...
Show More
My feelings toward Diana Gabaldon are very love/hate. She is, on the one hand, one of the greatest writers I have ever come across. I want to shake her hand for being so carefully detailed and doing what must have been an unbelievable amount of research to put together her 7 (currently) gigantic novels of this series. I love her characters, how the events are all interwoven with true historical happenings... she is just generally a literary genius when it comes to historical fiction.
But... seriously, I couldn't help but think repeatedly "why did we need to know that? what has the last 200 pages really added to the overall story?" The books are so well written but they are about 500-600 pages too long. Gabaldon frequently wanders off into subplots that we (or I, at least) don't care about. Her waffle would get an A* in a literary test but it's still waffle. And the general size of her books is off-putting, she should have left out those bits that we didn't need to hear and gave the readers a much less forboding 400-500 page novel.
The start of this book was even slower than Outlander, who actually cares about Roger Wakefield here? The whole point of this extremely long-winded beginning was to tell us that something bad had happened to make Claire return to the future, where she had given birth to Jamie's daughter and, for whatever reason, believed her wonderful red-headed Scot had been killed in the battle of Culloden. We are then taken back in time to when Claire and Jamie are in France trying to stop the rebellion before it ever happened.
This seemed a bit scientifically risky to me. If you assumed that they could change time and prevent the battle, surely this would result in a complete upheaval of historical events resulting in many changes. If such a huge thing happened, it is likely that everything would change and unlikely that Claire Randall would ever have ended up in Scotland at exactly that time to go wandering through the stones. And then, of course, had she not gone through the stones, she would have never been there to warn Jamie and stop the rebellion so... it's a bit of a historical and scientific conundrum. Therefore, I like my time travel to not interfer with past events - it wouldn't make sense. Unless it's a Back To The Future scenario where he actually fills in some of the necessary blanks.
To be honest, I didn't enjoy this book as much as Outlander because I didn't feel as much happened. But I adore the relationship between Claire and Jamie, even more so after reading this second installment, and I will definitely be reading Voyager as soon as I can get myself ready for another hefty volume. And thank god for the ending of this book when my slowly increasing depression throughout was finally alleviated - can't wait to see where this will take our characters!
But... seriously, I couldn't help but think repeatedly "why did we need to know that? what has the last 200 pages really added to the overall story?" The books are so well written but they are about 500-600 pages too long. Gabaldon frequently wanders off into subplots that we (or I, at least) don't care about. Her waffle would get an A* in a literary test but it's still waffle. And the general size of her books is off-putting, she should have left out those bits that we didn't need to hear and gave the readers a much less forboding 400-500 page novel.
The start of this book was even slower than Outlander, who actually cares about Roger Wakefield here? The whole point of this extremely long-winded beginning was to tell us that something bad had happened to make Claire return to the future, where she had given birth to Jamie's daughter and, for whatever reason, believed her wonderful red-headed Scot had been killed in the battle of Culloden. We are then taken back in time to when Claire and Jamie are in France trying to stop the rebellion before it ever happened.
This seemed a bit scientifically risky to me. If you assumed that they could change time and prevent the battle, surely this would result in a complete upheaval of historical events resulting in many changes. If such a huge thing happened, it is likely that everything would change and unlikely that Claire Randall would ever have ended up in Scotland at exactly that time to go wandering through the stones. And then, of course, had she not gone through the stones, she would have never been there to warn Jamie and stop the rebellion so... it's a bit of a historical and scientific conundrum. Therefore, I like my time travel to not interfer with past events - it wouldn't make sense. Unless it's a Back To The Future scenario where he actually fills in some of the necessary blanks.
To be honest, I didn't enjoy this book as much as Outlander because I didn't feel as much happened. But I adore the relationship between Claire and Jamie, even more so after reading this second installment, and I will definitely be reading Voyager as soon as I can get myself ready for another hefty volume. And thank god for the ending of this book when my slowly increasing depression throughout was finally alleviated - can't wait to see where this will take our characters!