Claire’s friend, the one who lends her medical supplies…she also came back through the stones, similar to Claire, yes? I started suspecting this last week or maybe even the week before (not sure when she was introduced) but this week’s episode practically shouted it from the mountaintops.
Spoiler box for the answer would be appropriate, I suppose.
To Ellis Dee
Yes, you are right. Geillis came from 1968.
To Hedda Rosa
Episode seven is entitled “The Wedding”. Tally ho, unflagging joy!
My friend just pointed out to me that this next one will be #5 of the 8 episode season. And then we’ll have to wait until early 2015 to get the next 8.
I started to hyperventilate a bit.
I’m going to have to rewatch the last episode because I didn’t catch that. But where in the last episode was that implied? (You can put your answer in a spoiler box if you like.)
Since Sattua has given me the answer, and therefore I’m no longer speculating as a book virgin, I’ll spoiler further discussion of this:
[spoiler]Not just this episode, but every scene between her and Claire since she was introduced. Her manner, her statements, her questions, the way she looks at Claire; everything about her screams “I know what happened to you because it happened to me too.”
I’m pretty sure it was last episode that I started thinking it, during the various scenes at her place. (Talking about the ear-nailing, her gassy husband, etc…)
Then this past episode, the scene with her in Claire’s workshop moved me from suspicious to convinced. The whole "Is he dead? “He’s not alive.” “So he’s dead?” exchange, the description of how she settled for her husband, etc…[/spoiler]
Our guide at Culloden battlefield museum said that tartans were not clan-specific until after the English allowed wearing kilts again around 1785, when they became an English fad. He specifically said that you couldn’t tell one clan from another by their kilts until after 1800. For what its worth.
Episode 105…
I feel like the show is starting to hit its stride. This week’s show was a poem to the Scottish Highlands, and I expect that they’ll be getting floods of tourists as a result.
This was the first episode where I really stopped counting along with what they changed and what they didn’t and just watched. So much to enjoy here from the costumes (though Claire seems verra clean for being on the road all those weeks. And where is she stashing all those extra changes of clothes?) to the interplay between Claire and Dougal, to seeing the villages and villagers. I loved the scene with the women and the cloth; book Claire doesn’t actually spend much time with women excepting Giellis so I really loved seeing that. Her slowly being accepted by the men is being handled very deftly - and I loved the breakfast fight scene…and that Jamie - although he’s clearly keeping en eye out for Claire - wasn’t in there mixing it up in that particular scene. It does seem like he’s the only guy who she really trusts to be a good person, the others she’s deeply suspicious of.
The one flashback to Frank almost turned me Team Frank - just a look in his eyes as he looked up at Claire, you could just see that he seriously had it for her, years of war-torn separation or not.
The flashback at Culloden I liked - it was a bit heavy handed (OMG she looked at the Clan Mackenzie stone!!) but having never seen it, never even though to google earth it, I liked that. And expected the famous Clan Stones to be bigger somehow.
It was great fun meeting Ned McGowan, though I though from the coughing that he would have consumption, and not asthma.
And finally I may or may not have yelled at the TV when the episode ended. I mean if you are a book reader you know where it is heading and what her answer will be, but GAH.
My husband wants to know if Claire is that stupid in the book, I agree that they overdid her outrage, in this episode… otherwise, I thought it was very good. The Scottish/English tension was thick, and I liked the inserted bit about Claire thinking Dougal’s just a scam artist, before she hears “Stuart go bragh.” Also the breakfast brawl. Klingons are what Ronald D. Moore does best. These Klingons just happen to be in kilts and plaids.
I want to say more, but I’d be saying it from a book reader’s standpoint, so I’ll hauld mah whisht for now and just say that I’ve got pacing concerns. More next week, when I’ll be reassured or worried.
Oh and I meant to add I think the voiceover was better this week - not so much of it and not so much narrating the action happening right there on the screen for us to see.
Sattua, Your husband is right. If you were dumped in a random place alone with a bunch of drunk warriors wouldn’t you keep your head down and shut up? But then that wouldn’t be nearly as fun to read about/watch.
Also I agree about the pacing, they have a lot of ground to cover and only 11 more episodes to get it done in. I wonder if there are any big set pieces that get cut. One that has been foreshadowed is the witch trial so I assume that they’ll give it full attention, but they have a lot of time to spend at Lallybroch and Wentworth to get through.
As a non-book reader, this episode was uninteresting to me, and felt like it dragged quite a bit. I almost started FFWDing through it, which is never a good sign.
SimWife and I are actually surprised at how much we;re enjoying the show - never heard of it before it showed up.
I went right along with Claire suspecting dougle of simple thievery until the cross scene - so it worked.
My girlfriend is a huge fan of the books, but I’m with your husband. It is hard to imagine that Claire hasn’t gotten her “attitude” (and mouth) beaten out of her more by this point. That they are so tolerant of her BS seems the most unrealistic aspect.
I guess it is understandable in the “Dances with Wolves” manner, that Claire is now growing some fondness for her captors. And it would be really tough not to try to protect them. But she doesn’t seem to be helping herself by trying to undermine their movement. Instead of “spy”, she’s now making herself out as a “subversive” - perhaps not only gathering information but also doing a little lowering of morale (“you’re going to lose”) as well. Dumb.
And I even question Dougal’s wisdom in even bringing her along on the “tax collection” (and fund raising rounds). There he is in “pub” basically saying “The english are scum. Look what they did to Jamie. We need to take them all down and for them to burn in hell…and by they way, that lady in the corner who we treat like royalty, is english. We like to bring her to along so she can note who all is donating to our cause.” Oops.
Overall the story seems to be meandering as opposed to heading “somewhere”, which seems to compound the pace of the show. Maybe things will start to pick up.
Well… like I said… as a book reader, I question the pacing of the TV show. There is a particular moment that is the do-or-die moment for the reader. Either they’re hooked by it, or they’ll never be hooked. Instead of making that moment happen in, say, episode 4 or 5, they’ve saved it for later.
Also, in the book, Dougal had a very specific reason to take Claire along. That reason has been written out of the TV show.
Seemed reasonable enough to me to bring your doctor with you when collecting rent from the rabble. A little medical care for the needy takes the sting out of taking their money.
What was the book reason? Spoiler box is fine.
In the book he is taking her to Fort William to turn her over to the British army–because she’s English and all. In the series they have decided to keep her indefinitely, so they had to make up that stuff about the British soldier pretending to be a blacksmith, etc. I guess they got episode 5’s cliffhanger out of it.
I think the reason that I’m not in love with this show is that the Producer has done the same thing with Claire that Hollywood often does with other strong female characters, and that is to turn them into shrews. Elizabeth Bennett, for instance, was a feminist in the sense that she innately believed that women were not inferior to men. But she was still a product of her time, and a dignified lady in ever sense of the word. In fact, she was mortified when her sisters made public spectacles of themselves. I hate when writers transform her into a sassy, loud bitch.
Similarly, Claire is intelligent and capable and not afraid to show it. But she’s lived her whole life as an Outlander, first as a nomad on digs with her Uncle Lamb, then as a nurse during the war, and finally as a time traveler. So she’s very aware of social hierarchy and customs, and women’s low rank. Yes, she does get into trouble from time to time for following her conscience, but she doesn’t go out of her way to alienate people. That would be stupid. She’d never dress down a War Chieftan in front of his clansmen. She’d never throw a tantrum because the men were talking Gaelic in front of her.
So I take issue with how the Producer is turning the Claire I admired into a shrew. It makes her look both petty and stupid. Oh, and having Jamie stand by impotently while Angus manhandled her? Not a great change of script.
I also agree that they’re doing a poor job with the costumes. They’re way too clean. Anyone who’s camped for even a single night knows that you look like a ragamuffin. Claire walking around with a stark white kerchief and perfectly coiffed hair looks contrived. It’d be more realistic to put some dirt and twigs in her hair.
I’m also mildly disturbed how much the actor playing Angus resembles Charles Manson. :eek:
I do like a lot about the series, and am glad that they produced it. But the reason I’m not loving it is that the Producer is not only changing minor plot, but he’s changing the essence of the characters. It’s great to throw in little details like Dougal and Jamie fighting during a friendly “game” during the Gathering, or adding some intrigue, such as the English dragoon coming to Claire’s defense. But he’s changing Claire into something that she’s not, and I don’t like that.
I think you’re spot on, PunditLisa. Agree 100%.
Although, Jamie probably knew his place well enough to not interfere with Angus doing the bidding of The MacKenzie.
PunditLisa I’m totally with you too. Show Claire is demonstrating almost a late-20th-century feminist outlook, but without the common sense to not piss off the people around her that Book Claire had. Remember, Claire would have actually been born in the late 19-teens, though she came back from the 40s. A very different understanding about women’s role in the world even she did live on digs and even if the war did change a lot of things.
Alienate is the right word, and that’s precisely what she is doing. Granted Book Claire had to have some things explained to her at points as the story develops because she doesn’t understand the local mores, and she gets into hot water over that, but she understands that she needs to tread carefully in order to survive. Show Claire is not careful.
Also as a mom I have to say that the goat thing in episode 105 was bullshit - while yes you could feed goat milk to a baby, a baby that still had a living mom would have been breastfeed or in worst case scenario wetnursed. The whole thing was just frustrating and illogical.
What the woman said was that the baby was teething and wouldn’t nurse. I don’t understand why the mother couldn’t have expressed and let the baby drink from a cup, same as it was supposedly drinking the goat’s milk. Or, failing that, surely someone else in the village has a goat. I mean, goats make a lot of milk. A lot.
I like much about the show, but I am rather underwhelmed by the actress playing Claire. In the first episodes, she seems to only have one emotion – petulance. Yes, you’d be afraid and disoriented after going back in time, but being a pissy bitch wouldn’t help you out one bit.
In the last episode, we did see her start to move out of that a bit and I hope it continues.
And I love the actor playing Jamie. Great hair. 
I also unexpectedly **love **Graham McTavish playing Dougal McKenzie.