S03.E08: First Wife

[GHScorpiosRule]

11 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

He knew in the show.  He did not know in the books.

Never have I been happy to be wrong. I knew Jamie didn't know in the buiks. Just wasn't sure if it was made known in the show for certain.

 

3 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

True enough.  But as this is all one finished product, story changes have consequences and making those changes in the early seasons only to end with Jamie lamely try to excuse marrying a woman he knew full well, jealousy of Claire aside, would have seen an innocent person burned alive is not a good look for Jamie.  I can buy the rest of the show's emphasis on the reasoning for the marriage to largely be about giving himself a replacement family for the children and life he had been denied.  This is one of those instances though where the show actually managed to make something worse from the book.

 

Oh, I totally agree. I hate this change and how it makes Jamie look.

[FnkyChkn34]

23 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Never have I been happy to be wrong. I knew Jamie didn't know in the buiks. Just wasn't sure if it was made known in the show for certain.

Oh, I totally agree. I hate this change and how it makes Jamie look.

I forget how he knew, but in "The Fox's Lair" (the worst episode of the series, imo), he says Claire told him everything.  I don't think we ever actually see or hear her tell him though.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I should probably put this in the quotes thread, but I dinna feel like it. I loved this moment, as much as Jamie came off as thinking he was the only one living a half life. Well, he was, because for most of the twenty years, he didn't have a wife, but at the same time, I loved Claire getting in his face with how it was.  I'll give the full scene quotes later, as I'm at work...

Jamie: "Do you know what it is to live twenty years wi'out a heart? To live half a man and accustom yourself to live in the bit that's left?"

Claire: "Do I know? Do I know how that feels? Yes, you bastard, I know! What did you think, that I went back to Frank to live Happily Ever After?!"

Jamie: "Sometimes I hoped ye did. And Sometimes I could see it--him with you, day and night, lying with ye, taking your body, holding my bairn! And God! I could kill ye for it!"

Claire: "Well, I don't have to imagine Laoghaire."

Jamie: "Laoghaire? Laoghaire? CHRIST!" Jamie kicks table? Pottery?

Me: Hoo, is it hot in here? even as I'm on the edge of my sofa. Sam and Cait were just FANTASTIC here.  And then before this, was this line:

"Why?" Jamie's breath seems to stop. "Why? Because I.am.a.Coward. That's why." There's more, but just those few lines, and the way Sam said them. GOD. I will wail and shriek like a BANSHEE if he doesn't get an Emmy for this year!

8 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I forget how he knew, but in "The Fox's Lair" (the worst episode of the series, imo), he says Claire told him everything.  I don't think we ever actually see or hear her tell him though.

Oh yes. And then when Claire told Jamie to thank her, that's when he called her a besom, and didn't see why he had to thank her for anything after everything she'd done.

Edited November 6, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[DittyDotDot]

59 minutes ago, Atlanta said:

She's younger. In MOBY, Roger meets her and she's around 15/16 and Jamie is away as a mercenary in Paris thus putting him at around 19. However, Outlander wikia has her older. I'm confused.

Jenny is definitely the older. When Roger meets her in MOBY, Jamie has just left for schooling in France--I believe he's 16 or 17--and Jenny, I believe, is around 19. 

Edited November 6, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[GHScorpiosRule]

OMGEE!!!!! Anne Kenney was a part of filming this episode!!!!!! No wonder it was sae wonderful!!!!!

[iMonrey]

Two thoughts here: it really seems like a dumb blunder on Jamie's part not to tell Claire about Laoghaire before they got to Lallybroch. Surely he must have realized they could bump into her. Also, it's a wonder he wasn't shitting his pants every time someone who knew Claire saw her again because if it were me I would have blurted out "but what about Laoghaire? You know, your other wife?" 

Secondly, I don't see why Claire and Jamie couldn't tell Jenny and Ian the truth about where she's from and where she's been. The excuse before was "Jenny wouldn't believe it" but now they've got proof. Claire has those photographs, some even in color, and the likes of which are unknown in 1765. She also has that zipper on her dress - that's not possible in 1765 either. Finally, it appears she also had the foresight to bring a little modern medicine back with her. Granted there's no way to explain what penicillin is but even young Ian recognized that her surgical tools seemed especially fancy. I think with Jamie backing her up and confirming he saw her go back through the stones with his own eyes they could have simply explained this all if they really wanted Jenny to understand.

[TaurusRose]

4 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

He knew in the show.  He did not know in the books.

Yes, this bugged me too!  "I had a career!  A family!"  Then you should have stayed there.  Don't bring it up now just because this man you pined over for 20 years actually pined over you for 20 years too, still wants you, and is moving heaven and earth to be with you - but you're a little butthurt over his one bad decision.  Just don't.  

Yes. Yes! YES!!!

[ferjy]

5 hours ago, Mrs. Hanson said:

I thought the episode did a great job of addressing the Big Question:  "Did I make a mistake in coming back?"  and/or Maybe You Can't Go Home Again.  They are both different people and are not to be faulted for the choices they made.  Jamie had no idea Claire would return and he ached to be a father, the father he could not be to Brianna.  Marrying Leghair.....ugh. 

I agree - people can go back and forth and tweak the semantics but Jamie DID withhold a big whopper on this one.  "When we get back to our home....let's see....we'll need to tend the garden, feed the sheep, get firewood and oh yeah.....MEET MY WIFE.  The one who accused you of being a witch!!"  

lol... just slipped his mind. 

I think that was a stupid bit, marrying Laoghaire. I don't care how lonely you are or how much you want to be a father. She not only accused Claire but set the whole thing up. The love of his life almost brutally burned at the stake because of her! Makes Jack Randall look like a saint. Surely there were enough widowed lasses with children in those times that he could picked from. And he sheepishly tells Claire that she told him to be nice to her. Good God, men can be dense. I loved Claire's retort "I told you to thank her, not marry her!" Ha!

Edited November 6, 2017 by ferjy

[ferjy]

6 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Claire: (with a WTF expression)-"I told you to THANK her, NOT marry her!"

Loved that! Sorry, I didn't see your message before my post. 

[ferjy]

6 hours ago, Summer said:

I get why it would be normal for her to have doubts, are they the same people from 20 years ago, they both lived lives etc.  but that part at the end when all of a sudden she starts saying her life in the 20th century wasn't that bad really annoyed me. We had to endure 5 episodes of sad, mopey, heartbroken living half a life Claire and now she's saying "Hey, it wasn't ALL that bad" it just bugged me.   

That's exactly how it came across. Very contradictory. They tried to meld Diana Gabaldon's viewpoint with their own and it just didn't work. If they were going to change Claire’s feeling to be more like real life where you would be doubtful whether you made the right choice then they should have also changed future Claire to have come to terms with living without Jamie and happily moving on (then having her life turned upside down with the news that he never died leaving her with a big struggle of whether to go back). Diana's vision was completely different. They seem to have missed that point entirely. Diana's was less realistic, but the fantasy is part of the appeal. Claire never felt settled back in the future and felt more at home and content arriving and living in the past again. Her link to Jamie made any of the inconveniences in the past trivial and the modern conveniences of the future relatively unimportant. In real life that wouldn't happen which is what the show is trying to portray. But it's not what Diana Gabaldon wrote and the two don't mesh. So it ends up looking more like "the grass is greener".

Edited November 6, 2017 by ferjy

[WatchrTina]

19 hours ago, iMonrey said:

it really seems like a dumb blunder on Jamie's part not to tell Claire about Laoghaire before they got to Lallybroch.

Yes.  Yes it was.  In the book and in the show.  It's a bit more understandable in the book.  I always got the feeling that Book!Jamie kept meaning to tell her but then just kept postponing the moment, knowing it was going to rain muck all over his happiness.  It was a very human reaction but, in the end, he blew it.

I liked how, in the show, he does start to tell her -- it's clearly eating at him.  But he delays just a bit too long.  And I like how in the show he explains himself, admitting he was afraid she would leave if she knew (and PS in the book she DOES leave.)

 

19 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Secondly, I don't see why Claire and Jamie couldn't tell Jenny and Ian the truth about where she's from and where she's been. The excuse before was "Jenny wouldn't believe it" but now they've got proof. Claire has those photographs, some even in color, and the likes of which are unknown in 1765.

That's a harder question because, eventually they DO tell Jenny (in a later book).  But in book 3, Claire has only just returned from the future and the memory of nearly being burned as a witch is still fresh in her mind (see discussions above about her fury at Jamie's marriage to Laoghaire.)  She's also just recently been assaulted and ended up killing a man in self-defense so it's understandable that she might be feeling a wee bit skittish about the dangers of the 18th century.  I think Jamie and Claire can be forgiven for not being ready to tell Jenny that Claire is a time-traveler just yet.  As someone above already pointed out -- Jenny would tell Ian.  Ian might end up telling one of the children and from there it could get out and once it got out there could be trouble.  Note that in later books (stop reading now if you don't want to know) when they DO tell Jenny, it causes a rift between them because she comes to believe that Claire has supernatural powers -- powers that could be used to heal Ian of the consumption that is killing him -- if only she would agree to use them.  Jenny is family.  Imagine what other (non-family) people might do if they thought they could exploit Claire's abilities.  In fact, that very plot happens in books 7 & 8.  Bad guys in the 20th century find out about the time-traveling abilities of Brianna, Roger and the children.  There is a kidnapping.  Very Bad Things happen.  In the book-verse it is just not safe for people to know about their time-traveling abilities.

Edited November 7, 2017 by WatchrTina

[nodorothyparker]

I can buy all the contradictory stuff going on with Claire pining and pining and pining to get here only to then suddenly have a grass is greener moment.  By the time she decides to go, she's built up the whole love of my life romance novel swelling music thing in her head where Jamie's concerned and to be fair she does sort of get that initially.  They get this big night together where they're trying very hard to convince themselves all that time apart doesn't matter, one true love that transcends time, blah blah blah.  But then in short order, show Claire accidentally murders a man.  There's a bit of arson.  And then the reveal of a second wife, and did we mention a shooting?  All while 20 years older Jamie isn't quite an exact match for her memory after all.  At that point, it's not that much of a stretch for her to be thinking "hey, in modern Boston I had this really great house and career and I went years and years without this much calamity falling all around me.  Why, I haven't been assaulted in ages.  Maybe it wasn't as terrible as I was making it out to be after all."  

There is some element of that in the book, although to a lesser extent.  The big fight at Lollybroch where they can finally be honest that, yes, it damn well does matter that she was comfortably sleeping and living with Frank all that time and that Jamie has done something other than quietly and honorably pine for her 20 years that ultimately results in her dragging ass back in the general direction of the stones is just a different version of it.

[GHScorpiosRule]

6 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

But then in short order, show Claire accidentally murders a man.

No, she didn't. He slipped on some of duvet? her clothes? and fell back and hit his head on the hearth. She didn't push him. She just failed to save him when she operated on him.

[nodorothyparker]

True, but she characterized it as she killed a man.  And so did Ian.  So for all practical purposes, yeah, she did.

[WatchrTina]

5 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

No, she didn't. He slipped on some of duvet? her clothes? and fell back and hit his head on the hearth. She didn't push him. She just failed to save him when she operated on him.

You know that.  I know that.  It's doubtful that Jamie knows that.  And wee Ian certainly doesn't know that.  He brags -- in front of his parents -- about how “Auntie Claire killed him.  Killed him GUID!”

Edited November 6, 2017 by WatchrTina

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

You know that.  I know that.  It's doubtful that Jamie knows that.  And wee Ian certainly doesn't know that.  He brags -- in front of his parents -- about how “Auntie Claire killed him.  Killed him GUID!”

? ? ?

[terrymct]

I love the truth that Jenny told Claire.  A lot of that really needed to be said.

Points that bugged me in this episode:

- Why was Laoghaire at Lallybroch rather than Castle Leoch for that party?  Was that explained?  Functionally, she had to be there because she’s pretty much the person with whom Claire would have the greatest objection, outside of Jack Randall.   This seems like a cheap romance novel twist.

- Why the heck did Ian have to swim to that island?  They should have just hired or borrowed a boat to row out there.  It was another cheap device to get Ian isolated so that the sailors could grab him.  Just plain silly.

The preview bugged me.  There is a HUGE potential next episode for some cultural misrepresentation on the scale of a 1970’s James Bond movie.   

[iMonrey]

Quote

That's a harder question because, eventually they DO tell Jenny (in a later book).  

Thanks for the info WatchrTina. I just remember being impressed that Claire brought some things with her this time around, because on her first trip she had no way of proving she was really from the future. Now she does. I wonder, will those photographs ever come into play? Will anyone ever discover them and wonder what the hell they are? Or are they merely a passing plot point that will never be mentioned again?

[Kata01]

51 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

I can buy all the contradictory stuff going on with Claire pining and pining and pining to get here only to then suddenly have a grass is greener moment.  By the time she decides to go, she's built up the whole love of my life romance novel swelling music thing in her head where Jamie's concerned and to be fair she does sort of get that initially.  They get this big night together where they're trying very hard to convince themselves all that time apart doesn't matter, one true love that transcends time, blah blah blah.  But then in short order, show Claire accidentally murders a man.  There's a bit of arson.  And then the reveal of a second wife, and did we mention a shooting?  All while 20 years older Jamie isn't quite an exact match for her memory after all.  At that point, it's not that much of a stretch for her to be thinking "hey, in modern Boston I had this really great house and career and I went years and years without this much calamity falling all around me.  Why, I haven't been assaulted in ages.  Maybe it wasn't as terrible as I was making it out to be after all."  

There is some element of that in the book, although to a lesser extent.  The big fight at Lollybroch where they can finally be honest that, yes, it damn well does matter that she was comfortably sleeping and living Frank all that time and that Jamie has done something other than quietly and honorably pine for her 20 years that ultimately results in her dragging ass back in the general direction of the stones is just a different version of it.

I agree, but I also think the timing on the cliffs at the end of the episode is questionable? I know she means what she’s saying when she says it, but does she believe it? Flaky Claire. At the moment on the cliffs as she poses the “maybe we don’t belong together” to Jamie, Young Ian is swimming out to retrieve the treasure. To pay Laoghaire off.

She sat through the entire settlement negotiation with Jamie and Ned...and then promised Ian & Jenny to take care of Young Ian in France with Jamie (I took her silence as agreement when Jamie promised “we” will take care of him.) 

So as I said I do believe she means what she is saying as she says it on the cliffs, but I don’t think she REALLY means it. At that point Jamie’s life is completely and utterly imploded. Claire is all “I’m having doubts. But before I may or may not go back to my old life in Boston, I want to be 100% sure you and that Leghair person are dunzo because that I cannot countenance.” lol. If she were seriously thinking of going back, I think she would’ve done it when she was sure of Jamie’s survival after the gunshot wound. I think on the cliffs she is primarily seeking reassurance from Jamie as the reality seeps in.

[nodorothyparker]

The timing of the cliffs discussion is definitely a fair point.  Jamie's entire life has pretty much gone up in smoke, things have been smoothed over after she's already made the rounds announcing "so sorry you thought I was dead," promises have been made, and NOW she's second guessing it all?  I agree it seems like she's mostly looking for reassurance as much as anything that she hasn't made this huge incredibly wrongheaded decision by coming back, but I wouldn't have blamed Jamie for some serious side eye or even a hearty "are you fucking kidding me?" moment.

[Rilla-my-Rilla]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I wonder, will those photographs ever come into play? Will anyone ever discover them and wonder what the hell they are? Or are they merely a passing plot point that will never be mentioned again?

In the books, yes they do come up again. All in the 3rd book. So, unless they drastically change it, we should see them again this season.

Someone finds them, crazy things happen, and after that plot point is done, they are lost at sea.

[WatchrTina]

2 hours ago, terrymct said:

Why was Laoghaire at Lallybroch rather than Castle Leoch for that party?  Was that explained?

Yes, mention is made of a nearby village (Balriggan?) where Laoghaire lives and it's reasonable to conclude that she was living there before she married Jamie -- presumably in the house of her late husband -- when she was invited to the party.

Edited November 7, 2017 by WatchrTina

[Nidratime]

I believe Laoghaire's second husband was from the Frasier clan so that's probably why she was living close enough to Lallybroch and was invited to the party there.

As for Castle Leoch, we have no idea whether Leoch as it once was even exists. With Colum and Dougal both dead, with Jamie either in hiding, in prison or in Edinburgh after Culloden and with Hamish so young, I'm guessing the place is no longer the great house it once was and -- I thought I read somewhere -- that Hamish and his mother left Scotland.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Nidratime

[tennisgurl]

I haven't read the books (but a book reader friend spoiled me on basically everything) so I know I`m not supposed to be over here, but quick question. Did Claire leave a story for Brianne to tell people about where she went after she time traveled? Its not as easy to disappear to lands unknown in the 1960s than in Jamie's time! I would think if a prominent Boston doctor just disappeared, there would be questions or something. 

Also, I know I said this in the other episode thread, but I think it bares repeating. Has Claire seriously romanticized her last time in the past with Jaime over the last 20 years? "I wasn't prepared for it to be so difficult"? Because, from what I remember, every second of their lives were a parade of murder, rape, war, torture, war, witch trials, plagues, and all kinds of stuff. Shit got real every other day! There were certainly good times, and I dont blame Claire for going back, but the past was never exactly a picnic. Attempted rape, an accidental murder of an asshole, a fire, and some in law awkwardness almost seems mild!

[GHScorpiosRule]

5 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

Has Claire seriously romanticized her last time in the past with Jaime over the last 20 years? "I wasn't prepared for it to be so difficult"? Because, from what I remember, every second of their lives were a parade of murder, rape, war, torture, war, witch trials, plagues, and all kinds of stuff. Shit got real every other day! There were certainly good times, and I dont blame Claire for going back, but the past was never exactly a picnic. Attempted rape, an accidental murder of an asshole, a fire, and some in law awkwardness almost seems mild!

In a word, no. This wavering of “didn’t know how hard it would be” is a change the writers made.  In the buik, Claire had no doubts.

 If you go back and read my earlier comments, I call out the producer who “felt” Claire should have doubts, thus not being true to her character.

[tennisgurl]

5 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

 If you go back and read my earlier comments, I call out the producer who “felt” Claire should have doubts, thus not being true to her character.

Ah, I see it now! I didn't read all the comments yet, I guess I should before asking questions! What a weird choice to make, it seems to make Claire seem rather wishy washy. She spent all that time trying to get back to Jaime and mourning Jamie, and now its like "I forgot the past kind of sucks" after some hard times. 

[LadyBrochTuarach]

Oh, this episode!! SO. MANY. FEELS. 

I can't even. 

 

Finally Outlander has come back to its heart. I felt so happy watching this episode. Jamie and Claire feel as if they finally are themselves again. Claire had some off points for me, as others mentioned, the whole "Boston wasn't so bad" but, give me a break. But otherwise, everything for me was pretty spot on. I'm usually snarking on the changes from the buik to screen, but I could live with them this time around, for sure. 

Claire's emotions and face expressions said it all, when Marsali, Joan, and Laoghaire came bursting into the room. I felt for her, and I could feel her pain welling up and preparing to implode in anger. That was a loaded scene, and it was perfect. One thing I would have loved to see is Jamie come back and shave, just as in the buik Wee Ian did before facing his parents. But, I'm pleased with the small scene changes they did, and for me it flowed very well. 

 

I also had had a heart wrenching moment when Jamie danced with Marsali and Joan at Hogmanay. That was beautifully done, and it was wonderful to see him laugh and smile again. I felt like Jenny in that moment! No wonder she encouraged him to marry Laoghaire. I can put myself in Jenny's shoes for that, definitely. I buy this from the show perspective MORE than the buik perspective. IMO, it works better to the reason Jamie married her. I wish they would have kept the secret that Laoghaire caused Claire to end up at the witch trial and he never knew, but oh well. That topics been beaten to death so I'll hand wave and leave it be. 

Anyone who is asking about why they didn't get a boat for Wee Ian, I assume there wasn't any for miles and miles, because as we know from the buik, there is literally nowhere to go if you escaped Ardsmuir, towns and villages were very far away. There was probably no way to get one. Also, they likely wanted no one to know what they were doing, or what they were after. Which is why a third party wasn't involved. 

That fight between J&C and then Jenny throwing water on them was hilarious to watch on screen! Reminiscing from the first season where they had angry makeup sex. It was GUID, and I'll stick to that. And I LOVED the portrayal of Jenny. I also liked her in the books, and I think she had legitimate cause to be angry. I'm very glad to see they expanded on her feelings in the show and also in her conversations with Claire. 

 

Everything else was great, the strap for punishment in the book was funny, but I'll buy the change and also enjoyed it. 

 

Anyone pick up up on the bird reference from earlier in the season? I didn't see it mentioned in the comments. I know it was discussed for that particular episode (I forget which one now), so I was happy to see that this was one of the loose ends they started tying up! I made my heart skip a beat when she said that she imagined the bird was Jamie speaking to her, and his response just made me go ??????

One of my favourite episodes this season!!! 

 

5 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

True, but she characterized it as she killed a man.  And so did Ian.  So for all practical purposes, yeah, she did.

I don't know why she didn't just come out and say, "it was an accident!" ?

 

5 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

You know that.  I know that.  It's doubtful that Jamie knows that.  And wee Ian certainly doesn't know that.  He brags -- in front of his parents -- about how “Auntie Claire killed him.  Killed him GUID!”

I took this as Wee Ian wants to show his parents how his been on this amazing adventure, and he's a grown man, and, wow, Auntie Claire is amazing! I giggled thoroughly at this bit. It was perfect! 

Also, side note, in the buik, isn't Claire somewhat of an interesting topic amongst the Murray offspring? I mean, I recall it being mentioned somewhere how Wee Ian thought she was a fairy, and I think one of the other children mention how she doesn't look like a witch. Which leads me to believe they all have this incredulous fantasy of who their Auntie Claire is. That reminds me, I kind of like that Wee Ian was the only one to call her Auntie. And it made sense to me that Wee Jamie didn't remember Claire, whereas I believe he does in the buik. It showed how Claire is an outsider now, she's a stranger to everyone, and that she has to work hard to earn the love and respect of the family. 

[Scarlett45]

@tennisgurl In the show Claire did put Brianna on the bank accounts and the mortgage, as well as write an official letter of resignation for Joe. Given she had just confessed to Joe she wanted to go back to scotland to reconnect with Brianna’s bio-father (which is partly true), I assume that’s the story Brianna is using when people ask her about her mother. 

[LadyBrochTuarach]

Upon rewatch something I noticed... Laoghaire looks like a young Mrs. Fitzgibbons !  Anyone else see this? 

 

Also, this question stuck with me, and I never thought about it this way while watching. I like it, so I'll put it out there. 

 

Edited November 7, 2017 by LadyBrochTuarach
Adding photo and more thoughts, instead of new post

[rxpert14]

9 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I haven't read the books (but a book reader friend spoiled me on basically everything) so I know I`m not supposed to be over here, but quick question. Did Claire leave a story for Brianne to tell people about where she went after she time traveled? Its not as easy to disappear to lands unknown in the 1960s than in Jamie's time! I would think if a prominent Boston doctor just disappeared, there would be questions or something. 

Also, I know I said this in the other episode thread, but I think it bares repeating. Has Claire seriously romanticized her last time in the past with Jaime over the last 20 years? "I wasn't prepared for it to be so difficult"? Because, from what I remember, every second of their lives were a parade of murder, rape, war, torture, war, witch trials, plagues, and all kinds of stuff. Shit got real every other day! There were certainly good times, and I dont blame Claire for going back, but the past was never exactly a picnic. Attempted rape, an accidental murder of an asshole, a fire, and some in law awkwardness almost seems mild!

In my mind, when Claire states she wasn't prepared for it being so difficult, she was referring to her relationship with Jamie, and not the external conflicts (the fire, assault, etc). In her previous time in the past, the one thing that was easy was loving and trusting Jamie. I don't think that part was ever difficult for her, nor him for her. But while she loves him still, the trust has been broken, and rebuilding trust is quite difficult (just ask Jenny). I don't think she ever dreamed there would be a time when she would lose her trust in Jamie.  I might have second thoughts at this point as well. But that's just me.

[DittyDotDot]

36 minutes ago, rxpert14 said:

In my mind, when Claire states she wasn't prepared for it being so difficult, she was referring to her relationship with Jamie, and not the external conflicts (the fire, assault, etc). In her previous time in the past, the one thing that was easy was loving and trusting Jamie. I don't think that part was ever difficult for her, nor him for her. But while she loves him still, the trust has been broken, and rebuilding trust is quite difficult (just ask Jenny). I don't think she ever dreamed there would be a time when she would lose her trust in Jamie.  I might have second thoughts at this point as well. But that's just me.

That was how I felt in the books; Claire and Jamie had lost step with each other in the 20 years apart and that's what Claire wasn't prepared for. I really believe she was prepared for the hardship of the times, but never doubted her connection with Jamie and how easy everything generally was between them.

Edited November 7, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Haleth]

9 hours ago, LadyBrochTuarach said:

Anyone pick up up on the bird reference from earlier in the season? I didn't see it mentioned in the comments. I know it was discussed for that particular episode (I forget which one now), so I was happy to see that this was one of the loose ends they started tying up! I made my heart skip a beat when she said that she imagined the bird was Jamie speaking to her, and his response just made me go ??????

Yes, the little finch that perched on the windowsill.

38 minutes ago, rxpert14 said:

In my mind, when Claire states she wasn't prepared for it being so difficult, she was referring to her relationship with Jamie, and not the external conflicts (the fire, assault, etc). In her previous time in the past, the one thing that was easy was loving and trusting Jamie. I don't think that part was ever difficult for her, nor him for her. But while she loves him still, the trust has been broken, and rebuilding trust is quite difficult (just ask Jenny). I don't think she ever dreamed there would be a time when she would lose her trust in Jamie.  I might have second thoughts at this point as well. But that's just me.

I agree.  She knew 18thc post Culloden Scotland wouldn't be a piece of cake, but she never doubted her emotional tie to Jamie... unless he was, you know, remarried.

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 hours ago, LadyBrochTuarach said:

Upon rewatch something I noticed... Laoghaire looks like a young Mrs. Fitzgibbons !  Anyone else see this? 

 

Also, this question stuck with me, and I never thought about it this way while watching. I like it, so I'll put it out there. 

 

Whatever, Ron. 

2 hours ago, rxpert14 said:

In my mind, when Claire states she wasn't prepared for it being so difficult, she was referring to her relationship with Jamie, and not the external conflicts (the fire, assault, etc). In her previous time in the past, the one thing that was easy was loving and trusting Jamie. I don't think that part was ever difficult for her, nor him for her. But while she loves him still, the trust has been broken, and rebuilding trust is quite difficult (just ask Jenny). I don't think she ever dreamed there would be a time when she would lose her trust in Jamie.  I might have second thoughts at this point as well. But that's just me.

See, I didn't get that at all. Because she didn't talk about things not being the same between them on the cliff; she was talking about the external things-her career, social life, etc. I'm as peeved with him as everyone for marrying that twat, especially since Moore decided to add in that Jamie was very well aware of her hand in trying to set up Claire and see her killed. But the show also showed me, at least, he struggled and kept trying to tell her, and then it was too late and it imploded. And in the buik, she did leave him, running off, and I remember reading that she expected Jamie to come running after her, because that's what she wanted and expected Jamie to read her mind. I'm glad they cut that out, because it was ridiculous for someone of Claire's age to act like she was a teenager.

But, it's done, and now it's time for hijinks on the sea! I'm so glad we still have Wee Ian. I don't think we saw him in the buik until Jamie and Claire found him with...Geillis.

[WatchrTina]

19 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I'm so glad we still have Wee Ian. I don't think we saw him in the buik until Jamie and Claire found him with...Geillis.

I second this!  It's wonderful that in the show they'll be able to break out of Jamie & Claire's point-of-view to show us what is going on with him during his captivity.  That freedom will, I hope, aid in the translation to the screen of a REALLY tough part of the book.  

Edited November 7, 2017 by WatchrTina

[FnkyChkn34]

Random thought - who is going to start using the term "kebbie lebbie" in their everyday conversations?  Me.  ;-)

[AheadofStraight]

2 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Random thought - who is going to start using the term "kebbie lebbie" in their everyday conversations?  Me.  ;-)

I re-read that section of the book and was pleasantly reminded that Janet used the term there too!

[TaurusRose]

15 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

@tennisgurl In the show Claire did put Brianna on the bank accounts and the mortgage, as well as write an official letter of resignation for Joe. Given she had just confessed to Joe she wanted to go back to scotland to reconnect with Brianna’s bio-father (which is partly true), I assume that’s the story Brianna is using when people ask her about her mother. 

Not to mention it was way easier to drop off the grid in the 1960s than it is now. 

[TaurusRose]

5 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Random thought - who is going to start using the term "kebbie lebbie" in their everyday conversations?  Me.  ;-)

Nah, I’m going to be using the “shit boiling/stirring like God’s work” remark. That was awesome! ?

[FnkyChkn34]

5 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

Nah, I’m going to be using the “shit boiling/stirring like God’s work” remark. That was awesome! ?

Shite.  ;-)  

[Scarlett45]

45 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

Not to mention it was way easier to drop off the grid in the 1960s than it is now. 

Very true. It’s not like anyone will be expecting her to reply to texts/emails or phone calls. Brianna knows where she went so she isn’t going to be reported missing, and Claire DID tell Joe (an unrelated 3rd Party) she wanted to go back to Scotland. Who else would be looking for Claire so intently that Brianna would need a more solid “story”?

Actually Im still surprised that frank was never accused of Claire’s murder (I guess 21st century thinking here), but without a body or a crime scene the idea that she left him made more sense to the police. 

[FnkyChkn34]

12 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

Very true. It’s not like anyone will be expecting her to reply to texts/emails or phone calls. Brianna knows where she went so she isn’t going to be reported missing, and Claire DID tell Joe (an unrelated 3rd Party) she wanted to go back to Scotland. Who else would be looking for Claire so intently that Brianna would need a more solid “story”?

Actually Im still surprised that frank was never accused of Claire’s murder (I guess 21st century thinking here), but without a body or a crime scene the idea that she left him made more sense to the police. 

Frank was already dead.  Had been for a few years.  If neither Brianna nor Joe ever reported her missing, then no one would care.

[Nidratime]

Quote

Actually Im still surprised that frank was never accused of Claire’s murder

I think she meant when Claire originally disappeared while on her Scottish honeymoon in the 40's.

Can anyone remember what the explanation was for Jamie taking just one gemstone from the jewel box when he first went to Selkie Island, and giving it to John Gray? There was some reason he had, I know. I'm just not free to watch that episode right now.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Nidratime

[Mrs. Hanson]

On 11/6/2017 at 7:55 AM, Mrs. Hanson said:

Marrying Leghair.....ugh. 

I should be sorry for calling her Leghair.....but I am not.  LOL!

[GHScorpiosRule]

10 minutes ago, Mrs. Hanson said:

I should be sorry for calling her Leghair.....but I am not.  LOL!

Why? I call her hosebeast! 

[FnkyChkn34]

11 minutes ago, Mrs. Hanson said:

I should be sorry for calling her Leghair.....but I am not.  LOL!

I've been calling her Leghair since I saw someone else use that term years ago on the IMDb forums.  I can't take credit for it, but I can love it. ;-)  

[Scarlett45]

2 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Frank was already dead.  Had been for a few years.  If neither Brianna nor Joe ever reported her missing, then no one would care.

I meant originally in the 1940’s. Thanks @Nidratime  

[WatchrTina]

5 hours ago, Nidratime said:

Can anyone remember what the explanation was for Jamie taking just one gemstone from the jewel box when he first went to Selkie Island, and giving it to John Gray?

If he had taken the the whole box or even just a big handful -- what could he have done with them?  He was an escaped prisoner who was actively being hunted.  He was unlikely to be able to make in onto a boat without being stopped and questioned (if he could even make it to a port -- Ardsmuir being located at the arse-end-of-nowhere).  And even if he succeeded in getting passage on a ship, what then?  Was he really willing to live the life of a fugitive, hiding out in France for the rest of his life? And what of his men back at Ardsmuir?  By then he DID think of them as his men. He couldn't abandon them. That's just Book!Jamie.  TV!Jamie had the added incentive of returning to look after Murtagh.

So he took one stone and hid it (by swallowing it, so the guards wouldn't find it during the inevitable search upon his return.) He figured it might come in handy one day when (he hoped) he would be freed. He figured he could successfully continue to hide one stone once he, uh, "recovered" it.  In fact, he does hide it successfully for a good long while.  It is only when John Grey finds out where his family live and threatens them that he decides he must confess what happened (just not ALL of what happened, ye ken).  After telling the story he produces the sapphire as proof that his story is "true."  He doesn't tell John how he hid it until John is holding the stone in his hand.  :)

Edited November 8, 2017 by WatchrTina

[millahnna]

I'm kind of inclined to agree with the AV Club reviewer on this one; Jenny is the only person on this show with a lick of common sense right now.  Claire and Jamie being stupid jealous of each other's past lives is just not playing well on screen for  me.  Logically, it makes a certain amount of sense that people in their situation might feel this way.  But it's coming off as immature and stupid to me; something just isn't gelling in the writing for the concept.  Definitely not the first episode of this season I'd show someone were I trying to introduce them to the show while skipping seasons 1 and 2.  Right now, this one is near the bottom of the pack of the season so far, though I agree the pacing was (mostly) better, Jamie's incredibly boring exposition notwithstanding.

[GingerMarie]

Season 3 has been spot on for me.  Sure there have been changes some good some bad and some unfortunate.  But in all a very solid story.  millahnna I do understand your immaturity comment regarding J&C to some degree but then going back to someone after 20 years is insane.  They both feel the same insecurities but just have different ways of expressing it.  Would be very unrealistic if they did not have feelings of jealousy, resentment, uncertainty as well as that first blush of total bliss of seeing each other again'.  It will take time for them to find their way back to each other and if there were no obstacles in their way than that would just not be life.  No one is ever going to have that perfect little neat package of a life.  No matter how much you love someone.  **it happens.  I also am a 'Jenny' fan.  She ROCKED this episode.  PEACE

[Nidratime]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

If he had taken the the whole box or even just a big handful -- what could he have done with them?  He was an escaped prisoner who was actively being hunted.  He was unlikely to be able to make in onto a boat without being stopped and questioned (if he could even make it to a port -- Ardsmuir being located at the arse-end-of-nowhere).  And even if he succeeded in getting passage on a ship, what then?  Was he really willing to live the life of a fugitive, hiding out in France for the rest of his life? And what of his men back at Ardsmuir?  By then he DID think of them as his men. He couldn't abandon them. That's just Book!Jamie.  TV!Jamie had the added incentive of returning to look after Murtagh.

So he took one stone and hid it (by swallowing it, so the guards wouldn't find it during the inevitable search upon his return.) He figured it might come in handy one day when (he hoped) he would be freed. He figured he could successfully continue to hide one stone once he, uh, "recovered" it.  In fact, he does hide it successfully for a good long while.  It is only when John Grey finds out where his family live and threatens them that he decides he must confess what happened (just not ALL of what happened, ye ken).  After telling the story he produces the sapphire as proof that his story is "true."  He doesn't tell John how he hid it until John is holding the stone in his hand.  :)

But that's not how it happened in the show, right? Jamie handed it right over. Didn't he have a reason for that?

 

Quote

I'm kind of inclined to agree with the AV Club reviewer on this one; Jenny is the only person on this show with a lick of common sense right now.  Claire and Jamie being stupid jealous of each other's past lives is just not playing well on screen for  me.  Logically, it makes a certain amount of sense that people in their situation might feel this way.  But it's coming off as immature and stupid to me; something just isn't gelling in the writing for the concept.  Definitely not the first episode of this season I'd show someone were I trying to introduce them to the show while skipping seasons 1 and 2.  Right now, this one is near the bottom of the pack of the season so far, though I agree the pacing was (mostly) better, Jamie's incredibly boring exposition notwithstanding.

 

But, that's the point, right? That people in their situation might feel that way. If we were going to watch a show where everyone behaved just as they should, logically, common sensically -- is that a word? -- then why bother to read books, attend plays, or watch series or movies? Watching people be *people* with all their weaknesses and jealousies and anger and happiness and hopes and nobility is the point, isn't it?  If Jamie and Claire always did the "right thing" -- whatever that might be -- would we feel for them as representing human beings in this fictional universe? If you're feeling that they were immature or stupid, then the story is succeeding because they are not supposed to be perfect representations of human beings. They are suppose to make us think and understand and deliberate over the varied emotions and decisions -- wrong and right -- of human beings.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Nidratime