Spoilers
The worst Outlander book so far, which is saying a lot since the last few have been less than impressive. If all the Claire/Jamie/William/Ian/Rachel/John parts had been cut out and just Roger/Bree/Jem's chapters remained then I would have rated this four stars. I never would have thought I'd like Roger/Bree over Jamie/Claire, but they were my favourite characters in this one, probably because they had such an engaging plot especially when compared to the rest of the characters. For most of the book I was hoping Claire, Jamie and co would just drop dead because they were that snooze-worthy. Alas, they didn't.
Random thoughts:
-The two things I liked: The Roger/Bree/Jem story was engrossing and Henri-Christian's death was done quite well (although I would have preferred one of the core characters dying instead of a minor one).
-Random thing I hated: The coincidences, all the bloody coincidences. Characters just so happened to bump into each other whenever they were in danger or in need. I could excuse it the first couple of times it happened but when it kept occurring over and over it got ridiculous and made me want to punch things.
-The plot? What plot? There was only one proper arc and that was Jem going missing/kidnapped and his parents trying to find him. The rest of the 'story' consisted of silly romances (Ian/Rachel, Dottie/Denzel, William/Jane) and Claire/the gang being thrown into the American Revolutionary war in various contrived and far-fetched ways. You'd think war would be exciting and make for thrilling reading but it was the exact opposite — the war parts were made up of a lot of walking, lots of waiting around, and random soldiers/generals popping in and out to make things confusing, it was the same repetitive cycle over and over… And the things that should have been interesting (near death, fighting) were written in a dragged out, muddled, dry way. I just didn't care. What would have been more engrossing to me was if Jamie/Claire just sat around drinking cups of tea and sharing thoughts/stories with each other… It would have made for far more fun reading than the dull, slow paced, pointless back and forth with the war.
-I HATED Jamie. He was a huge hypocrite, after all the shit he put Claire through with his secret wife, step kids, bastard son, and his constant lying/hiding things he had no right to get angry with her or think about beating her because of what happened with John.
Ugh, he's always managed to wriggle his way out of the many crappy things he's done, everyone just forgives him, and he ends up practically being worshipped by most of the people he comes in to contact with. Whereas Claire has to beg Jamie for forgiveness and spend time winning back his trust and whatnot. The double standards was so irritating. For once I'd like Jamie to be held accountable for something without him 'charming' his way out of it with pretty speeches.
-William was a brat and a self-pitying, whiny manslut. He had a life filled with nothing but happiness and comfort, and he had loving parents/grandparents. Lord John loved him like his own and gave him so much yet William still managed to act hard done by and tortured — he'd never experienced any true hardships, anytime he did go through something 'difficult' it was only because he bought it on himself. So his whole 'ooh-I'm-so-tortured-and-have-been-through-so-much-pain' just made me roll my eyes. If I could go into any book and viciously kill a character, it would definitely be him.
What was the point of his character? All he's ever done in the series is sulk and whine.
I couldn't stand him or Ian when they'd both happily slept with prostitutes, they knew those girls were only prostitutes because they had no other choice… So for them to happily sex them up made me sick. It pissed me off even more when all the other main characters acted like Ian and William were oh so honourable and good. No, they were both sick irredeemable fucks.
-William judging Jane for killing Harkness was laughable. It was okay for him to kill and defend for his life and country but it wasn't okay for Jane to kill a pervert who was going to have sex with her eleven year old sister. In my eyes Jane had more reason to kill than William, she did it out of love and protection for her sister whereas William just did it for glory, self-preservation and ego. He had no fucking right to look down on Jane.
His general superiority when it came to her more than grated on me. She was a prostitute but only because she was forced into it as she had no protection or money, it was the only way she and her sister could survive… Yet William thought very little of her, the only reason he helped her was because he fancied her. Him and Ian were both scum who greedily paid for sex with teen girls who had no other choice, there was nothing decent or redeemable about them.
And how many times did loser William fall for someone? His feelings were so fickle, he'd have feelings for any attractive girl he came in contact with. I feel sorry for his future wife knowing she's just another in a long line of girls he's fallen for.
It seemed like the only point of Jane's character was to make William seem oh so tragic and tortured — yea, it didn't work on me, he'll always be a pointless sick fuck of a brat.
-I knew Jane would end up dead, any female character that's not whiter than white always does. I would have liked for once to have a female character with a messed up past to actually get some happiness instead of being killed off. Of course, do goody Mary Sues like Rachel and Claire always survive. But female characters like Jane who have suffered and been forced to do questionable things always end up dead or evil. Ugh, I would have much rather read about Jane than Rachel/Claire.
-One thing rubbish about the series were the main characters always finding themselves in danger and bother but none of it was tense or exciting as it was obvious the MCs would be safe no matter what situation they were put in… Claire, Jamie, John Ian, William, Rachel, Bree, John, Roger, Jem will never be killed off so putting them in life threatening situations seemed pointless… It just made me sigh in boredom since I already knew they were going to be a-okay.
-Bree and Roger not locking their doors was beyond daft. Why would they be so trustworthy after everything they'd been through? It was a thick thing to do, especially when they had letters/diaries which contained sensitive information. That was the only really frustrating thing about them.
-I wasn't a fan of Bree and Roger initially but they really grew on me in this one. Compared to Jamie and Claire they seemed normal and flawed in a real way. Whereas Jamie and Claire separately and together seemed false, thus I no longer believed in their characters.
-It was weird how Bree hardly ever thought of Frank when he was the one who raised her, spent the most time with her, and loved her as his own — he was a great dad to her but she'd all but forgotten him. Of course, she didn't stop banging on about saint bloody Jamie and his never ending awesomeness. Ugh.
I found it weird how Bree took after Jamie in mannerisms, thinking, and temperament yet she had nothing of Frank even though he was her beloved dad for the first two decades of her life and was more of a parent to her than Claire was… Apparently nurture doesn't matter, in Frank's case anyhow. Whereas Jamie's non-biological children somehow adopted all his traits. Basically, Jamie's nurture and nature win out over anyone else's nature and nurture. Ridiculous.
I found it unbelievable that both Jamie's children took after him in mannerisms/personality even though he hadn't raised either and both had other loving parents/guardians. His kids mothers seemed to contribute nothing either, William/Bree's looks and personality were all Jamie's, they had very, very little of their mothers.
It was daft how EVERYONE took after him in some way regardless of whether he was blood related to them or if he'd raised them… Whilst the other biological/foster/adopted parents managed to pass on NOTHING to their children. Superhero Jamie was the only one allowed to pass on traits/genetics to anyone.
-One thing I found irritating was in the last book when Claire thought Jamie was dead she was seriously thinking about killing herself because she couldn't live without him… Yet in this one when Claire was at death's door, Jamie said he wouldn't kill himself if she died because he had other things to live for. So yea, another case of a heroine not being able to live without her man and having nothing without him, whilst the hero can live without his woman and has plenty going for him outside of her. Ugh, the double standards and sexism were killing me.
-Was Ian wearing his first wife's armlet to his wedding to Rachel meant to be some weird gesture to show he was over her? It was obvious that he still loved Emily and would always love her, the only reason they split was because they couldn't have children, if they'd been able to he wouldn't have looked twice at Rachel. Rachel was just second choice. So yea, I didn't believe in their supposed meant-to-be love when it was clear that Ian still loved Emily and would always love her and was only with Rachel because he couldn't have his first wife.
-It was annoying how Ian kept calling himself a mohawk, he was Scottish born and raised, he wasn't a mohawk. Sure, he was married to one and was in her tribe for a while but that ended years ago. He shouldn't be calling himself a mohawk or an Indian and claiming their heritage as his own.
-Ian and Rachel's marriage/relationship was an unrealistic Mills & Boons-esque fantasy. Their basic principles and beliefs differed vastly, Rachel didn't believe in violence and killing even in self defence yet Ian killed loads and was very violent. It was implausible and nonsensical that Rachel could magically overlook Ian's murdering/violent ways just because she loved him. A couple like that wouldn't last when they had such different morals, I didn't appreciate the ridiculousness of them being able to have a successful marriage.
-Ian and Rachel's sexy times and just any time they spent together was cringey… Like Rachel wanting to watch Ian piss, it was revolting. I actually found Buck kissing his mum/almost shagging her less distasteful than Ian/Rachel's sex life. Also, Rachel finding Ian pissing and farting oh so fascinating and adorable was ludicrous. She really was the worst kind of unrealistic Mary Sue.
-How did Roger/Bree and the kids manage to travel a few decades ahead at the end? I thought they could only travel approximately two centuries back and forth, not decades. That was the established rule, I hope that rule hasn't suddenly changed to fit the story line. I guess, Roger/Bree could have gone back to their own time, flown to America, and then used the stones there to jump back to Claire/Jamie's current timeline/location… But it's always been said that much time jumping would cause serious health problems. Also, where the hell was Buck? He never went back to his wife and kid, so what happened to him?
-Claire and her many medical miracles made me scoff. She always managed to save everyone when she didn't have the proper equipment/medicine/lighting/knowledge or good enough eyesight. I could understand her managing to solve simple cases or getting lucky but no way would she be able to solve/save all those complex cases and near death patients.
-I'm so sick of every character being in awe of Jamie. Their reverence of him made him come across as an unlikeable speshul little snowflake Gary Stu.
-How did Frank's letter to Bree end up in Lollybroch? He couldn't possibly have known she'd end up living there. I hope it's explained at some point.
-It was the same repetitive rubbish when it came to the main story… the insipid war, the non-stop walking, the manufactured separation between characters, the cheesy romances, and the contrived and far fetched situations. Where were the twists and turns? Where was the intrigue and suspense? Where was the organic/genuine drama?
-Jamie and Claire's sex life hadn't changed since their twenties even though they were in their sixties and/or were seriously injured. Yea, right.
-What was with all the forgiveness and pathetic excuses for various rapists. There was this underlying tone that rape survivors should pity their rapists and forgive them everything. Ugh, it was fucked up.
-Just how many times is Claire going to lose her medical equipment and worldly possessions? It happens in every bloody book.
-What the hell was a 'Scottish noise'? There's no such thing, noise is noise.
On the whole I didn't enjoy Written in My Own Heart's Blood. Most of the POV characters had dragged out, pointless story lines which only made them more insufferable then they already were. The only reason I got through all of it was because of Roger, Bree and their absorbing story. Unfortunately, since they were reunited with Jamie/Claire at the end, they'll probably be swept away in their dull story lines in the next book. I'm hoping that won't be the case though.