My take on Outlander Episode 107: The Wedding

Much has been said all over the internet about this wonderful hour of television last Saturday, so I won’t repeat it.  These are just a few observations of mine that I haven’t seen mentioned elsewhere.

    1. Right before their wedding, Frank refers to Claire as Mrs. Frank Randall.  On their wedding night, Jamie refers to her as Claire Fraser.  The former, where the man’s name is used, may be proper but it has always irked me.  It takes away the woman’s own identity as if she only matters now in relation to her husband.

      I haven’t read the books, but the impression I’ve gotten from what little we’ve seen of Frank is that he loves Claire in relation to himself.  She’s his arm candy.  She puts up with his self-centered ancestry quest on their second honeymoon.  She’s willing to have sex with him.  But I feel like he would be totally unaware or uninterested in the parts of her that don’t involve him.

      Jamie, by calling her Claire Fraser, has perfectly nailed the “two become one” concept.  She is still herself, Claire, but she is also now a part of him with his last name.  I feel like he respects her in a way that Frank doesn’t or can’t.  That he appreciates her as a person, not just as his wife.  And, thus, he will love her in a far deeper way that Frank ever could.

      I would love to know if Diana Gabaldon did this on purpose or if I’m just reading too much into it.


    1. Diana Gabaldon wrote and Sam Heughan portrayed the perfect combination of unsure yet confident as Jamie Fraser in the post-wedding bedroom scenes.  In general, Jamie is a very confident man.  He’s strong, tall, good-looking, smart, witty, and bunch of other things rolled into one and he knows it.  Not in a cocky way, but in a way that instills confidence.  However, as we know, Jamie was a virgin going into this night, so he is somewhat unsure of himself when it comes to certain things.  He has a complete lack of experience and, on top of that, he knows that she does have experience.  He’s eager but a little nervous about making a wrong move and her skittish behavior isn’t helping.  But rather than reducing him to a pathetic puddle of nervous groom, Diana and Sam maintain his charm and sense of humor and use both whenever they are not directly engaging in or talking about engaging in sex.  This perfect balance of self-assurance and self-doubt makes Jamie absolutely, positively lovable.


    1. Some bloggers and others have mentioned the lack of body hair on 18th century Claire and Jamie.I admit that I noticed Caitriona Balfe‘s smooth pits in one of the bedroom scenes, but I quickly realized that I was glad her pits were shaved and that I would’ve been highly distracted if they were hairy.  Although the show is doing a great job of staying true to the times, I think unshaven armpits on a woman would be an unnecessary step and probably would’ve caused a bigger hubbub than her hair-free underarms.

      As for Sam Heughan… be still my heart.  Oops.  I digress.  Again, I haven’t read the books so I have no idea how much body hair Jamie has been described as having.  I do, however, know that wedding night Jamie is supposed to be 22 or 23 years old and that Sam Heughan is supposed to also be playing Jamie in his 40s or 50s later on.  It occurs to me that perhaps Jamie’s sparse body hair is one of the ways the show is using to make Sam appears younger at this point.  I guess I’ll find out down the road when I see an older, shirtless Jamie.  But it’s something to keep in mind for those who are bugged out that Sam doesn’t perfectly meet their imagined image of James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie Fraser.


  1. And my final thought (for now):  Did anyone else notice that Claire’s boobs and bodice made a perfect heart shape as she was walking into the church?  😉


Originally published on my other blog:

Battle For The Net

If you woke up tomorrow, and your internet looked like this, what would you do? Imagine all your favorite websites taking forever to load, while you get annoying notifications from your ISP suggesting you switch to one of their approved “Fast Lane” sites.Think about what we would lose: all the weird, alternative, interesting, and enlightening stuff that makes the Internet so much cooler than mainstream Cable TV. What if the only news sites you could reliably connect to were the ones that had deals with companies like Comcast and Verizon?  On September 10th, just a few days before the FCC’s comment deadline, public interest organizations are issuing an open, international call for websites and internet users to unite for an “Internet Slowdown” to show the world what the web would be like if Team Cable gets their way and trashes net neutrality. Net neutrality is hard to explain, so our hope is that this action will help SHOW the world what’s really at stake if we lose the open Internet.If you’ve got a website, blog or tumblr, get the code to join the #InternetSlowdown here:  Everyone else, here’s a quick list of things you can do to help spread the word about the slowdown: Get creative! Don’t let us tell you what to do. See you on the net September 10th!

via Battle For The Net.