Outlander Series discussion
miscellaneous
>
Jamie or Claire? Which one will die first? Lets talk aout it!
Oh man, I hate even thinking about the idea that Jamie and Claire not just die together. I know that it is a completely unrealistic to think that this will happen but I hate the idea of having to read about one of them dying and leaving the other behind.I want to say that I would rather Claire die leaving Jamie because I couldn't hand reading about Claire losing Jamie, but the thought of reading about Jamie without Claire puts a huge hole in my heart.
I will say this though, I hope that however it happens we do get to read Jamie and Frank finally meeting each other in the afterlife. I have been yearning for them to come face to face.
Ohhhhh Sharonh, I am only on FC, please don't make me face that reality. But if I did I would love for them to die like the couple in the cave in France, but instead have them back in Scotland.
Yeah, I want them to die together but I don't think that is how it will happen....UNLESS...DG has given us a clue/premonition by the newspaper notice that turned out to be false .....so far....that they died in a housefire both of them together. Guess it could happen that way. I can't stand to think of either of them without the other one again...it nearly destroyed Jamie when he lost her just befoe Culloden and didn't know if she was dead or alive and their child with her. But I could handle Claire dying befoe him better than him dying before her! I can't stand the thought of Jamie EVER dying!
That's how I feel too, but then when I think about the amount of pain and grief he will go through I almost feel like it would be easier if he went first.
Pinda wrote: "Ohhhhh Sharonh, I am only on FC, please don't make me face that reality. But if I did I would love for them to die like the couple in the cave in France, but instead have them back in Scotland."@Pinda, poor thing. I will try not to say anything about any of the books, just the theories and thoughts. Promise.
In my head, they'd die together exactly at the same time in each other's arms. :-) And yes, I did actually thought of the couple in the cave in France, that might be them. But for some reasons, that I don't recall, I ruled that out (temporarily, though, because DG always surprises you).
I have thought about the theory of time traveler's death --- how could one dies in the time when one has not even been born, and when one dies, will it be in the future or past? --- But it's gotten to be too complicated for me and I couldn't wrap my head around it so I just left it alone until, now (thanks to Sharonh).
By not putting so much thought into it, Claire will never die in the present time, she'll just be missing, right? But she will die in the past (although, she wasn't born at that time). So for instant, If Jamie dies first and Claire follows him a month aftherward, he wouldn't have to wait 200 years to meet with her "afterlife". It would just be a month later, right? Arghhhhh! I'm telling you, it's getting tooooo complicated.
I think that even if you time travel to a time that you aren't born yet, if you die, you die in the time that your body is. If Claire dies in Scotland in the 1700's her body can't just go poof back to the present when she needed the stones to get there in the first place. But the idea that 200 years later Jamie is roaming the earth without Claire scares the hell out of me!!!!!!!
I don't know, I can see that maybe if she does her soul goes back to her correct century. Or that is if there is even a difference in century's when your dead. Maybe there's no such thing as past present and future...
Well Geillie Gillis died on the island in the cave when Claire killed her in the 18th century and she was born in the 20th century....and Claire saw her skull before in the 20th century before she went back and killed her. Man this is a brain twister! And concerning the couple in the grave who died in each other's arms...how could Jamie and Claire be them????? They couldn't be looking at their own bones...could they?
Now, I remember, that was it. That's why I ruled that out. Jamie can't time travel. So he can't go back to the past. This is a little off topic but if anyone haven't seen the movie "Timeline", this is pretty much the plot. The hero, an archaeologist, found his own tomb in the present time burried arms in arms with his future wife, that he met when he time traveled to the past to save his boss.
With Geillie, I didn't really know where she went. Also, all the ones that didn't make it where did they go? Present, future or stuck in the middle?
I think the thread is turning its head to the different direction. Haha..
Sharonh wrote: "Well Geillie Gillis died on the island in the cave when Claire killed her in the 18th century and she was born in the 20th century....and Claire saw her skull before in the 20th century before she ..."Maybe the couple was just a foreshadow for their own death. Remember the the drawings on the cave wall, I don't think DG meant it to be them, but maybe a clue to what will transpire.
Good point with Geille. This is too much thinking this early in the morn for me.)
Pinda, refresh my memory...what were the cave drawings of? I don't remember!
This is totally making my head spin :) I just like the thought of them living forever and can't even begin to contemplate their deaths.
I know Samantha! And if DG doesn't let them die together...you know it is gonna be an all out heart wrenching tear jerking experience for us readers!
I think regardless it is going to be an all out tear jerker. I have a feeling I'm going to need a whole box of tissues for that one!
I think I am going to need a 12 step program of some sort when the series finally ends!
OMG! we'll all be deers in headlights. Like, now what!
Diana has said that the couple in the cave is not Jamie and Claire (well, at least that's not who she intended them to be when she wrote them):"Who were the Paleolithic lovers in Dragonfly in Amber? What was their significance?
I didn't really have anything specifically in mind about the Paleolithic lovers--they were simply a metaphor for the briefness of life and the importance of love--but then again, often I write something that I intend to be only colour, and it sort of turns into something else in later books.
There's that ghost in Outlander, for instance....{grin}
I got the lovers from The National Geographic, as a matter of fact. {cough} The original were a couple from Herculaneum (or possibly Pompeii) whose skeletons had been found during the excavation, lying the manner I described in Dragonfly--his arms around her, trying to protect her when the fire came down on them. One of the most touching and dramatic pictures I've ever seen. It's stuck in my mind for years and years, so it was there when my subconscious needed it as an image of mortality and love. One reason why writers ought to read more than just their own genre (whatever that may be {grin})."
Personally, I would like Scotland to be Jamie and Claire's final resting place. I've always wondered if the fact that Jamie's ghost shows up in Inverness is indicative of where he is buried. Food for thought. I do think Jamie will precede Claire in death. I'm probably going to be crying so hard reading about their deaths and the ghost that I won't be able to read!
Well, re: the ghost. I think Jamie had already met and loved Claire in the 18th century when his ghost was standing looking at Claire in the 20th Century. She wasn't even aware of it/him...because at that point of her life in the 20th century she hadn't been to the 18th century yet. He was waiting for her to come to him...or his ghost was waiting. Mind boggling! But soooooooo romantic! OMGosh...Jamie is the utmost romantic man! Sigh! I loved it when she was telling him she couldn't bear for him to die and she couldn't live without him...and Jamie said "well I was dead all those 20 years we were apart"...what I think he meant was...she went back to her time (20th centery) and was living those 20 years in her own time and he really was dead during those years....only he still lived when she came back to the 18th century to be with him. Sigh...
SPOILER! Echo in the BoneI hate to be a downer here, but Claire thought Jamie drowned in Echo. She was distraught, but didn't really have time to grieve beacuse LJG kept insisting she was in danger and had to marry him. She jumped right in there. I personally did not like ths. She should have waited a while to make sure Jamie was really gone. How many times did she think Jamie was either dead or about to die? I thought DG rushed this too much. I know she meant this as an introduction for the next book, but jeez!!!
Yeah, I think so too Sue...just seemed kinda rushed to me too...but Claire HATED to be locked up somewhere and I think she was trying to help Fergus, Marsali and their family by jumping into the marriage with LJG. Echo is my least favorite of all the books plus it brings me back to my least favorite scene in ANY of the books...where she found out that Jamie had married Leghair...I don't guess I'll ever get over that...I thought that wasn't handled just right....Jamie wasn't remorseful enough and he had always promised her honesty but he WAS NOT HONEST at that time and she almost lost him because of stupid Leghair shooting him. I would have made him squirm and grovel for awhile and made him think I was gonna find me another man or something...she forgives him too easily...sometimes I think she is an idiot. God, I can't wait till Book 8 to see how all this plays out. OK, back on topic girls! Who's gonna die first?????
Sheesh, I keep forgetting these are not real people! Talk about obsessed! :) Still hate Leghair though and hate the fact that Jamie would beat the hell out of a man for messing with Claire but let Leghair, Marsali and other women treat her like crap...whats up with that? And I don't wanna hear that Jamie wouldn't touch a woman in anger OR give 'em a tongue lashing. He has done both to Claire. LOL now look who's off topic???
Off topic and back onto our long debate, lmao!! It's like we keep going around and around the topic of Loaghaire... it's comical. Both sides are so stubborn.Wan - I saw Timeline, and I have to say if you enjoyed the movie you should DEFINITELY pick up the book by Michael Crichton.
I agree with Wendy. Timeline the book is fantastic and the movie is just good. It's one of Crichton's best.
I cannot remember in what book this was wrote but it was one (I'm thinking the end of ABOSAA) of Jamie's dream that he said he saw Claire with silver in her hair and electric lights and it just made me think that Jamie would die 1st and Claire would go back to the 20th century to be with Bree, Roger and the grandchildren. I would love them to die together I think. I read this one book series by Dana Stabenow her Kate Shugak Series and one of the main charters die's in one book and I remember I just cried and cried and sobbed. I can't imagine what I will do if and when Jamie or Claire die. Geez I need to repeat it's just fiction, it's just fiction!
That scene Patty was where he told Claire of the dream and said he thought it was electric light because he had never seen that kind of light before but Claire asked him how she looked...or maybe how old she was and he said he didn't remember....it didn't say anything about her hair being silver or having silver in it....so no help there!
I don't ever want to read that. I think it will exhaust and devestate me for days. I've (and others here) been in love with this series for almost 2 decades... it'll feel like I've lost a beloved friend.
He said that she just looked like 'Claire'. That he doesn't ever see age on her. He said, "You looked like you."
Haha. on my earlier post. I posted dears instead of deers. Just fixed it. Sorry.
Wendy wrote: "Off topic and back onto our long debate, lmao!! It's like we keep going around and around the topic of Loaghaire... it's comical. Both sides are so stubborn.Wan - I saw Timeline, and I have to..."
That's so funny. I saw the used book for sale at my libarary today. Picked it up, flipped it around, and then put it back on the shelf. What's wrong with me and it's only a buck. I'm going back to get it tomorrow.
I have been out of these posts for along time and am sure I have missed a lot. But I have to ask...why does everyone think that we will be reading about either Jamie or Claire dying? Did DG say that is how she is going to end the series? I have been hoping that I simply will not have to read about the end of their lives - either of them. I am sure that DG, as creative as she is, can tie up the series prettily without having them die. So everyone, what am I missing here???
I heard that she said that the series would end with their death... but maybe I'm wrong.
I read where she says she sees the series ending with everyone back in Scotland. Of course she worded that so she could change her mind. Mairicat has such a good point! Why do we think we will read about them dying? Jamie's ghost? The grave marker that Frank planted?
Personally, I would feel like there were loose ends if I didn't get to read about the end of Jamie and Claire's lives. I would always wonder what happened to them after the end of the series and how they died. Maybe that's just me, but I couldn't stand not knowing.
Because of Jamie's ghost at the beginning of the series....at least we will know about that because she said in one of her interviews that it will be explained...in the last book in the last chapter...and she said it with a laugh...to the best of my recollection. Its 3:00 a.m. and I can't sleep! Cant think of a better way to while away the wee hours!
I agree with mairicat,we don't have to be part of their death. We can think of them together, alive in that time or have postscript that tells us how they died peacefully together of old age. LOL, just want a happy ending I guess!!
Death can be a happy ending. I'm with Kimberley. It'll kill me if it's tragic but if it ends with them still alive I'll feel like there should be one more book.
Oh no. I have to know how & when they die. It's the closure, I need, for me to go on with my life. :-)Alright, today I feel like a drama queen.
If Diana doesn't complete the books by explaining how Jamie and Claire pass can you imagine how many fans are going to ask her how they die? We'll be knocking down her door! ;-)
I am on the side that needs an ending. I want to follow their lives until they are dead. I would be happy if they died together embraced in their final sleep!
Latinlandish wrote: "I am on the side that needs an ending. I want to follow their lives until they are dead. I would be happy if they died together embraced in their final sleep!"Agreed!
Wendy wrote: "Latinlandish wrote: "I am on the side that needs an ending. I want to follow their lives until they are dead. I would be happy if they died together embraced in their final sleep!"Agreed!"
I second that!!!
Did anyone see the movie "Somewhere In Time" with Jane Seymore and Christopher Reeve? I loved that movie and the ending was great. He died trying to get back to her but when he did die...she was there waiting for him! Now that was a happy ending!
I LOVE LOVE LOVE THAT MOVIE.... what is it about going back in time that I so verra attracted to?
I watched the movie. OMG it was so SAD. & Yeap, she was waiting for him. But for how long though....
Lydia wrote: "I LOVE LOVE LOVE THAT MOVIE.... what is it about going back in time that I so verra attracted to?"I know, right? Sometime, I feel like I was born in the wrong time and place.
with time travel anything is possible. maybe the ending won't be the end, but a new beginning again.
sometimes I feel that there are all the other years coexisting, and if we could just step through the barrier we could be there. Has anyone read Time and Again by Jack Finney? I thought it was really good
Another possiility is that though Jamie is dead and a ghost in Outlander (well heck he's walking in the 20th century...so yeah...he is dead)...he could have just chosen the wrong time to look for her...she may be dead and he is trying to find her in the "afterlife" and maybe that is why he looks so unhappy to Frank??? Jamie did say " I will find you...even if it takes 200 years"...or something to that effect. What do y'all think? I know it all revolves around how DianaG writes it...but it is fun to speculate...right?