Outlander

Hey guys it's Lydia here! I finished Outlander a few days ago and I have a few views and opinions I'd like to express.

Author: Diana Gabaldon
Published: 1st June 1991
Publisher: Arrow
Pages: 864
Genre: Historical fiction, fiction, romance

Small description (from Amazon)

1946, and Claire Randall goes to the Scottish Highlands with her husband Frank. It’s a second honeymoon, a chance to learn how war has changed them and to re-establish their loving marriage.
But one afternoon, Claire walks through a circle of standing stones and vanishes into 1743, where the first person she meets is a British army officer - her husband’s six-times great-grandfather.

Unfortunately, Black Jack Randall is not the man his descendant is, and while trying to escape him, Claire falls into the hands of a gang of Scottish outlaws, and finds herself a Sassenach - an outlander - in danger from both Jacobites and Redcoats.

Marooned amid danger, passion and violence, her only chance of safety lies in Jamie Fraser, a gallant young Scots warrior. What begins in compulsion becomes urgent need, and Claire finds herself torn between two very different men, in two irreconcilable lives.

Review

Outlander as a whole was a fantastic read, even though I'm going to discuss aspects of the book I didn't enjoy, generally it was an exciting read all the way through.

Again like in my last review, I would recommend this book to readers who are aged eighteen and above, because there's quite a lot of sexual language.

The time settings of the book (there are two) are very interesting, as at the beginning the story is set after the Second World War, a time of peace and tranquility, where society was trying to rebuild their lives after six years of horrific war. But Clair, our narrator is transported back in time to the 18th century, a completely different and perhaps brutal society. However, another view could be that Clair is transported back into a similar atmosphere of the war, and evermore reflects her 20th century life in the progress of the Battle of Culloden (16th April 1746). The time difference may have been created by Gabaldon to convey how decorum has changed over the years, and that peoples attitude towards one another became less harsh and savage.

The plot was well structured and written, keeping myself as a reader full of excitement and anticipation for what was next to come. This can also be said about the characters. While I actually read the book by listening to the audio version, I felt that I more vividly imagined and heard the characters when they spoke to one another, as through their voices and dialogue I could understand their sense of character. Like the Harry Potter series, Outlander has many characters, and all are explored and used well in the journey the reader takes with Clair into the new and scary world of the past. My favourite character is Clair, as I think she is for many readers. I enjoyed her as a character and a narrator because although she is launched into a new place, her sense of self and character doesn't change. She is still the same strong-minded, determined, passionate and kind-hearted person she was in 1946 and 1743.

My other favourite character is Jamie Fraser. Although I dislike some of the aspects the character is involved in (which I will comment on further on), he really is  brilliant. I felt that I couldn't write a review about Outlander without discussing Jamie. As a reader and writer, I have connections with characters, and I feel like he is a genuine person and very down to earth; Gabaldon has created someone unique. I won't say too much about him, as I like to keep my reviews as spoiler free as possible. But my favourite aspect I like about Jamie, is that for most of the part, he treats people with respect.

That brings me into the romance of the book. The love interest in Outlander is gradual, and this make the story feel more realistic and personal, in some books the romance is really corny, like 'I saw her face and knew that I would love her forever'. However, you watch Jamie and Clair become friends, lovers and then soulmates. This is in retrospect with the TV series. Although I do love the live action version of the characters, I felt that there wasn't enough awkwardness in the TV series as there was in the book (as Clair and Jamie married for practical reasons), and that the characters on screen adapted to each other as a married couple too quickly.

On the flip side of romance, I'm going to discuss the sexual assaults and manipulations in Outlander. While reading these horrific moments, and becoming enraged and pitiful for the characters, I feel that Gabaldon, again has included these interactions and descriptions in her book because she wants to get her readers to understand the low treatment people had of each other. While it is mostly men of women, we do encounter a reversal, the reader shall also feel and understand the shame and isolation of sexual assault other from a female perspective. I just disliked the way some of the male characters spoke to women. Even when Jamie and Clair are married, he became brutish and used sadism against her, and plainly because it was how husbands disciplined their wives (I know I sound negative about Jamie, but honestly he does love Clair). I can understand the marital customs of the time, but it was hard for me to listen to as a 21st century reader. However, as I have said before, perhaps the writer has pushed the reader into hard and uncomfortable situations between people, because she is trying to mirror current treatment men and women have of each other, and perhaps it doesn't differ so much as it did almost three hundred years ago.

I hope you like my review of Outlander, and I also hope I didn't spoil any of the book for you. It was a historical and loving read.

Robinson Crusoe

Hello, this is Heather! Since my Tuesday postings are usually honest reviews of books that we get sent in (if I keep up with my schedule, which is rare), I’ve decided to spend Thursdays writing about any other piece of writing that sparks my interest. It’s going to be more informal and rambling-styled, because I’m exhausted by this time in the week. Despite taking an A-Level in maths, I keep thinking that sixteen comes after seventeen today, which is a little worrying. It seemed proper to start this with what could possibly have been the first English-written novel (with a lot of debate around the topic, for instance Beware the Cat by Baldwin is a strong contender, funny title given that the protagonist of this one is rather cruel to cats), Robinson Crusoe. 

To say I enjoyed this novel would be perhaps an exaggeration. I actually read the first chapter on holiday and found it so dreary that I put it down and decided not read it again. Like Robinson himself, I went against my word and drudged through it with the aid of an ASMR rainy room to exude the whole stormy atmosphere.

Alright, so it’s crucial to note that Defoe didn’t have all the resources writers do today – on almost every writing tips list, it’s highlighted that reading a variety of novels is vital. 1719? Well, life was somewhat different to 2017; Defoe himself having lived through the Plague, the Great Fire of London and the raid on Medway. His mother sadly did pass away when he was ten, and it’s highly probably that he was familiar with death given that only three houses survived the Great Fire of London in his neighbourhood including his own. England itself prosecuted anyone that involved in a religion outside of the Church of England, so it’s likely that Defoe was familiar with the Bible, which is echoed further in Robinson Crusoe. Obviously, the amazing Shakespeare had been around before Defoe was born, perhaps the Tempest influenced the whole island theme, this is all speculation as no one knows for sure. What we do know is that Daniel Defoe was born with the surname Foe, probably adding the ‘De’ on to sound more aristocratic, he was awful with money, being in enormous debt regularly, and other than writing, he also worked as a spy and pamphleteer. Normally I wouldn’t include so much context, but honestly without all that it’s difficult to appreciate the depth of the novel. 

For a modern audience, it’s pretty difficult to actually like Robinson. As a protagonist, he’s infuriating. Like Victor Frankenstein, he spends a long time loitering in a state of self-pity and commits himself to doing something stupid that everyone and God disapproves of. Everyone warns Robinson not to go to sea, and when he does go, his first voyage is such a fiasco that he initially views it as a sign from God that he should stay away from the sea, but being the stubbornly romantic idiot that he is, he does indeed sail again. His adventures get a little more exciting than a rebellion against the family and feeling awfully sea sick when he gets enslaved for a couple of years, breaking out with Xury, who I saw as a symbol for an angel or at least some rationality. Naturally, Robinson messes up a lot more, I won’t spoil the plot, but I think we all know that he inevitably winds up on an ‘uninhabited island’ that is actually used by cannibals to kill and eat their next meal. If you didn’t know that then frankly it’ll be a kind spoiler, I spent the majority of the book awaiting the cannibals. Eventually, I’m relieved to say that he is low on ink and thence cannot waffle nearly as much, making it all much more bearable. So, Robinson is stubborn, stupid, defiant against anyone that cares about him, kills several people (admittedly sometimes this is, arguably, justified) and pretty treacherous too. Oh, and he also drowns countless numbers of kittens who clearly just want a cuddle. Yup. I know, there are several rude words that I reserve for such kitten-slayers as he. I will never look at Robinson fruit juice without remembering Crusoe.

Naturally, in an older book, there are some ideas and words that are now offensive utilised, given the date of publication this really shouldn’t be penalised. I’d love to show Defoe how different our societies are. Really, what I found the most astonishing thing was the fact that Robinson apparently never really needs to use the loo or shower on this island of his. With that being said, writing usually leaves out such details, note how Harry Potter is basically told by Cedric to take a bath in the fourth book. Some of the topics discussed are actually really interesting – despite being dislikeable, Robinson has some thoughtful moments, then again, I guess we all would if we were on an island alone for so long. My favourite was the debate over cannibalism; is it wrong for someone to kill a fellow human if they think of it as normal and acceptable? Like I said earlier, it’s also important to remember that thanks to Daniel Defoe, novels became far more popular after Robinson Crusoe was publicised. Furthermore, it probably served as inspiration towards several castaway and desert island books. If ever anyone has found themselves on an uninhabited island and is familiar with the novel, this novel could potentially save their life, they’d know to lookout for cannibals. 

However, I feel like if this book could be a masterpiece if only we could scrub it, washing off the irrelevant and dull paragraphs of Robinson complaining or telling us again and again about how he’s building a fence. If the reader takes the time to analyse the novel, it’s pretty clear that Defoe has mastered the fundamentals of being human, letting Robinson fully express regret, sadness, guilt and confusion, and understand how simple our society could be, our needs being purely to eat, drink and retain good health. I’ve read several reviews that state that he has no character development and honestly, I really disagree with this. As the novel progressed, Robinson became less ignorant and more patient, valuing of the companions he had rather than discarding them and realising the futility of money when you only have the basic tools to survive with (perhaps something Defoe did to make his gigantic debt feel less stressful). Another plus point is that this is simply an adventure book. There’s no romance, no fantasy, no mystery, and it’s getting rather rare to find novels that fit snugly in one category. He’s adventuring not only literally but also spiritually; through meeting Friday in particular, he realises what his religion means and wonders why God allows certain actions.

Whilst I cannot say I loved this book, I can definitely appreciate the amount it's done in allowing us to understand humanity, stripping us back to basic needs, and for literature as a whole. If anyone wants to share their view on the novel, please do comment below.