S04.E08: Wilmington

[FnkyChkn34]

On 12/23/2018 at 6:11 AM, Petunia846 said:

Maybe he's making use of it as a secret name, like Jamie used Alexander Malcolm.

Was I the only one squicked out by seeing "the kids" naked? Obviously they're grown ups, but it felt so weird. I have no problem with the scenes with Jamie and Claire, but for some reason I didn't want to see Roger and Bree like that. So awkward.

Good episode overall. Leaves you with a stone in the pit of your stomach though. I almost with I hadn't watched this week, and waited until the next episode is out so I could just go straight into that.

I agree, they all use fake names when doing illegal things. 

I didn't really mind the scenes with Bree and Roger.  Richard Rankin is about to turn 36, after all, not much of a kid. 

[Cdh20]

On ‎12‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 4:11 AM, Petunia846 said:

 

 

Good episode overall. Leaves you with a stone in the pit of your stomach though. I almost with I hadn't watched this week, and waited until the next episode is out so I could just go straight into that.

I binged the first 3 seasons & I must say I preferred watching it that way to week to week. But I can't help myself from watching each week, instead of saving them up to binge. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

10 hours ago, Ziggy said:

I've often wondered if her accent is part of the reason she is criticized, especially by Americans.  I just wondered if her accent is just so ordinary compared to the English and Scottish accents.  I think she's doing a wonderful mid-western accent,

Except that she shouldn't have a midwestern accent. Brianna was raised on the East Coast--Boston, to be specific. So she should have the North-Eastern or "Bostonian" accent. And my issue with her isn't because of the American accent she's supposed to have. I'm American. And I don't think her accent is ordinary. I've watched plenty of shows and movies where the actors are Austrialian, Irish, British, who can do an American accent and still be good actors. Sophie is just FLAT and WOODEN in everything. Her voice is grating, and there is no affect. No range of emotions, as I stated up thread. If she's struggling in trying to do an American accent, they should have continued looking and hired someone who could and still act.

[Ziggy]

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Except that she shouldn't have a midwestern accent. Brianna was raised on the East Coast--Boston, to be specific. So she should have the North-Eastern or "Bostonian" accent.

Totally agree.  I was very disappointed that she didn't have a Bostonian accent.  I've been told that it's a very difficult accent to teach, but ...  I don't blame the actress for that, though.  Clearly, this was the accent she was told to do.

I enjoy listening to the books, and I think Davina Porter does an amazing job!!!  Really!  She's incredible.  Still, I have trouble believing Bree would pronounce "vitamins" with a short "i," "schedule" with an "sh" sound at the beginning instead of an "s" followed by a hard "c" and that she would pronounce the "h" in herbs instead of a silent "h."  I do think i'm being nitpicky, but it just sounds very, very strange to be listening to a very common American accent and then hear the word "herbs" pronounced with the "h."  By the way, Davina also does a Midwestern accent for Bree.  Still, I want to say, the word is anything (the "y" is pronounced like a long "e"), not anithing where the "y" is pronounced like a short "i."

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Sophie is just FLAT and WOODEN in everything. Her voice is grating, and there is no affect. No range of emotions,

I actually disagree with you hear.  I don't think she's flat or wooden.  I do think she does a lot of acting with her eyes and with her facial expressions.  When Roger called her to tell her that he found out that Claire had found Jamie (before he found out about the obituary) there were so many complaints that she was terrible in that scene.  I thought she was amazing!  She said so much in her sighs, in the way she was struggling to think of what to say, in the way that she rolled her eyes at the stupidity of what she had just said.  I guess I can relate to a lot of how she chooses to play the character, because those are exactly the things I would have done (in real life ... I'm no actress).

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ziggy

[areca]

11 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

Yes, in epi 201 Frank revealed to Reverend Wakefield that he was unable to father children, so taking back already pregnant Claire was his only chance to be a father, & he took it.

I always thought "You bastard!" at that.  He never told Claire or gave any indication that he was going to!  He was condemning her to a life without children without consulting her!  And this was back in the day when it was *always* the woman's fault there would be no babies.

[FnkyChkn34]

I had to watch this episode twice. Somehow I completely missed Fergus and Murtagh the first time...

It was still just okay for me. I wasn't really shocked or appalled or moved by any of it.  It was good to see Fergus again, but I miss Ian. Sophie's acting has gotten much better, in my opinion, but the writing isn't great for anyone lately. 

I think I'm just bored with this season, which is a shame because I know next season won't get any better; book 5 is where I quit and haven't been able to finish. 

[snowbryneich]

2 hours ago, areca said:

I always thought "You bastard!" at that.  He never told Claire or gave any indication that he was going to!  He was condemning her to a life without children without consulting her!  And this was back in the day when it was *always* the woman's fault there would be no babies.

In the books, Frank also knows he is sterile but not at that point. It comes up when Claire is thinking about the conversation they had when he told her he was going to leave he revealed he'd been tested ' a few years back' and learned he was sterile. This is just before Brianna turns 18 so a few years back implies he got tested long after adopting her. But it was part of why he wanted to take Brianna as the only child he would ever have. So he didn't know when he adopted Brianna in the books and he does tell Claire - eventually. In fact in book 1 when Claire is wondering if there is something wrong with either of them that they haven't conceived before or after the war, seeing wee Roger makes her bring up the possibility of adoption to Frank as there a lot of war orphans needing homes and Frank thinks he couldn't love a child if it wasn't really theirs which I always find ironic on reread.

[Ziggy]

7 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I think I'm just bored with this season, which is a shame because I know next season won't get any better; book 5 is where I quit and haven't been able to finish. 

Book 5 stalled me, as well.  Maybe it was because I read the first 4 books in less than a year (which is fast for me, given how little time I have to just read).  I think it had everything to do with the gathering.  That took forever, and I'm not convinced most of it was necessary.

I ended up really liking Book 5 (after I took a break), but I enjoy the every day stuff.  Books 5 & 6 have lots of everyday stuff.

I think Season 5 might surprise you.  There's no way a tv show can do as much of Book 5 as any previous book, so my guess is most of the book will not end up on screen.  I think they are going to end up cutting out so much of the every day stuff that many fans who found the book a bit tedious and unadventurous will be pleased.

Just my guess.

[ruby24]

I think that as well- that maybe Book 5 will translate better onscreen than some of the more packed books, just because it's pretty easy to edit out a lot of unnecessary shit. They can do that whole gathering in one episode. The most dramatic events the rest of the season will be the regulator mini-war, the baby Claire finds in the woods, Jocasta's wedding, and Roger's hanging. Oh, and Jamie's snakebite. There's no real villain in this one, I don't think. (Bonnet's still hanging around, but he's not in it much).

I can't actually remember what the climax of that book is. Is that the one where Brianna is kidnapped and Jamie and Roger come save her and have to kill those guys in the woods? (That might be the sixth one).

Edited December 27, 2018 by ruby24

[FnkyChkn34]

@Ziggy and @ruby24 - I hope you guys are right!  I made it through the gathering, but that must have taken all of my energy...

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, ruby24 said:

 

I can't actually remember what the climax of that book is. Is that the one where Brianna is kidnapped and Jamie and Roger come save her and have to kill those guys in the woods? (That might be the sixth one).

That was Claire.  It's yet another rape we have to look forward to.  That said, I'm not sure if it's book 5 or book 6 - those two books run together in my head.

[ruby24]

14 minutes ago, toolazy said:

That was Claire.  It's yet another rape we have to look forward to.  That said, I'm not sure if it's book 5 or book 6 - those two books run together in my head.

They run together in my head too, but I wasn't thinking of the Claire rape. There's actually another part of one of those books where Brianna's taken and kept in an attic or something. She runs into Phaedre and they're going to be sold into slavery, and then Jamie and Roger make their way into this place through the woods. I think Bonnet might be involved in this whole thing too, but he escapes again. It's near the end of one of these, but it might be the sixth one, because I think Brianna's pregnant again and that's where she tells Roger.

I can't remember what happens at the end of Book 5. I think that book had the least amount of action scenes and dramatic events overall.

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, ruby24 said:

They run together in my head too, but I wasn't thinking of the Claire rape. There's actually another part of one of those books where Brianna's taken and kept in an attic or something. She runs into Phaedre and they're going to be sold into slavery, and then Jamie and Roger make their way into this place through the woods. I think Bonnet might be involved in this whole thing too, but he escapes again. It's near the end of one of these, but it might be the sixth one, because I think Brianna's pregnant again and that's where she tells Roger.

I can't remember what happens at the end of Book 5. I think that book had the least amount of action scenes and dramatic events overall.

Oh, that's right. I completely forgot about that bit of stupidity.  Yes, Bonnet kidnapped her.  And there's a bit where Josh ends up on a slave ship and no one tries to save him.  But honestly, I skip over those chapters because I just can't deal.  

Edited December 27, 2018 by toolazy

[ruby24]

I'm honestly wondering if they're going to shorten Bonnet's story on the show and not have him survive all the way to the end of Season 6. That's just a long time for no resolution to this storyline (it was in the books too, I couldn't believe he got away again at the end of Book 5).

And I'm guessing they will keep the part this season about Bree letting him out of his jail cell so she can "forgive" him, which leads to his escape, but man I hope they change that. That was just SO STUPID in the book, and no one will understand her wanting to do that on the show. Plus, she goes through this whole dilemma about wanting to forgive him, only to wind up being the one who kills him at the end of Book 6 anyway. None of that was necessary. I hope they shorten this whole thing on the show- they could easily have him die in the warehouse explosion and do any events from the next two seasons that include him with another character. He's minor from that point on anyway, there's really no point to keeping him around. 

[toolazy]

7 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

I'm honestly wondering if they're going to shorten Bonnet's story on the show and not have him survive all the way to the end of Season 6. That's just a long time for no resolution to this storyline (it was in the books too, I couldn't believe he got away again at the end of Book 5).

And I'm guessing they will keep the part this season about Bree letting him out of his jail cell so she can "forgive" him, which leads to his escape, but man I hope they change that. That was just SO STUPID in the book, and no one will understand her wanting to do that on the show. Plus, she goes through this whole dilemma about wanting to forgive him, only to wind up being the one who kills him at the end of Book 6 anyway. None of that was necessary. I hope they shorten this whole thing on the show- they could easily have him die in the warehouse explosion and do any events from the next two seasons that include him with another character. He's minor from that point on anyway, there's really no point to keeping him around. 

And when she does finally kill him, it's a mercy killing!  He told her that his biggest fear in life was drowning so she shot him in the head before he could drown at the stake.  The whole thing is just bonkers.  

[ruby24]

3 hours ago, toolazy said:

And when she does finally kill him, it's a mercy killing!  He told her that his biggest fear in life was drowning so she shot him in the head before he could drown at the stake.  The whole thing is just bonkers.  

Yeah, there's some really weird stuff in the aftermath of this rape over the next two books where Gabaldon is almost trying to convey that Bonnet has some sort of hold over Brianna somehow. It's off-putting. Like when he kidnaps her the second time but doesn't rape her (because she's pregnant) and then he has sex with a prostitute in the room in front of her, and Brianna is like, half turned on by it? Like, wtf? 

Then I swear there's a part where Roger is concerned that Brianna thinks of Bonnet when they have sex, which I almost couldn't believe was actually written. It wasn't even that he's concerned that she is now uncomfortable with sex due to the fact that her second experience of it ever was being raped (which Claire brings up at some point), but no, he's worried that she's actually thinking about him and comparing the two of them and he's jealous. I could not believe that was actually on the page. 

Roger in the book was actually incredibly insensitive to the fact that she was raped and how that could have affected her. His first concern is that her baby might not be his, which bothers him for years. Then he gets impatient that she doesn't want to sleep with him right away. I swear there's never a point where he really cares about what actually happened to her, his hatred of Bonnet is very much just because he's the guy he's gotta get revenge on because it's his duty as a man or something. He and Brianna never even talk about it!

I'm expecting them to make him on the show not as much of an asshole about that. 

Frankly...because of all of this stuff and the issues that he and Brianna have over the years (isn't he attracted to one of the widows that lives on the ridge at some point? He definitely looks at other women), I had wondered if Gabaldon was intending to make them an example of a failed marriage eventually and have them go back to the present and just get divorced. Claire herself even wonders if they won't make it as a couple. They were never written to be soulmates like Jamie and Claire were supposed to be and they argued constantly. They don't really want the same things, and back in the 1980's, Roger doesn't even want her to work. I honestly don't think these two people are right for each other.

Edited December 28, 2018 by ruby24

[Noneofyourbusiness]

4 hours ago, toolazy said:

Oh, that's right. I completely forgot about that bit of stupidity.  Yes, Bonnet kidnapped her.  And there's a bit where Josh ends up on a slave ship and no one tries to save him.  But honestly, I skip over those chapters because I just can't deal.  

 

Who's Josh? Using the search on Outlander Wiki (which is for both the books and the show) only turned up one page with the word "Josh" on it on the wiki, the page for the episode "Savages", where there's a Josh Whitelaw credited as Ethan MacKinnon.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Noneofyourbusiness

[tennisgurl]

I swear, I knew this was coming, but watching Bree walk into that sketchy tavern was like watching a horror movie, where the killer is clearly behind the poor sap who just wont look behind them. This family honestly just seems to under a really fucked up rape curse, so many members of this family have been raped and/or sexually assaulted. I mean, its obviously not just them (rape is pretty much everywhere in this series) but its just so depressing how much of it seems to happen to this family, and the people in their lives. And this rape is probably one of the worst in the series, both in how nasty it is, and all the weird crap that follows it. I do hope the show changes some of the way it plays out in the book, like with Roger being all weird and jealous and not super supportive and empathetic towards his wife being raped, or the weird relationship between Bonnet and Bree, with him having this weird connection with her, it was all so weird. I can see the problematic issues in just focusing on the sounds of the rape, and not actually showing Bree go through it, but I am totally fine with just hearing it. The non reactions of everyone in the tavern to a violent rape happening in the next room was especially horrible and nightmarish. 

There are so many times that I love Bree and Roger and their romance, and so many times I just dont get them as a couple. I can get why they share an attraction, and a string connection, but they seem to be so fundamentally different from each other, that its sometimes hard to fully get behind them. Bree is just so much more of your classic modern 60s/70s girl, while Roger is rather old fashioned, and it seems to constantly rear its ugly head at the worst times between them, and its hard to see them lasting forever with these huge differences. Its fine to have differences between people that love each other (its probably a good thing in many cases) but with them, it just seems like this massive hurdle they struggle to overcome all of the time. I mean, Roger and Bree are basically decent people, so I can still get behind their dramatic reunion and lovely wedding scene, but it gives me romance whiplash!

I do always love when Claire goes into combat medic mode. She really does manage to take charge of any room she happens to be in instantly. I do wonder sometimes why we dont see as much pushback to her modern lady doctor ways, but I guess most people will let a person who knows what they're doing do their thing. I especially loved her quick annoyed glance at the doctor saying that he would treat the guy with gas up his ass or some such thing. Like all she could think was that even by this times standards, thats really freaking stupid. 

The Washingtons! No wonder Claire practically squeed. Oh Claire, no one there got your modern joke, but I giggled. 

There are a few details here and there now that I wish were here from the book, more than in many other changes. Like Bree being particularly tall, especially for the 17th century, or Lizzie being a young woman and not a kid. Its minor stuff, but they make me kind of sad. 

[Dejana]

11 hours ago, ruby24 said:

Yeah, there's some really weird stuff in the aftermath of this rape over the next two books where Gabaldon is almost trying to convey that Bonnet has some sort of hold over Brianna somehow. It's off-putting. Like when he kidnaps her the second time but doesn't rape her (because she's pregnant) and then he has sex with a prostitute in the room in front of her, and Brianna is like, half turned on by it? Like, wtf? 

Then I swear there's a part where Roger is concerned that Brianna thinks of Bonnet when they have sex, which I almost couldn't believe was actually written. It wasn't even that he's concerned that she is now uncomfortable with sex due to the fact that her second experience of it ever was being raped (which Claire brings up at some point), but no, he's worried that she's actually thinking about him and comparing the two of them and he's jealous. I could not believe that was actually on the page.

Roger in the book was actually incredibly insensitive to the fact that she was raped and how that could have affected her. His first concern is that her baby might not be his, which bothers him for years. Then he gets impatient that she doesn't want to sleep with him right away. I swear there's never a point where he really cares about what actually happened to her, his hatred of Bonnet is very much just because he's the guy he's gotta get revenge on because it's his duty as a man or something. He and Brianna never even talk about it!

I'm expecting them to make him on the show not as much of an asshole about that. 

Frankly...because of all of this stuff and the issues that he and Brianna have over the years (isn't he attracted to one of the widows that lives on the ridge at some point? He definitely looks at other women), I had wondered if Gabaldon was intending to make them an example of a failed marriage eventually and have them go back to the present and just get divorced. Claire herself even wonders if they won't make it as a couple. They were never written to be soulmates like Jamie and Claire were supposed to be and they argued constantly. They don't really want the same things, and back in the 1980's, Roger doesn't even want her to work. I honestly don't think these two people are right for each other.

 

That's probably because of the dream diary of Bree's that Roger read (he was looking through some sketches of hers, found the writings, and of course he's a fictional character who didn't stop reading soon enough). Anyway, she recounted a dream of having great sex with her eyes closed, presuming it was Roger, only to open her eyes in the dream and see it was Stephen Bonnet. She wrote about how this was really upsetting to her and it being difficult  to shake. She wanted to remember the various aspects of it and reassure herself that it was okay, it was just a dream, etc., but part of wanting to remember everything about the dream was wanting to remember how the Stephen Bonnet dream sex felt, how she had the big O, basically, and how she could do it again with Roger. This is in Chapter 38 of The Fiery Cross. Don't imagine the show is getting anywhere near that development!

The books said that Brianna had an American accent, but I remember leanring that the stereotypical Boston accent wouldn't have been found among the upper middle class and up, and also recalled Conan O'Brien joking that the Kennedys were the only people in Massachusetts who talked the way they did. So, I guess I imagined Bree having a "neutral" TV anchor accent, more or less. A person who grew up in America with English accents at home and American accents at school could end up anywhere in between the two, realistically. Show Bree is already so different from Book Bree, and if Sophie's acting would significantly improve by not having to concentrate on the accent, then IMO just let it go. She can still have a modern American mindset without particularly sounding like she's from there, and they can just never mention that her accent has changed from before. I feel like I've watched a dozen Michael Caine or Anthony Hopkins movies where they start off sounding American and just gave up halfway through it without any sort of explanation or anyone else in the story noticing.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Dejana

[Summer]

Coming out of lurkdom, not very interested in the show anymore so I only watch sporadically.  

I LOVE Richard Rankin, but, man, he and Sophie just don't have any chemistry.  That love scene made me cringe and I really didn't need to see Sophie's boobs.  Richard and Sophie seems so personable and funny together in interviews, cons, etc, but that chemistry doesn't seem to translate to the screen.  

Can someone do me a huge favor?  I'v only read the first three books and I'm pretty much done with the show so I'm considering canceling my Starz subscription before the season ends.  I keep hearing what is yet to come for Roger, can someone tell me what is in store for him for the remainder of the season?  It will help me decide if I want to continue watching or not.  

Thanks!!

Edited December 28, 2018 by Summer

[toolazy]

12 hours ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Who's Josh? Using the search on Outlander Wiki (which is for both the books and the show) only turned up one page with the word "Josh" on it on the wiki, the page for the episode "Savages", where there's a Josh Whitelaw credited as Ethan MacKinnon.

He was one of Jocasta's slaves - the groom with the Scottish accent.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, Summer said:

Can someone do me a huge favor?  I'v only read the first three books and I'm pretty much done with the show so I'm considering canceling my Starz subscription before the season ends.  I keep hearing what is yet to come for Roger, can someone tell me what is in store for him for the remainder of the season?  It will help me decide if I want to continue watching or not.  

As best as I can recall, Roger gets the beatdown from Jamie and Wee Ian, thinking he was the man who raped Brianna, because LIZZIE told them so. Of course, I recall in the buik, it being all kinds of stupid that Roger didn't tell Jamie his name of Mackenzie. Then Jamie hands him over to the Mohawks. Though I wonder if it will be the Cherokee, since they're the tribe we've been introduced to this season; Roger is nearly hung. I think something was forced around his throat? down his throat? That caused him to lose his voice? Whether we'll see all that in the show, is up to debate.

[snowbryneich]

39 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

As best as I can recall, Roger gets the beatdown from Jamie and Wee Ian, thinking he was the man who raped Brianna, because LIZZIE told them so. Of course, I recall in the buik, it being all kinds of stupid that Roger didn't tell Jamie his name of Mackenzie. Then Jamie hands him over to the Mohawks. Though I wonder if it will be the Cherokee, since they're the tribe we've been introduced to this season; Roger is nearly hung. I think something was forced around his throat? down his throat? That caused him to lose his voice? Whether we'll see all that in the show, is up to debate.

Roger's hanging is actually in book 5 due to a misunderstanding with his great great great (etc) grandfather. In the book the local tribe is Tuscora not the Cherokee and so they take him to the Mohawk because they don't want him to be local so it could still end up with the Mohawk that they trade Roger too. He's also going by Roger Mackenzie which is probably quite sensible given the large percentage of Scottish population in the colony and only manages to give his surname to Jamie and Ian but Bree has them all looking out for Roger Wakefield. When Bree (who is a talented artists in the books - I don't think this has come up in the show?) draws Roger to help Jamie look for him they realise what has gone on and Jamie and Ian (and Claire) go to get him back while Brianna goes to River Run with Jocasta.  Claire goes because Brianna doesn't trust Jamie to bring Roger back. They get Roger back from the Indians but when they were there Roger killed a man not aware they'd come to get him (he's in a bad state and a fellow prisoner is being executed at the same time)and to replace the dead man someone has to be adopted into the tribe. Jamie plans to volunteer but Ian beats him too it, then on the way back they tell Roger that Bree is pregnant but also that it might not be his due to the rape and when he is hesitant over this situation Jamie sends him away and tells him not to bother coming near Brianna unless he's prepared to claim her and the baby. He turns up near the end of the book and does so after living rough for some time. 

Edited December 28, 2018 by snowbryneich
typo

[Summer]

Well alrighty then, not sure I'll be sticking around for all of that mad cap adventure.....Thanks so much for the info @snowbryneich and @GHScorpiosRule!!

[Ziggy]

4 minutes ago, Summer said:

Well alrighty then, not sure I'll be sticking around for all of that mad cap adventure.....Thanks so much for the info @snowbryneich and @GHScorpiosRule!!

That was a very frustrating part of the book, but I don't think there's any way around it considering the ramifications for other characters.  I will say that the story of Roger and Jamie after that is really amazing.  They have some great moments, and it's clear that their respect for each other really grows.

[toolazy]

The whole thing would have been avoided if 1) Brianna had mentioned that she and Roger were handfast and 2) Claire had told Jamie that it was Stephen Bonnet who raped Bree.  

All of the stupidity would be avoided but Roger would still get to be angsty about whether or not the baby was his.  Surely DG could have found something for these characters to do that didn't hinge on two moronic failures to communicate.

[snowbryneich]

4 hours ago, Ziggy said:

That was a very frustrating part of the book, but I don't think there's any way around it considering the ramifications for other characters.  I will say that the story of Roger and Jamie after that is really amazing.  They have some great moments, and it's clear that their respect for each other really grows.

This is true. I do love when Jamie seems to accept Roger more and starts calling him Wee Roger - the man is all of an inch or so shorter than him right? I love the scene when Jamie wants to go hunting and he bursts into Brianna and Roger's cabin early morning and Roger's trying to preserve his modesty and Jamie is just like 'This is no time to be hanging about bare arsed Wee Roger.'

[AuntieMame]

On 12/27/2018 at 7:13 PM, ruby24 said:

Yeah, there's some really weird stuff in the aftermath of this rape over the next two books where Gabaldon is almost trying to convey that Bonnet has some sort of hold over Brianna somehow. It's off-putting. Like when he kidnaps her the second time but doesn't rape her (because she's pregnant) and then he has sex with a prostitute in the room in front of her, and Brianna is like, half turned on by it? Like, wtf? 

Then I swear there's a part where Roger is concerned that Brianna thinks of Bonnet when they have sex, which I almost couldn't believe was actually written. It wasn't even that he's concerned that she is now uncomfortable with sex due to the fact that her second experience of it ever was being raped (which Claire brings up at some point), but no, he's worried that she's actually thinking about him and comparing the two of them and he's jealous. I could not believe that was actually on the page. 

Roger in the book was actually incredibly insensitive to the fact that she was raped and how that could have affected her. His first concern is that her baby might not be his, which bothers him for years. Then he gets impatient that she doesn't want to sleep with him right away. I swear there's never a point where he really cares about what actually happened to her, his hatred of Bonnet is very much just because he's the guy he's gotta get revenge on because it's his duty as a man or something. He and Brianna never even talk about it!

I'm expecting them to make him on the show not as much of an asshole about that. 

Frankly...because of all of this stuff and the issues that he and Brianna have over the years (isn't he attracted to one of the widows that lives on the ridge at some point? He definitely looks at other women), I had wondered if Gabaldon was intending to make them an example of a failed marriage eventually and have them go back to the present and just get divorced. Claire herself even wonders if they won't make it as a couple. They were never written to be soulmates like Jamie and Claire were supposed to be and they argued constantly. They don't really want the same things, and back in the 1980's, Roger doesn't even want her to work. I honestly don't think these two people are right for each other.

 

Amen ruby24. I'm another person bogged down in Book 5 and after reading here, I'm feeling less of a failure as a reader. I've tried to read this series all the way through for years and failed. Let me say that I'm a readers reader and a big fat series is my pleasure of choice. Ah well, at least I gave my mother book joy by sending her the first book almost thirty years ago. 

Rape as a way for male characters to learn things or examine the affect a partner's rape has on a man is an all too common trope. I don't mind it so much as long as the feelings of the actual victim are considered too. The series Spartacus of all things actually did a better than average job examining this issue and how it affects a couple and didn't have the woman immediately go back to bed with the man she loved. Even though he rescued her from slavery. Yeah, I was surprised too, but this was a place where I felt sympathy for both characters. And the guy did want sex, not just for the sake of it, but for the healing. Goes to show that this kind of material can be handled in a way that is realistic for male and female characters. And in the last place you would expect it. 

Edited December 30, 2018 by AuntieMame
Because crazypants autocorrect changed joy to not and other idiocies. Not to mention Jamie to Jaime. Sigh.

[pootlus]

Just caught up (Google Play being late putting the episode up again!).

Totally distracted by Sophie's pink lipstick (are we supposed to believe she brought a pastel pink lipstick through the stones, or somehow located a similar shade in the 18th century?) but she did some really good work here, both in her fury at Roger's lies and the shock/frozen horror in the aftermath of the rape.

Speaking of which, I though it was almost worse hearing it than it would have been to see it, the indifference of the bar patrons was chilling.  The last scene, silent with her going back upstairs and the lights slowly dimming, was very sad.  Honestly they could have ditched the rape and it would also have spared us the tiresome paternity plotline, much improving the show.  It would also ditch the weird and frankly problematic stuff Gabaldon wrote about Bonnet/Bree in the future - bar her shooting the fucker in the head, that is (which I actually said to his smug face when he was 'paying' her the ring).

I liked the hernia surgery and Murtagh's aborted highway robbery (as well as the reunion of Fergus and Murtagh). It was nice to see Claire save someone's life so efficiently, and get respect for it.  

I wonder what words were exchanged between Jamie and the Washingtons in the carriage - I do like these extra bits that are a surprise for the book-readers.

[Stephanie1216]

I hate hate hate Roger Wakefield. I at first thought “it’s just that stupid beard” but then he shaves that off somehow has longer hair with a teeny tiny pony tail to go back in time. He’s a scholar trying to be a tough guy on a boat yuck.

he gives bree ultimatums and when he has his shirt of YUCK shave your chest or work out YOU ARE NO JAMIE we don’t want to see your chest to go with your bad attitude.

but the worst, what I REALLY HATE

THOSE STUPID CUT OFF PANTS WTF?

he looks real tough in those.

and tha sickening line “i always wondered what color your hair was down there” SERIOUSLY

[mary2013]

1 hour ago, Stephanie1216 said:

I hate hate hate Roger Wakefield. I at first thought “it’s just that stupid beard” but then he shaves that off somehow has longer hair with a teeny tiny pony tail to go back in time. He’s a scholar trying to be a tough guy on a boat yuck.

Since this is the book thread.  In his youth, Roger spent summers on a fishing boat.  He is a tough guy on a boat.

[taanja]

Late to the game--- the holidays and all that goes with them are finally over at my house, So I finally caught up with Outlander.

Really enjoyed this ep. If I went by other people's comments-- I might not have even watched it but I thought the rape scene -- or lack thereof was handled very well. Quite poignant. Very powerful.

Of course no one in the tavern would intervene-- hello! Beside the fact that Bonnet comes across as a real asshole who will kill you as soon as look at you -- no one is going to confront him over some unknown girl. Besides-- this is def the time and place in history when the men folk (and some woman folk) would be thinking that girl deserves to get what she is getting -- she walked into the tavern alone-- she talked to a strange man and went into a room -- alone-- with him-- so surely it is all her fault.

Yup. We still deal with that mentality today. Good job show.

[Kim0820]

On 12/25/2018 at 10:09 AM, AuntieMame said:

There isn’t anything wrong with I’m not ready to make the serious commitment of marriage yet, but let’s take our courtship to the next level, but somehow Bree looked unreasonable saying this and Rogers “Hiw dare you even think about sleeping with me and losing your virginity?” was more than cringeworthy. 

 

1970 was 50 years ago.  The "level" thing about relationships didn't exist yet.  It was vey early in the sexual revolution.  Not everyone let go of the old constraints at once.  The pill was just recently invented and still controversial.  

On 12/26/2018 at 2:05 PM, Petunia846 said:

 

Yeah, language acquisition research shows that children pick up accents from their peers, not their parents. I see it all the time at work.

Immigrants' children always sound American.  They are living in the U.S. and spend a lot of time with their peers.  They might know some of their parents' language.  But they will take on the American accent.  They are surrounded by it, their ear is still not hardened (the reason older people keep their accent or have a harder time learning a new language). 

On 12/27/2018 at 11:24 AM, areca said:

I always thought "You bastard!" at that.  He never told Claire or gave any indication that he was going to!  He was condemning her to a life without children without consulting her!  And this was back in the day when it was *always* the woman's fault there would be no babies.

He found out he was sterile while Claire was in the 1700s - he thought his fertility was a moot point at that time.  So the first time he could tell her would be 1948 when she came back pregnant.  

[TVForever]

On 1/7/2019 at 12:06 PM, taanja said:

Late to the game--- the holidays and all that goes with them are finally over at my house, So I finally caught up with Outlander.

Really enjoyed this ep. If I went by other people's comments-- I might not have even watched it but I thought the rape scene -- or lack thereof was handled very well. Quite poignant. Very powerful.

Of course no one in the tavern would intervene-- hello! Beside the fact that Bonnet comes across as a real asshole who will kill you as soon as look at you -- no one is going to confront him over some unknown girl. Besides-- this is def the time and place in history when the men folk (and some woman folk) would be thinking that girl deserves to get what she is getting -- she walked into the tavern alone-- she talked to a strange man and went into a room -- alone-- with him-- so surely it is all her fault.

Yup. We still deal with that mentality today. Good job show.

Even later to the game. I'll finally add my (probably unpopular) opinion on the rape:

Brianna seems to have the same problem as Claire-lack of respect for the time they've chosen to walk around in. How much trouble has Claire caused (usually for others) by insisting on acting like a mid- 20th century woman in the 18th century?

Now Brianna has done the same-except this time, she is the one who paid the price. For Heaven's sake, even the most casual student of history knows that a woman unaccompanied in the 18th century was considered "fair game", and that would have been in so-called polite society. This was the "wilderness" of the colonies, and she was a young woman going into a tavern (!) alone (!) into a room alone with a man who wasn't even all that subtle about what he expected in exchange for the ring(!)

Of course, no one in the tavern was going to intervene! Any of the few women in the tavern were likely grateful that they didn't have to fight this guy off, and probably more than one of the men might have just been waiting for their turn! 

This isn't victim shaming-this is about all of these time travelers needing to respect the time they're in: Claire, Brianna, even Roger has made some dumb moves. Ironically, Geillis seemed to understand the most, too bad she was also a psycho, but she was the best at adapting to whatever time period we were spotting her in.

I say all of this from my experience watching the show only-I haven't read the books. These characters may show more sense there.