Outlander Series discussion
miscellaneous
>
Jamie or Claire? Which one will die first? Lets talk aout it!
Couldn't just be a dream. Remember Frank sees him!!
Jamie lived in the 18th Century....so far he hasn't time travelled...well established that he can't...so far. Claire was in the 20th Century and hadnt evidently met him yet...when Frank saw him..Claire had not gone through the stones yet. So, that being said...Jamie was dead somewhere near 200 years before Claire met him. He said to her in EOB (I think) when she said she couldn't bear for him to die "those years we were separated..I WAS dead wasnt I". Meaning...she was back living in the 20th century and he had lived his life in the 18th century and actually was dead...I mean after all he couldn't physically live 200 years. Hope this makes sense.
So he could die in the 18th century and then go into the future as a ghost. Normal people see ghosts.
what was funny about the conversation with Claire is that she was in the 20th century, but she had already died in the 18th century. But that would be crazy. So I think she can't die in the 18th century.Jamie will die, and claire will go through the stones once more and die in the 20th century.
It will be too weird for her to die in the 1700's and then be born in the 1900's.
Nah, I think she could die in the 18th century. It's just an endless cycle. She's born in the 1900's, lives, marry's Frank, goes to Scotland, marry's Jamie, dies, then she's born all over again.
so true Latinlandish....I think Jaime will die for some reason some how to protect Claire. Then Claire will go back through the stones to be with Bree, Roger and the kids. I then think Jaime (while dead) will be going back through time to watch Claire and see what he missed in her life before and during the 20 years they were apart. But who knows....Diana is a master at complicated story lines.
Heather, the more I think about his, the more I see it as the right end to end the story. He would die, and then she would feel like the reason to be in the 1700's wasn't there anymore. Furthermore, the other people that she loved most were her daughter and grandchildren. It would make sense to go back to the 20th century.and it would explain the ghost wandering through the ages.
Then the end of it all would be when she dies and the ghosts meet, and the series can go on forever and ever in heaven!! ahah:)
And, if Claire were to die in the 18th century...then Bree and Jem might never be born...wasnt that what she was afraid of for Frank if Jamie killed BJR in the 18th Century...Frank would never be born???? We have to remember this is fiction and DG can write it AND explain it any way she wants to. LOL,
Elizabeth wrote: "OMG Noooo! DG please let Jamie and Claire live forever in my heart and mind even after your last novel in this series. I also hope that they are still alive when the books end. There is no really good reason for them to die! Better to know they are in their "sunset" years together.
I imagine all the characters will be at a contented place in their lives. Other wise, there would have to be more books. Hmmm - a new series?
No, see she was worried that if BJR died it would halt the blood line that led to Frank. Sort of like if Claire found her direct descendent and killed him, then she may stop existing. But Claire dying in the 18th century wouldn't impact the year she was born. She's following the normal course of her life.
I think a revisit to Diana's "The Gabaldon Theory of Time Travel" is in order. This stuff will really make your head spin no? Although I am really enjoying these theories! Too bad we can't major in Outlander, don't mind the study material!
Sharon, I do remember that passage, good point. I tend to agree with Wendy in that I think an endless cycle is very likely and believable. That's what I am hoping for anyway!
Wendy wrote: "No, see she was worried that if BJR died it would halt the blood line that led to Frank. Sort of like if Claire found her direct descendent and killed him, then she may stop existing. But Cla..."
I agree--if she dies in the 18th century that won't affect her being born later.
Removed
Wendy wrote: "Nah, I think she could die in the 18th century. It's just an endless cycle. She's born in the 1900's, lives, marry's Frank, goes to Scotland, marry's Jamie, dies, then she's born all over again."Oh, me too! I love this theory!
Bah, this entire thread is heart-wrenching for me to read...I have to stop clicking here...lol.
Elizabeth wrote: "Bah, this entire thread is heart-wrenching for me to read...I have to stop clicking here...lol."Ha..ha... It's an addiction. You won't/can't (whatever) even if you try.
I feel the same. I am going on a trip next week, and I keep thinking how am I going to be able to stand without my goodreads friends!
Latinlandish wrote: "I feel the same. I am going on a trip next week, and I keep thinking how am I going to be able to stand without my goodreads friends!"Have a great trip, you will be missed!
Latinlandish wrote: "I feel the same. I am going on a trip next week, and I keep thinking how am I going to be able to stand without my goodreads friends!"Yeah i know how you feel. I went away this summer for a week and missed you guys ridiculously. I don't really know any of you but we still have this bond, it's weird.
I know, and in this website I found someone that lives in a town close to mine and we are already planning to have coffee some day and talk about Jamie!Wouldn't it be awesome to have a reunion someday?
I think about this group randomly, lol. Something will happen and I'll go "I have to post that in the group!".
Think of us like "instant" pen-pals. -- When I was little, my highlight of the week or month was to get letters from my pen-pal friends. Now, I check it everyday, even at work, and here you all are. :-)
It's almost better. You're at home, you're at work... If I hop on the computer at my moms I can still chat.Ha, it's great.
Hehe...this is the first place I check when I wake up and have my coffee before starting my day.Latin, maybe a reunion in Scotland!
I decided I will bring my lap top on my trip so I can check the messages!
HAHAHA! I would do the same thing!
Oh, you all made my day!! I am hopelessly addicted too! And feel exactly the same as so many of you about this group.It’s amazing to me how much I ponder what you all say. How distinctly individual our personalities are and yet our discussions flow so nicely!
I have tried some other groups , but this is absolutely THE best! When I am reading something interesting, immediately I think about sharing it over here.And I love to read the posts about the books, how people interpret things in different ways.
Latinlandish wrote: "I have tried some other groups , but this is absolutely THE best! When I am reading something interesting, immediately I think about sharing it over here.And I love to read the posts about the book..."Latin, I agree. I find it interesting when people comment on a character in a book and I am like "wow, I totally do not see it that way". I believe peoples life experiences has an impact as to how we interpret these stories.
Oh to be sure Elizabeth, to both your comments. That has been proven to me again and again.
That is so true. Although I could never say that my life remotely resembles time traveling, I could understand some of what Claire felt when she decided to stay with Jamie. I was 28 when I moved to this country to be with my husband, and I felt like I had to leave behind my whole life, "kind of like" Claire in a MUCH lighter version!!
this group gave me an outlet during work when I can't read. I was going to the bathroom all the time trying to read a page or two while I was in there.also learning about the series as late as I did, I kinda felt alone with my obsession. Its nice when other people are can understand how you are feeling about charters.
Lydia, you are certainly not alone. Plus people are discovering this series for the first time all the time! Especially as those who have read it continue to introduce the story to who ever will listen, ha. Of course only after they are deemed worthy, ;0)
Sorry if this was already mentioned I couldn't get all the posts read.In my mind Claire and Jamie die together.
I always picture them like the couple in the cave in DIA.
In each others arms for eternity!
I'd like to see Jamie travel to the future. I know in the book he says he's unable to do it but what about Geilis? She did it. What about those native american activists after Jamie and Claire reach the new world? They were able to do it another way through some ceremony. Also the gems that Geilis was collecting helped the transport as well, didn't they?Another off-topic thought: What the heck happened to Master Raymonde? I thought he was a neat character and was sure there would be more of him in the future books but there was nothing. I also thought he was from another time -- maybe from the past instead of the future. I wish she would explore him more.
I think DG has said on the Compuserve board that Master Raymond was a timetraveller and that she is contemplating a book on him in the future! That should be interesting!
Ladytron wrote: "I'd like to see Jamie travel to the future. I know in the book he says he's unable to do it but what about Geilis? She did it. What about those native american activists after Jamie and Claire reac..."Geillis was from 1968...went to try to help Scots. Book after Outlander tells about her leaving Craig Na Dun. She never went back to her real time. The activists also were from "present." Turned out that Brianna knew of them before they went "back in time."
Well and we know that multiple people can hear the stones, it's just not Claire and Bree. They liken it to rolling your tongue, some people can do it, other's cant.Jamie has proven again and again that he can't. Also, while I think it would be nice for Bree, Roger and Claire to have Jamie in the present day, poor Jamie would be absolutely miserable. He's a man of his times, I can not imagine him fitting into the modern world as easily as they fit into the past.
I think I would have a hard time fitting into the past. There is no way I'd be subservient to a man! Ask my husband. LOL. I'd stay in trouble all the time because I wouldn't wear stays OR a mobcap...ugliest things I ever saw. I think they were meant to make women look ugly...not for modesty at all. When I look my worst my husband is happiest...but when I look good...its like he has to pee a circle around me in pubic just to let other men know I'm his. LOL. But I like it...kinda.
I like a possessive man too, Sharonh. A little bit of territory marking is just fine with me.
he has to pee a circle around me in pubic just to let other men know I'm his. LOL. But I like it...kinda.Ha ha! Thats funny. mines pretty possessive too! Came across a very short cute denim skirt at the mall last summer. It was on a mannequin in the window. I said, "I want to wear a skirt like that!" My DH said, "you can! You just can't leave the house!"
I remember years ago when I was much much younger I bought a denim miniskirt....my husband nearly had a coronary! LOL. Wouldn't let me wear it at all! He said don't put it on cuz its just gonna get ripped off!!! By him! LOL.
Ok, I don't think anybody is really considering exactly what happened in that scene in Outlander when Frank sees Jamies ghost. The fact is, is that it happened. Jamie did see Claire in her real time. He knew who she was but she didn't know about him. Therefore, she MUST be reincarnated in a sense or lose all memory of time travelling for some reason. Diana can do so much with that part of the story...who knows what approach she will take. But, since Jamie was a ghost, obviously he died in his own time and was is going to be able to see Claire in her time. Since neither of them "remembers" this event, it has not yet happened right? Actually, why hasn't Claire remembered that night? I think she would eventually think about that night and realize that the ghost was Jamie. Remember how the whole thing gave her an eerie feeling? So I don't think she would have forgot about the whole incident. Why didn't she think about it when Jamie was talking about his vision. The only thing that is confusing is the grave site thing.I really wish Diana would give us some clues!
Sharonh wrote: "I think DG has said on the Compuserve board that Master Raymond was a timetraveller and that she is contemplating a book on him in the future! That should be interesting!"I'm waiting for her to get over LJG and write Jamie's mother and Father's story!
Well she wouldn't have known him because it hadn't happened to her yet. Jamie's ghost showed up to see her before she went back in time. She didn't lose her memory of time travel because at that time she didn't have the memory at all, it hadn't happened.But I can agree that it may mean that he dies before her... I just hope not. I want them to die together.
Wendy wrote: "Well she wouldn't have known him because it hadn't happened to her yet. Jamie's ghost showed up to see her before she went back in time. She didn't lose her memory of time travel because at that ..."Right, Claire wouldn't know...but how would Jamie know and Claire wouldn't know? And if he visited her before she went back in time, why wouldn't he remember it when they did meet? Why don't either of them remember the incident?
They never said the age of the ghost, maybe it wasn't his vision, maybe it was actually his ghost. Jamie doesn't remember because it hasn't happened. Maybe he dies first and his ghost travels through time and sees Claire before she travels.And Claire probably just doesn't think about it other then it just being a ghost. It was just a tall ghost that Frank saw, over the years the specific's of that conversation with Frank have probably faded from her memory and a ghost that Frank saw from before she went back in time probably doesn't strike her as odd any longer.
That's my theory... but man it is definitely fascinating.
So anti climatic!