamie outright told Major Grey that there WAS no French gold. Although he didn't say it, we knew it was just BPC lying to his followers. Jamie even confronted him about that lie at the meeting where the decision was taken to fight at Culloden. If anyone knew if the French had provided gold it would be Jamie who had been charged with trying to get it.

True, Jamie would have been tasked with meeting the gold, transporting the gold, guarding the gold. There's no way BPC would have entrusted anyone else with it, but I thought Jamie said there was never any gold, or something like that. I'll have to re watch again.

On 5/16/2021 at 8:56 PM, Anothermi said:

astly—the bolded part—I assumed that John did not keep it for himself but used the sapphire to pay for the Doctor who came to treat Murtagh. John had already said that the prison didn't have funds or other resources to treat all the ill prisoners or he would agree to do it. Jamie then bargained for just Murtagh. (as he should) However, I don't know if the sapphire was used for the payment as a fact.

Ah, I never even thought of that but you're right, that makes a lot of sense. He doesn't come from a poor family, but in that situation he has no income to pay for things so it makes sense. I wonder if we find out in the books, or if we'll find out in the Show...I'm a sucker for jewelry characters!

Edited May 18, 2021 by gingerella

[Anothermi]

50 minutes ago, gingerella said:

True, Jamie would have been tasked with meeting the gold, transporting the gold, guarding the gold. There's no way BPC would have entrusted anyone else with it, but I thought Jamie said there was never any gold, or something like that. I'll have to re watch again.

My point was that  Jamie knew there was NO GOLD coming from France or anywhere. Before we they finally got out of Paris Jamie heard BPC declare he'd been promised gold—but Jamie and Claire deprived him of the gold he thought he'd get from the Compte (and Murtagh got a lot of wine)—and no other source confirmed giving any gold either. Not the chess playing Frenchman—with the ear of Louis—not the dastardly Duke of Sandringham... no one. Jamie knew BPC well enough to know when he was lying to get his way. Even if BPC had claimed he'd sent someone else to get it, Jamie would recognize that as just another desperate story.

I think that is why BPC stopped treating Jamie as his favourite. Jamie knew too much and wouldn't just be a toady. But too little too late BPC. Jamie already had his number. 

[Cdh20]

1 hour ago, gingerella said:

 

Same girl. His BJR has ruined watching the Crown for me right now. I cannot get past BJR flashbacks whenever he's on screen.

 

Same here with the flashbacks. I think he did any amazing job with these two characters but I hated him in the Crown ( I hated the whole cast change but that’s for another forum). 

[gingerella]

21 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Not the chess playing Frenchman—with the ear of Louis—not the dastardly Duke of Sandringham... no one. Jamie knew BPC well enough to know when he was lying to get his way. Even if BPC had claimed he'd sent someone else to get it, Jamie would recognize that as just another desperate story.

I think that is why BPC stopped treating Jamie as his favourite. Jamie knew too much and wouldn't just be a toady. But too little too late BPC. Jamie already had his number. 

Yes, you're right of course. I know BPC kept yammering on about gold coming and I suppose since there was a time lag between the time Jamie and Claire left France - knowing there was no gold to be had for the Rebellion - and the time that they reconnected with BPC and hearing that gold was coming, there could have been another deal struck with someone unbeknownst to Jamie, but Jamie would have known about it so...yes, you're spot on, Jamie knew he was lying. It was apparent that BPC was sort of humoring Jamie when he had Jamie walk with him and he said Jamie was his 'doubting Thomas', and it felt very apparent in that moment that he wasn't taking Jamie seriously anymore, IMO.

I've been thinking about the directions both Claire's and Jamie's lives have taken since they've been apart. I assume we will see more in coming episodes, but what we've seen so far seems to be that they are going in completely opposite directions. Because Claire believes that Jamie died at Culloden, she is trying to move on, to make something of her life because she cannot just sit and drown in memories of a love that will never be again. So she throws herself into being Brianna's mother to uphold her promise to keep Jamie's child safe and well cared for, then into becoming a surgeon in an attempt to do something useful for others so that really her life is very full and has less time to dwell on losing the love of her life. On the other side of the Stones, however, Jamie is doing everything he can to die. He doesn't want to move forward and try to make something of his life, he wants to end his life, but he just cannot seem to make that happen. Not on the battlefield at Culloden. Not when he's destined to be shot right after the battle. Not when he tries to get John Gray to fulfill his promise to kill Jamie after saving him. He cannot kill himself because we know he considers that a mortal sin, but ironically in an age when it's just not that hard to die or be killed, Jamie is failing at dying miserably. It's interesting to me how Claire is trying to overcome and rise above her grief, whilst Jamie is sort of giving in to it and wanting to end it all. Just an observation, I don't know what to make of it yet though...

ETA: Perhaps it is that Claire has moved forward through time, and has her whole life ahead of her to make of it whatever she will, yet Jamie is stuck knowing that Claire is now 200 years ahead of him and there is no way he can bridge that gap in his lifetime, so he just wants this lifetime to be over so he can wait 200 years to come and create the catalyst for Claire to come through the stones and meet him for the first time...so now it's like he wants to do for Claire what Claire did for Frank. Claire was obsessed with BJR not dying because she thought it would mean Frank was never born. Now Jamie is thinking that he has to somehow get himself 200 years into the future to prompt Claire to get to the Stones, which means he has to die? Just throwing stuff at the wall to see what will stick...

Edited May 19, 2021 by gingerella

[SassAndSnacks]

23 hours ago, gingerella said:

His BJR has ruined watching the Crown for me right now.

 

22 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

Same here with the flashbacks. I think he did any amazing job with these two characters but I hated him in the Crown ( I hated the whole cast change but that’s for another forum). 

I had to stop when he started. 

23 hours ago, gingerella said:

One thing that makes me feel better in a petty way is that everything Frank looked at Brianna he knew she was the product of Claire and Jamie's love. So suck on that Frank.

YAASSSS, GURL.  (As the kids say these days, or so I'm told.)

23 hours ago, gingerella said:

I don't think it's a spoiler but you can put tags on it just in case?

I'm 90% sure they touched on this in the show, but very (too) briefly - 

Spoiler

Mac Dubh refers to "Son of the Black."  Jamie's dad was known as Black Brian because of his dark hair, like a silkie.  

 

5 hours ago, gingerella said:

It was apparent that BPC was sort of humoring Jamie when he had Jamie walk with him and he said Jamie was his 'doubting Thomas', and it felt very apparent in that moment that he wasn't taking Jamie seriously anymore, IMO.

Gold aside, I think BPC's change in treatment to Jamie is also because Jamie was telling him things he didna want to hear, ye ken?  Jamie knew they were headed for not fun times and tried his best to steer the ship a certain way.  In the process, he had to stop blowing smoke up Bonnie's arse, and Charlie Boy wasn't such a fan.  

6 hours ago, gingerella said:

It's interesting to me how Claire is trying to overcome and rise above her grief, whilst Jamie is sort of giving in to it and wanting to end it all.

I read this comment before I fell asleep last night, and I've been rolling it around in my head all day.  Around 1:30 this afternoon, I had some really articulate response, but it's 9:30 now, and I've lost it.  I'll try to piece it back together...

Claire 1) made a promise to Jamie to live and bring his child into the world, the child that was "all that would be left" of him (small sob).  She HAD to live and not only live but to live a life of which Jamie would "approve" of, if you will, for Brianna's sake.  Claire 2) threw herself into being a doctor because Jamie so admired that in her - her ability to help people.  Her ability to help and heal is what brought them together initially when she set his shoulder and then again when she treated his gunshot wound.  He knew her as a healer, she HAD to live her life as a healer to keep him with her always.  And also, because Jamie knew her that way, she would want Brianna to also see her that way.  

Mostly though, I think Claire lived because Jamie died to her.  I think it would be easier to move on, knowing that someone was completely gone and there would be no chance of that person coming back.  There's no hope, and so you have no choice but to move on.  

It is different for Jamie because he isn't sure what happened to her.  He doesn't know about his child.  He can't even imagine that life.  He can't even fathom what they could be doing, because how could he possibly picture the future?  He knows he can never physically reach them.  He sent her to be with someone else.  But she is still alive, and she could possibly come back.  There's hope, but that hope is dashed as the years roll on.  Wouldn't it just be easier to be dead (Jamie's thinking...not mine) than to continuously be disappointed and hurting because she isn't there?

Claire had purpose - raise Jamie's child and live a life that would honor him.  Jamie lost everything - Claire, baby, home, family, friends, culture, birthright, everything.  What would be left to live for?

6 hours ago, gingerella said:

but ironically in an age when it's just not that hard to die or be killed, Jamie is failing at dying miserably.

I do find it interesting that Jamie is good at basically everything except for dying.  I guess it you're going to be bad at something, be bad at dying.

[Cdh20]

1 hour ago, SassAndSnacks said:

 

I read this comment before I fell asleep last night, and I've been rolling it around in my head all day.  Around 1:30 this afternoon, I had some really articulate response, but it's 9:30 now, and I've lost it.  I'll try to piece it back together...

Claire 1) made a promise to Jamie to live and bring his child into the world, the child that was "all that would be left" of him (small sob).  She HAD to live and not only live but to live a life of which Jamie would "approve" of, if you will, for Brianna's sake.  Claire 2) threw herself into being a doctor because Jamie so admired that in her - her ability to help people.  Her ability to help and heal is what brought them together initially when she set his shoulder and then again when she treated his gunshot wound.  He knew her as a healer, she HAD to live her life as a healer to keep him with her always.  And also, because Jamie knew her that way, she would want Brianna to also see her that way.  

Mostly though, I think Claire lived because Jamie died to her.  I think it would be easier to move on, knowing that someone was completely gone and there would be no chance of that person coming back.  There's no hope, and so you have no choice but to move on.  

It is different for Jamie because he isn't sure what happened to her.  He doesn't know about his child.  He can't even imagine that life.  He can't even fathom what they could be doing, because how could he possibly picture the future?  He knows he can never physically reach them.  He sent her to be with someone else.  But she is still alive, and she could possibly come back.  There's hope, but that hope is dashed as the years roll on.  Wouldn't it just be easier to be dead (Jamie's thinking...not mine) than to continuously be disappointed and hurting because she isn't there?

Claire had purpose - raise Jamie's child and live a life that would honor him.  Jamie lost everything - Claire, baby, home, family, friends, culture, birthright, everything.  What would be left to live for?

I do find it interesting that Jamie is good at basically everything except for dying.  I guess it you're going to be bad at something, be bad at dying.

Omg, I am crying! I wish I was this articulate! 

[mythoughtis]

On 5/16/2021 at 3:40 PM, gingerella said:

I absolutely loved watching Jamie try to make potions to heal Murtagh, using what he had seen Claire do in her healing. He's channeling Claire, but has he told Murtagh what happened to her? It seems not clear, and I don't remember him saying he was sending her through the Stones for her own safety so maybe even Murtagh doesn't know what happened to Claire.

At some point, Murtagh specifically mentions Claire going through the stones. He also mentions Claire being pregnant.  So he knows.  He also understood what the ‘white witch’ mention by the new ‘prisoner?’ might  mean. 
 

I know people thought the white witch might be Geillis.  However she is definitely not a white witch.  I can’t see her being able to act like one. 

Edited August 22, 2022 by mythoughtis