Wednesday, June 2, 2010

New Video from My Outlander Purgatory!

Oh boy. Wait until you see these. There are six. But they're worth it because we covered a TON of ground from Echo and beyond (predictions anyone?!)

And we answered your questions!!!

And there are a couple special guests in these videos... and maybe a little surprise. :)











42 comments:

Tracey R. said...

DYING for people to see #6 and comment on our theory. I have to say that it is so squeelicious I dinna know what to do with myself. I have also thought of some related scenarios which I will describe once people start commenting.

Jeaniebirdie said...

Your theory about Claire's parents being part of all this? Yes, I can definitely see that happening, but to be honest...at this point nothing would surprise me...DG is so brilliant in her thinking, as are you guys for coming up with the theory, and I am sure there will be more twists and turns in book 8.

Oh, and Tracey. I read the Lord John books, and like you, I liked the second one the best. Percy is such a big part of LJ's life, and I completely agree that this should have been read before reading Echo. I read it in between my first and second read of the Outlander series, and I got so much more of LJ after reading about him. I have NOT read anything from Scottish Prisoner, but am looking forward to that book from what you said in the videos about Jamie being a big part of it.

I would also say that I would so buy books about Ian's life with the Mohawks. We have gotten little pieces here and there, and would love to read more. But, like Shannon said, I think, anything with DG's name on it, I will buy.

Ok, I'll stop now, but also have to give you guys props for re-enacting the "Canna be gentle scene" I was literally in tears from laughing so hard...

Unknown said...

LOVED the videos!

Tracey R. said...

I have two versions of the theory, but both involve Claire's parents originating in the 18th century and accidentally going through the stones.

THEORY 1: Claire's parents go through the stones while pregnant with Claire (shades of Bree!!). They are flummoxed, but adapt to the 20th century and raise Claire before being killed in the car crash. (Not sure how uncle Lamb figures in this one--maybe they befriend him or something? Maybe he's the only one who knows their secret?)

THEORY 2: Claire and parents go through the stones when Claire is 5. Parents don't make it--Claire is the only one who survives the crossing through--and somehow comes across Uncle Lamb.

In both cases, there's a whole mystical, fate-ish thing going on in that Claire is SUPPOSED to be with Jamie all along, but because of this mishap with the stones, fate is screwed up in some way, and somehow Claire has to be brought back to the past. Jamie's "ghost" is actually him Jamie dreaming in the past and encountering Claire (who he doesna know yet, but feels some connection with) at the window and Frank on the street.

Keep in mind that this could all be refuted by some evidence in the books that I'm totally forgetting about--but I swear, I am CONVINCED that at the end of the day, Claire BELONGS in the past. For real.

Angela Fielding said...

Oooohh that was so fun to hear your all talk about my question!!! That's what I was thinking! That maybe Claire's parents were from the 18th century. I was always so amazed how well Claire adapted to the 18th century! I think most modern women would kind have a melt down without all those modern conviences. Yet, she adapts so well to her enviorment! Claire being the heroine in the story. I think something major will be revealed about her. Wasn't there also some mention (can't remember where) I think at the time of G. Duncan. Something prophetic about a blood line (I think that being Jamie & Bree)needing to prevent war or change the course of history???? But maybe it's really through Claire's heritage that Jamie and her needed to produce an heir that could resolve whatever that was! I need to go find that part. Anywho, this re-kilting of the series. I'm taking notes in the margins!LOL I know I missed so much! You ladies are so fun! Love the videos!

Tracey R. said...

Angela--I think what you're referring to from Voyager is Geillis needed to know the last of the Lovat line (to use for a time-travel sacrifice, I think)--but she didn't realize that the line did NOT end in the 19th century, but continued and that Bree was REALLY the last of the line. That seemed to be why she was returning to the future in 1766--to find Bree and do whatever it was she thought would help her go back and re-try the Rising. (I'm assuming said action would not have been a good one for Bree.)

I am planning on participating in the Outlander rekilt as well, but prolly will lag a bit behind--I'm finishing up Sookie Stackhouse #10 (BTW... BORRRRRR-ing) and then have to read The Reliable Wife for book club. But I am SO taking notes on this reread of Outlander, too!

Angela Fielding said...

Yes! That is exactly what I was thinking about! Thanks for clearing that up. You have an amazing memory girlie! My brain doesn't retain anything since I've had my three boys! haha. And another boy on the way! I can only imagine how absent minded I'll be after this one!! Ginko please!

I know...I was going to start 'Into the Wilderness' But I'm too excited about reading Outlander again!

L said...

You guys rock!!! love the opening scene. Great videos and sooo much to take in. And so many more questions in my brain. Who is Claire, interesting speculation? If she is a descendant of The Compte St. Germaine, was HE a time traveler? Master Raymond knew him. Was Master Raymond a traveler? Can Furgus time travel?

My question, "What does DG have against Roger?" Well, he was sold to the Indians, hanged, lost his voice. Now he is (possibly)on a wild goose chase in the past with Uncle Buck. Makes me think DG does not like him. :)

I just remembered the tease about Roger's father MAYBE being caught in a time portal. I wonder if that will ever resurface.

Random thoughts again, L

Christie H said...

Hi all! New poster, lassies!
Love your blog & videos!!

Two thoughts:
1. I don't think that Jamie will be too upset about Claire and LJG. But I do think that Claire will be VERY upset that LJG told Jamie about the carnal knowledge!! In fact, in my mind I see Jamie having to rescue LJG from Claire's murderous rage!
2. You realize, of course, that if Claire is a descendant of Fergus then that means she's also from Leghair's line (through Marsali) OMG! Plus that makes her her own step-granny or some such!!!

Thanks again for all your entertaining posts!

Christie (yes, that's my name! just like Tom! spelled the same way and everything!)

Brandy said...

I have to say I never thought about that theory of Claire really being from the past but I love it!! Love the video's too ladies!

Purgatory Carol said...

Thanks all! We had a ball making them. LORDDDDDDDDD we had a ball.

The theories are so much fun, too. I've never given much thought to Claire's parents... and I suppose I should. If you watch Vampire Diaries, you know the "deceased parents" always present themselves in some way, shape or form. What freaks me out is that virtually ANYONE can show up at any time... because they've time traveled from the 20th century. I keep waiting for Frank to show up. "Remember that time I went to London for 2 months, Claire? Well, actually I went through the stones and here I am!" ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE! :)

Purgatory Carol said...

PS - WELCOME CHRISTIE! We love comments! Keep 'em coming!

Stephanie said...

Okay, watching your videos has made me rethink the whole Claire/LJG/Jamie thing (again) and here's what I've come up with:

1) We know the first Claire/LJ encounter they were both mourning Jamie and finding his memory in each other. COMMA HOWEVER, LJ and Jamie never had a physical relationship while Jamie was alive, for obvious reasons. Could this possibly explain (not excuse) Lord John's actions in approaching Claire again?

2) Regarding how Jamie might consider the whole consummation issue. Remember, in Fiery Cross, there was the whole will they/won't they with Jocasta and Duncan. Clearly, they wouldn't, but the priest married them anyway. It was a marriage of convenience, and Jamie accepted it as such (granted, his elderly aunt and a prison buddy is not the same as his wife and best friend, but work with me here). My point here being that it is not necessarily true that Jamie would have expected a true marriage between those two in every sense of the word. Just like Jocasta needed a man's name to put on her business dealings, Claire needed a man to keep her from the gallows.

Also, Jamie and Claire had to be sure that no one could challenge their marriage and turn Claire over to BJR anyway. Hence, the party of men outside the room. Here that would be less of a concern, as no British soldier would question Lord John's word as a gentleman.

That's my 2 cents. Or maybe 5. This was kind of long :^)

Purgatory Carol said...

Stephanie - whoa - NICE POINTS! Long?! We made SIX videos - and you WATCHED 'em! You ROCK in my opinion! :)

Wow. I totally forgot that Claire married Jamie originally to avoid arrest! Nice comparison.

I honestly think Lord John was seeing this as a marriage that would continue and - as Shannon says - was following in the deer's footsteps. As Tracey reminds us though; it was just not a long enough time for any of us to have bought them being SUCH the married couple that they'd be dressing together (um, EW).

Can you imagine if we really thought Jamie was dead? Oh wow - I never thought of that before. I think I'd have been FREAKING OUT about Claire and LJG... and feeling like they were desecrating his memory or something. But because I new he was alive, I almost found their coupling...funny!

Wow I have to think about this way more now. THANKS for the tremendous commentary. I'll be thinking about this all night!

L said...

@Christie, Own Step-Granny!!!!!! FUNNY Would that mean that Leghair could also go through the stones. The plot thickens!!!

Angela Fielding said...

L and Christie....I never thought about either of those points!! Awesome!!!

Louise said...

I'd like to think that when Claire and Lord John were in the bedroom dressing together it was pretty innocent. After all she was doing her hair and he was putting his boots on. It isn't as if they were prancing about in their undies!

I think Diana mentioned on compuserve that she just needed them in a room together on the second floor of the house so that the subsequent "scenes" could take place as she wanted them. I do agree that Claire's reaction to Jamie suddenly appearing wasn't as momentous has I would have liked. She could at least have fainted as Jamie did when she reappeared in Voyager.

As for "Ghost Jamie" I always assumed that the "dream" Jamie had about seeing Claire doing her hair in a room full of light was the same time that Frank saw the ghost.

Tracey R. said...

Louise: re: DG's strategic placement of Claire/LJ-- WOW WOWWY WOW is all I can say about that. If that's really the case, and we've been obsessing about it all this time, when in fact it was nothing more than a logistical issue????? Wow. I need to ponder that one a bit. I mean, to me it was such an opportunity for reading between the lines in terms of the familiarity of their relationship. Hmmm.

Christie H said...

OK, well, here's a theory of mine about the Jamie-ghost thing...
When Jamie's ghost was looking at Claire in the beginning of Outlander, she hadn't been through the stones yet. But he knew she was going to, so he was impatiently waiting for her (and jealous of Frank, of course). But, now that she has gone through the stones, not once, but twice, Jamie's ghost will not have to come and find her in the future - that's one thing that her time traveling will change.
I don't know... it kinda makes my head hurt to think about it. But, quite frankly, I'd rather not think about Jamie's ghost wandering around without Claire's ghost right there at his side.

Louise said...

Christie ... is the ghost actually a "traditional" ghost where a person is dead and his spirit is wandering round or is the "vision" that Frank saw some kind of manifestation which comes from Jamie's weird "dreams" that he has about the future?

When Frank saw Jamie he asked Claire if there had been any scottish soldiers who were in love with her. Now at this time Claire was only 28 so if "Ghost Jamie" was "dead Jamie" he would have been 60+. Frank wouldn't have assumed that he was Claire's love interest.

Tracey R. said...

Here's a question related to Louise's: do we have any confirmation that either Jemmy or Mandy have actually SEEN Jamie during the times we know he's dreamed about them? We know that Mandy "talks" to Jamie, but does she actually see him? Did Jem see Jamie when he wanted to call him on the phone at the Wakefield house?

Hmm...maybe you can only see the ghost/vision if you're the one Jamie is dreaming about....

Christie H said...

oooo.... so maybe the ghost that Frank saw was young Jamie who had died at Culloden (or with Black Jack Randall or when Dougal bashed his head in... my, that man has had a lot of near-death experiences) because Claire hadn't come through the stones yet

But now that won't happen because she did/has and they will die together so he won't have to wander around without her

like I said before - thinking about time travel makes my head hurt!

Tracey R. said...

Oooh, Christie, now THAT is interesting (the "Jamie dies at Culloden" part), because as of yet, Jamie still hasn't remembered everything that happened there, and we STILL haven't learned exactly what went down with BJR. Maybe THAT'S the Frank connection!

OMG, lasses, we are totally going to crack this mystery. I can feel it. ;-)

Purgatory Carol said...

Oh my god my head is SPINNING after reading all of these theories! I love them... but wow.

GOOD POINT about Jamie's ghost being young. I don't even know how to begin to explain that away.

Claire/LJG being in the bedroom... I dunno. I get that they had to be on the 2nd floor... that makes sense. But the whole "getting dressed in the same room" thing made no sense to me because didn't they have separate bedrooms? Why would they be dressing together in the same room? Diana might not have given it much thought... but Tracey and I have! LOL

I think my main prediction about Book 8 (apart from Jamie/Claire/LJG sitch) is that we're going to see Frank in some way, shape or form. The whole thing about Bree being dangerous... and the fact that you can time-travel back to different times... means Frank could have traveled back - and never told Claire/Bree once he came back through and went home. Could have happened. Probably not - but could have, right?!

Anonymous said...

I love this site... but I wish I'd never seen it! Not because of the spoilers exactly... I don't know if I can handle reading any further now. I'm 3/4 of the way through Dragonfly in Amber. I still love Claire, still LOVE Jamie, still dislike Frank and so on. I can't bear to think about either of them sleeping with other people much less being involved in meaningful relationships with other people. I think I need to put the book down and walk away! (but I won't)

lesley said...

hi ladies
loved the videos and loved your theories, got me thinking.
-what if uncle lamb (whoever he was) was claires guardian from back in the 18th century with a mission to look after/protect her? .that would make his interest in archaeology (sp)a good cover for taking claire all over the world in less civilised living conditions to prepare her for going back.did he really die in the war or just go back because his job was done?
-master raymond seemed to recognise claire in some way when they first met and said her aura was blue like his (do all time travellers have blue auras?)
-got to be more to jamies being able to see into the future in his dreams as jenny seems to have some sort of sixth sense as well(her seeing claires fetch? at jamies and l,heery,s wedding)
-is the bloodline thing that geillis/gillian was trying to stop significant as it,s a line of gifted people who can change maybe the future? hmmm jem and mandy seem to be exceptionally gifted especially mandy who seems to have inherited not only the time travel gene but the seeing things/sensing things aswell.
-i can,t wait to find out the rest of frank,s letter to bree that she never got to finish.
-whew once you start thinking about these things it,s hard to stop.but i,ll stop the post now
lesley :-)

Tracey R. said...

Lesley--LOVE all your theories/ideas!!

Here's my "aha" moment for the day: Do you think Claire wrote to Scotland to let Young Jamie et. al. know about the "death" of Jamie/Jenny? Given my whole feel of "Jamie was only dead within LJ's house at 145 Spruce St.," maybe not--but if she did, might that have any repercussions?

louise said...

I'm not sure what repercussions there could be apart from everyone thinking their mother and uncle had died. If they have had the news I'm sure someone would write another letter saying "... opps we got it wrong!".

HOWEVER ... did Lord John write to Hal and his mother about his marriage? or about Dottie's plans to marry Denny?

I doubt they would be very pleased with either marriage and I could see his mum getting on the next boat to sort it out :)

Amie said...

That was fun, next time I am going to make myself a margerita to drink along with you :).

AFA my "question" went, I thought it was really cool ya'lls said "hi" to me but I should have put that comment in the other post - it didn't really go there.

ANYWAY, ya'll are too much fun. I love the Clair's parents being from the past idea - that would totally make sense.

Unknown said...

Great videos and discussion. You ladies Rock!
Wasn't there some point where Jamie was remembering a girl from his youth but no one knew for sure who it was? I think it was in Echo but I've only read part of it.
Could he have connected with young Claire in France before he got his head hit & lost memory?
Again I thought at one point he told her he thought he willed her to him through time, I thought he meant the first time. So maybe they met when they were young.

I need an Outlander series search thing like Google or somehting so I can search every bit of it's text fast. lol

Purgatory Carol said...

Whoa MELODY! Thank you! I have TOTALLY FORGOTTEN to ask about that obscure little part about the girl from Jamie's youth! It was just sortof.. THERE.. all the sudden.. and I was like "What? WHAT? WHO?!" YES! Thanks. Have to a) ask Karen, b) ask Tracey and c) search Compuserve!

Tracey R. said...

I believe HERSELF has said that we will learn about Jamie's French girl in the graphic novel. Three more months, lasses...

Purgatory Carol said...

Wait though, Tracey... are you talking about the one he had the duel for? The one who didn't choose him? I got the feeling this was a different girl. Dang. I suppose I should read that part again. PS - I dinna want to know ANYTHING about any other female in Jamie's life than CLAIRE!!!

Christie H said...

Wasn't there also some French girl that died... somehow during a pregnancy or in childbirth or something like when Jamie was there as a soldier? I don't really remember - it seems like it is someone that Jamie just thinks about briefly like in a dream or something? I don't even know if he told Claire about her.

Have fun at your event!

Tracey R. said...

The French girl is the one Jamie thinks about when he's on the boat with Jenny headed for America. Just another of those "wha-haaah????" moments from the last 50 pp of Echo... ;-) DG has said that we will find out about her in the graphic novel.

JaneEllen said...

I agree with you all that there is _something_ about Claire, but I'm not sure I agree that she and/or her parents originate in the 18th century. For one thing, she mentioned several times in earlier books (I specifically remember it in the "seinfeld" scene in DOA) that bugs don't bother her, and she thinks it's because bugs and people evolve together and she isn't in sync with 18th century bugs.

But there is something more to Claire... she's yet to achieve her FULL POWERS that the old Indian woman predicted. What will this mean? Also, the "white witch" thing.

I'm currently working my way through the audio versions of the books. I was listening to Voyager yesterday and FREAKED OUT at something that didn't mean anything to me when I originally read it, but it seems to take on more meaning now. During the time that Jamie is at Ardsmuir, LJ takes him to question a prisoner about the gold. The guy is incoherent, but there are things that Jamie thinks have specific meaning. The guy talks about a white witch, and Jamie continues to question him about it, asking a couple of times - who is the white witch? This is the part that freaks me out, here's what it says:

"At once Duncan Kerr's eyes flew open. He stared up, up, past the two faces bending over him, seeing something far beyond them.

"She will tell you," he said, in Gaelic. "She will come for you." For a split second, his attention seemed to return to the inn room where he lay, and is eyes focused on the men with him. "For both of you," he said distinctly."

WHAT?! Is this some sort of foreshadowing of Jamie, LJ, Claire's future? What does this guy know, and how does he know it? And what the heck does it mean?

I'm convinced that Claire does have some sort of special powers or something that has been with her the whole time. Not sure whether she knows it or if she will figure it out when we do. I think Herself has a plan and we just have to gnash our teeth until she tells us.

Elizabeth said...

Okay on an earlier entry I said I couldn't find you guys talking about the last few chapters. NEVER MIND!! Found the videos and they made my day.

Carol PLEASE answer me this one question. When Jaime is on the boat to go see Claire in Philly he is thinking of "a nameless girl" that died in France before he met Claire. What?! How is this?

Tracey R. said...

Hi Elizabeth--it's never made clear who Jamie is thinking about on the boat out of France; HOWEVER, over at the CompuServe forum, DG has said that we will find out more about the mystery girl in the Outlander graphic novel that's coming out in Sept.

Tracey R. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Elizabeth said...

Thanks sorry I was too anxious to read the above comments. I HAD to ask. I see now that you mention it. Thanks!

Purgatory Carol said...

Jane Ellen - I thought he was talking about Geillis??? That she'd come for both him AND Claire? Hmmm....

Elizabeth - I know. I KNOW. That part REALLY bothered me... but the last 50 pages were so intense, I kinda-sorta forgot all about it! So THANKS for reminding me! I could do a whole blog entry on the nameless girl!!!

Purnima said...

Hi guys,
I'm super late to this thread BUT - I'm wondering if Jamie's "ghost" is actually a "fetch" and it has nothing to do with J&C being separated in death. After all, Jenny saw Claire's fetch at Jaime and Laoghaire's wedding when Claire was alive (200 yrs in the future).