Book 1: Outlander / Cross Stitch

[Athena]

This thread contains spoilers for the first book of the Outlander series.

 

For those of you who have read the first book, please feel free to talk about the adaptation. Please discuss events that happened in this book and not beyond. Thank you.

 

Synopsis: Claire Randall, a 1940s English former war nurse, travels back in time to the 18th century Scotland and meets James Fraser, a Scottish man of some charm.

[peacefrog]

I wonder if we will get a lot of Claire voiceovers? There is so much internal dialogue, especially once she goes through the stones. Will there be someone she tells where she came from earlier than when she tells Jamie?

[TOWTooMuchTV]

I can't see her trusting anyone else enough to tell them. Interesting thought about the voiceovers, though. So much of the first half of the book is inside Claire's head. 

[insubordination]

I'm wondering what the pacing will be like. Will the first book be over by the end of the series?

[auntlada]

I've wondered that, too. I don't see how it can be unless they skip a ton of stuff, which they probably will have to anyway, but it seems like it would make viewers have to make leaps of logic that they may or may not be able to do.

From the unspoilered speculation thread (but my answer contains book spoilers):

 

Agreed. They should develop her relationship with her husband first - though everyone will be desperate to see Jamie.

 

They could always show the ghost or whatever it was Frank saw outside the house where he and Claire were staying. The one watching Claire brush her hair.

[springbarb]

I think I read that the goal was to do one book per season. I'm not sure how many episodes the season is (or how long the episodes are), but I have no idea how they're going to pull it off. She'll probably be through the stone in the first 15 minutes of the show.

[Athena]

@springbarb , the first season will be 16 episodes and hour long. They will be adding some scenes not in the book I think, mainly to establish the relationship between Claire and Frank. Probably in flashback though.

[springbarb]

@springbarb , the first season will be 16 episodes and hour long. They will be adding some scenes not in the book I think, mainly to establish the relationship between Claire and Frank. Probably in flashback though.

Thanks! In a preview clip, it looked like we get some clips of WWII, which we don't really see in the book. (...Which I am rereading. Of course.) It does also include Claire voiceovers, which makes sense.

[rainsmom]

Oh yes, the book quality dipped. I've read the first book a dozen times. (Seriously.) I think the first book is amazing. The second one is pretty good. The third one is okay. After that, they're unreadable. I think I gave up halfway through book five and just read reviews. The reviews convinced me I did the sane thing.

 

But book one. Oh, how I love it.

[Petunia846]

I don't know, even the first book had a lot of stuff that could have been cut, imo, and I wasn't totally satisfied with the ending. I tend to prefer a good hero's journey plot circle over a long, meandering epic journey though, so I guess that first book came the closest to delivering that. I guess the first two books together could be said to have a kind of circular plot, but then after that it's been just willy nilly all over the place. Meh. The situations are interesting and engaging enough to keep going. I can't imagine how anyone ever thought they could make a movie of the book, but I can definately see them making good TV episodes.

[Athena]

@Petunia846 : I agree that the books are addictive. They've dipped a lot in quality since the first couple of books. I do continue to read them mainly because I really like the history aspect of it, I still care about a couple of the characters.

 

This topic is for Book One, but I'm starting to wonder if we should just make it for the whole book series except put the last, most recent book stuff under spoilers until the paperback. We did something similar in the TWOP True Blood thread eons ago.

[Petunia846]

Yeah, that's why I didn't comment here to begin with (that and that it wasn't my plan to start a long discussion, just ask the one question), but I also don't think I would comment in a whole series thread until after I've finished all the books anyway, so oh well. Tricky tricky.

[Athena]

Yeah, that's why I didn't comment here to begin with (that and that it wasn't my plan to start a long discussion, just ask the one question), but I also don't think I would comment in a whole series thread until after I've finished all the books anyway, so oh well. Tricky tricky.

 

That's fine. There's a spoiler free Gabaldon topic in Books as well. We'll probably keep Book 1 here until the first season is over. It'll be used to compare. I think most of us have read book one anyway.

 

I think I'm just wondering how much some of us want to snark about the later books. I still read them, but I know they aren't perfect either. Heh.

[Dejana]

There are some shout-outs to the TV series in the latest book, Written in My Own Heart's Blood. Not sure if that should go here or in a media thread? 

 

A big part of the first book is Claire internally freaking out about her predicament, which will be hard to capture without voiceovers or discussions with other characters, prior to revealing it to Jamie. I suppose there's the old soap opera standby of talking to yourself at length, but it doesn't seem like it will be that sort of show.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Dejana

[peacefrog]

I actually prefer the later books for reasons that I can't explain here due to spoilers, so I would welcome a book spoiler thread that is open to all the novels in relation to the tv show.

[Insomnia]

I really liked the first books then about Drums of Autumn my mother discovered them and I kind of stopped reading them. She was just so excited and they were so amazing. They were her thing then and I didn't really want to share. I went back to the series years later when I was in England in a used bookstore and saw Cross Stitch and remembered the series and there were about eleventy billion books to catch up on. Anyway, now my dad is all excited: "We're getting a Scottish Game of Thrones!" because that's how it was presented and I'm still not sure what to tell him. (He called my boyfriend Sassenach because he was born in England and our family name is Scottish ((But I'm third generation Canadian)) and well... it's going to be interesting.
 
When I first saw pictures of Jamie, he was not Jamie, not how I pictured him when he came out. But then they did this whole speak Gaelic thing on the site and well, this show could go off the rails as weirdly as True Blood and end up being as horrible as the ending of Dexter and I'm going to watch until then end. My expectations for books I love being translated well (or even staying decent themselves) is pretty low. And I'm a sucker for accents.
 
I'm excited for this series and can't wait to see what they cut and what they keep. True Blood and Game of Thrones were both fairly good at sticking to the original book the first season, but the first books of each series weren't as long as Outlander by itself when put together.

16 episodes doesn't seem like it will be long enough. Whoops, I lie! A Song of Ice and Fire was 16 pages longer. Nevermind! Well, still won't be long enough with all the accents to listen to.

 

Excuse me I'll be over... there...

 

[Athena]

@Insomnia : Welcome my nemesis and fellow Canadian!

 

 

When I first saw pictures of Jamie, he was not Jamie, not how I pictured him when he came out. But then they did this whole speak Gaelic thing on the site and well, this show could go off the rails as weirdly as True Blood and end up being as horrible as the ending of Dexter and I'm going to watch until then end. My expectations for books I love being translated well (or even staying decent themselves) is pretty low. And I'm a sucker for accents. 

 

Yeah, those videos really helped. The actor has a verra nice voice. He may not look like the Jamie in our heads, but he damn well comes close to sounding like him.

[Insomnia]

Hello there! Despite my novel length posts on the True Blood forums, I'm actually more of a lurker. You never know where I might pop up next. I might even be reading things in other threads right now!

 

Right now I'm waffling between reading the books again or waiting or what honestly. I don't mind books to movies or TV (in fact when I was younger I often wanted my favourite books to be TV shows rather than movies, because they would be longer.) But Jaime was probably my first bookboyfriend and I'm more worried that without those puppy-dog tinted eyes of youth (I was probably a bit too young reading these when they first came out as holy shit I was only 14!) will change things. And I kind of want him to always be my first bookboyfriend, as I expect TV Jaime to be another one of my TVboyfriends. I can separate the two, I'm sure! It's more a question of before, during, or after the series airs.

[maraleia]

I read that they are including the Jaime spanks Claire scene from the book in the show. It will be interesting to see how they portray it.

[Spiderella2]

I'm already irritated with the actress they chose for Claire. In the book, she is described quite often as a Bonny lass, with curves, plump in all the right places. I just always pictured her as at least a size 12. But this actress, is so skinny. Like Hollywood skinny--- I'm just not buying it. I know that the characters on the show will never live up to our imaginations but in the books, that was a real selling point for Claire. It made her a relatable woman, and at least a normal person.

[peacefrog]

I think the marketing for this has been fantastic!  My excitement is building!

 

I also think the casting has been spot on. I don't care about exact eye or hair color, I just want them to capture the characters' essence. Out of all the casting the look that surprised me the most was Dougal but again he really seems to capture how imposing he is.  

 

In the trailers Claire has the perfect attitude! It's funny how you think she is to thin as I always got the impression when reading that she was very slender, just a plump arse.  

[Dejana]

I also had the impression that Claire just had a big butt and was otherwise thin...in Voyager,

she asks a male friend to size up her figure and he used the term "skinny".

Edited July 24, 2014 by Dejana

[GHScorpiosRule]

I remember when the issue of Jamie spanking Claire came up in this Yahoo! group I was in years ago. So many screamed he was "abusing" her, being abusive, and how DARE he lay a hand on Claire.

 

Maybe it was because I'd done my fair share of reading historicals, but I had no problem with this. First because, hello, this is the 18th century! When I read a period piece, I put my then 20th century mind aside and read knowing that this was acceptable back then. Besides, if memory recalls, Jamie told her to stay put and she didn't.

 

To expand, and I'll only go off topic for comparison purposes, but Johanna Lindsay, had a book, Prisoner of My Desire, from the mid 80s.  The heroine was forced to have sex with the hero, who had been kidnapped by heroine's stepbrother, so she could get pregnant. This was because the man he'd forced/blackmailed her into marrying, who was 4 times her age, died before he could consummate their marriage on their wedding night. Anyhoo, what she did was rape him. Hero was gagged, and chained--arms and legs, while she had to arouse him and then, well, ride him.

 

Now, it turns out that he wasn't a peasant, but a War Lord, and when he escaped (the heroine had her maid release him after three days because she couldn't do it anymore and felt guilty), he returned and took her prisoner. And for three days, he chained her, aroused her, until she begged him to well, you know.

 

sorry for the long post, point being, a lot of readers called him a Rapist. But what she did was totes okay because she was being blackmailed and told if she didn't get pregnant by him, stepbrother would kill her mother, who he was holding hostage.

 

I can't and didn't accept such hypocrisy. It was the 11th century, and well medieval times and I had no problem with the way he exacted revenge. Because by the end of the third day, they became lovers. (She was initially attracted to him when he was brought to her).

 

Point being, I try to view period pieces through that lens.

[peacefrog]

I viewed the spanking the same way.  Should be interesting though when the episode airs to hear the reactions. 

 

It also highlights how different the times are and Jamie and Claire's viewpoints.  Jamie himself was not above taking a strapping when he did wrong, so from his viewpoint he was only punishing the way he would have been. They do have it out and both seem to understand where the other was coming from, Jamie vows to never do it again.

 

First reading it did shock me and I did not think she could write her way out of it. At least for me it made Jamie fallible and more real because by then he was being written as way to good to be true!

[Elsinore]

I am not looking forward to the Geilis and Claire take a beating and Geilis ultimately dies a horrible death part of the first book.

 

Really, the spanking and Jamie being whipped twice over I can take. But that one? I think they've shot those scenes already, so I know it's coming but still not too thrilled.

 

The only upside is knowing that Geilis doesn't really "die" but it still horrified me.

[DoughGirl]

I'm already irritated with the actress they chose for Claire. In the book, she is described quite often as a Bonny lass, with curves, plump in all the right places. I just always pictured her as at least a size 12. But this actress, is so skinny. Like Hollywood skinny--- I'm just not buying it. I know that the characters on the show will never live up to our imaginations but in the books, that was a real selling point for Claire. It made her a relatable woman, and at least a normal person.

In Outlander, Claire states that she's 5' 6" and weighs nine stone.

[Insomnia]

I never had an issue with the spanking thing. I mean, I got spanked, once when I was a kid. My parents got spanked more. If I had kids today and spanked them, I'd be a child abuser.

 

Different times, different ways people look at things. My example covers only half a century, not the century and a half the book does.

 

Actually, I lie, thinking about it. It always bothered me that Claire was bothered with it as much as she was, given when she came from. My grandfather nearly threw a priest down the stairs because he had my grandmother crying because he was saying she was going to go to hell since she was Catholic and he was Protestant. And that would have been a decade or more after Claire's time. And sure, she came from a time where women did things for the War. But it was only for the War, things slipped back to the way they had been after. Hell, look at The Honeymooners. I always found Claire a bit too modern, there.

[Vandy10]

Book 1 pretty much lost me during the spanking scene. I can understand why a character would do something with my objective history lens, but that doesn't mean it's not going to turn my stomach or offend my sensibilities, which it did.

 

I still went on to finish Book 1 and several other books because at the time I was living in another country, and they were some of the few English-language books my local book store sold (this was pre e-reader days). As a bibliophile, reading something that annoys me is better than reading nothing at all. But I moved back to the US sometime in the middle of the 4th (or maybe 5th?) book, and finally gave up once I had access to better reading material.

 

That being said, I'm totally in for the series. It's summer; what else am I going to do?! I'm actually looking forward to refreshing my memory and reading here about the differences from the book/show; I can hardly remember any details from the books, just general plotlines.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Okay, can someone refresh my memory? Is that military officer who tortures Jaime, is he Frank's ancestor? I remember most of Outlander, but that detail is escaping me at the moment.

 

Thanks!

 

ETA: Never mind! Just saw Jonathan Randall, played by the same actor, so I'm guessing yes.

Edited August 2, 2014 by GHScorpiosRule

[Petunia846]

Yes, you're right, he is.

 

Although in a later book we learn it's actually Jack's brother who fathered the baby, but he died and Jack married the woman. But we don't know that at this point in the story, and I don't think Frank ever found out about that.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Thanks Petunia, and after reading the spoiler, I remembered that part. It's slooowly coming back to me. And now that it's been over 10 years since I read these books, I may just give them a try again after the first season.

[Petunia846]

Heh. I read all 8 of the main books from June to July (laziest summer vacation ever), and now I'm rereading the first one. I'm not obsessed or anything.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Like I posted when this forum was first created, I made it through one third of Voyager, before giving up, and should have been able to read it, because I was finally getting the pov from Jaime's side, for fuck's sake! But Dragonfly just burned me out, it was torture reading that one.  But, like I said, it's been 10 years...

 

And how some of you are with this series, that's how I am with JD Robb's In Death series.

[dustoffmom]

And for me Scorpio it was just the opposite.  Dragonfly remains probably my favorite of all the books and I had to drag myself through Voyager!  Who knows???  :)

 

[Glaze Crazy]

I got turned onto this series by way of a co-worker.  She was a big sci-fi fan and said she picked it up based on the time travel hook.  She said she was surprised she'd get into a romance novel.  I think only Outlander comes even close to the romance genre and I appreciate how Diana Gabaldon has kind of switched it up for each book.  

 

Of the first 4, Voyager is my favorite and Dragonfly in Amber is my least favorite since I have less interest in the French court storyline, but I respect how it ties France into the second Jacobite Rising.  I think so much happens in Voyager and moves Jamie and Claire through both years and continents.  For me, it's the least tedious book.  The later books introduce so many different characters and follow other storylines so they can get a bit busy.  The last 4 have so much detail that it takes several chapters just to get through a day or two in the story.  I almost gave up reading A Fiery Cross, it took me a while to get through it.  But overall I really appreciate her attention to historical detail and that most of her characters seem realistic and human, time travel notwithstanding.

[WatchrTina]

I actually think Diana's writing gets better as the series goes on.  She admits she wrote the first book to learn how to write a novel and in my opinion, it shows.  I found the first book difficult to read due to the quality of the writing (it didn't help that I picked it up right after finishing all of George RR Martin's As Song of Ice and Fire books).  But the premise was good and I fell in love with Claire and Jamie so I just overlooked the bad dialog (like "Jesus H Roosevelt Christ!") or the repetitious use of weak metaphors or the use of too many adjectives and adverbs (which they preach against in Creative Writing 101).  I've always assumed that after the success of the first book Diana had the money to do even more research, including travel to Scotland, and was assigned better editors, and that that was part of the reason that the writing improved.  Yes the plot gets pretty free-wheeling in later books and the coincidences in the later books are positively Dickensian -- Diana's characters run into people they know in the remotest of locations -- but then again, Charles Dickens was a pretty good writer.

 

Now about that spanking scene -- I absolutely hate it but I think it belongs in the book for two reasons.

 

1.  Jamie tells her if he doesn't punish her for putting all the men in danger they will hold it against her.  And of course he's right.  They tease her the following day and all seems to be forgiven but before the spanking they will barely look her in the eye.  She needs those men on her side and Jamie needs them to help him continue to protect her.  If a spanking is the price she has to pay for their continued protection, then so be it.  Besides, it's already been established that corporal punishment is commonly used in that time, even on adults.  Laohaire nearly gets spanked in public until Jamie volunteers to take the beating instead.  And Jamie tells of being spanked on his bare ass in front of everyone at castle Leogh after he insults Mrs. ______ (the one who assigns the rooms and runs the staff.)  And he tells Claire that his Da always spanked him outside where the tenants could see so they knew he wasn't being allowed to get away with bad behavior.  Claire's spanking is totally in keeping with the culture of the time.  Her reaction, however, is totally in keeping with 1945 which brings me to the second reason I think that scene belongs in the book.

 

2. I love that she fights him and that he comes out of the room scratched and bruised.  And afterward she warns him what will happen if he ever does it again and he promises that he never will.  It's a moment of character growth for Jamie.  He didn't take the 18th century position and tell her her to get used to the occasional spanking.  He realizes that with this woman, that approach is going to have seriously bad repercussions and he adapts his approach accordingly.  It a very enlightened and "modern" position for him to take.

Edited August 3, 2014 by WatchrTina

[Petunia846]

Okay, so the one thing that bugged me about the first episode is that Claire didn't meet the Reverend's "son" Roger before going through the stones. I've heard that they did cast a little kid to play Roger, so maybe he's in another episode, but Claire is already gone, so even if we, the audience, see him, she won't, and isn't it important for future books/seasons that Claire knows who Roger is and hears about his family tree from the Reverend?

[glitterpants]

I'm another one who really liked the first book of the series. I enjoyed the second one even though I thought it dragged a bit and Jamie and Claire felt kind of peripheral to the main plot, but hated the third book (mainly from the second half I think, catching up with Jamie at first was fine) which I thought was completely ludicrous and kind of put me off the rest of the series for a while because I hear it gets even worse. With that said, I'm still extremely excited about the show!

[ihartcoffee]

I read up thru book 4 before I gave up, it became draggy and redundant.  I enjoyed the first episode and look forward to the season. 

 

I have one question, is it revealed in book one who the "ghost" outside looking at Claire is?  I am pretty sure I know who it is, but can't recall exactly how he gets there.  I don't want to reveal anything outside book one though.

[nodorothyparker]

Unless I'm remembering it wrong, the "ghost" is never clearly identified.  But I've only made it through the first four books so far.  There are several instances of people claiming to have "seen" Claire after she goes back to her own time, so I've always wondered about that.

 

Having seen the first episode, I admit to being momentarily distracted by the fact that Jamie isn't noticeably taller or bigger than the other men.  Mostly because Claire never seems to go beyond more than a page or two of narration without mentioning it.  I'll get over it though because the actor is otherwise fine.  Dougal also didn't look anything like I had pictured.

 

The spanking scene and some of the other brutality in the book is important both because it's historically accurate for the time and because I always felt like Claire  didn't fully grasp the seriousness of her predicament until she was confronted with it like that.  She does a fair bit of internal freaking out about suddenly being thrust back in time, but she also at times seemed rather self congratulatory about how adaptable she was and how she was able to fool everybody.

[ihartcoffee]

Unless I'm remembering it wrong, the "ghost" is never clearly identified.  But I've only made it through the first four books so far.  There are several instances of people claiming to have "seen" Claire after she goes back to her own time, so I've always wondered about that.

 

Having seen the first episode, I admit to being momentarily distracted by the fact that Jamie isn't noticeably taller or bigger than the other men.  Mostly because Claire never seems to go beyond more than a page or two of narration without mentioning it.  I'll get over it though because the actor is otherwise fine.  Dougal also didn't look anything like I had pictured.

 

The spanking scene and some of the other brutality in the book is important both because it's historically accurate for the time and because I always felt like Claire  didn't fully grasp the seriousness of her predicament until she was confronted with it like that.  She does a fair bit of internal freaking out about suddenly being thrust back in time, but she also at times seemed rather self congratulatory about how adaptable she was and how she was able to fool everybody.

 

I could have sworn it is addressed at some point, but I could be wrong.  Maybe someone will come along that has a better memory than me, I read them a couple of years ago.  

 

I agree about the spanking.  It explains in the books that she put lives in danger, the other men resented her.  If Jamie didn't punish her it would have been worse for her with the rest of the group.  He hated it though and vowed to never do it again.  I'm looking forward to seeing their love affair begin.  You are right that show Jamie looks nothing like the books description.  He's cute though, so I'll give him a chance. 

[WatchrTina]

I've read all the books, some more than once, and I don't think the ghost has ever been explained.  I was very glad his face was not shown in the show because my own personal theory is that it is the ghost of Jamie -- a very elderly Jamie if I get my wish -- who has come back to this moment to see his beloved in her youth, they way she looked when they first met.  I do believe it was a ghost (they walk on Samhain) and not a time-traveler for reasons I can't go into here.

 

There is also a moment in book 2, Dragonfly in Amber, when -- WHOOPS -- I just realized that I'm spoiling book 2 and they asked us not to.  So I'm cutting out the specifics about when this passage happens and will only say that at some point, when their lives are in jeopardy (again) Jamie says the following.

 

 

 

     "I will find you," he whispered in my ear.  "I promise.  If I must endure two hundred years of purgatory, two hundred years without you -- then, that is my punishment, which I earned for my crimes.  For I have lied, and killed, and stolen; betrayed and broken trust.  But there is one thing that shall lie in the balance.  When I shall stand before God, I shall have one thing to say, to weigh against the rest."

     His voice dropped, nearly to a whisper and his arms tightened around me.

     "Lord, ye gave me a rare woman, and God! I loved her well."

 

God, that passage makes me weep.

 

So that's my justification for why the ghost of James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie Fraser shows up at the beginning of book 1.  If you want to know how long he lives before he becomes a ghost, read the books!

Edited August 3, 2014 by WatchrTina

[GHScorpiosRule]

Granted, it's been 10 years since I read this book, but I always thought that the ghost was Jaime, based on the description. Could have sworn the description was of Jaime. {shrugs}

[Nidratime]

Okay, so the one thing that bugged me about the first episode is that Claire didn't meet the Reverend's "son" Roger before going through the stones. I've heard that they did cast a little kid to play Roger, so maybe he's in another episode, but Claire is already gone, so even if we, the audience, see him, she won't, and isn't it important for future books/seasons that Claire knows who Roger is and hears about his family tree from the Reverend?

 

Perhaps there will be more "flashbacks" (flashforwards?) in future episodes where we see Claire meeting little Roger even if the book didn't handle it that way. I honestly can't remember how it was dealt with in the books since I read them years ago.

[Petunia846]

The only thing that happened in the book was that Claire and Frank went to the Reverend's house, like in the episode. Frank was working and Claire went to sit down since she was bored, but when she turned a chair around to sit in there was the little boy asleep in the chair. He woke up, was introduced, and scampered off and then later the Reverend showed Claire Roger's family tree that he kept around so that Roger would remember his family history, since both his parents had died. So they did the scene with the Reverend at his house, but they left out Roger. I'm really curious to see whether we see more "flashbacks/forwards" with Claire in the 40s. Maybe you're right and they'll get it in later.

[WatchrTina]

 

I'm really curious to see whether we see more "flashbacks/forwards" with Claire in the 40s.

I'm betting they do.  One of the more interesting aspects of the show is the casting of one actor to play both Frank and Black Jack and it would be a shame if all the Frank scenes were done now.  I assume we'll see Claire dream about Frank or find her lost in reverie, remembering Frank -- like we saw in the first episode when she flashed back to Frank telling her about the British ambushes. Perhaps wee Roger will appear in a flashback when she is introduced to someone she recognizes from his family tree.

[Athena]

It has also been years since I read the first book, but I think the show captured a few things well. When we first meet Jamie in the book, like Claire, I'm not sure what to think of him. She notices right away how tall he is, but also how young he is. I got that a bit in their scenes. She's very much the scolding nurse type. I do believe they have chemistry, but it's not as strong yet. She and Frank have it in spades because it's been developed. The actress is very lucky to have two great co-stars and they her. 

[peacefrog]

I remember first reading it and I liked Dougal! 

The ghost reportedly is supposed to be explained at the end of the last book whenever that may be.

Someone mentioned in the episode thread an astute observation regarding the narrative as being spoken as if talking about the past.  Taking this thought to book spoiler thread!

[auntlada]

Perhaps wee Roger will appear in a flashback when she is introduced to someone she recognizes from his family tree.

 

Does she meet anyone who is listed on that family tree? I mean she might, but I don't think anyone was mentioned in the book.

[dustoffmom]

I am positive the ghost issue has never been fully addressed.  It is one of the two questions I need Diana to answer so I can die at peace.  LOL  She did once, in an interview somewhere, sort of/kind of discuss it but not with real authority if you will.  Yes, I too am among the group that believes of course it has to be Jaime.  But until herself says it really is, then it remains a question doesn't it?