REVIEW: Written in My Own Heart’s Blood by Diana Gabaldon
Dear Ms. Gabaldon,
It’s fair to say that reading Outlander however-many-years-ago was what turned me into a romance reader. I had had fitful encounters with the genre before, as a teen, but it was Outlander that made me OBSESSED with historical romance. I still remember searching for books immediately after finishing it that might replicate the experience I had with Outlander, with very mixed results (Catherine Coulter and Woodiwiss’ The Flame and the Flower…shudder). I’ve read before that you reject the romance label for the Outlander series, and I certainly understand why – they’re no more “just” romances than they are “just” fantasy time-travel books. But at the same time any books that contain such an incredibly compelling central love story have to be considered romance on some level.
Written in My Own Heart’s Blood is the eighth entry in the Outlander series, and like a lot of fans of the original book, my feelings about the series have waxed and waned over the years. It’s bad enough that I’ve forgotten whole chunks of books five, six and seven; my memories of all but book one get hazier as the years pass. The central details of some are vivid (Claire and Jamie’s reunion scene in Voyager…sigh), but the surrounding pages (hundreds of pages) are much less so. I really need to re-read the entire series from the start, but that would involve slogging through some of those less-than-compelling entries, and we’re probably talking well over 5,000 (maybe closer to 10,000?) pages at this point, and there’s SO MUCH else to read…maybe I’ll just go refresh myself with some online synopses for now, and hold off the reread for retirement. Anyway…
My main recollection, when I read earlier this year that WiMOHB actually had a publication date, was how angry I was at the ending of the previous book, An Echo in the Bone. I remember very little about AEitB except for how pissed I was about this incident (SPOILERS AHEAD!): Jamie was thought dead (again?!), and Claire was of course grief-stricken, but forced to marry Lord John Grey to protect herself from possible arrest as a rebel spy in Philadelphia, which was still held by the British Army at that point. One drunken night Claire and John consummated their marriage in an act of grief and shared passion for Jamie. Who then showed up, alive, of course, almost immediately afterward. This struck me as both the lowest sort of soap-opera conflict-creating nonsense, and sort of distasteful given John’s orientation and long-standing love for Jamie.
Anyway, Jamie’s return was only one of the cliffhangers that AEitB ended with – the other was the modern (well, relatively) day troubles of Roger and Brianna, whose son Jem was kidnapped and, they believed, taken back through the stones by some crazy guy whose motive I’ve already forgotten. (An online synopsis suggests it has something to do with hidden gold, which I vaguely remember coming up before. Okay, then.)
So it should go without saying that Written in My Own Heart’s Blood begins with a lot of action – there’s Jamie’s joyous return and his quick escape from British forces. But before he escapes he encounters Lord William Ellesmere, who is Jamie’s illegitimate son and John’s stepson (as well as a British officer), and William rather abruptly realizes that he’s Jamie’s bastard rather than the son of an English nobleman, as he’d always thought (based pretty much entirely on the marked resemblance between the two men). The revelation doesn’t go over well.
Meanwhile, Claire is ecstatic that Jamie and his sister Jenny are alive, but she’s got problems. One of them is that she’s got two husbands; another is that she’s got to tell her first husband that she slept with her second husband (Lord John actually takes care of this, in what I thought was a fit of over-sharing; the consequences end up being troublesome if not disastrous for him).
So then there’s the fact that Claire’s first husband has absconded with her second husband (technically, second husband with third husband, actually), and shortly after everyone connected with the British army in Philadelphia appears to be looking for said second third husband, up to and including his older brother, Hal Grey, the Duke of Pardloe. Claire’s somewhat unorthodox solution to dealing with Hal is to essentially take him hostage, which she does while treating him for a severe asthma attack.
In the 18th century, we are also following the doings of William, Jamie’s nephew Ian, Ian’s fiancée, the Quaker Rachel, Rachel’s brother Denny and his fiancée, who is Hal’s daughter. And that’s before you even get to the more minor characters or to the business in the 20th century – Brianna and her kids, and various folks who have mysterious designs on their family. Then we have a storyline set in a THIRD time – Roger and his time-traveling ancestor Buck have traveled back through the stones at Craigh na Dun (which are starting to resemble a set of revolving doors, with all the coming and going) to try to find Jem and his kidnapper (who aren’t even there, not having ever actually traveled through the stones). They end up in the wrong time, though, and encounter none other than Brian Fraser, Jamie’s father, having landed in the 1730s, a few years before Brian’s death and before Claire originally traveled back in time (as detailed in the beginning of Outlander).
The preceding paragraphs have crystallized for me the impossibility of writing a coherent synopsis of this book. It would be like 8,000 words and probably wouldn’t make sense. Suffice to say, a lot of stuff happens in WiMOHB. While Claire’s is the only first-person perspective (in keeping with the tradition set by the previous books), we get at least a half-dozen others: Jamie, Ian, Lord John Gray, William, Brianna, Roger. Naturally, some are more compelling than others.
I was surprised to find early on that Brianna’s story in 20th century Scotland was more compelling to me than the stuff going on in 18th century America (though I think in part it was because there was a mystery as to who all was involved in Jem’s kidnapping and what they wanted). I found some of the newer voices more interesting – Ian and William are both intriguing (though Ian’s POV has been represented in probably several books prior to this one; I honestly can’t remember). It’s not that I don’t like Claire and Jamie – I LOVE Claire and Jamie. It’s just nice to hear from the fresher voices (even if in this case the fresher voices have been present for four or more books).
There can be a dissonance involved in switching not just between perspectives but entire centuries; thankfully, Brianna’s chapters and Roger’s chapters are kept pretty much separate from those of the characters in Revolutionary War America. Even then, I sometimes felt like I was being batted around in the middle of the book, when we rapidly (well, rapidly for an 850 page book) switched scenes amongst the various characters involved in the run up to a battle, the battle itself and its aftermath. I think it would have been easier if all of the characters were focused on the battle, but there’s just so much else going on: Jamie’s worried about Claire, Claire’s worried about Jamie, Ian’s going his own stuff going on, Lord John Grey is both worried about William and concerned about his own situation and the appearance of Percy Wainwright, Grey’s former stepbrother, erstwhile lover and general no-goodnik.
The switching perspectives and concerns didn’t bother me exactly (reading the entire five-book Song of Fire and Ice series since I read the last Gabaldon has kept my mind limber for POV changes) but reorientation was required at times. And while, as I say, I liked that Roger’s and Brianna’s sections were kept distinctly separate, I felt a bit of anxiety about what was going on during the hundreds of pages we were away from them. Conversely, when the action finally switched back, I started to wonder what was going on in Ye Olde Revolutionary War America, and to miss the characters there. In some ways WiMOHB is like a couple of books smushed together, and the effect is to make the story feel episodic, but in a weird way, since the episodes are often intertwined (not just within each time period; a lot of Brianna’s actions as the story progresses are informed by what she knows about Roger’s movements).
Even within the book, there were things going on that I just didn’t understand, probably because they involved things ancillary characters had done in previous books, things I had long forgotten about. I could just look these folks up (thanks, Outlander Wiki), and sometimes I did, but sometimes I didn’t really care enough to. It wasn’t that I didn’t care about the characters or the story, it was just that my plate was full of characters and plot and I couldn’t really be bothered to try to figure out why some other random soldier has nefarious plans involving William going back to the last book. I was content to just let the story unfold without worrying about the backstory.
A few quibbles: at one point, there is a scene with four characters, and all of them are time travelers born in different times (though two have traveled to the place they are at together). On the one hand, I find the stuff about other travelers intriguing; on the other hand, it starts to feel a little gimmicky when 18th century Scotland gets overrun with time travelers. Also, the action did start to lag in the last third to quarter of the book; it wasn’t so much that it was boring was that it was quieter than the previous sections and so felt slightly dull in comparison.
To get back to my “episodic” comment, in some ways, this and other recent books in the series strike me as something that resembles old-style serialized writing. The scenes are almost like little (or not so little, depending) set pieces. Some are action-oriented; some advance the story; others seem to be included just as color or because the author researched the subject (if that sounds critical or dismissive, it’s not meant to be; a bit late in the book where Claire performs surgery on a child slave who has been raped and given birth, causing damage to her bladder and other organs, was not connected to the larger story but still very interesting and well done). By their very nature, and because the book is so long, some parts are going to be more interesting than others. But overall I thought Written in My Own Heart’s Blood was an excellent entry in the series, and left me eager for me. My grade is an A-.
Best regards,
Jennie
AmazonBNKoboAREBook DepositoryGoogle
I enjoyed it too. I only discovered the series 3 or 4 years ago, so I didn’t have as many problems remembering things, but there are a lot of characters. I feel like these books are like a big warm blanket you can surround yourself with and immerse yourself in. I did an audiobook retread of the series last year (I listen while I walk for exercise), and I did them all in a row. It was really good, and it helped me forget I was exercising. This book is not the best in the series (books 2, 3, 4 & 6 are that for me) but I really enjoyed The Jamie, Roger, and Ian plots. I must admit I am eagerly awaiting the next one, and hope it does not take 4 or 5 years for the next one to come out.
I stopped reading the series at ABOSAA. I just couldn’t take anymore. I almost stopped in Fiery Cross thanks to the entire chapter describing the bonfire scene. But I persevered. I wanted more Jamie and Claire and less filler, but it kept getting less and less Jamie and Claire centered so, when I learned at the end of ABOSAA what was in the box, I was satisfied and that’s enough for me. I’m almost enjoying the series more only because it’s almost totally centered (so far) on Jamie and Claire and not all the extraneous stuff. So far…
With this series, I had always read each book (some multiple times) then listened to the audiobook. I made the choice for WiMOHB to just get the audiobook when it was released because I so enjoy Davina Porter and I knew I would not have the time or patience in my crazy packing up and moving to sit down and read.
I will admit I seem to be one of the few fans of the series who wasn’t totally put off by the cliff hangers at the end of AEitB. It made me even me interested in jumping into the mammoth WiMOHB. I have given up recommending or even discussing this series with people because most folks either get it or don’t. I consider the books my own little love story and I totally admire all the mind boggling detail that the author shares as well as the meandering threads of the multiple complex layers of stories. I like your comment about “old-style serialized writing”. That is exactly how I see the books as the series goes on.
Thank you for a well written, balanced review. I like your analysis and viewpoint on much of what struck me throughout this book as well as the entire series.
@theo: I’m the opposite – I was very invested in Jamie and Claire through the first four books or so, but have gradually lost interest, especially in Claire. I feel like Gabaldon just doesn’t have anything for Claire to do, other than perform increasingly improbable medical procedures. I’d rather read about Lord John/Hal or Jem or Ian. Even Bree.
I agree with Jennie that all the time traveling (and I’d add the many coincidences) are getting gimmicky and excessive. I wish I could have enjoyed this one as much as she did, but I’m afraid this series just isn’t for me anymore.
@Rose: I agree that they have nothing to do anymore. Jamie gets into one fix after another and it almost seems like Claire offers her vagina to extract him more often than I care for, but I think they have nothing to do because of so many other rabbit trails. They’ve become almost peripheral characters in what started out to be a Claire/Jamie centric storyline. By the end of ABOSAA, I realized I just wanted to read about them and not everyone else unless it was in their own books like the Lord John series (which also is getting more rabbit trails as time goes on.) I don’t care much anymore for all the other stuff because out of 1200 pages, it seems like 100 or so get you Jamie and Claire and the rest…well, I just gave up. I read Outlander at least twice a year and listen to it on audio when I’m exercising but I just got too frustrated to go on.
@theo: I don’t think the issue is that Claire and Jamie have nothing to do because of other storylines; I think they have nothing to do because their story is, for all intents and purposes, complete. How many more times must Jamie go into battle? How many more people should Claire save with 20th century medicine? How many more historical figures will they meet? There is nothing for them to do at this point that they – and the readers – haven’t been through before.
In hindsight, though I did like Drums of Autumn and A Breath and Snow and Ashes, I wish I’d have stopped at the end of Voyager. That’s essentially a complete trilogy and I love the open-ended optimism of Claire and Jamie arriving in the new world to start a new life. I’ve come to realize that I just don’t care for the minutiae of this life, or the endless coincidental meetings and connections between the characters which seem to be driving the series at this point. I don’t need the LJ books to fill in the missing years in Voyager. I don’t care if Fergus is related to the Comte St. Germain or not. I think Roger and Buck saving Jerry McKenzie with an assist from Black Jack Randall was ridiculous. Or Ian running into his half-dead secret cousin near the Dismal Swamp in the previous book.
Of course the entire setup from the very first book requires some suspension of disbelief, and I was willing to do so because I loved the story and the characters. But now it’s gone too far, and neither the story nor the characters are as compelling as they used to be.
At this point, the only story I’d care to read is The Adventures of Jenny Fraser Murray in America. I’ll accept guess appearances from Jem and from William and his uncles. Maybe Ian and Rachel, too.
I read that whole review and then went A MINUS?? That did not read like an A- review. It sounds to me as though the reader is blaming herself (her inability to remember previous books, her confusion about characters, her annoyance at deus ex machina and characters behaving inconsistently) for the book’s flaws, and marking on a pretty steep curve! FORGIVE YOURSELF, JENNIE — BLAME THE BOOK. I realize that Gabaldon has rabid, rabid fans who think every word is a precious pearl. But I tend to think that writing tight narratives takes more discipline than a giant sprawl…and I think Jennie would remember more if the earlier books (except, as she says the first, and I’d add the second) had been more memorable. I recall every book of the Chronicles of Narnia, even 30 years after reading them for the first time, because each one is so damn distinct and vivid. And I too have read all the books in the series (except this one, which I’m waiting for at the library) and to me, too, they have blurred in a gelatinous porridge-y mush. From book three on, I was hate-reading, and yet the cracktasticism (and to be honest, completism — I HAVE INVESTED SO DAMN MUCH I GOTTA FINISH IF IT KILLS ME DAMMIT) continues. And the TV show — sooo muuuuch prettttttyyy pretttyyy people prettttty land — has insured my compliance. I AM DOOMED.
@Rose: YOU POST FOR ME!
Jeepers- that’s a lot of capital letters
Jennie, thanks so much for this apt review which encapsulates my own feelings about the Outlander series. I too love the first book (which I read 20 years ago exactly) and have re-read it multiple times. I was very invested in the series right until Drums of Autumn, but beyond that, there was too much minutiae and padding. I have all the books of the series but have still not read Echo in the Bone as I heard about the cliffhanger, and now I have Written in My Own Heart’s Blood as well. However, I need to find a protracted period of time to read them together in order to try to keep all the characters and the various plot-lines in my head. Perhaps I should wait until the entire series is complete! Claire’s getting married to Lord John was always on the cards as I remember Diana Gabaldon posting work-in-progress over 10 years ago on her website with a snippet / scene which is probably now in WiMOHB. For a while I thought that plot-line had been dropped, but now obviously not.
Still love Jamie and Claire, have a huge Ian crush, but oh lord is it too late for DG to work with an editor who will restrain her a bit? There is so much in almost every book that contributes nothing to the actual story, or even to further character development. In fact, the medical sequence with the slave girl that Jennie refers to is a perfect example. I have come to realize that when Claire gets out her medical kit, it’s time for me to skim. And yes, some of the storylines need to be tied up or in some way combined. I’m in it for 9, however long it takes for her to write it, but certain time travelers need to pick a century and stick with it.
(Totally different subject, but I’m curious as to how well the series will continue to do when Jamie and Claire jump forward 20 years in age.)
I’m an Outlander tragic so I lapped up this instalment. I thought the last section of the book felt tacked on – the revolutionary war section covered 3 months with painstaking detail but the last bit was just little episodes, which jumped forward in time a lot.
I detested the female slave scene because I thought Claire’s question to the lady slave owner was way inappropriate. It was a question for the patient and not asking her was appalling to me. That said, it was a tiny part of the whole.
I thought there were some continuity issues in Roger and Brie’s storyline but I loved the ending and I still adore Jamie and Claire (especially Jamie). I had to break out the tissues a couple of times for those lost during the book and I enjoyed all of the various POV characters. I thought this was much less soap operatic than previous books and there was a lot less of the torture porn, which I was glad of (& I say this as a fan of the series). Extra bonus: No-one was raped! Yay.
@Lammie: I feel like these books are like a big warm blanket you can surround yourself with and immerse yourself in.
Yes, exactly – that’s why it gets such a high grade from me in spite of my nitpicks. There’s a level of comfort and enjoyment that’s just inherent in the story for me, regardless of what is happening. I just like spending time with these people.
@theo: The series has definitely morphed over the years. Like a lot of big series, the stories get more and more sprawling. I don’t think it’s a bad thing, it’s just…different. But I understand that the Jamie/Claire relationship is so intense and compelling in the early books that the change in focus can be disappointing.
Thanks for your review, Jennie. It made me laugh, and gave me a glimmer of hope.
I don’t remember when I first stumbled on this series (15 years ago?) or how I found it, but it was as if I’d been struck by lightning. I’ve rarely had the kind of reaction to a book like the one I had to Outlander. Yes, I know it wasn’t perfect, but I can overlook the problems because of the things that were done so well. Mostly, of course, I loved the relationship between Claire and Jamie. The were both fully developed characters with complex pasts who loved each other. . . and had great sex. And I loved the epic quality. It was a BIG book in every sense of the word. It reminded me of the sagas I read in my teens, but it was also fresh and groundbreaking (to me, at least).
My joy and interest started to wane after the first three books. There would be scenes and storylines that I enjoyed, but I felt like I had to endure painful forced marches to get to them. The first books were so vivid and alive to me, but I can barely remember those that followed. The loooong wait between books certainly didn’t help. I actually started to have some renewed hope with ABOSAA. While I still only recall a very small percentage of the events, I felt like the pace had picked up and Gabaldon wasn’t meandering about quite as much.
I’ve been reluctant to start WIMOHB, partly because of the size of the book, partly because I wonder how lost I’ll be without a refresher reread of at least ABOSAA, and partly because I fear being disappointed yet again.
@marjorie: I have a tendency to focus more on the negatives than the positives when I review, so that’s part of the difference you noted between the review and the grade. The other part is something I think I almost subliminally assumed that readers would get: I wouldn’t read an 800-page book if I wasn’t pretty damn invested and into the characters and the story. As mentioned in the comments, for me there’s a level of comfort in slipping back into this world that’s become so familiar to me at this point. I honestly can’t imagine anything that would prompt me to give any of the entries in this series lower than a B grade, at the lowest. There’s so much that I like and connect to and I’m sorry I didn’t focus on that more but I think on some level I expected it to be a given for fans of the series.
As someone who quit the first book about 800 pages in, I find this review and comments fascinating. It confirms for me that I made the right decision in not going back to finish Outlander and declining to read the following books. I thought there was extraneous detail and a slow pace to the romance even in Outlander, and the rest of it struck me as a rescue fantasy rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat.
I discovered the Outlander series about 4 years ago and read it back to back, slogging through each book, addicted, loving even the technically boring parts. I thought it was the smartest, most romantic story evah! God, I loved that series. Until I got to the end of AEitB and hit the mother of all cliffhangers. I’m still bitter. BITTER. I had to wait, what, four years for the sequel? That’s crazy sauce. Kaetrin has tried to bring me back to the fold, I’ve heard others talk too…but I’ve remained obstinate (not even watching the show!)…until today. Thank you for bringing up the cliffy issue and how you found resolution. And hearing you talk of the characters, I’m reminded how much I loved Ian and Rachel, etc. And I’m always up for Claire using her mad 20th century doctor skills. Oh gosh, sounds like I’ll be reading this, (and ordering Starz). :)
@msaggie: I used to read the snippets on Gabaldon’s website but not regularly so I guess I missed that. The marriage didn’t bother me so much as the sex, which just felt very, very contrived. But whatever, I’m over it now. :-)
@Laura: I’m wondering that too (about the tv show). I’m guessing it will take a few seasons, since there’s SO much still in Outlander and DiA to cover. Maybe by the time Voyager content comes around in the series, the actors will have aged a lot! :-) (Alternatively, I guess, they could cut down on the length of the separation, though that would be difficult with Brianna in the mix.)
I really didn’t mind the surgery bits this time. Gabaldon obviously finds researching and writing them interesting; sometimes they interest me more than others. These ones were okay (the stuff with Lord John’s eye was kind of squicky, and I’m not even one of those people who are freaked out by eyeball stuff that much!); better than some of the sequences back on the Ridge where we learned how candles were made or whatever.
(Which reminds me; as much as Jamie and Claire want to be back on the Ridge, some of the boringest moments in the series have taken place there. I’m guessing they won’t be there for long – there’s still a war to fight – but who knows?)
@Kaetrin: I was also squeamish about the question to the slave owner, but I tried to put it in perspective and see it as Claire being just very, very practical about the situation. Still, it was unpleasant, and a little shocking to me.
@Janine: LOL – that’s probably one of the reasons I like it so much. I am a complete sucker for the rescue trope, especially ones where both h/h rescue each other. (Spoiler alert: Claire is involved in Jamie’s rescue at the end of Outlander even if she didn’t participate directly from a physical perspective and then she’s involved in his emotional rescue (even if it is a bit woo-woo.) And later in the series, Claire and Jamie often rescue each other.)
@Michele Mills: OMG Michele – you are going to love the TV show!
@Jennie: I tried that but completely failed in finding any perspective. Claire had opportunity to speak to Sophronia alone or just to her directly before the surgery. She had most recently come from the US in the late 1960s a time of great social upheaval especially around the civil rights movement and women’s rights. Her BFF in the US is a black man. So I couldn’t give her a pass on it. I couldn’t accept that she wouldn’t know better. Frankly, I thought it was a kind of unnecessary scene in the book. It wasn’t really connected to anything else – it was nothing more than an excuse to show off Claire’s medical skills. And I’d have been okay with the question if she’d only asked Sophronia instead of Mrs. Whatshername.
It was a very small part of the book however. I gave the whole thing a B+. I devoted an entire post on my blog to my outrage about Sophronia though! LOL.
@Jennie: So since I stopped reading at ABOSAA and I have no intention of continuing, someone want to let me in on what the question was? It obviously hit a nerve here and I’m curious…
@theo: This will answer your question http://www.kaetrinsmusings.com/2014/08/the-thing-which-got-up-my-nose-in-a-big-way-about-the-latest-outlander-book.html
@Kaetrin: I actually quit (by misplacing my copy of Outlander) right at the point when Claire was planning to rescue Jamie from Jack Randall. I watched the TV show (which I like somewhat better) with my husband and he commented on all the poorly thought out decisions Claire made. I explained to him that it was so Jamie could charge to her rescue. I understand that Claire rescues Jamie too, but the fact that he had to rescue her so often in the part I read was a big turnoff, because it undercut Claire’s supposed strength.
@Janine: When I first listened to it, I listened with a fairly uncritical ear’ I just got caught up in the drama. Looking back now I can see faults more easily but it’s too late – I already love it, problems and all.
@Kaetrin: I bailed on this series quite a few books ago, although the separation was gradual (skim-read Book 4, bought Book 5 but never read it, passed completely on Book 6 and onward).
Here’s my take on the question: I totally sympathize with how you felt, but I have to say I think that the way the scene played out was appropriate to the historical situation. Slaves were considered property and therefore they would not have had the autonomy to make those decisions. It would have been seen as the owner’s prerogative, since it affected what the “property” could do and be (I apologize for using these terms, but I believe that they are the legally correct ones).
It’s similar to the way in which it was not possible, in the legal sense, for wives to be raped by their husbands in the US before the 1970s, because the legal autonomy necessary to assert such a violation did not exist.
@Kaetrin: I read your post at your blog and I have to agree with @Sunita on this one. Property was property, right or wrong, and asking the slave would have been moot. Also, having lived through the 60’s and 70’s, I can say; although women were pushing the envelope for empowerment, doctors and others in authority were not and whether Claire was thinking like a doctor or woman, she is still in a century not her own and would follow, in this instance especially I would think, the path that would keep her politically correct for the times. How many times over the books has not only Jamie but Lord John told her not to draw unwarranted attention to herself? Not that she always listens, but in this case…
I think this is one that goes back to the adage, read the story with the perspective of the era, not your contemporary POV. But that’s just me…
And thank you for the blog post! :)
@Sunita: If Claire had been a person of the 1700s I could totally buy that excuse (but if she was, she wouldn’t have been doing that surgery at all of course). But she is a woman of the *20th Century* (and, most recently from the late 1960s). She is also a very creative and clever woman. She could have found a way to ask the question of Sophronia privately. Or she could have not asked the question at all. Either would have worked for me. I expected better of Claire. I don’t think Claire can play the “I’m a modern woman” card and “that’s the way it was back then” card at the same time without there being any tension depicted. But there wasn’t. She didn’t have a second thought about asking. She didn’t think “I should have asked Sophronia but…” She didn’t think “Dammit, I forgot when Sophronia was awake.” Not cool. (I know you don’t think it’s cool – I’m talking only about the book here.)
I forgot to say@Sunita: Forgot to add that in the book, it was Rachel who is a woman of the 1700s who pointed out that the decision was Sophronia’s and gently led the slave owner/slave owner’s wife to the decision of no. (Which to the slave owner/slave owner’s wife’s credit, she had hesitated over anyway).
@theo: I don’t buy that because she could have asked Sophronia and if Sophronia had said yes, she could have just done it without anyone else knowing about it. The slave owner/slave owner’s wife was in the room but she wasn’t in a position to tell (even if she had been staring at the field of surgery itself) exactly what Claire was doing. She could even have, quite honestly, told the slave owner/slave owner’s wife (after the fact) that as a result of the surgery Sophronia woud be unable to bear further children so that Sophronia would never be questioned about it.
We criticise books all the time for the modern sensibility/historical context all the time. I think an author can be creative and get around a lot of these things. I think DG could have done so here.
But I appreciate that not everyone share’s my view. Which is fine. :)
@Kaetrin: As a woman of the 1960s, Claire would not have lived a life in which she, as a woman, was an autonomous human being. In fact, having moved to the US, she would presumably have been familiar with the civil rights struggle to grant women and blacks that status, which they did not have. So I would say that her own experience would not lead her to expect what you’re asking her to know. Of course, given her frequent omnipotence and the rest, I can see why you would expect her to take that road. I’m just saying it’s not one that someone in the 1960s would take as a matter of course, more that it would be a strong political statement to do so.
If Rachel said that was Sophronia’s decision and encourage the slave-owner’s wife to agree, that’s also against the prevailing history, i.e., it would pit the wife against her husband’s interests, and therefore her own, since she was not legally entitled to a separate interest unless Sophronia was specifically *her* slave (and I’m not sure it would be her sole interest even then). There are lots of intersecting (and tragic) interests embodied in this example, if I’m understanding it correctly.
@Sunita: Claire’s life had been pretty autonomous both in the 40s and 60s IMO. She was perhaps one of the privileged few but that’s how she always came across to me.
She was raised very unconventionally by her Uncle Lamb. She then was married to Frank but was largely alone for much of that time because of the war. Then (spoiler alert) when she went back to the 1960s she trained to become a doctor and rose very high in her field. Joe Abernathy, her colleague and best friend, is/was a black man. She both witnessed and fought against prejudice because of her gender in her chosen field. In MOBY she gets pissed off with Army surgeons who think because she’s a woman she can’t be a doctor – and she notes that it’s nothing new. I think she actually did know what was right/wrong about this precisely because she was an eye witness to the civil rights movement in the 60s and the women’s rights movements at the same time. She regularly brings “modern” thinking into the 1700s – when Jamie hits her with a belt she doesn’t accept because it’s his “right as her husband” (in Outlander) for example.
Rachel is a Quaker and so I thought her actions were very consistent with her religious beliefs (or, at least, how I understand them).
Rachel was the only person in that scene who considered Sophronia’s wishes at all.
As for Mrs. Bradshaw, she had already demonstrated some level of autonomy from her husband simply by taking Sophronia to the doctor anyway. Her husband didn’t know anything about it. Claire didn’t have any problem with that.
As you can see, I’ve given this a lot of thought! The more I thought about it, the more it bugged me.
@Kaetrin: I would be bugged too! (Will be bugged too. Who’m I kidding. I’m powerless in the face of my addiction and will be reading this and cursing it as I have the last 4-5 installments.) We can argue about whether Claire would realistically consider Sophronia’s wishes, but uh this is a series about TIME TRAVEL so I think Gabaldon had some wiggle room here! And as you point out, Claire has always been portrayed as a fierce, brave, assertive woman who has always been unusual for her time (whatever time that’s happened to be). It sounds to me that this was an insensitive slip on Gabaldon’s part.
@Kaetrin: A privileged life doesn’t prevent you from absorbing the norms of your era. Claire was born in the
1920s1910s. And being Quaker in the 18thC didn’t mean believing in racial equality, to put it mildly.But I think we’re best off agreeing to disagree on this.
@Sunita: Fair enough. I wasn’t trying to convince anyone. Just stating why I hold the view I do.
@marjorie: LOL! Yes – time travel.
@Sunita: “And being Quaker in the 18thC didn’t mean believing in racial equality, to put it mildly.”
But according to Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_in_the_Abolition_Movement
I think Gabaldon should have started a new book series after the third or fourth book. It’s possible that she may have stretched this series a bit too far.
@Kaetrin: I agree. I read Outlander, and thought it was kind of fun. when Claire showed up as a widowed doctor, .my first thought was DG is going to have Claire travel back 20-ish years later and find Jamie? The great love affair is proceeding with aging characters in a precarious situations I often wonder if DG and George Martin grouse about demanding fans over coffee.The title of the last book had me thinking this would be it. Jamie would die and be buried in his time, and Claire would come forward to be a widowed doctor in her own time. I am done.
@theo: I have read the books and yes I am out now as I say the same …I just wanted the Jamie and Claire story,but once the kids Rodger and Brianna came into the story …and more wars it became over the top.Its not Game of Thrones…at lest we have a ending
I don’t care anyone else from the book I just want Jamie be happy and end up getting older with Claire in they land :)
i love all the books and will continue to read them imon bookkn8bwimohb and love it and and im looking forward to tell the bees were gone book 9 i hope its out soon wth are you people being so negative about i bet youy cant write such great novals now can you its fiction tho it is based on true facts as well
sorry about the typos didnt have spell check on my bad
I was bedridden for a wk & took MOBY under the covers with me for company. I had visited my sister in Asheville NC and was imagining life on the Ridge while travelling the Blue Mountain Parkway etc. so was in the mood for more Gabaldon. When I first read the book I needed to know what had happened after the cliff hanger the book before and sped through most of the Revolutionary War. This time I reversed that and didn’t read the alternate 20th century chapters at all. It worked well and made the book a more reasonable size. One nagging question, what year is it when the families are reunited at the end of the book?
@judith gray: I’m not sure – I don’t think it says in the book. I expect we’ll find out when the next one comes out!
WIMOHB is not the end of this series? When is the release of the next one?
I was really thrown only by the ending of this one because of the time discrepancy in Roger/Bree family returning to the ridge during the Revolutionary War when they had arrived in Scotland in the 1730’s.
I enjoy the minutiae of the daily life. The medical procedures and especially how Claire improvise with her 20th century knowledge and the available tools.
@Debbie: She’s still writing it so your guess is as good as mine as to when the next one comes out!
There’s a big desk in the study at lallybroch which has a secret drawer holding Three Victorian stamps. Bree puts in the drawer a note to Roger telling him that Jem is still with her, before she leaves for America. In America Abernathy informs her that the desk had to be taken apart, the drawer was discovered, and inside were the three stamps and a 200 year old letter from Roger.
I can only assume that the writer has lost track of the plot element regarding the drawer. Fans also can’t keep track. But still continue reading.