S04.E08: Wilmington

[gingerella]

40 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

@gingerella I understand why Jaime introduces Claire as a “healer”, it’s a less eyebrow raising profession for a woman in this time, and a typical person is going to trust a “healer” more than a surgeon. In a world where women weren’t even allowed in medical school, would you trust one claiming to be a surgeon- possibly her father/brother taught her at home, but it sounds fishy.

In a world without antibiotics, anesthesia (other than whiskey), sterile medical practices, surgeons were considered by many to be BUTCHERS. A very last resort to maybe save your life- if the infection didn’t get you first.

A “healer” actually has a chance to get to talk to people and earn their trust, and can better serve them. 

Thank you for that explanation! I knew it, but I lost sight of it. It is interesting though, that with all the indignation we see from Claire about how women are treated in the 1700s, it's surprising she hasn't said anything much when he introduces her. I mean, she ouahes back on alot of things but not this. 

[SassAndSnacks]

On 9/4/2021 at 6:24 PM, Cdh20 said:

I love reading your predictions!

I second this!!

On 9/4/2021 at 4:56 PM, gingerella said:

I was surprised at how fast Roger found Brianna. If only they'd gone back to the inn and gotten their own room for their wedding night, all would have been a lot better.

Hear hear!!  YES!  Them shacking up in a smithy in broad daylight and then into the night made zero sense.  Was no one working?  Was it Murtaugh's place and since he was out rebel-rousing he wasn't around to break up the love nest?  

On 9/4/2021 at 4:56 PM, gingerella said:

George AND Martha Washington having zero British accents.

I'd also like to add that George Washington should always be played by Ian Kahn from Turn.  There should be an index somewhere that outlines which historical/literary figures can only be played by specific actors.  This Washington is wrong, and I won't stand for it.  

On 9/6/2021 at 10:21 PM, Scarlett45 said:

A “healer” actually has a chance to get to talk to people and earn their trust, and can better serve them. 

This is interesting.  Were Healers more respected than surgeons at the time?

Edited September 8, 2021 by SassAndSnacks

[Anothermi]

14 hours ago, SassAndSnacks said:

This is interesting.  Were Healers more respected than surgeons at the time?

Source of quote below: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/medicine-has-scarcely-entered-its-threshold-medicine-1700s

Quote

Many colonists lived in rural areas that lacked easy access to a physician. Mothers and wives often took up the role of healer for families and communities, bringing in physicians for more serious ailments. While women were typically responsible for medical care within the family, they rarely received a formal medical education. Instead, they used herbal remedies passed down through generations as well as guidebooks that were published in throughout the 1700s. One such book was Every Man His Own Doctor: OR, The Poor Planter’s Physician which contained “plain and easy means for persons to cure themselves of all, or most of the distempers, incident to this climate, and with very little charge, the medicines being chiefly of the growth and production of this country”. Using information contained in various editions of this book, many women created herbal medicines thought to cure ailments. Herbs like lavender, rosemary, wormwood, sage, foxglove, mint, and more found in gardens helped cure ailments from headaches, dropsy (swelling), to stomach pains. For example, the regimen listed in The Poor Planter’s Physician for fevers was to “drink freely of water gruel, orange whey, weak chamomile tea; or if his spirits be low, small wine-whey sharpened with the juice of lemon”.

This—along with the points Scarlett45 mentioned above regarding the reception that Claire, a woman, would receive if introduced as a "surgeon"—would be reason enough. 

The timeframes of this episode would still be the early 1770s and "the colonies" had only recently established medical schools. (Quote from same source)

Quote

Most physicians in colonial North America were trained through apprenticeships, not by attending medical school. There just were not many medical schools available in North America. Medical schools thrived in countries throughout Europe such as in Scotland and France, but the first medical schools in the Colonies were not established until 1767 with King’s College in New York and 1768 with the Philadelphia College of Medicine.

The other point that has to be taken into account is the cost of consulting a doctor. Most rural folk would not have access to a doctor, nor would they be able to afford the treatment. I expect most people would know what a surgeon is but would not have kept up with surgical advances. 

This episode was set in a "big city" and among the upper class so they would be more accepting of medical professionals because they could afford them. Claire uses a lot of medical words but I expect it was her tone and her confidence (that she learned during WW2) that created acceptance of her ability under the circumstances presented.

As Jamie would not be expecting a surgical situation at a play there would be no reason to use the term "surgeon". He did use it when both he and Claire realized that she could save the man's life.  

 

[Anothermi]

As @gingerella mentioned. We were expecting a change for the worse either this episode or the next one. Show didn't prove us wrong. 

I'm having trouble dividing things into what I liked and didn't like because they are often part of the same scene!

- Agree that it was good to get an update on Fergus, Marsali and baby "Germain" (or so closed captions tell me). I couldn't make a name out of what I heard them say on the show! They DO look like they are doing very well for themselves, and

- Marsali serving notice to the world (when talking with Claire) that she's ready to kill anyone who might do her baby harm! Time for them to move to a more dangerous location?  That scene was slightly marred by being reminded that Claire and Jamie haven't told Fergus and Marsali that they actually had a child - and Claire only remembering that fact at the last minute by tacking on an "I'm sure." to her own affirmation of that protective maternal feeling before she imparted the wisdom she'd gained after 20 years of motherhood—you can't always protect your children from life. (guess we'll see how she handles Brianna's rape.)

Roger & Brianna:

I enjoyed seeing Roger & Brianna reunited BUT:

• I wondered why we got so much of what's-her-name from Roger's ship if we won't be seeing her again, and
• I wondered what kind of blacksmith has a smithy that can be turned into a romantic hideaway, but doesn't come to work or get drop-in repair requests! 🙄 And has a pile of clean blankets that turns the floor into a slightly raised bed!?! 🙄🙄
• AND, of course, these two have a chronic Failure-of-Communication disease.  Neither of them is a "Jamie" (who did the heavy emotional lifting between him and Claire.)    Blech. 🙄🙄🙄
• (and of course though Roger knows that a Hand Fast marriage is a legal marriage in the era they are currently in—I doubt Brianna sees it as such.)

Brianna: 

The sins of the mother are borne by the child?  (if Claire hadn't fallen in love with a man from two hundred years ago, Brianna wouldn't have encountered  the brigand. Uh, I guess Brianna wouldn't exist to encounter him so there's that.) 

Or it's a generational thing. Claire is independent but grew up with plenty of examples of women depending on men for protection while Brianna, in particular, is of a generation that didn't see that as necessary and she hadn't yet had any experience that would make her suspicious of what Bonnet was implying with his knowing looks (nod, nod, wink, wink). Like Claire did, she is having era adjustment problems—but Claire was lucky in that she was "captured" by men with some semblance of honourable conduct.

And the positioning of this event after her blowup with Roger smacks of implying she was getting her just desserts. Did. Not. Appreciate. This. At. All. 

I have to agree with @gingerella that there's bound to be a Who's The Daddy storyline—Plus it couldn't be more obvious that Roger will be set up to be accused of the rape. Gah! But will Jamie try to kill Roger (because he doesn't know him like Claire does) and will Claire have to save Roger from Jamie? It's possible isn't it?

Claire and Jamie:

The only bit of this segment I could tolerate was watching Jamie work out how he could get away to warn Murtagh and Claire owning the governor and physicians with her superior stitching skillz. (not to mention diagnostic skillz). Not even the presence  of George and Martha Washington (and Claire fan-girling over HIM). But at least the show introduced them as "the woman who could fill as many ships as she wanted with tobacco"—meaning shrewd business woman—and her husband, Colonel Washington. I enjoyed that because Claire was rolling her eyes at having to join the "wives" only to discover they weren't the nobodies she thought they were. 

Murtagh:

At least his storyline was allowed to reach a non-perilous conclusion. I loved that he was miffed that Jamie didn't come  to warn him himself! Plus any amount of Murtagh is better than no Murtagh.

Jamie:

Keeping his mouth shut about the Governor et al blaming George Washington for warning the Regulators of the trap.  Guess he decided it was just assisting George toward the side he was supposed to be on. 🤣

 

Edited September 8, 2021 by Anothermi
clarity

[Scarlett45]

On 9/7/2021 at 9:57 PM, SassAndSnacks said:

This is interesting.  Were Healers more respected than surgeons at the time?

Yes. A surgeon was only available to the very rich and often feared/considered a butcher by a typical person. I can’t imagine people being keen on the idea of surgery with no anesthesia and a high likelihood of dying of infection afterwards. 
 

Surgeons were often called for amputations, but not common ailments. 
 

Claire is a healer so I am not surprised at all that Jaime referred to her in that manner.

18 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Like Claire did, she is having era adjustment problems—but Claire was lucky in that she was "captured" by men with some semblance of honourable conduct.

And the positioning of this event after her blowup with Roger smacks of implying she was getting her just desserts. Did. Not. Appreciate. This. At. All. 

I don’t think the writers/show runners were implying that Briana was getting her just desserts. I think we are all to feel sympathy for Briana. I think positioning this after her blow up with Roger has her emotional (rather than clear headed) and shows just how vulnerable women were in these times. Briana wasn’t thinking about the fact that she went back in time 200yrs, and how was she supposed to be acting as not to bring attention to herself etc- she was angry and upset and just wanted her Mom’s ring back. 
 

Briana was born in 1948 (same as my Mom)- women in 1948 went into bars/clubs without being assumed to be sex workers. You could even be in a room or vehicle alone with a man and not assumed to be sex worker or interested in sex with them. In 1768 (I assume that’s where we are), women did not travel alone. Period. Even if you were a poor woman that worked for wages, you were always with someone else (another woman in your family or someone who worked at the tavern etc with you). Bonnet is also an evil POS, and sadistic. Briana had the BAD LUCK to come across this evil man in a society where I’m sure many of the tavern patrons didn’t care about her screams. (Remember The Accused, over 200yrs later!)

I think had Briana and Roger had not fought they would’ve been together when she came across Bonnet, and things would’ve gone differently. Even if Bonnet had tried to fight Roger, they would’ve had a better chance of over powering him- it would’ve been two against one. 

[Anothermi]

2 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

Briana was born in 1948 (same as my Mom)- women in 1948 went into bars/clubs without being assumed to be sex workers. You could even be in a room or vehicle alone with a man and not assumed to be sex worker or interested in sex with them. In 1768 (I assume that’s where we are), women did not travel alone. Period. Even if you were a poor woman that worked for wages, you were always with someone else (another woman in your family or someone who worked at the tavern etc with you). Bonnet is also an evil POS, and sadistic. Briana had the BAD LUCK to come across this evil man in a society where I’m sure many of the tavern patrons didn’t care about her screams. (Remember The Accused, over 200yrs later!)

 

21 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Like Claire did, she is having era adjustment problems—but Claire was lucky in that she was "captured" by men with some semblance of honourable conduct.

Yes. That is what I meant about having era adjustment problems. You've fleshed out the issues fully. Thank you. Plus, in 1968 it was even MORE common for women to expect to go to bars, or parties or get lifts to their destinations, without being molested. 

The fact that Claire wasn't ravished was the GOOD LUCK Claire had by looking and sounding like an upper class woman, the story she told about how she came to be there—indicating she HAD a man—and the willingness of Dougal to give her the benefit of the doubt (and his men respected his decision).  Brianna didn't have any of those things going for her and was likely a great deal more naive than Claire was (due to her war experience and her unusual upbringing).  Plus, although she was surrounded by a lot of men, all of them believed what happened to her was what she deserved. (Certainly nothing she should be protected from.)

Perhaps the show wasn't trying to make the point that upset me, but even now, woman who get attacked are often judged as "asking for it" because they dared to believe it wouldn't/ couldn't happen to them or because, like Brianna, they were preoccupied with some other emotional issue and not as vigilant as women are expected to be. (and viewed this way by other women as much as men)  The Accused shone a light on that—opening some eyes—but it still exists. 

[Scarlett45]

@Anothermi we are in complete agreement. Briana had already been through so much trying to find her parents and then this happens to her. I feel horribly for her. 

[gingerella]

I have a bone to pick with this episode...It is just way too convenient that Brianna and Roger find one another that quickly. It's preposterous actually! The whole thing is stupid, lazy story telling, IMO. I know, I know, this is a saga that involves time travel through huge, solid stones. Where people manage to fall through a stone monolith and if they bring a gemstone to pay the Stone, they get spit out in the exactly correct time that they want to be in. And not only that, but TWO people can go through the Stone within weeks of one another and manage to end up in the same place at the same time. I call BULLSHIT on that.

That's all I wanted to say...

[Anothermi]

1 hour ago, gingerella said:

I have a bone to pick with this episode...It is just way too convenient that Brianna and Roger find one another that quickly.

Well, you forced me to google the population of Wilmington around that time. Closest that Wikipedia comes is for 1820 - Population: 2,633.

That's at least 50 years after the time depicted in this episode. I grew up in a town of under 2500 people—and it wasn't a port town so it wouldn't have as many "Inns"—but it had 2 hotels (both with bars) and one Main Street. If someone new showed up? Everyone would know about it by the end of the day! I expect Wilmington had less permanent residents than that and more transient visitors in the form of sailors, so probably more bars and lodgings but they'd all be located pretty close to the docks. The number of transient visitors might mean strangers wouldn't stand out—like they did in my town.

We saw Roger showing Brianna's picture around and getting no lead from that. I think we are supposed to think he'd been doing that for a while at least. As for arriving at the same time despite leaving a couple of weeks apart? Brianna was on foot from Craig na Dun and had a worse-than-useless map to get her close to Lallybroch. And didn't Jamie say it was a couple of hours to get to Leery's home from Lallybroch? Anyway. Brianna didn't have a horse nor a wagon. She walked—and we were shown at least one night she spent outside. Then, we don't actually know how many days she spent with Leery and Joanie. But I wouldn't be surprised if just that ate up most of the time difference between her arrival in the 18th century and Roger's. Plus, Roger was more prepared and clearly had thought about how to get to the nearest port town (that had ships bound across the Atlantic) from Craig na Dun. 

With all of that to consider? I think them finding each other within a day is not so far fetched. Could have even been two days. But if they didn't up and leave the town, they were bound to find each other sooner or later. 

 

[SassAndSnacks]

On 9/8/2021 at 6:47 PM, Anothermi said:

I wondered what kind of blacksmith has a smithy that can be turned into a romantic hideaway, but doesn't come to work or get drop-in repair requests! 🙄 And has a pile of clean blankets that turns the floor into a slightly raised bed!?! 🙄🙄

YESSSSSSSS!!!!!  I'm willing to hand wave A LOT of things with this show, and I have to just to make it through sometimes, but this one...c'mon.

On 9/8/2021 at 6:47 PM, Anothermi said:

Or it's a generational thing. Claire is independent but grew up with plenty of examples of women depending on men for protection while Brianna, in particular, is of a generation that didn't see that as necessary and she hadn't yet had any experience that would make her suspicious of what Bonnet was implying with his knowing looks (nod, nod, wink, wink). Like Claire did, she is having era adjustment problems—but Claire was lucky in that she was "captured" by men with some semblance of honourable conduct.

And the positioning of this event after her blowup with Roger smacks of implying she was getting her just desserts. Did. Not. Appreciate. This. At. All. 

 

17 hours ago, Anothermi said:

The fact that Claire wasn't ravished was the GOOD LUCK Claire had by looking and sounding like an upper class woman, the story she told about how she came to be there—indicating she HAD a man—and the willingness of Dougal to give her the benefit of the doubt (and his men respected his decision).  Brianna didn't have any of those things going for her and was likely a great deal more naive than Claire was (due to her war experience and her unusual upbringing).  Plus, although she was surrounded by a lot of men, all of them believed what happened to her was what she deserved. (Certainly nothing she should be protected from.)

Really appreciate your analysis in the two comments above.  In reading it, it helped me fully understand by feelings for Brianna in this situation.  I also think her youth played a part - young 20s, you're invincible, right.  You can do anything.  I did things in my 20s that I find to be so foolish now.  Even though Claire was only slightly older than Bri when she first came through the stones, she had a lot more life experience and knew boundaries more (as much as Claire can know boundaries, that is).