Just an Outlander Fan

Eh, don’t sweat it pookie. Why doesn’t matter. I had a lot of fun for a little while. My fun wasn’t fake even though they were.

I got some new books today and a new blanket. Which should I read first ya think?

Canongate Kirk. 

The last time I was down in the Canongate a few weeks ago the Kirk was covered in scaffolding as painstaking work to restore the 300-year-old royal coat of arms and other work was carried out. The intricate work was carried out by Nevin of Edinburgh painters and decorators, They were required to follow standards set by the Court of the Lord Lyon, which regulates heraldry in Scotland. The work involved the delicate application of gold leaf.

The church was founded in 1688 and completed in 1691. The master mason in charge was James Smith. A plaque on the front of the church bears witness to it having been built through a large bequest from a local merchant. 

“In 1688 King James VII ordained that the Mortification of Thos. Moodie, granted in 1649 to build a Church, should be applied to the erection of this structure”

By the time the Kirk was completed in 1691 he had lost the throne and was living in exile,  instead the emblem of Nassau was placed in the centre of the royal coat of arms to honour his successor William III.

Previously the residents of the Canongate had used the Abbey Church adjacent to the Palace of Holyroodhouse, but King James VII ordered the construction of the new Kirk of the Canongate, allowing the Abbey Church to be converted into a Chapel for the Order of the Thistle. (The current Thistle Chapel is attached to St Giles’ Cathedral ).

Architecturally, the Kirk has a Dutch-style end gable and a curious, small doric-columned portico over the entrance. Although outwardly rectangular, the Kirk’s interior has a cruciform layout (highly unusual for a post-Reformation, pre-Victorian Church of Scotland building). The Kirk’s interior was extensively remodelled in 1882, with the inclusion of a pipe organ and a central pulpit. These unsympathetic alterations were removed in the early 1950s, along with the galleries. The resulting reordering considerably increased the levels of light; the original dignified simplicity of the Kirk was able to be appreciated once more. The Kirk was further restored in 1991 by the Stewart Todd partnership, followed by the installation of a new Danish-built Frobenius pipe organ in 1998, in memory of the late Very Rev Dr Ronald Selby Wright. This was the 1000th organ to be built by the Frobenius company.

Following the Disruption of 1843, a Holyrood Free Church congregation was formed. A church was built in front of the Palace of Holyroodhouse, but the building was closed in 1915 (when that congregation united with Abbeyhill United Free Church, becoming Holyrood Abbey Church, located in London Road.) The former Holyrood Free Church building was reopened as The Queen’s Gallery in 2003, to house exhibitions from the Royal Collection.

The Canongate kirkyard is the resting place of several Edinburgh notables including the economist Adam Smith, the philosopher and Smith’s biographer Dugald Stewart, Agnes Maclehose (the “Clarinda” of Robert Burns)  and the poet Robert Fergusson, whose statue in bronze by David Annand stands outside the kirk gate. Bishop James Ramsay is also buried here.  David Rizzio, the murdered private secretary of Mary, Queen of Scots was also reputed to have been buried here, if he was the body may have been interred at Holyrood Abbey at a later date, as the grave reported to be his has been found to be empty.

Hi anon. My thoughts are quite simple really. I believe a wedding happened in St. Mary Church in Bruton, and I believe the bride and groom were Cait and Tony. There really is no other logical explanation for the sequence of events and for so many significant people in Cait’s life to be in the same small town at the same time. And I do not believe it was a “staged” wedding for any of the various theories we have entertained thru the years. I do not believe anyone is going to get married in a Church with family and friends present to satisfy higher ups or to stop rumors about possibly dating someone other than one’s fiancé . We may not agree with it, we may not like it, we may even be saddened about it. But I believe that is what’s happened. Life has taught me to be a realist. 

“The bones themselves were remarkable.  The skull was perfectly shaped, the only flaw being a small chip in its base.  A trauma of some sort, a blow to the back of the head.  Perhaps in battle, she thought.  The femurs and tibias were long, the metatarsals long, the ulna, radius, all long. This Viking was tall.  Very tall.  But if he dated back to Culloden, he would have been 18th Century, which would have made him uncharacteristically tall for the time period.  Because that would have meant that he was a pure-blooded Viking.  All those centuries later, no dilution, no ancestors other than Celtic in origin.  Unheard of really, because most 18th century men were shorter, growth stunted from poor nutrition and the mixing of cultures.”  

Chapter One:  The Find

Chapter Two:  The Shape

Chapter Three:  The Lost

Chapter Four:  The War

Chapter Five:  The Found

Chapter Six:  The Prodigal

Chapter Seven:  The Dead

Chapter Eight:  The Goodbye

Chapter Nine:  The Missing

Chapter Ten:  The End

You’re a daring woman, sassenach

 Sam Heughan, Unfiltered  Magazine  

As a huge @Outlander_STARZ fan so dramtastic to discover that  @SamHeughan is a fellow @SMWSUK member in @Unfilteredmag. I totally loved the illicit distilling scenes at #FrasersRidge. If that ain’t a good name for a future @GreatGlenCo release I don’t know what is. #Outlander 

In this post I’ll be addressing a few critiques I’ve seen of the show in general this season. 

Warnings:

1) This is a LONG post

2) There may be some minor spoilers for later books/seasons (I don’t think I gave away anything too important)

A lot of fans say that season 1 of the show was the best. I don’t know that I agree with that. There are portions of season 1 that I don’t like all that much (the first few episodes were very slow at times, I felt like parts of “Both Sides Now” didn’t serve Claire’s character and the content of “The Search” could have been given to us in half an episode) and portions of other seasons that I would argue are better than those. There were also portions of the first season that I loved and would rank above weaker parts of other seasons.  I would find it difficult to rank my favorite seasons for that reason. Also my opinion of the source material varies. For example, I found Dragonfly in Amber rather tedious at certain points, but I concede that the second season was well done in terms of craft and storytelling.  

But I think there are several reasons that people tend to feel that the first season was best, outside of quality (which is always completely subjective!). One is that there wasn’t any basis for comparison in terms of TV. Yes there were always the books as comparison but that’s a very different medium. With the second season, there was immediately a basis for comparison: the entire first season. Season 1 didn’t have to live up to any of those expectations because it was an unknown quantity. 

Season 1,was also the longest at 16 episode, and it was based on the shortest book in the series. While there were still a lot of cuts necessary, there were fewer than in later seasons. Unfortunately 16 episode seasons weren’t sustainable for the series as a whole. The only reason they were able to do it at all in season 1 is that it was split into two parts of 8 episodes each. At that pace it would take about 20 years to film the series from start to finish (assuming 10 books: 10 seasons total). Money is also a factor. 16 episodes cost more to film than 12-13. So they had to switch to a more sustainable filming model, with fewer episodes, while at the same time adapting longer books. I think some of the changes that are made to content is not a result of creators being “bored” or not respecting the source material. It’s just what’s necessary to tell the story in a shorter amount of time.  

Even things that seem like additions (for example, Frank’s inclusion in episode 4x07) are ways of introducing themes and ideas quickly. In that case the “what did Frank know and when?” issue was introduced in a few scenes in one episode rather than having Claire find the fake grave in season 2, and having Roger deliver the letter that Frank wrote to Rev. Wakefield where he carefully outlined everything he did regarding that knowledge, and showing all of the characters responses to that information. At the same time, those same few scenes told the viewer a lot about Brianna’s relationship with Frank, how that affects the prospect of her relationship with Jamie, and gave viewers an understanding of Brianna’s tendency to push people away when she’s hurt or angry. In that way, it was a very economical way of handling a lot of material.

A lot of people have said that the show glorifies Frank’s character. I think that was somewhat true in the first season, but as it’s gone on it’s shown Frank’s faults as well. I do think that Brianna as a character idealizes Frank’s memory. So sometimes when we see Frank through her eyes, he seems idealized. But the show didn’t keep Frank alive when the books killed him off. They portrayed him being a less than faithful husband to Claire, and they let us know that he was deceptive about Jamie’s survival. They also let us know that he knew of Claire’s impending 18th century death, did nothing to warn her, and tried to take her daughter away. None of that is flattering! That wasn’t in the books. It was an addition for the show. But the fact that he was a loving father to Brianna balances some of it out. The fact that they were able to establish all of this over about 20 minutes of screen time in one episode is impressive! 

Another example  of this economical storytelling might be Murtagh’s character. In the books the Regulators weren’t really addressed until The Fiery Cross. By having Murtagh as a Regulator the show is able to lay a foundation for that story line earlier. They were also able to give us a character who we’d already come to care about that was strongly involved. Therefore, when that story line is developed next season we’ll already have an introduction to the issue and an investment. Rather that spending an entire episode in season 5 outlining who the Regulators were, what the politics were, and introducing all new characters, they’ve given audiences a background with a few minutes of dialogue/scenes in the fourth season, so they can just jump into the story later on. If Murtagh is going to replace Duncan (as some have speculated) as Jocasta’s next husband that would be more streamlining. They wouldn’t have to introduce Duncan and his relationship with Jocasta because we already know Murtagh and see a foundation for that relationship.

I started reading the book series years ago, and when I heard that it was becoming a tv series I got very nervous. I didn’t want Hollywood to ruin one of my favorite series. While I don’t like every choice the creators have made, I do have the sense that it’s in the hands of people who love and respect the material. They don’t always interpret it the same way I do, but who’s to say that my interpretation is “correct”? Even among fans there isn’t always a clear consensus.  Sometimes show will depict something different from how I “wanted” it and and I’ll like it better that way. I’m grateful to have dramatic representations of scenes that I’ve read a hundred times. I glad that they cast actors in the central roles who seem to really understand their characters. I’m glad that the author has a role as a consultant and that production has her opinion on certain changes. I’m also glad that sometimes they make changes in spite of her disapproval (the books aren’t perfect either and sometimes changes improve things!) . I’m glad that it’s airing on a premium cable network that allows it to keep some content that is disturbing or controversial or just not appropriate for regular broadcast TV. I’m also grateful that the show’s creators are open and willing to give us the same story that is being told in the books, albeit sometimes telling that story in a different way.

Warnings:  

1) This is a LONG post

2) There may be some minor spoilers for 413 and later books/seasons (I don’t think I gave away anything too important). 

3) The following is my opinion. You are free to disagree, but please keep things respectful. 

I’ve seen a lot of posts saying some variant of the following: 

-There isn’t any Jamie and Claire intimacy in Season 4

-The characters don’t interact/talk anymore

-We can’t even tell that they’re supposed to be in love

-The showrunners/actors/writers/producers are bored with the material

-The showrunners/Starz/Sony are preparing to write Jamie and Claire off the show.

Firstly, just for the sake of facts regarding intimacy/interaction/being in love:

let me first off by saying … I should stay off of Twitter after watching Outlander at midnight because seeing some tweets makes my blood boil … 

This episode was so damn good & had me on the edge of my seat and it furthered my Lord John Grey and Brianna ship. (Personally, I think they have more chemistry than Brianna and Roger). David is such a little button. 

As much as I love Jamie and Claire, I didn’t miss them in this episode. I loved how the writers/director showed the love & support between Fergus and Marsali, Fergus rescuing Murtagh, Brianna, and Lord John Grey’s blossoming relationship and Brianna confronting and snapping on Bonnet. 

Also how the hell was Bonnet keeping that jewel in his teeth? My ass would’ve swallowed it by now. Though as much as you want to hate Bonnet, Edward Speleers makes you fall in love with him. 

Though people are already complaining – some even said that this was the worst episode of Outlander or of the season, I think the fuck not. HONESTLY, it’s my favorite. It’s sad, heartwrenching, full of drama and desperation. 

The ending is what broke me. The preacher, the Mohawks, I mean my god, I was sobbing, loudly. The story of Father Alexandre and Johiehon tragic romance – oh my god. I was in hysterics. Kaheroton’s devastation as he watches Johiehon walk into the flames and burn with her lover. 

Richard Rankin’s acting as he breaks free but goes back and witnesses Father Alexandre and Johiehon’s death. I mean this guy is amazing when it comes to the dramatics. You could feel his devastation as he witnesses the death of what you could call his friend. A guy that Roger begged to save his own life and you could really grasp the different mindsets of different centuries. 

I know in the book that Jamie and Claire were there and witnessed this first hand but I was glad that they weren’t. I think Jamie and Claire have gone through enough – but I liked how the writers decided to solely let Roger face this alone. Let him experience this grief and cruelness. I think it helps with his character growth, BUT this is just my opinion. 

If you are a fan of the books, I don’t know how you don’t walk away from this episode without your heart bursting for Roger Mac. Rankin, as usual, is just stunningly good. And I want to talk a bit about how this episode, more than any other, is when he settles fully into who he is. 

While he sits in the Idiot Hut with the priest and they talk about the priest’s history and his dilemma, Roger begins to unravel. We see him desperately trying to convince the priest to save himself. It would take almost no effort to do so, but the priest, shattered by shame and self-loathing for what he has been taught is sinful, refuses. It is, of course, Roger talking to himself. 

Had he cast that love aside at any number of moments, he might have spared himself agony and suffering. He had so many chances. The comfort of living was always there for the taking. And still, he couldn’t do it. He wouldn’t do it. Because at his heart, he is a man bound by honor and love. He doesn’t have it in him to put himself first.

The increasing desperation in his voice is only partly because he knows he can’t convince the priest to save himself. It is perhaps even more his own realization that he cannot be someone he isn’t. 

The melding of religion with this moment is key to who Roger becomes as well. When he prays over the priest, that is our first glimpse of Roger Mac, the man who would devote himself to serving God for the people of The Ridge. 

We see that man again and again this season, in moments of beauty within chaos and danger. When he first helps Morag and the baby on Bonnet’s ship. When he is drawn to Johiehon and her baby in the village. This is a gentle, peaceful man who is forced into violent situations, who never feels quite at ease in that role.

Jamie is a warrior. That fierce brutality is in his blood, something always churning beneath his skin. It frightens him at times, but often saves him and others. Roger does not have that warrior within. And we’ve seen time and again that, while he is a survivor, the drive beneath his survival is not the brutality needed to do what must be done, but rather desperate choices made out of compassion.

It’s why the relationship Jamie and Roger end up having is so beautiful. They are very different in many ways, but both will do whatever they need to for those they love, though they may use different methods to achieve their goals. And they both come to highly respect the other because of who they are.

When Roger turns back to put a swift end to the priest’s life, while he berates himself for his idiocy, that is also Roger turning his back on ever considering that he could be someone else. It is the final moment of transition into Roger Mac. He draws from a deep well of bravery and compassion to sacrifice himself yet again. It is one of the most beautiful, heroic moments we’ve seen on the show.

The last time I cried this much watching an episode was Faith in Season 2. Both moments are of horrible grief and loss, but also something beautiful. Claire, in all her agony, survives, her strength fragile, but thrumming in her. Kaheroton, clinging to the baby, his heart shattering, but also bursting with love for that child that he didn’t father, but who is all he has left of Johiehon. When we see Roger, the horror fading from his face, we see something shift, a strength in him, a settling into who he is, accepting who he is.

Roger in this season has been just superb; it has been such a privilege to follow him and witness his growth. What’s best is that he is such a complex human being - or basically, a human being - he is like a real person, instead of an idealised caricature of a perfect hero. He has faults and weaknesses, he stumbles, and as he so eloquently said himself, can be such an idiot… Yet his heart is in the right place and he tries and tries again and does the right thing in the end.

It is so refreshing to see such a person depicted in a drama series, especially in the kind of series which often depicts people as good or bad, as heros or villains. It may not be a popular choice (judging from the comments I see - ¯\_(ツ)_/¯), as it is harder for many people to grasp. Yet I am glad the showrunners didn’t take the easy way out but made this season better by introducing more of the complexity of human nature into Outlander.

Much of this can also be said about Brianna, who, too, has shone during this season.