Outlander
by Diana Gabaldon
|
List Price: Our Price: $7.40 You Save: $9.60 (56%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $1.25 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Outlander
Book Review: Amazing Historical Time Travel Romance
Summary: 5 Stars
This is one of those books whose reputation precedes them. I've heard this mentioned over and over in romance forums and also from my fellow authors that I knew I had to check it out. Going in I already had so many questions boggling my mind. How did the time travel work in this world? How is it seamed into the contemporary world of the 1940s? How can the heroine, who is already married, run off and marry some dude from the past and brush off her husband?
I was pleasantly surprised as I read through the book. Not only was it engrossing, it was also entertaining. Normally I don't read ginormous tomes as my time is pretty limited. I have to admit once I started on the first few chapters, I kept lamenting over how many pages I had to go to even make a dent in this book. But soon as I kept reading Outlander, I didn't want to stop and my progress didn't matter (although it's still fun to keep track) as much as I wanted to know the characters and their story.
Many have called this a romance even liking it to a Harlequin book. Far from. I like HQN, but this isn't it. To me this is historical fiction with a romantic as a backdrop. Normally a romance would be centered around the hero and heroine who are shown right from the beginning and the relationship is the focus. This book is so much more. It's an adventure, a historical, a family saga, but most of all it's a fabulous tale that spans the ages.
The story begins in 1940s Scotland shortly after WWII. Claire is on her second honeymoon accompanying her husband Frank to the highlands of Scotland on a research trip after spending time away serving as a wartime nurse. During their highland travels, Frank traces his family lineage and much of the traditions and history of Scotland is revealed through their finds. Looking back, some of it is a great setup for what we are shown through Claire's journey back in time.
During one of her walks, Claire runs into a mysterious stone circle with ancient elements called Craigh Na Dun. There her journey truly begins.
I really got into the world and found myself fascinated as Clare was. Gabaldon writes the story as a well researched adventure. I cringed at the harsh punishments and somewhat wild nature of the time. The author really showed the world contrasted from 40s Scotland from the clothing and style, right down to the speech patterns of the people who lived there. It didn't bother me to read the accents and the author's voice is so strong that I could hear their voices (even Claire's) clearly in my head.
I can see why the 'hero' of the story, Jamie Fraser, is well loved by many readers. He's a romantic, eager, noble and honorable character with a complexity that is rarely explored in novels. The fact that he was a virginal hero made it all the more interesting and even more rare. There's a rawness about Jamie and his developing feelings for Claire. I love the way Gabaldon shows the very basic human emotions in a way that the reader identifies and sympathizes with exactly what the character is going through. It clashes with his moments of outrage and then brings us right around to sympathy when we learn of his upbringing. This character skill is matched only by the author's amazing descriptions of time and setting that makes the reader feel as if they are right there in the middle of the story with the characters. Jamie is considered by most to be 'perfect' and in a lot of ways he is as we see how he speaks straight from the heart. Despite what he has seen in his life, he is consumed by the life for his wife which brings out the strong romantic hero in him. But he is very much with flaws due to his anger and stubbornness. Gabaldon gives enough of this complexity to make him real without going over the top.
That said, I'd have to say the antagonist in this piece Captain Jack Randall is a revolting character and is probably one of the most evil and complex villains I've come across in my reading. Kudos to the author for throwing in the twist in connection with Claire's (first) husband. The description when Claire meets him and is subject to his cruelties (which was pretty gut wrenching) was all the more disturbing as she realizes the man before her bared much resemblance to her husband though very much lacking his warmth and sensitivity. This reader felt empathetic to Claire's shocking situation because it was universally human. I couldn't wait until Randall got his comeuppance and wanted so much for it to be at the hands of either Jamie or Claire.
Before I read Outlander I heard about a certain scene that made me cringe right away. Let me tell you it was nothing compared to reading the ordeal it had on the character during and after. It had been a long time before since a book had me in years and I was definitely sympathizing here. I was confused when it was 're-enacted' and was still thinking of it the next day as I realized the depths one would go to bring someone they love from mental anguish.
Normally I don't like first person because it traps the audience in the main character's mind and feels so limiting. I didn't have this problem with Outlander. Claire is a very intelligent and perceptive woman and the way she describes other characters, you get a picture of who and how they are right away. Especially with Jamie's character you know exactly what he's thinking and how he's feeling even in the moments where he dismisses his feelings or tries to hide them. I love his storytelling scenes because they add so much to his character and we see where he's coming from.
There are some pretty sensual love scenes in here. Not in the sense of being crass or crude but very sensual and sexy while being highly emotional. I prefer sensual romance over erotica and the scenes were effective in showing how the characters were feeling during the act indeed. They were raw with passion because they are described as very human and universal in their impact. Never did I feel it was there just to stimulate the audience.
All in all I LOVE this book. It's been a while since I read a book where I can really lose myself in the setting, characters and story and Outlander hit all the right spots. This is definitely going on my keeper shelf to reread over and over again. I can't wait to dive into the next book!
Book Review: It's okay to betray the one you love when something better comes along...
Summary: 2 Stars
There are many more salient criticisms of this book here, but this is what I have to say...
First, some praise - this a good story concept, and the book is extremely well written. The author really knows how to turn a phrase, and is quite clever and eloquent in her descriptions, dialog, and humor. She proves herself extremely witty time and time again.
However, there are many problems with this book. There are one or two minor plot inconsistencies (small problems in contrast to the rest of my complaints), but at approximately 850 pages, the book really is too long. There are very long stretches of the book that could either be edited out completely or reduced to a few pages, or even to a few short paragraphs, without any detriment to either plot or character development. While the good writing sustains much of the unnecessary length, this book could have been a much better read at 400 or 500 pages.
Warning - Spoiler Alert!!!
My biggest problems with this book, however, are the two main characters, Jamie and Claire, and their relationship. Let's begin with Jamie.
Jamie Fraser is the perfect romance-novel paramour to the point of ridiculousness. It's clear in the beginning of the book that Claire is being set up to be attracted to Jamie (and this is in fact a great tension builder at first), but as one works through the procession of scenes designed to illustrate Jamie's attractiveness and perfection (a veritable avalanche of them) one by one, and with each one yet another one of Jamie's of positive traits is displayed, ultimately one is forced to either groan, giggle, or ruefully shake one's head. The author does attempt to give Jamie a flaw or two - but these are vastly overshadowed by his multitude of virtues. Though he is likable, Jamie Fraser is a two-dimensional fantasy book hero of the sort which inspires little beyond boredom and yawns.
On to Claire: As a reader, I tried to sympathize with Claire's position... after all, her journey through time and the forceful separation from her life and home and husband were not her doing. She was put into a very tough position... this was not something that she asked for... it happened to her... she is a situational victim here. And there is a lot to like in Claire: she's intelligent, eloquent, assertive, and has a quick sense of humor. Certainly, these are things that I myself like and look for in a woman.
However, the book jacket states that Claire "...becomes a woman torn between fidelity and desire..." This proves to be an outright falsehood as fidelity is rather quickly tossed out the window in favor of desire with little ceremony or regret. She glibly, blithely allows her affections to transfer from Frank (whom she loves deeply - or so we are led to believe) to Jamie. To this reader, Claire seems, fickle, inconstant, and emotionally unaware of herself in a way that borders on stupidity. But since we have been shown that Claire isn't stupid, her actions therefore invite us to mix wanton callousness and mercenary insensitivity into the matrix of her personality. To me, this makes her not only unsympathetic, but patently unlikeable in a way that's one of the worst stereotypical portrayals of fickle women who use men while they're convenient, and abruptly dump them when a better beau comes along. All these traits, combined with the beating of Claire by Jamie, I think, would have resulted in the book being labeled as misogynist if it had been written by a man instead of a woman.
Women seem to love this book. As a male, I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's the storybook romance element, but for me this leaves much to be desired. After all, the moral of this story seems to be: 'it's okay to betray the one you love when something better comes along.' Would those very same women who love this book put up with being treated the same way as Frank was treated if the tables were turned?
I have been exhorted me to overlook Claire's shortcomings and focus on the beauty and intense physicality of her relationship with Jamie. I must admit that I was unable to do this, since I did not care for the relationship, which frankly, I found to be distasteful (which is something I blame on Claire, not Jamie). Because of this, I glossed over most of the book's many sex scenes, only going back if it later became clear that I had missed a piece of crucial dialog.
Similarly, I found the book's climax to be an anticlimax. The final 150 pages or so are devoted to the efforts of Claire and Jamie attempting to heal their relationship after the damage inflicted on it (and Jamie) by the antagonist. Again, since I was not interested in their relationship, the book could have ended 150 pages early as far as I was concerned. Did I bear either of the characters ill will? Of course not. Did I want them to have a happy ending if at all possible? Certainly. But did I really care that much either way? Not really.
And in regards to the romance element and for the many female fans of Jamie Fraser out there, my advice is this: women who are searching for the ultimate man in the form of a Jamie Fraser should stop talking to men, collect lots of cats, resign themselves to living alone, and bury themselves in the other books of Ms. Gabaldon's series. I'm sorry ladies, and it really is a shame, but Jamie Fraser is nowhere out there in the real world.
Book Review: wth?
Summary: 1 Stars
Warning: I was not amused. >.>
Here we go:
Okay. I consider myself relatively open minded, but in a clean way. I read this book, not because I like the genre, but because it was suggested to me. And I started out pretty optimistic. The fact that it was about Scotland had me sold. Early on, some parts of it were attention grabbing and sometimes it was even funny and compelling. As for the writing, it was also well at times. I can step back and appreciate it for what it is, even if it's not really my taste. (I DO like Celtic stuffs, but I'm more a fantasy person than a romance novel person.)
....That's about all I have to say as far as positive reviews. Here is where you won't like my review anymore.
For me, the most important part of the story is what makes the journey worth it- the message. If I suffer with the characters, I also want to learn with them. And the message is what will make even the most horrific scenes worthwhile. If the message is bad, the WHOLE THING, no matter how nicely written it is, how pretty the cover art is, is CRAP. To me, anyway. And the messages I walked away from this book with downright offended me:
1. "It's okay to betray and forget about the one you love when something better comes along."
First off, I'm really bothered by just how quickly and easily she switched over to Jamie- and HOW she switched over to him is the part that bothers me and disgusts me the most.
2. "Nothing spices up your love life better than a little domestic violence! :D But it's only just the once."
Okay, I'm not into BDSM, and maybe that's why this whole scene and aspect of the story bothers me. I think there is NO excuse. Jamie abused Claire. If I were Claire, I would have told Jamie from the get go that if he hit me EVER, even ONCE, I would knee him where it hurts over and over again until he passes out and LEAVE! She should have made a B line for the stones and went back to the guy who treated her right. Oh yeah, now I remember, according to the fan base, a guy who doesn't beat you is not sexy. That's what makes Jamie *so* perfect. Because he knows how to beat a woman without giving in to the temptation of raping her right afterward and still enjoy himself. *rolls eyes*
This leads me into so-called moral #3"
3. "If you love someone, you'll beat them. If you don't beat them, you obviously don't love them enough."
This book has a warped view of love that goes from bad to worse. If you think this is bad, it's multiplied 100 times over with the villain. Oh, and Jamie is such a hypocrite- on the one hand, he tells Claire he's glad she is barren because he couldn't stand to see her in pain, and on the other hand....
4. "Domestic violence makes the heart grow fonder."
Claire: You beat me! ;_;
Jamie: If it makes you feel better, my dad beat me ALL THE TIME growing up. I liked it. :) I miss him. :(
Oh for the love of--- ugh. >.<;
Now, I know what a lot of you are probably thinking: "oh, you sound like one of those people who wouldn't punish their kids"
Oh, I'd discipline them all right, but I'd never hit/spank/BEAT THEM because then you'd get more books like THIS being written; portraying warped views of love and sexuality with a sadomasochistic rose-tinted lens. I think this book speaks for itself in that department, no matter how the author tries to 'justify' it.
And finally, the part that gets me the MOST!, even more than Claire falling in love with someone through a beating with a few little rapes here and there ("Not now Jamie!" *sex anyway* "stop, you're hurting me!" *SEX*), is how the author twists scripture to justify that everything in her story is okay. They were with monks, and fictional monks are never wrong, right? :D? With the way the author warped things, this book is nothing more than Cathlically "correct" porn. ...Written by an old lady. Who resembles my neighbor- but with less cats.
To me, a story has no purpose if it has no message, and the 5 points I just named are what I believe the author is trying to communicate based on what I read. As a result, here is what I thought of the whole book by the end of it: If a bull defecates and a dung beetle comes along and rolls it up and eats it, then the dung beetle in turn defecates, THAT is what I felt about Outlander. It's not just crap, it is the CRAP of crap. It both disturbs me and disgusts me that this goes on for more books- and that there is such a large following, despite the violence and warped BDSM. It only confirms to me that society has a one tracked mind. :/ I haven't hated another book this much since Twilight (Breaking Dawn more specifically), a series that this book gave me horrible flashbacks of.
P.S- Here's the line that made the crap of crap factor sky rocket: "round and round the mulberry bush the monkey chased the weasel". When I read that, I wanted to burn the book. I was reminded of my friend who yelled bloody murder at Twilight in the middle isle of Costco when he picked picked up a copy and read the line: "He looked at me, alluring, I looked back at him, also alluring."
WTH?!
Book Review: Engaging, but tedious.
Summary: 3 Stars
I haved mixed feelings about this book. I listened to it as an audiobook, narrated by Davina Porter, who does a marvelous job with the various accents and voices (female and male). You always know who is speaking. I had read reviews of the book years ago, and was curious enough to finally buy it. The author has herself a big challenge to pull off the story of a time-traveling nurse involved in a swashbuckling 18th century adventure/romance. It's obvious such a theme appeals, as measured by the success of all of Gabaldon's books as well as spinoffs like "The Time Traveler's Wife".
On the one hand, the character of Claire is very well drawn, if not a bit detached and not overly sympathetic. In this first person narrative, she is able to narrate her way virtually unscathed through adventures that would have felled most women in any century. Her 18th century lover/husband Jamie is a wonderful character, a lively conversationalist, kind, and full of life and humor. He seems a bit wiser than his mere 23 years, though he had already lived several lifetimes in hell by that point. In contrast, her 20th century historian, Frank, seems a pale shadow, a mere wimp and a geek. No wonder she chose Jamie.
Having said this, I found several depictions of Jamie in the story to be inconsistent and offputting,
especially when he berates his poor sister with the most foul language interminably for something she didn't
even do. That did not seem in character, although I did understand why he would thrash Clare for disobeying
his orders when it put several men's lives in grave danger.
On the other hand, the book seems way too long for the story -- the author had to keep stringing together
adventure after adventure to keep it going; from the hero or heroine being be-set by vagabonds, tried as a witch, having encounters with wild animals and redcoats, and myriad floggings and other bodily invasions. Gabaldon's writing style is engaging, if a bit too detailed and literary, verging on repetitive. The endless descriptions of floggings, whippings, stabbings, sexual abuse etc. and their aftermath was wearying, getting more tedious each time it appeared. Okay, so life in the 18th Century was no picnic. "We got the message." By the third description of Jamie being violated by the arch villain I wanted to scream myself. The story also contained excruciating detail on how Claire treated wounds, and what these things looked like at every stage. Aack! Enough is enough. There were even too many sex scenes, which brings to my mind the Western expression, "A woman has to be in the mood, but a man just has to be in the room."
I also had a hard time accepting that Claire could adjust so easily to life in a time of no electricity, indoor plumbing or running water. It appeared that no one in the story ever took a real bath (other than a dunking in a stream, mostly be accident), or ever washed their hair. Truly appalling. They would put clean clothes on filthy bodies drenched in sweat, excrement and blood. I recall in particular the scene where Jamie
makes love to Claire out in the woods just after fighting a ferocious battle with several brigands; you'd think with all that testosterone and adrenaline he'd have stunk to high heaven. Being a World War II nurse, she would be both conscious of the need for antiseptics (or their herbal equivalent), in wound treatment, and she was, and of the need for bodily cleanliness. You'd think she would have paid much more attention to the latter, finding creative ways to get clean. It seemed she and Jamie spent half the book wearing torn and filthy clothes, with unspeakable substances tainting both skin and hair.
On the positive side, the author seems to embody the speech and character of 18th century Scotsmen and women well. I also enjoyed it when Claire made references to the 20th century to the bewilderment of her 18th century comrades, such as telling someone not to be "John Wayne" or when she used terms like "bloody Jesus Roosevelt Christ". That was fun, and I wish the author had made more use of the time traveling theme and its paradoxes in the book. She does that a little bit, and it's fascinating, such as implying that if Jack Randall had died before it said in the family geneology document, he wouldn't have been able to father a son, and therefore her husband Frank (his 6th time great-grandson) could never have been born either. Something to think about. My favorite scene in the whole book was the one where Claire reveals to Jamie that she came from the future. A beautiful and emotionally wrenching scene.
By the time I finished listening to Outlander, I felt about as exhausted and traumatized as if I'd been in the book
instead of just reading it. I am not inclined to continue with the series, as I know it will comprise lots more interminable descriptions of bloodshed, whippings, maimings and other abuse.
Book Review: Outlander, the Enjoyment of which Greatly Depends on the Reader
Summary: 3 Stars
After some thought, I've given Outlander 3 1/2 stars. Normally I would've rounded that up to four stars for the sake of leaving some room for aspects of the novel which were only a hindrance to my enjoyment, personally. However, I am reluctant to do so in the case of Outlander because I'm sure that what bothered me will also bother many other readers.
There's nothing outrightly wrong with Outlander in the way it is written, save for a little cheesiness now and again which is easy to overlook when taken over by its fast-paced, action-filled plot. And it has definitely got one of those! After the first few chapters, which are deceivingly slow, the story line is filled with action sequences, escapes, fight scenes, mortal danger, etc. There is no doubt that Gabaldon is a master storyteller, and that her main character Claire is a lively narrator. But Outlander is, at heart, a love story. It never pretends to be anything else, and a good love story coupled with a good plot and plenty of excitement in the form of life-threatening situations is usually a good recipe for a wonderful read. And sometimes it worked in Outlander, but at other times, it failed miserably, repulsing the reader instead of compelling them.
The main problem lies in the character of Jamie Fraser, the romantic hero of Outlander, if you will. He is one of the biggest reasons why I think that this book was only meant for certain readers. If you fall in love with Jamie like Claire did, then you will undoubtedly love the rest of the novel, and from what I've heard, most Outlander fans would give their right leg for James Fraser to be real. But I was not one of them, and as a result struggled through the novel without much hope of redeeming him in my eyes. That's where I believe the real dividing line is. Depending on who you are-- and consequently how much you like Jamie's character-- you will either love this book or hate it. And to give you an idea of which category you will fall into before buying the book: [MINOR SPOILER WARNING] there is a scene where the "romantic hero" Jamie beats the heroine viciously with a leather strap, and the heroine forgives him about two pages later. I know that in those times, it was not uncommon for a man to beat his wife, but her forgiveness of him just made me lose all respect for her. And more to the point, Jamie says that he enjoyed beating her, which I'm sure is not the mark of a sane human being, either now or then. The main antagonist, Jonathan "Black Jack" Randall is also a sadist, maybe in a more extreme sense, but I kept feeling that at least he was always portrayed as such, whereas Jamie was touted as this warm, kind individual who just occasionally enjoys beating helpless women. Ugh. [END SPOILER] Again, if you have no problem with that, and are just as willing to forgive Jamie for what Gabaldon seems to think is a small indiscretion, then you will probably emerge an Outlander fan, but if you are like me, you will end up not caring what happens to the main characters. And that's never good.
There are a number of other characters that most will like, of course. Claire's first husband Frank, though only appearing briefly, was possibly my favorite (kind, handsome and a historian?) and there is a witch named Geilie Duncan who is an altogether fascinating character, not to mention a kindly Franciscan who is everything a proper priest should be. In opposition, the villains of Outlander are amazingly villainous, particularly the aforementioned Jack Randall (although the descriptions of his villainous "actions" are not for the fainthearted or the weak-stomached, another group of people who would do well to stay away from this book). His resounding evil makes the plot enjoyably tense and fraught with danger, as it should with an antagonist that knows no bounds to his cruelty. The main character Claire (who experiences most of this tenseness and fear) is sometimes vivacious, human, and her situation is rightfully intriguing. Somtimes. Mostly she has a very, very irritating way of arguing with almost everyone and being amazingly pigheaded and childish. She hardly gives Frank a second thought, which also makes her shallow in my opinion. Out of sight, out of mind, huh, Claire? Again, just my point of view.
So perhaps I shouldn't say that I hated Outlander. I will say that I would have loved it, in fact, had it not been for the one glaring exception of Jamie Fraser. However, as it is, I could not truly enjoy Outlander when its idolized male lead was someone I could not respect or even like.