BACK IN TIME WITH OUTLANDER

Thanks to the wonders of Netflix, I’m spending the deep, dark days of winter wrapped in the warmth of one of my favorite romance stories—again. Yes, friends, there is nothing like settling down on the couch with a blanket, a warm drink and a few episodes of Outlander to heat things up on a cold night, no matter how frigid the air may be outside your cabin window!

The new (fifth) season of the historical romance series based on the novels by Diana Gabaldon starts this Sunday on the premium STARZ network, but you can stream the first three seasons now on Netflix free if you have a subscription. And, if you’ve never been introduced to this story of a fiery-tempered WWII nurse who falls through a circle of stones in 1945 to land in Scotland in 1743 only to fall in love with a brawny Highlander, you really must take advantage of this opportunity to find out what the fuss is about.

 

Claire and Jamie: Eyes for only each other

I first met nurse Claire and Highlander Jamie through a free copy of the first book in Gabaldon’s nine-book Outlander series, given to those of us who were lucky enough to attend her speech at the New York City Romance Writers of America® conference a few years back. Gabaldon said in her talk that her book had been a hard sell at first. This was in the days before Highlander romances were vastly popular; there was virtually no such thing as a time-travel romance; the book was too long, had too much history in it, was impossible to categorize. (Does any of this sound familiar, SFR authors?) So, she started challenging potential agents, editors and publishers with this: Take the book, open it to any page and start reading. I guarantee you won’t be able to stop.

People, that’s what you call chutzpah! I wish I had half that much confidence in my writing.

The result, of course, is that Gabaldon started a whole new genre of her own in romance writing. Highlander romances are everywhere now, and time-travel romances are no longer unusual. In fact, in paranormal romance, they’re very common. Thanks to Diana Gabaldon and the overwhelming success of Outlander.

I’ve read the entire series several times. My husband has read it, too. I’ll admit I like historical romance, and both the settings (first Scotland, then France, Jamaica and North Carolina) and the time period are interesting. But those aren’t the only attractions. The greatest appeal for me, and undoubtedly for the millions of Gabaldon’s fans, is the couple at the heart of the books—Claire and Jamie Fraser. 

On the surface, they appear to be the cliché’d spunky heroine and stalwart hero. Oh, but they are so much deeper than that. Gabaldon has imbued them with real quirks and flaws, with individual mannerisms and world views, with souls we can see so clearly, it’s as if we know them from the first page we meet them. We can be frustrated with Claire’s stubborn streak and her impetuous temper. We can roll our eyes at Jamie’s macho posturing and naivety. Because in the next chapter, Claire’s generous heart and Jamie’s poetic soul redeem them (and bring them back together again). And the sexual attraction between these two, though it’s seldom graphic in the novels, can really steam up the pages!

Then there is the complication of what Claire has left behind in 1945—her husband Frank, who she genuinely loves. But maybe not as passionately as this Highlander who is obviously her soulmate. 

And just happens to look exactly like Claire and Jamie’s 1743 nemesis,Captain Jonathan “Black Jack” Randall. Every story needs a villain to match the power of the romantic bond, and, boy, does this one live up to the role. Randall is irredeemable. Evil with a capital “E.” And he finds every opportunity to get in the way of Claire and Jamie’s happiness, often succeeding for months, or years. (Yeah, the series has a long timeline.) Of course, he can’t succeed forever. Outlander is a romance, after all.

The television adaptation is a sumptuous treat, gorgeous to look at, accurate in its period detail and beautiful in its Scottish Highland scenery. And the actors chosen to play Claire (Catriona Balfe), Jamie (Sam Heughan) and both Frank and Black Jack Randall (Tobias Menzies) are perfect for their roles. I am constantly in awe of their performances, particularly in Season One, when Black Jack does his worst. (Warning: Some of these scenes are definitely not for the squeamish. But Gabaldon was incredibly brave to write the original scenes in the novels; Ronald D. Moore was just as brave to include them in detail in the televised version; and the actors above all deserve praise for depicting them onscreen.)

Best of all, Balfe and Heughan bring Claire and Jamie to life in a way I could never have thought possible. She, taking Claire from waspish to tender in a moment. He, taking Jamie from boyish eagerness to steely courage in a heartbeat. And together? Fireworks! (Including some much more graphic sex on the screen.

Yeah, I’m really enjoying this, and I think you will, too. I can’t wait for Season Five! 

Cheers, Donna

WHOSE CHARACTER IS IT, ANYWAY?

Looks like Jamie to me!

Diana Gabaldon, author of the mega-bestselling Outlander series, raised some eyebrows recently when she defended the choice of actor Sam Heughan to play Jamie MacKenzie in the Starz! Television version of the book.  Seems some fans weren’t happy with the way young Heughan looked.  He didn’t fit their vision of a character they had grown to know and love.

Gabaldon set them straight in her Facebook post.  She argued that, as the author, she ought to know what Jamie looked like, and, more importantly, acted like.  And an actor’s looks were less important than the skills he brought to the role.

She watched the audition tapes and summed it up:  “[T]he bottom line is simply this: He showed up and he _was_ Jamie.  (You know something? I don’t really _care_ if you, personally, have been imagining Chris Hemsworth as Jamie. You’re wrong; he doesn’t look like that at all. )”

Now, Gabaldon, who single-handedly created the time-travel romance phenomenon and the Scottish Highlander romance craze with Outlander, despite the well-known facts that it is too long, takes too long to get to the romance, has too much history and too many odd details about flora and fauna and a hundred other things, and strings out the story over nine volumes, has never been known for her tact.  And she’s right, up to a point, that Jamie is her creation and she knows him from the inside out.

But she’s wrong if she thinks she can control what her readers think of him.  How they see him is entirely up to them. 

In truth we lose control of our characters before the story is even finished, if we allow our intuition free rein.  Every writer has had the experience of characters “speaking” to her, of demanding to be heard, even of taking over a story.  My African-American friend Linda had slave characters from the time of the Civil War who demanded to have their stories told in her book, Out from Egyptland.  I’ve had secondary characters literally take over and turn a story in a new direction, hijacking a book.  Backstory reveals itself, relationships turn out to have a history, even villains develop a conscience (or at least an explanation).

But once the story is locked down and presented to the world, then the real mutation occurs. Because every reader has his own imagination, her own interpretation to bring to the world you have created.  It would be a miracle if all your readers saw your world and your characters just as you saw them, no matter how well you painted the picture for them.  Of course, the idea is to communicate with your readers and you want to pass on your vision to them.  But if you’ve described your hero as tall and muscular, and your reader prefers her guys with the build of long-distance runners, so she envisions him like that, who’s going to care?  As long as she continues to buy my books, I won’t object!

For that reason, the characters’ physical characteristics are their least important aspects. Most readers will just skim right over a block of physical description and supply their own, based on tiny details of action or dialogue.  Not so long ago, however, the “rules” of romance required that you supply a catalog of physical details right away for your hero and heroine—eye color, hair color, “broad shoulders”, “trim waist” and the like.  Some contest judges will still harp on this point, but I think they’re a dying breed (or interested only in  category romance).  There are much subtler ways of getting the essence of your character across, to show people who your characters are, rather than telling them what they look like.

Who your characters are will always be a matter of debate once they enter the wide world.  I admit it’s rather odd to be on the other side of the literature class analysis.  What was the author thinking when she created this character?  What did he intend with this heroine’s story?  A lot of it, at least in the first draft, is unintentional.  The characters tell their own stories.  It’s only when you get to the revisions that you begin to consciously of goals, motivations and conflict.  Of whether your heroine is acting consistently throughout the book or whether your hero is too emotional here and not emotional enough there.

That’s when you truly get to know your characters, and, if you do your job, your readers can truly feel they know your characters, because they act consistently from scene to scene, from chapter to chapter, and, if it’s a series, from book to book.  Gabaldon could confidently say she “saw” Jamie in Sam Heughan because, after nine books, she’s created a consistent, recognizable character, that Heughan could recreate.  Her readers will have to trust her that they’ll have the same experience, but they’re uneasy, because they feel the same sort of ownership now.

It’s no wonder, however, that films have such a poor success rate in re-creating the magic of books.  There is usually no match for our own imaginations working in concert with the author’s.  I’ll never forget my first reaction to seeing Peter Jackson’s THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING.  As a lifelong Lord of the Rings fan, I couldn’t believe the way Jackson had captured my vision of Middle Earth and all its characters.  It was just the way I had imagined it as I read it.  His vision, Tolkien’s and mine (and, apparently, millions of others’) had all coincided in a miraculous way.  I’ve never had that experience, before or since.  I certainly don’t expect to have it if any of my books are ever adapted for the screen (Yeah, I like to dream big!)

So, given the low odds, Gabaldon and her fans (of which I am one) should be happy there is a good-looking, passionate, athletic, Scottish actor to play Jamie.  Our thoughts turn now to Claire, and who will play that smart, prickly, impulsive Sassenach.  I know my husband can’t wait to find out.  God knows what kind of visions he’s been having!

Ping Pong

--Congratulations to Laurie (as Editor-at-Large) and Pippa (as a selected author) for all your hard work in producing the first annual anthology Tales from the SFR Brigade.  The content is outstanding, the authors are stellar and the production work is fantastic.  This was a first-rate job all around, and I’m sure will be catching much attention for all involved.

--Whew, Pippa!  Just hearing about your schedule last month makes me tired!  Take a break and relax—you deserve it!

Cheers, Donna