IMO it is what it is. Moore's "Outlander" is so far from the book series already that it has very little to do with the novels. Moore seems to be borrowing Gabaldon's characters in name only, while treating them as he sees fit, with little regard for her plot development or thematic concerns, Gabaldon's script for…

Serious question: Lately this comment thread has fielded quite a few posts highly critical of Gabaldon's series. Why wouldn't it be a good time right now, at the end of Season 2, for Moore to drop following her series altogether and go his own way with this material, if her novels from three on are so "ludicrous" and…

Lately this comment thread has fielded quite a few posts highly critical of Gabaldon's series. Why wouldn't it be a good time right now, at the end of Season 2, for Moore to drop following her series altogether and go his own way with this material, if her novels from three on are so "ludicrous" and "weak" and…

He could just stop here with trying to follow the books and go his own better way. Why not? We all can still admire the books, etc. He could do something far more cohesive than following the books in some respects and ignoring them in others, as you are suggesting. Why not let his better ideas organize and…

Consider this: Lately this comment thread has fielded quite a few posts highly critical of Gabaldon's series. Why wouldn't it be a good time right now, at the end of Season 2, for Moore to drop following her series altogether and go his own way with this material, if her novels from three on are so "ludicrous" and…

Lately this comment thread has fielded quite a few posts highly critical of Gabaldon's series. Why wouldn't it be a good time right now, at the end of Season 2, for Moore to drop following her series altogether and go his own way with this material, if her novels from three on are so "ludicrous" and "weak" and…

So true. There is nothing more irrational—and, in an everyday way, sacred—about why one does, or does not, "like" reading a particular book. There is always a kind of magic when a book comes alive for a reader. Comments like yours acknowledge and protect it.

[SPOILERS: I thought Gabaldon took the series to America because the Highlanders and their culture were virtually wiped out after Culloden. Like slaves from Africa, many Scots were shipped to the New World as indentured servants, when the Brits tired of executing them and no longer wished to bear the expense of…

Like it that you hopped on the comment thread, and agree about the centrality of "the Claire/Jamie relationship."

Forgive the interruption—great discussions on this comment thread!

You were not unclear, impolite, or impolitic, nor did you sound pompous in any way. I may have been, however, and for that I apologize—"Moi!" (in Miss Piggy's voice). This time it's fun to explain how I jumped to the wrong conclusion. Starz PR machine is now pushing the word "bodice-ripper": Even Catriona Balfe, one…

This convinces me that you are a Starz's hack hired to stir up buzz on social media. Men protecting their power make strange bedfellows, though I understand the need to make a buck. Try to keep your stories straight-er.

Thanks. I well understand how you see these novels as "scan-worthy fluff": It is what I expected, coming to them a year ago, as a person who can still remember cramming for my 100-book exam covering classics of a bygone era. I also recognize that Gabaldon's originality is not everyone's cup of tea, nor is (or was)…

I never said Claire was—or was not—the main protagonist. In my last post, I discussed how Gabaldon's Claire performs the function of narrator in many different ways within her novels. Before that, I did try to show that the narrator is not always one of the main characters in a novel: You brought up the pertinent…

Moore's Claire isn't one of them, perhaps. We could debate that a bit. But Gabaldon's Claire takes on varied roles, as most close readers understand. When she first tumbles through the stones, she is our proxy, the role of many narrators in fantasy and science fiction novels. Elsewhere, she lapses into modernist…

Sometimes the narrator isn't the main character in a novel or play, but plays the role of interpreter or observer: Think Ishmael in "Moby Dick" or Nick Carraway in "The Great Gatsby" or the stage manager in "Our Town." Not all narrators are dependable: There can be a narrator who is deceitful or simply wrongheaded.…

The fan fiction version Moore will create over the next two years should be the occasion for much more criticism based on the weaknesses of his "adaptation." Those who like his interpretation will get to gush and troll his critics. Everyone's happy.

Moore’s Claire prefaces her anachronistic FU remark to Dougal with an equally modern interpretation of his narcissism. She no doubt references Ovid’s Narcissus, a handsome youth who is traditionally viewed as subsumed by masturbatory fantasy. FU indeed. World War II combat nurses probably received little training…

Why lift material from Michael Ondaatje in an adaptation of Gabaldon's novels? What was the point? Just to do the same thing: Show how a WWII combat nurse loses her nerve when friends are killed in front of her on the road with an IED? Isn't it just more of Moore going, "Look at me! I made an analogy!"?

An added irony is that Gabaldon has expressed major reservations about fan fiction in other contexts. No doubt Moore's project is a big money generator for her, what with consultancy fees for her work on the show and for appearances (I would think), book sales (for sure), and probably a cut of income from "Outlander"…