MovieChat Forums > Outlander (2014) Discussion > How come Claire and Brianna are so woke ...

How come Claire and Brianna are so woke with 2000's attitude towards race?


How come Claire and Brianna are so woke with their attitude toward blacks?!? They are supposed to be from the 1950's, so their attitude should reflect that time not the 2000's Political Correctness wokeness. In the 1950's they probably would be dating White Supremist guys

reply

They’re from the 60’s actually, which was the time of the Civil Rights Movement. So I would guess they were black allies as there were white people at the time who supported the movement.

But I get what you mean and I think that happens a lot in period dramas, they show the main character as a person with ideals of the time when they were made rather that the time the story is set in.

reply

There is no apostrophe in an abbreviation of a decade. It waw the 60s. Read The Chicago Manual of Style, by Kate Turabian.

reply

Fascinating! I have never thought about this and always written 60's, 70's, etc. It's funny the things we do just because we saw someone else do it and never gave it a second thought. I have a master's degree (in theology, not English, so I in no way want to pretend to be a grammar expert), and we used Kate Turabian's book for all of our papers. I'm pretty sure there is a copy somewhere in my basement :-) Fun fact, one thing I learned while in grad school is that the last book of the Bible is "Revelation" not "Revelations." There's no "s" at the end. Most people just say "Revelations" because that's what they've always heard. When one of my classmate pointed it out, we were all shocked (and we were all studying theology)!!!

It's truly amazing how many things humans do just because it's what they've always seen or always heard and never gave it a second thought.

reply

Yeah. I've never been amazed like that in my entire life. It's truly incredible. I don't know how society could go on for so long. Some things are misspelled. What an uncanny phenomenon !

reply

depends on whether its formal or informal, in this case, the 60's was ok to use.

and also its you're not your....

reply

Interesting, I did not know that. I guess I also write the way I’ve seen other people do. Also english is not my first language, so I’m bound to make mistakes.

reply

no they're not , it's 1945

reply

Claire originally traveled from 1945 and came back in 1948, the year Bree was born. Twenty years later she returned to the 18th century. Bree and Roger didn't travel to the 18th century until 1971. So to say Claire and Bree are from the 1960s is fairly accurate.

reply

I think older Clarie went to look for Jamie by herself in the late 60s. Probably 68 or 69 at least that is how I remember it, but I might be wrong.
Don’t really remember how much time has passed between Claire going back and Bree going to look for her. Yeah, it was a turn of the decade, so early 70s were still similar to late 60s in stlyle and attitude.

reply

I don't know. Great Britain has a different history when it comes to race, compared to the US. But I'm not familiar with all the details.

reply

They abolished slavery quite a bit before the US did, but they have plenty of racial issues. Not just with those of African ancestry, but those from Pakistan and India, the West Indies, and Asians. There are idiots in all countries, of every race and creed.

reply

She had a quite unusual upbringing in travelling the world with her archeologist uncle and most likely socialized with people from various cultures and castes. Growing up without a direct female role model may have driven her to become as bold, inquisitive and determined as her Uncle Lambert.

When she fell through the time vortex the first time, she also experienced the ferocious and homicidal consequences of racism, classism, and misogyny in 18th century Scotland. By the time she lived through the US Civil Rights movement, she was probably more aware of the need for legal equality and justice for other people.

reply

I don’t buy the theory that traveling the world with her archaeologists uncle would have made her woke. He was a white man stealing (figuratively) the cultural and historical treasures of other countries. All the artifacts unearthed by western white men and now owned by western museums are a very controversial topic. Those Practices were the opposite of woke.

reply

This reminds me of Alasdair Beckett-King 😂

https://youtu.be/Y2RMSpTsMUU

reply

And forgetting her time in medical school, or her African-American colleague. She experienced pretty severe sexism and saw racism first hand.

reply

Claire in general is more like a woman from the 70's even from the start of the series which was WW2. Regardless, if she were to go back to the 17th century and mouth off the way she does she would be slapped down quick smart. One of the biggest flaws of this show in my opinion. The 17th century men are way too Woke/tolerant as well.

reply

Your first sentence — exactly! That used to drive me crazy. I can only imagine how the sisters (head nurses) would have dealt with her if she’d acted like that in a British Army field hospital. They would have broken it out of her, for sure.

reply

Because racists are pathetic?

reply

Claire was always a very open-minded woman, and well-traveled too, after her upbringing with her uncle. She also lived in a time after slavery was illegal in America, by about 80-some years. I wouldn't be surprised if she was more forward-thinking than a lot of people in the times she lived in, and she would have impressed that on her daughter as well. And keep in mind that Brianna had reached adulthood in the 1960s, when the Civil Rights Movement was taking place.

She and her mom sound like the types who would have supported such a movement. However, neither Claire, nor her daughter appears to have been hot-headed activists, despite what was going on in America in the 20 years they lived there. They mostly just passively watched what was going on. Brianna would have been more vocal about her support of Civil Rights, but I don't honestly see her marching in a protest. Claire would have quietly supported it, but she too wouldn't have tried marching or talking openly about it like some people did.

So on the one hand, they both understood that slavery was wrong, but they also knew there was nothing they could do about the legal slavery going on in the 18th century. Trying to stop it alone in that era would have been like using a bee-bee gun to stop a freight train. The best they could do was not own any slaves, and to show kindness and consideration to any black people they encountered.

I seem to recall that Claire and Jamie set up a homestead in the mountains of North Carolina, and neither ever owned slaves, black or white.

Please tell me those idiots who made the show didn't go all "2010s-in-the-past" BS they keep pulling with historical shows these days.

reply

And, happily, “Voltaire” left a year ago.

reply

Not all white people are racist. There were whites in the 1700s who were abolitionist. People, like Quakers, believed in complete equality of both race and gender for centuries, too.

Claire is a doctor when that's extremely rare for a woman. Someone like her would be progressive about many things. Her daughter and eventually she also live during the 1970s which had social movements for equality.

reply