MovieChat Forums > Outlander (2014) Discussion > DIA reread chapters 27 - 29

DIA reread chapters 27 - 29

posted 8 years ago by broughps
6 replies | jump to latest

Chapter 27

Do you like the idea of Claire staying in Paris to recover or going to Fontainebleau better?

I like Magnus. Too bad the servants dithered so long about the note. Claire would have found out much sooner about Jamie.

Grrr Sorry Claire but losing Faith was not Jamie's fault. If anyone was to blame (and really we know that nothing would have saved Faith) it would have been Claire chasing after Jamie when she was on bed rest. She endangered her own self.

Still would like to know how the gendarmes found out about the duel. Sandringham you think?

Yes Louise, Claire did need to know about Jamie being in the Bastille. With Louise's attitude about her own husband I wonder if she would have ever gotten around to telling Claire about Jamie if Magnus hadn't shown up.

See Claire tossing the maid into the armoire would have made for some good tv.

Reading about Claire's tumultuous thoughts and feelings about Jamie, it's easy to see how couples can implode when a child dies.

I had forgotten that Herr Gerstmann was in on getting Claire an audience with Louie.

No Jamie wouldn't like being a cuckold. Could you cheat on your spouse to save them?

Really people have got to get over the idea that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. It doesn't say that anywhere in the bible.

If nothing else I'd be afraid of catching STD from Louie is he's slept with that many women.

Yes Sandringham would want Jamie out of the way.

Did Louie arrange for the events of the Star Chamber to coincide with Claire's visit do you think?

In his "travels" how many times do you think Master Raymond has been on trial for "witchcraft"? How many of the "witnesses" were bribed?

Did the real Louie prosecute those he thought were practicing sorcery?

Ah so it was changed from the Comte producing the snake to Louie in the show. It would have been better to keep it as written, make it look more like a duel between the two instead of Master Raymond thwarting the king.

Yeah I can believe all was pandemonium.

[–] broughps 8 years ago

Chapter 28.

Fergus is always up to something - usually antagonizing someone bigger.

Claire finally learns why Jamie dueled with BJR. She had to have known that it wasn't some trivial. Jamie only breaks his word if he can't help it under normal circumstances.

So was BJR at Madame Elise's for a woman or not? He took Fergus only when he saw him, but did he think there would be men or boys there for him or was he going there to "rent" a woman?

I can see why they left out Fergus being a sometimes child prostituted out of the show. That would have bent the PCers minds out of shape.

No Fergus you were not to blame.

I do believe Louise set Claire up to meet Jamie.

(how's that for timing with reading this chapter and the extended scene of this reunion coming out now)

I understand Claire being angry at losing Faith, and I can understand her blaming Jamie at first, but she knows the truth now and keep blaming him just makes me want to slap her.

I have to say the show did a pretty good job of portraying Claire in the hospital. Seems pretty darn close to the book.

We've all been saying how much we should have gotten those cut few minutes, but there isn't any of that in the book. It's very short.

Both Jamie and Claire will be haunted by the events of Faith's death and thinking about what the other went through.

No Claire the Comte isn't gone. I'll leave that there for those that haven't read any of the short stories.

That plan was much better than highway robbery.

Whatever happens Claire and Jamie are two halves of a whole and will always come back to each other.

[–] redheid 8 years ago

So was BJR at Madame Elise's for a woman or not?

I think he was, but when he saw Fergus he saw an opportunity to terrorize and inflict pain on a helpless child. So he took it. Madame Elise did not cater to the more varied tastes of men; Fergus said there were other places for that. So I think BJR originally wanted a woman he could use and rough up, but Fergus looked like a better option. BJR had no way to know that a boy would be at Madame Elise's establishment so I think choosing Fergus was just a case of wrong place, wrong time, not an intentional choice of seeking out a child there.

I also wanted to slap Claire. Once she learned what BJR was doing to Fergus, and that Jamie saw that? Anger over. Or should have been. Claire knows how that would have impacted Jamie. She alone knows more than anyone else what was done to him-what could have been done to her. Had I been Claire I would have spent the rest of my life being grateful to Jamie for sparing me from the clutches of Marley and BJR. Claire had medical knowledge, too, of what caused the loss of her pregnancy. Between that and the truth of why Jamie dueled with BJR, she should have forgiven Jamie. But I think she was so depressed, and wallowing in it all alone, that she couldn't get out of it without Jamie. And didn't really want to, as she said she didn't want to feel again. Still makes me furious with her. It WAS Jamie's child, too.

We've all been saying how much we should have gotten those cut few minutes, but there isn't any of that in the book. It's very short.

I still liked the longer version of that scene. I wish they had shown more of Jamie's pain. Two people created that baby and two people were broken by her death.
There was one line in the show that was changed from the book that I wondered about. When Claire asks Jamie if he can give her back her child, he says, "No, I canna do that. But...with the grace of God...I might give ye another?"
The show had Jamie say, "We lost our child. But by the grace of God, we may be given another."
Was the change from I to we in having another child made to show the unity of Jamie and Claire? That they are still bonded to each other? An acknowledge that it was their child who was lost, not just Claire who lost her baby?

[–] broughps 8 years ago

Chapter 29

No matter the reason for Scotland only, I'm sure going home held great appeal to both Jamie and Claire. I would think just getting away from BPC would be a great idea.

Well obviously if it's hot and no one's around you strop down to nothing.

I'm surprised that Claire is surprised that Jamie can read her. He pays attention woman.

This is such a nice section with Jamie and Claire talking things out. I do find it hard though to believe that Claire would submit to being beaten/whipped with nettles. She thinks awful highly of his pride.

I've never liked DG using sex a punishment.

That was one heck of a wound Jamie gave BJR.

Are there caves near Fontainebleau that cave paintings in them?

So what do you think the story is for the skeleton couple Jamie finds in the cave? And no DG has said the couple isn't a future/past Jamie and Claire.

This was a good conclusion to the France section of the book.

[–] redheid 8 years ago

I would think just getting away from BPC would be a great idea.

Mark me, that would be an excellent reason to leave France.

This is such a nice section with Jamie and Claire talking things out. I do find it hard though to believe that Claire would submit to being beaten/whipped with nettles. She thinks awful highly of his pride.

This part of the book is good, with them finally talking about things, but...Jamie says that Claire lied to him about the King. She never mentioned it. She told Jamie about the Star Chamber events, but not the rest. She didn't technically lie to him. Jamie didn't ask her about the King until they were sunbathing. Yet she said, "If you'd asked-and you did, Jamie, you did!..." But Jamie didn't ask, not until the next day. I'm sure Claire knew Jamie wondered about Louis, but he never specifically asked her. I've read that part more times than I can count to see if I missed it. Claire knew that Jamie knew, but he didn't ask her outright. Jamie just told her what he imagined happening. (Which is why I hope she told him all of it, at some point.) Then Jamie told Claire he didn't want to hear...and she breaks in to tell him about the Star Chamber. She didn't lie and say nothing happened. He didn't ask her if she slept with the King.
As always, Jamie breaks my heart with his thoughts for Claire. When he tells her that she had taken him to her breast and cherished him after Wentworth, that she loved him in spite of what happened, he wants to do the same for her. That was why he came after Claire, walking all the way to Fontainebleau.
And then the nettles part. I did not get the leap Jamie made from Claire saying, "Jamie, please." to his reply of "Do you want me to beat you, than?" Huh? WHERE did she say that? Where did that come from? He promised not to beat her again so why would he even mention it? Especially as it sounds as though she'd asked him to do it. I thought it was odd here. Of course then we have the rough punishment sex...

I've never liked DG using sex a punishment.

Ditto. Sometimes the way Jamie and Claire use sex is at odds with their love for each other, their relationship, and their marriage, at least to me.

I think the couple in the cave is a symbol of the love of Jamie and Claire. They will never part, even in death. Just as the cave couple remained together after death.

[–] redheid 8 years ago

Do you like the idea of Claire staying in Paris to recover or going to Fontainebleau better?

I'm torn on this one. I like the show version of Claire returning to Jared's house and the kindness of the servants. (I liked Magnus, too, and Suzette.) But I liked the isolation of Fontainebleau, too. Jamie having to walk all the way out there, nearly not going because he thought he knew what Claire had done with the King. I did miss the garden scene where Jamie and Claire finally see each other. But I think staying in Paris saved time and money, so I'm okay with it.

Grrr Sorry Claire but losing Faith was not Jamie's fault.

No, it wasn't, and Claire should have figured that out much sooner. She knew what caused the loss of her baby, and it was a medical condition, not Jamie dueling. Claire's blaming Jamie for the death of Faith really irritated me. I kept thinking...This is the man who gave himself to BJR to save your life. He allowed himself to be raped and tortured for hours, so that YOU weren't! Jamie saved you from being raped by Marley, sliced up by Jack Randall, and you hate him now?...I know Claire was grieving, but she knew why Jamie broke his word and considering his history with BJR I think it was understandable. Of all people, Claire should "get it."
I couldn't figure out why the gendarmes wouldn't patrol the woods where the duel was fought-they knew it was used for that purpose so why not stroll through it on an irregular basis? Could have been Sandringham who reported them, or maybe a friend of Le Comte who was at the brothel? Or the friend could have told Le Comte and he told the gendarmes. Both men would want to get rid of Jamie.
I guess I don't think of Claire and the King as "cheating" because of how little was done and how much she did not want to do it. I have always hoped Claire told Jamie exactly what happened, because it was so much less than what his imagination would dream up given his own sexual experiences with Claire.
I can't really imagine a reason or situation to actually cheat on my husband to save him. Blackmail, maybe?
I think Louis set up the Star Chamber event to see how things would play out among the participants. It was not a coincidence that Claire happened to be there.
Now about those STDs...How prevalent were they among prostitutes, the nobility, the regular people? Various characters visit prostitutes throughout the books, yet the only real threats among the main characters were from Geillis to Young Ian, and then when Claire was raped-and using penicillin then was just a precaution. Yet Young Ian, Fergus, LJG, William, and others visited prostitutes regularly. Only Manfred, Lizzie's suitor, was infected among the recurring characters that I recall right now. Claire mentions deformed babies from syphilis, but it never seemed to cause any real issues with the main characters. Would that be realistic? How widespread would STDs have been? I would think it would have been a huge issue among the nobility and royal family in France. I'd have been a nervous wreck if I'd been Claire.

[–] broughps 8 years ago

I think STDs would have been fairly prevalent amongst prostitutes, no way of preventing it. Maybe why so many men kept mistresses instead?

Anyone want to look up stats about 18th century prostitutes and STDs?