Outlander (Outlander, #1) in Around the World in 80 Books

Apr 08, 2018 Lindsey Z rated it it was ok

This book is utterly ridiculous and not in a guilty pleasure, smutty, page-turning kind of way I *thought* it'd be when I picked it up to read after my surgery; I was looking for something quick paced to breeze through and indulge in, but this book offered up little pleasure to me. Here are some of the many ways in which this book is terrible and why I will not be reading any more in the series:

1. I can't stand Jamie Fraser. His character is flat, he's obsessed with sex and telling Claire consta This book is utterly ridiculous and not in a guilty pleasure, smutty, page-turning kind of way I *thought* it'd be when I picked it up to read after my surgery; I was looking for something quick paced to breeze through and indulge in, but this book offered up little pleasure to me. Here are some of the many ways in which this book is terrible and why I will not be reading any more in the series:

1. I can't stand Jamie Fraser. His character is flat, he's obsessed with sex and telling Claire constantly that he wants to bed her like she's a whore. I didn't care about his backstory or childhood or any of his suffering for that matter. He's probably the MAIN reason why I will not continue this series because, you guessed it, he's front and center of all of the rest of the books. He makes Claire's character unlikable and every scene that he wasn't in I found to be compelling and full of potential but they were few and far between.

2. Gabaldon indulges too much in pedestrian romance writing. When Claire first meets Jamie, she remarks that he's got these big muscles (like a romance novel character) and ends up comparing him to a horse that she'd like to ride anytime. Ugh. No. Fine: put sex in your writing. But do you have to do it in the most cheesy, eye-rolling way? I just couldn't handle their immature and very bizarre sex scenes.

3. Speaking of bad writing, man is this book in need of an editor. Conversations between Claire and Jamie are so damn repetitive. What takes them 3 pages to say could have been trimmed down to one page (at least). And sometimes Gabaldon's descriptions are exhausting not in their detail but in the fact that she starts with a respectable literary description and then literally explains to her readers what she actually means. Have some respect for your readers that they can figure out that "he darkened the door" means that his figure was big enough to cover the light from the door and not follow it up with "he literally darkened the door; his figure covered the door.." (I'm misquoting here but you get the point). This book could have been 200 pages shorter, easily.

4. The premise of this book (Claire finds herself going back in time from 1945 to 1740s Scotland) is the main conflict of the book and it simply doesn't work. There is absolutely NO story arc. No fight against evil. No larger problem to solve. It's just Claire figuring out how to live in 1740s Scotland and she and Jamie traveling around different parts of it and getting themselves into trouble. And there are LONG stretches of boring exchanges between people in which nothing interesting happens. For a book that's touted as being action packed, I was really bored most of the time while reading this story.

5. One of the other reasons why I was so bored is because the story is so damn formulaic: either Claire or Jamie gets themselves into a pickle and the other one comes sweeping in at the last minute and saves the other. Every. Damn. Time. There's even one pretty fascinating scene in which Claire is on trial for being a witch and she literally thinks, "Oh I wish Jamie were here right now to save me." And what do you know: he arrives just in time. Ugh. This book was so predictable after a while that nothing surprised me or even piqued my interest in terms of conflict resolution after the first 200 pages.

6. Because we only get Claire's point of view, we have to follow her every boring move. Sure, reading about her discovering how to be an 18th century physician and use medicine of the time was interesting to me, but the story would have been served by us seeing what the many other interesting characters were doing while Claire wasn't there to witness them. For a series that is THOUSANDS of pages long, only following one character's POV (I'm assuming that's what Gabaldon does in the other ones) just doesn't work for me and I got really exhausted by only hearing Claire's voice and only witnessing scenes with Claire in them.

7. One such other character I would have liked to have gotten to know much more is Geilie Duncan. Her character was utterly intriguing to me and her enigmatic nature kept me guessing as to what she'd do or say next. The scenes in which Claire is with Geilie, and especially the witch hunting/trial scene, were hands down the best in the novel. If Geilie had been in a main story line, I would have enjoyed this novel so much more. But nope. She's only there for like 30 pages total. I do think she makes appearances in the other books but it's not enough for me to want to keep reading because, well, I'll have to wade through Claire and Jamie's boring lives and conversations to get to her.

I could seriously go on and on but I've already spent enough energy and time despairing about having read this book. I do think Gabaldon nailed the time period and place; her setting and atmosphere are rich and I felt like I was in 18th century Scotland. But I will never understand why so many people love this series, especially those who say this first one is the best. It is simply not for me and you can't convince me otherwise. ...more

Like · see review

Apr 02, 2015 Maria Yohn rated it it was amazing

I don't think I've ever read an over 800-page book that was almost impossible to put down from start to finish. I think I've officially become a member of the Outlander cult... ...more

Like · see review