S04.E10: The Deep Heart's Core

[Future Cat Lady]

On 2019-01-08 at 2:04 AM, carolibra said:

I can understand not spelling "Laoghaire" correctly, but........

It's Jamie, NOT Jaime, and Roger, NOT Rodger.

It’s also Germain not Germaine.

[areca]

On 1/6/2019 at 1:23 PM, nodorothyparker said:

I like that the show has tried to streamline the Great Misunderstanding down to its core without a lot of Jamie wandering around screaming about Bree's maidenhead or calling her wanton. 

He did though.  He basically said she lied about the whole thing and was a damn whore and jumping to the worst conclusions possible about *her*.  THAT is why she's mad at him, not the misunderstanding.  I can't believe everyone's missing that.

Edited January 10, 2019 by areca

[Ziggy]

On 1/8/2019 at 8:28 PM, taurusrose said:

Yes, it is. But the male variation is spelled J-A-M-I-E. 

Actually, both Jamie and Jaime are more commonly male names.  They are both female names, but much more commonly used for men.

[Ziggy]

27 minutes ago, areca said:

He did though.  He basically said she lied about the whole thing and was a damn whore and jumping to the worst conclusions possible about *her*.  THAT is why she's mad at him, not the misunderstanding.  I can't believe everyone's missing that.

I think she was mad about both, but I definitely agree with you that she was furious with him for what he said.

[FnkyChkn34]

40 minutes ago, areca said:

He did though.  He basically said she lied about the whole thing and was a damn whore and jumping to the worst conclusions possible about *her*.  THAT is why she's mad at him, not the misunderstanding.  I can't believe everyone's missing that.

Didn't he only do that to make her mad, to show her that she shouldn't be upset at herself for not fighting back?  He purposely made her mad, then got her in the headlock position to prove that she shouldn't be blaming herself.  He's not really mad, or calling her a liar or a whore.  He was tricking her into teaching her a lesson.   

[DietCokeJunkie]

46 minutes ago, areca said:

 

On 1/6/2019 at 12:23 PM, nodorothyparker said:

I like that the show has tried to streamline the Great Misunderstanding down to its core without a lot of Jamie wandering around screaming about Bree's maidenhead or calling her wanton. 

He did though.  He basically said she lied about the whole thing and was a damn whore and jumping to the worst conclusions possible about *her*.  THAT is why she's mad at him, not the misunderstanding.  I can't believe everyone's missing that.

 

But he didn't mean those things he said to Bree.  He was saying those things to get her mad so she would fight back against him, just like Claire pretended to be Black Jack Randall to help Jamie process and recover from his rape. I thought that Bree understood that when she broke down in his arms, and the anger after the Great Misunderstanding was only about what happened to Roger. 

Edited January 10, 2019 by DietCokeJunkie
Jinx, FnkyChkn34! Obviously we were typing at the same time!

[cardigirl]

5 hours ago, DietCokeJunkie said:

But he didn't mean those things he said to Bree.  He was saying those things to get her mad so she would fight back against him, just like Claire pretended to be Black Jack Randall to help Jamie process and recover from his rape. I thought that Bree understood that when she broke down in his arms, and the anger after the Great Misunderstanding was only about what happened to Roger. 

He said it again after she revealed he had beaten the wrong man. He said something about her lying all along and never having been raped and that’s when she slapped him and said her father would have never said those things to her. I think that’s why Claire was silent until she showed the wedding ring, and they all understood that it was Bonnet who had assaulted her. 

[Ziggy]

8 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Didn't he only do that to make her mad, to show her that she shouldn't be upset at herself for not fighting back?  He purposely made her mad, then got her in the headlock position to prove that she shouldn't be blaming herself.  He's not really mad, or calling her a liar or a whore.  He was tricking her into teaching her a lesson.   

 

8 hours ago, DietCokeJunkie said:

But he didn't mean those things he said to Bree.  He was saying those things to get her mad so she would fight back against him, just like Claire pretended to be Black Jack Randall to help Jamie process and recover from his rape. I thought that Bree understood that when she broke down in his arms, and the anger after the Great Misunderstanding was only about what happened to Roger. 

Yes and no.  He was definitely more extreme with what he said earlier in the episode when he was trying to show her that there was nothing she could have done.  But when she confronted him in the house, he said, "You bedded him from lust?" and "And to think, I was defending your honor.  And now I come to find you claim yourself violated upon finding yourself with child!"  Ouch!

Once he finally realizes that she was handfasted with Roger and later raped, he apologized, and she called him a savage.  That's when it finally comes to light that her rapist was Bonnet.

I'm no fan of this series of unfortunate events or what happens to Roger, but I actually love the way the show handled it.  Even though each of the characters withed information at some point or made an assumption based on limited knowledge, I can't really say that any of them behaved irresponsibly.  If you look at each character's point of view, individually and without any other knowledge, I don't think you can honestly say any of them should have done something different.

In the book, I thought it was very easy find fault with Jamie and Ian.

[Cdh20]

I imagine Jamie & Bree will continue to be at odds because of being from different times-Jamie & Claire have come to terms & respect each other, so now it will be Jamie & the younger generation.

 

And on that other tangeant-isn't every name these days unisex & spelled originally?

Edited January 10, 2019 by Cdh20
adding a thought

[aemom]

As far as I recall, Bree left in 1971.  When Bree and Claire were discussing all the things that they missed about the future, I found Bree's choice of Led Zeppelin odd.  These days it would make sense, but back then, they were still a very new band.  I would think that Bree would have missed a band that was far more established at that point like maybe The Beatles or the Rolling Stones.

[AuntieMame]

I agree that the show writers are doing the very best they can with The Great Misunderstanding. What surprises me in the comments section is that so many here seem to think that attitudes toward a rape victim, a rape pregnancy and/or a child of uncertain paternity have changed dramatically. People might keep quiet or grudgingly say what is expected, but I don't think things have really changed all that much. 

Think of the hullabaloo over defining a "real" rape. Or that a rape pregnancy isn't even possible because women's bodies can "shut all that down". If only. Think about the hue and cry about insurance companies not providing birth control if the employer seems it immoral. Enter single mothers and hatred of single mothers into a search engine and read what real live men have to say. It isn't positive and a lot of it has to do with paternity and purity. Things haven't changed. Not really. And thanks to the incomplete social revolution women are expected to provide sex but still get punished if a man feels they've misbehaved or bewitched his honor. The best women can hope for his a good brute who hits others instead of them. 

Visuals. Did anyone else notice that beautiful salt glazed ceramic pitcher? It was used in another episode too. Gorgeous, though I learned that the colonists were forced to buy British goods or send raw materials to England for manufacturing so development of some American crafts lagged behind except for very local cottage industries. 

I like the interpretation of the Mohawk feather head dresses. I wonder how they're doing it. I swear we've seen this group of Indians before too. Not as the local tribe, but separately. Like an earlier pister, I recognized actors and voices. A mystery. 

What was that patchwork monstrosity Bree was wearing in her initial scene with Jamie? It was correct and the kind of thing people could and did do with rags, but in comparison to everything else they're wearing, it looked like it was made by a blind seamstress. I did like the way Jamie demonstrated that there was nothing Bree could have done to fight Bonnett. That was the best the writers did in getting out of the Great Misunderstanding. Then of course Jamie ruined it during the right after (almost) all was revealed. 

Wouldn't it be almost impossible for everyone to leave the homestead? Even if it was autumn and what drops there were are gathered? It's my understanding That this kind of lifestyle requires constant, back breaking work. How could they just leave and not expect things to be ruined if stolen? Murtagh will be off hunting Bonnett, so no joy there. I know it is a romance, so I will handwave, but in an episode where Claire and Bree talked about what they missed? And food came up so primarily? The fact that food, it's production, processing, preservation and storage was a major preoccupation of the time doesn't even get mentioned? Sigh. Also, the garden plot they showed us was laughably small, good for a suburban dinner party, but not to feed five or six over a winter. 

Romance, it is a romance. But one of the things I like about time travel and historicals is that I learn things while being entertained. I for instance loved Claire's herbalism in the early books. 

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, AEMom said:

As far as I recall, Bree left in 1971.  When Bree and Claire were discussing all the things that they missed about the future, I found Bree's choice of Led Zeppelin odd.  These days it would make sense, but back then, they were still a very new band.  I would think that Bree would have missed a band that was far more established at that point like maybe The Beatles or the Rolling Stones.

She was in college and by 1971 they'd already released four records.  If anyone would have heard of them, a college student would - especially a college student at a good school with presumably good college radio.   Now Claire wouldn't have heard of them at all, so that part is kind of weird.  

[cardigirl]

1 hour ago, toolazy said:

She was in college and by 1971 they'd already released four records.  If anyone would have heard of them, a college student would - especially a college student at a good school with presumably good college radio.   Now Claire wouldn't have heard of them at all, so that part is kind of weird.  

Bree said Claire probably wouldn't like them, didn't she? 

[Atlanta]

2 minutes ago, cardigirl said:

Bree said Claire probably wouldn't like them, didn't she? 

Yep. Claire had no idea who they were.

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, cardigirl said:

Bree said Claire probably wouldn't like them, didn't she? 

 

1 hour ago, Atlanta said:

Yep. Claire had no idea who they were.

Oh, okay. I didn't remember that part but it makes sense.  

[Sew Sumi]

I think they used Led Zeppelin on purpose to illustrate how the future was moving along since Claire left. 

[taanja]

On 1/8/2019 at 5:09 PM, Cdh20 said:

Jamie’s life has been exceptionally difficult, but to be fair even the women do suffer quite a bit too.  I think Diana is a bit of a sadist. 

She uses pain and angst and drama because it sells!  Maybe in the books the day to day boring shit works but on TV? Nope! It's a visual medium and requires visual drama to make it exciting.

I really liked the Jaime in prison/ Jack Randall scenes. That was powerful television. and so was the way they decided to portray Bree's rape-- by not showing it but by showing the indifference/acceptance of the peeps listening but not doing anything.

That's the kind of stuff that makes this show so good.

[Cdh20]

10 minutes ago, taanja said:

She uses pain and angst and drama because it sells!  Maybe in the books the day to day boring shit works but on TV? Nope! It's a visual medium and requires visual drama to make it exciting.

I really liked the Jaime in prison/ Jack Randall scenes. That was powerful television. and so was the way they decided to portray Bree's rape-- by not showing it but by showing the indifference/acceptance of the peeps listening but not doing anything.

That's the kind of stuff that makes this show so good.

If you are talking about “Wentworth” & “To Ransom a Man’s Soul”, I remember the first time I watched them I thought I would be sick & also that I would never watch those again, but I later thought about how much they made me invested in the characters ( In a way that I  usually do not care about Tv characters). Of course I appreciated them more on rewatch- and when those times were with other people I was reminded by them of the horror I felt the first time! I was surprised to come to message boards though & see that people quit the show instead of appreciating the amazing acting! I am kidding myself that I just want a happily ever after show, although the one thing I love is that Jamie & Claire are together forever ( because of Diana). In most tv shows you get a couple with a little chemistry but then someone is killed off or leaves the show, &  I hate that!!

[taanja]

5 hours ago, AEMom said:

As far as I recall, Bree left in 1971.  When Bree and Claire were discussing all the things that they missed about the future, I found Bree's choice of Led Zeppelin odd.  These days it would make sense, but back then, they were still a very new band.  I would think that Bree would have missed a band that was far more established at that point like maybe The Beatles or the Rolling Stones.

*Raises hand!*

As a person who was alive and in teenage years in 71 - 72 ---Led Zeppelin was IT! In Through The Out Door! The untitled album -- with Stairway To Heaven-- that was like our anthem in high school. Stairway To Heaven was played on every rock and roll radio station in the country.

[iMonrey]

Quote

He basically said she lied about the whole thing and was a damn whore and jumping to the worst conclusions possible about *her*.  THAT is why she's mad at him, not the misunderstanding.  I can't believe everyone's missing that.

I'd have to go back and listen to the dialogue but she appeared to have contradicted herself when she initially approached him in the cabin demanding to know what he'd done to Roger. Jamie was confused because he couldn't understand why she'd be upset considering how the man had raped her, and Bree responded by saying he didn't. You can see Jamie's confusion. At that point he doesn't understand they are talking about two different people because Bree hasn't made that clear. His natural assumption is that she lied to him previously. Yeah, it's not a great look that he resorted to insults but under the circumstances he believed he'd been duped by her and lied to.

I get that this was a big old misunderstanding all around but Bree contributed to it. She understood at once that Lizzie had confused Roger for Bonnet. When she stormed into the cabin she should have led with the fact that Jamie beat up the wrong man before getting all shouty about beating him up.

[Hannah Lee]

4 hours ago, toolazy said:

She was in college and by 1971 they'd already released four records.  If anyone would have heard of them, a college student would - especially a college student at a good school with presumably good college radio.   Now Claire wouldn't have heard of them at all, so that part is kind of weird.  

She went to school in Boston were there most definitely was good college radio.

[taanja]

28 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:

If you are talking about “Wentworth” & “To Ransom a Man’s Soul”, I remember the first time I watched them I thought I would be sick & also that I would never watch those again, lt!!

I am a jaded f person I guess. Because I was like-- wow. This is so real. So brutal. So literal. Visceral. 

[Cdh20]

1 minute ago, taanja said:

I am a jaded f person I guess. Because I was like-- wow. This is so real. So brutal. So literal. Visceral. 

But had you seen that in a Tv show before-something that brutal? Because I guess I had not. Of course I had not seen sex like the Wedding either. I think that season was kinda groundbreaking.

[toolazy]

2 hours ago, taanja said:

I am a jaded f person I guess. Because I was like-- wow. This is so real. So brutal. So literal. Visceral. 

I appreciated the episodes technically and artistically but I will probably never watch them again.  

[FnkyChkn34]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

I'd have to go back and listen to the dialogue but she appeared to have contradicted herself when she initially approached him in the cabin demanding to know what he'd done to Roger. Jamie was confused because he couldn't understand why she'd be upset considering how the man had raped her, and Bree responded by saying he didn't. You can see Jamie's confusion. At that point he doesn't understand they are talking about two different people because Bree hasn't made that clear. His natural assumption is that she lied to him previously. Yeah, it's not a great look that he resorted to insults but under the circumstances he believed he'd been duped by her and lied to.

I get that this was a big old misunderstanding all around but Bree contributed to it. She understood at once that Lizzie had confused Roger for Bonnet. When she stormed into the cabin she should have led with the fact that Jamie beat up the wrong man before getting all shouty about beating him up.

Yes to all of this, too.  All of these misunderstandings are so stupid, and all characters contributed to all of the secrets, but IMO - I blame Bree the most.  I get that it is a very personal matter and she didn't want to tell everyone every single detail, but by not telling Lizzie who Roger was, or by telling a few more details to Jamie, she brought the majority of this on herself.  That might be an unpopular opinion, but it's how I see it.  I still blame Jamie for brutally beating a man in the middle of the woods, but he didn't know any better and that was his way back then.  I guess it's not like he was going to do a citizen's arrest and take him to the sheriff...

Edited January 11, 2019 by FnkyChkn34
fix typo

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 1/6/2019 at 11:21 AM, Cdh20 said:

I woke up early this morning & said to my hubby "I love Sundays" as tonight we get to watch Outlander...now I should get out of here & not be TOO spoiled before I watch! So not looking forward to Droughtlander-how did you all survive it so many times over these years (question to the fans that have been watching from the beginning)?

And if you have On Demand service, you actually can see it that way from the beginning of the day.

8 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I still blame Jamie for brutally beating a man in the middle of the woods, but he didn't know any better and that was his way back then.  I guess it's not like he was going to do a citizen's arrest and take him to the sheriff...

He should have taken him to Bree for identification. Bree didn't have to share any of the information she didn't share because it was her own business and had no way of expecting it to be important in a matter of life and death. Whereas Jamie had the man in front of him and didn't do due diligence because he had some daft notion of not wanting to upset Bree and Claire, when Claire had already told him Bree wasn't some delicate object that could break. And now he's having something done in secret again.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 1/6/2019 at 7:37 PM, Scarlett45 said:

The entire time I was thinking “Can you let Ulysesess do his job and read the letter?!!” The look on his (Ulyssesses) face....

That's pretty much what I said out loud.

[FnkyChkn34]

15 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

He should have taken him to Bree for identification. 

Oh yeah, I definitely agree with this.  But that wasn't the way back then; I feel like that's us thinking with our more modern brains.  Don't get me wrong, they all did very stupid things.  

I still also think of that stupid line from season 1, paraphrasing - "you can keep secrets but don't lie to me."  Secrets are damaging too, obviously!

[GHScorpiosRule]

17 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

He should have taken him to Bree for identification.

That would be the logical thing to do. BUT. Jamie wasn't in a logical or reasonable frame of mind. He was running on pure emotion. And it's a well-known fact, in both the buiks and show, that he has a temper. So I don't blame him for giving Roger the beatdown, as I stated in my initial post. It was SO JAMIE. And I have no issue with that.

[nodorothyparker]

4 hours ago, iMonrey said:

I'd have to go back and listen to the dialogue but she appeared to have contradicted herself when she initially approached him in the cabin demanding to know what he'd done to Roger. Jamie was confused because he couldn't understand why she'd be upset considering how the man had raped her, and Bree responded by saying he didn't. You can see Jamie's confusion. At that point he doesn't understand they are talking about two different people because Bree hasn't made that clear. His natural assumption is that she lied to him previously. Yeah, it's not a great look that he resorted to insults but under the circumstances he believed he'd been duped by her and lied to.

This is the issue exactly.  And considering that so much of their earlier talk was framed by her bringing up his rape and how he dealt with it out of the blue and asking him to dredge up those memories, I can't really fault Jamie too much for not being the immediate picture of grace and understanding or for being confused when she suddenly storms in screaming at him that no, she had consensual sex before only then getting around to clarifying that there were two men involved and only the latter of them was a rapist.

Still better than the book version of this, but no one comes off looking super great in the Great Misunderstanding.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 1/6/2019 at 4:28 PM, Nidratime said:

What I want to know is, where are those stones located in 20th Century America? Is there a highway there? A shopping center? Someone's backyard? Is it a National Park Service Monument? Do you only hear the buzz if the stones still exist in multiple planes, so that they're operational? What if they exist up to a point, but not in the time period to which you want to travel?

I remember in a FAQ, Diana Galbadon said it's that people build things like the stones at places where they sense something special in the geomantic energies. So not having a stone circle there in the future shouldn't prevent someone from passing through on that spot.

[Cdh20]

58 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

And if you have On Demand service, you actually can see it that way from the beginning of the day.

It's on a regular cable channel in Canada at 8 pm Sundays where I live!

[Squirrely]

On 1/8/2019 at 5:06 PM, Cdh20 said:

I do not object to the violence in the show either, obviously I am a fan, but I do make sure I warn others about it when recommending it. I do have a  few friends that could not stomach it, which is a shame they miss out on a good story, great characters.

 

Dude. Several years ago, at our last house, we had a sweet, elderly neighbor. She was lonely so I always took time to chat with her when I saw her. We knew we had a mutual love of reading. One day when I wasn't home, she brought a book over for me to read. My husband, thinking he's doing something great, gives her Outlander.

Cue me freaking TF out. And he's all, "Don't worry, I gave her the loaner copy, not your signed copy." He has no clue what these books contain. He only knows that I love to share them, and he was so proud that he knew not to loan out my cherished signed editions. I never in a million years would have offered her the book. Not because she was old, but from having a clear sense from getting to know her that she would not appreciate it.

This little old lady had brought me some Amish/Mennonite/chaste AF "romance" novel. 

She never looked at me the same. I still cringe when I think about it. And kick myself for not running over there the next morning and ripping it out of her hands. 

 

 

Topic? I didn't hate the episode. They did what they could with all the stupidity. I'm definitely looking forward to Bree and Lord John meeting! That's up there in my favorite parts of Drums. But man, I'm going to miss Ian and Rollo. We've had far too little of them in the show as it is. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Squirrely

[Noneofyourbusiness]

12 hours ago, AuntieMame said:

Wouldn't it be almost impossible for everyone to leave the homestead? Even if it was autumn and what drops there were are gathered? It's my understanding That this kind of lifestyle requires constant, back breaking work. How could they just leave and not expect things to be ruined if stolen? Murtagh will be off hunting Bonnett, so no joy there. I know it is a romance, so I will handwave, but in an episode where Claire and Bree talked about what they missed? And food came up so primarily? The fact that food, it's production, processing, preservation and storage was a major preoccupation of the time doesn't even get mentioned? Sigh. Also, the garden plot they showed us was laughably small, good for a suburban dinner party, but not to feed five or six over a winter.

Jamie said he was going to ask Tom Burley to look after the crops and the animals.

[Cdh20]

2 hours ago, Squirrely said:

Dude. Several years ago, at our last house, we had a sweet, elderly neighbor. She was lonely so I always took time to chat with her when I saw her. We knew we had a mutual love of reading. One day when I wasn't home, she brought a book over for me to read. My husband, thinking he's doing something great, gives her Outlander.

Cue me freaking TF out. And he's all, "Don't worry, I gave her the loaner copy, not your signed copy." He has no clue what these books contain. He only knows that I love to share them, and he was so proud that he knew not to loan out my cherished signed editions. I never in a million years would have offered her the book. Not because she was old, but from having a clear sense from getting to know her that she would not appreciate it.

This little old lady had brought me some Amish/Mennonite/chaste AF "romance" novel. 

She never looked at me the same. I still cringe when I think about it. And kick myself for not running over there the next morning and ripping it out of her hands. 

 

 

Topic? I didn't hate the episode. They did what they could with all the stupidity. I'm definitely looking forward to Bree and Lord John meeting! That's up there in my favorite parts of Drums. But man, I'm going to miss Ian and Rollo. We've had far too little of them in the show as it is. 

Lol, Give hubby a break, I spoke to a woman at a party last year who said Outlander was her 90 yr old mom’s fave show. 

[Ziggy]

6 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

Lol, Give hubby a break, I spoke to a woman at a party last year who said Outlander was her 90 yr old mom’s fave show. 

Our 8th Grade literature teacher and I volunteer together at our church.  I was telling her a funny story from an episode, so she decided to start reading the books!  When she told me, I thought, "Oh no!  But I didn't warn you!"  She said, "Thank you so much!  I love them, and I'm half way through the second book."  Big sigh of relief!

It can be a bit nerve racking to recommend these books, because you just don't know what people are ok with reading.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Ziggy

[Ruprecht]

I absolutely LOVE the name the "GoFugYourselves" ladies gave for the American stones:

"Creigh na Durham"

I cackled as I read it in my office in ye olde Durham, NC. 

[toolazy]

2 hours ago, Ruprecht said:

I absolutely LOVE the name the "GoFugYourselves" ladies gave for the American stones:

"Creigh na Durham"

I cackled as I read it in my office in ye olde Durham, NC. 

Those recaps are gold.

[AD55]

17 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

That would be the logical thing to do. BUT. Jamie wasn't in a logical or reasonable frame of mind. He was running on pure emotion. And it's a well-known fact, in both the buiks and show, that he has a temper. So I don't blame him for giving Roger the beatdown, as I stated in my initial post. It was SO JAMIE. And I have no issue with that.

It was in keeping with Jamie's character, which is why I wonder why folks think that Claire should have defended Jamie when Bree told her she couldn't trust Jamie and Ian's judgment. A person can have good intentions and bad judgment. Jamie doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes either, as evidenced by his asking Murtagh to find Bonnet and bring him to him. Bonnet's already been condemned to death, as Jamie knows all too well. He could ask Murtagh simply to turn him in. Others have also noted that he is putting Murtagh in danger. Jamie often does things because they make himself feel better. He wants the visceral satisfaction of killing Bonnet himself. If I were Bree, I would definitely want Claire present as a leavening influence, though she has had only modest success in that role.

[Sew Sumi]

I really enjoyed the actual killing of Bonnet, but I fear the actor won't commit to the two or so seasons it would take us to get there. We don't know how much Murtagh knows, since this is uncharted territory, but if they off Bonnet this season, I hope Bree has a part in it that brings her peace about the rape. I imagine that after Bonnet is gone that they won't drag out Jemmy's paternity much longer.

[Pingaponga]

On 1/6/2019 at 4:20 PM, WatchrTina said:

Another funny exchange is when Jamie asks Brianna “Can ye not be smitten with cousins in your time?” “It’s not encouraged” she replies. It’s doubly funny because just the week before we heard the story of Jamie’s having been smitten with his cousin, Dougal’s daughter. 

My shower-thought of the day...Brianna and Roger are, of course, cousins.  Distant cousins, but cousins nonetheless.  Roger is a descendant of Geillis and Dougal's child, and as Dougal was Jamie's uncle, that makes Brianna and the child first cousins.  So Brianna and Roger are first cousins many (many) times removed. Which makes this conversation between Jamie and Brianna kind of amusing.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 1/13/2019 at 5:51 PM, Pingaponga said:

My shower-thought of the day...Brianna and Roger are, of course, cousins.  Distant cousins, but cousins nonetheless.  Roger is a descendant of Geillis and Dougal's child, and as Dougal was Jamie's uncle, that makes Brianna and the child first cousins.  So Brianna and Roger are first cousins many (many) times removed. Which makes this conversation between Jamie and Brianna kind of amusing.

Bree and Roger are second cousins five times removed, to be exact. Jamie and the child of Dougal and Geillis are first cousins.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Noneofyourbusiness

[Pingaponga]

38 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Jamie and the child of Dougal and Geillis are first cousins

Ah right.  I've spent too much time on Ancestry.ca and getting all befuddled.

[taanja]

On 1/11/2019 at 9:23 AM, Ruprecht said:

I absolutely LOVE the name the "GoFugYourselves" ladies gave for the American stones:

"Creigh na Durham"

I cackled as I read it in my office in ye olde Durham, NC. 

Those recaps are the highlight of my week! I sit here at my desk laughing like a fool!

[Hannah Lee]

1 hour ago, taanja said:

Those recaps are the highlight of my week! I sit here at my desk laughing like a fool!

OMGosh, they are hysterical.  I was laughing so hard at all the "Trip Advisor" style reviews from Roger.  "Much walking.  Dead travel companion.  Still in culottes.  No stars."

[taanja]

1 hour ago, Hannah Lee said:

OMGosh, they are hysterical.  I was laughing so hard at all the "Trip Advisor" style reviews from Roger.  "Much walking.  Dead travel companion.  Still in culottes.  No stars."

Haha! Right! and just now reading your recaps of the recaps has me laughing!

[Kim0820]

On 1/6/2019 at 11:46 AM, GingerMarie said:

was not her story to tell.  I am ticked off at Claire for not defending Jamie when Brianna said she did not trust him and Ian to do the right thing when tring to find Roger.  Claire you let me down.  It felt like she was driving a wedge between father and daughter. 

Claire just didn't tell Jamie enough.  Though I guess she too thought Roger had gone back through the stones.  But it was possible that he didn't.  Big assumption on their part too.

On 1/6/2019 at 11:57 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

 

And this should probably go in the Unpopular thread, but Brianna can just stop with her rage at both Wee Ian and Jamie-to the extent that she’s acting like what they did with Roger was done with the knowledge of who Roger was. They didn’t. It’s all on Lizzie, If blame is to go around. And all she got was a “You should be” from Brianna when Lizzie said she was sorry.😒😒😒😒

No way will Roger go through the stones. Either he’ll stop or the Mohawk will yank him back.

I can’t recall if Wee Ian proposed to Brianna before she found out what he and Jamie had done with Roger in the buik, but his proposal in the show was a bad choice, considering that  Brianna has decided that Roger’s fate was an intentional EVUHL plan and that Jamie is an unconscionable “savage” and monster, instead of being given WRONG information. Yeah, TOTALLY #TEAMJAMIE here.

I did appreciate that Claire didn’t jump on the it’s all your fault, Jamie! bandwagon. And I thought it was perfect how she let Jamie know that Bonnett was the one who raped Brianna.

Wasn't happy that Brianna couldn’t or wouldn’t even consider why/how Jamie did what he did. 

I was thinking when Roger escaped - oh you just know it's not going to hold and he'll be caught again.  

I think Lizzie's conclusions made perfect sense; how was she to know?  Brianna didn't tell her a thing about Roger.

 

On 1/6/2019 at 6:53 PM, Atlanta said:

I do like that Bree mentions they are handfast. She didn't do that in the book. Jamie can understand that, but I can't believe there's not a priest or reverend that couldn't legit marry them there when they were in Wilmington. Big plot hole via Diana. 

I thought as soon as you slept together you were married; that was a big issue in Fergus' case.  

On 1/7/2019 at 5:14 PM, snowbryneich said:

I assume Claire didn't defend Ian and Jamie so that they could have the next big misunderstanding where Jamie spends the journey to the Mohawk wondering if Claire would prefer Frank to him just like Brianna. But actually, I've never really considered did Claire tell Jamie about to her promise to Frank to not look for him while Frank was alive? I know he later finds out Frank wasn't the best husband - I think Claire and her glass face give a bit away when he is talking about Laoghaire and how things were between them. Because otherwise given Claires timing - coming back after Frank's death Jamie could think he was second best. (Rare moment of insecurity for the King of Men there.)   

Claire went back because Brianna was an adult now.  Frank's death at the same approximate time was another Lucky Coincidence.  

On 1/9/2019 at 10:12 AM, aemom said:

The stones send you to whatever time you are thinking about when you cross.

Claire wouldn't have been thinking of any particular time her first time.  Though you could want that Geillis had just gone there and that made the stones pick it when the traveler wasn't thinking of a year.  And that the stones are not exact, explaining the different years Geillis and Claire went back in.  Both 1740s but not the same year.

 

On 1/13/2019 at 5:51 PM, Pingaponga said:

My shower-thought of the day...Brianna and Roger are, of course, cousins.  Distant cousins, but cousins nonetheless.  Roger is a descendant of Geillis and Dougal's child, and as Dougal was Jamie's uncle, that makes Brianna and the child first cousins.  So Brianna and Roger are first cousins many (many) times removed. Which makes this conversation between Jamie and Brianna kind of amusing.

As you go back each generation, the degree of relation is cut in half, you are half a parent, a quarter of each grandparent, an eighth of each great grandparent.  So when you go back that far, even in a direct line, the more remote ancestors are barely related to you.  You're more closely related to your present third cousins than to you 8 times great grandfather.  

And today there are US states that still allow even first cousins to marry.  

Edited May 14, 2020 by Kim0820

[aemom]

2 hours ago, Kim0820 said:

Claire wouldn't have been thinking of any particular time her first time.  Though you could want that Geillis had just gone there and that made the stones pick it when the traveler wasn't thinking of a year.  And that the stones are not exact, explaining the different years Geillis and Claire went back in.  Both 1740s but not the same year.

Claire was thinking about a time.  I forget what book or where it was, but she mentions that she was thinking about Frank's ancestors of the past at the time that she touched the stones.

Geillis also mentioned that she came to that time on purpose.

[Kim0820]

So a time can just be on your mind and you will go there if you accidentally went through the stones, not intending to, as Claire did.  

It's very convenient that there is a time travel portal near wherever Claire goes.  Maybe she is drawn to them.  Maybe there are quite common on earth.  LOL.    

Edited May 14, 2020 by Kim0820