Some Outlander Season 3 fans are giving Claire a ton of grief over her treatment of Frank. Here’s why it’s time to cut Claire a break.
Claire’s getting shade for her treatment of Frank in Outlander Season 3, and I’m not having it. There’s been a spate of social media pushback accusing Claire Fraser (okay, Randall, too) of heartlessness, selfishness, and general whoredom, among other unsavory things. My position is that Claire does not bear blame for the metamorphosis from a loving marriage to a nearly broken one. Here’s why I stand with Claire.
It’s a painful thing to watch Claire’s valiant efforts to resuscitate a marriage that has been torn apart, first by war and then by unearthly circumstance. When she reappears in the 20th century, Claire wasn’t terribly moved when Frank showed up in her hospital room; and surely didn’t expect him to remain with a missing wife who turns up pregnant with another man’s child. Ever mindful of the devastating situation posed to Frank, Claire makes no demands on him to remain. Despite the numbing pain of fresh losses, Claire follows Jamie’s wishes, and agrees to Frank’s terms to raise the child together as their own; to forget the past and move forward. That is pure courage, my friends, and she does it for Frank, and for Jamie and his unborn child. The love of her life is gone forever, and the living breathing man wants her desperately, and the baby too. To deprive them of each other would be the height of selfishness. I stand with Claire.
Hard Working Woman
Claire works hard to keep her promise, supporting Frank with her bright smiles and sunny disposition, despite her deep grief. Lest we forget, Claire also worked hard 200 years before, attempting multiple times to return to Frank and her own time. Outlander fans of any gender who may harbor the thought that Claire was unfaithful to the yet-to-be-born Frank by marrying Jamie take note: Claire’s early goal to get back to Frank occupied her every thought, and because of it, she narrowly missed being imprisoned and killed under the cruel actions of Black Jack Randall. She fought the necessary marriage to Jamie up to the last minute, and tried to get back to Frank even after it took place.
Then, it happened. Through mutual respect, trust, unimaginable acts of courage and a powerful physical compatibility, Claire finds herself in love with Jamie. When he learns all after Cranesmuir, and selflessly plans to return Claire to Frank and to her own time, Claire realizes that she simply cannot live without Jamie. And she stays; and because love is a cosmic thing, Claire could no more control her love than she could control trying to return to Frank in the early weeks and months after falling through the stones at Craigh Na Dun.
Fast forward to heartbreak, when on the eve of Culloden, Jamie selflessly plans to send Claire back again, but this time, she goes. Jamie expects that Claire will return to her marriage to Frank, taking bitter comfort in knowing she and his child will be cared for. Sadly, and reluctantly, I stand with Claire.
Love Lost
Claire’s losses are deep. In a time span of a few hours, she is told by her menstrual-astute husband that she is pregnant, and after a wrenching goodbye, Jamie walks her backwards to the stones—back to Frank. Claire has lost her soulmate and husband, the opportunity to raise his child alongside him, people she cares for and a way of life she has come to embrace despite its hardships.
Frank, we speculate, may have being doing his level best to move on during Claire’s absence, but the shocking surprise of her return, combined with her incredulous story sets Frank on a slash-and-burn mission of denial. He destroys her 18th century clothing, and is convinced that his plan to raise Claire’s child as their own in the setting of a loving marriage is a viable idea. He’s lost and then found his wife, but she is no longer his. Meanwhile, Claire is still in the early stages of grief, and in good faith, accepts his wishes. Loss is hard; forgetting is harder.
It Ain’t Easy Being Frank
We only know of Book Frank through Claire’s perspective, but showrunner Ron D. Moore brilliantly serves the watcher those aspects of Frank that readers see only in spare amounts. Watchers are given the task to understand Frank’s position, to the chagrin of some fans, but welcomed greatly by others. A friend of mine points out that any other actor might not have elicited the level of sympathy that Tobias Menzies’ performance brings to the role of Frank; that and excellent direction, storytelling and expansion of the character. Meanwhile, his angry resentment is simmering just below the surface. Frank’s master plan is collapsing; Claire gives her all until she’s pushed to react. Claire, I’m standing with you.
Claire and Sex
Early in Outlander—in fact, in Episode 1 of Season 1—we learn that Claire is indeed a sexual being. She is not shy initiating sex at the start of their second honeymoon, nor is she shy about foregoing her undies, as Frank discovers at the ruins of Castle Leoch. Later that same day, Mrs. Graham finds Claire’s sexuality laid out neatly in Claire’s palm. So why the clamor when Claire seeks sexual expression with Frank? Claire says she’s missing her husband. One of them, anyway. Claire’s imagery of Jamie during the act is unavoidable. Frank senses this and confronts her, and here he needs more patience, and less insecurity. His expectation of Claire to abandon completely all she’s lost is not cool, and not kind. She can’t give what she doesn’t have, and pays the consequences with her guilt over it. Still, she tries for a mutually beneficial physical connection, and I find that healthy. Would we question a husband seeking consensual marital relations with his wife? No. So, I’m going to move away from insidious double standards in the sex department and stand firmly with Claire.
Baby Mama
A pregnant woman may be, at baseline, irritable on a good day, and through-the-roof hostile on a really bad day. It’s morning, and Claire spies the bird outside the kitchen window, which continues to behave like a bird, free to function in the cycle of nature. Bear McCreary’s Scottish theme plays. Frank is reminiscing of things British, while Claire expresses a desire to embrace American culture. Frank’s idyllic breakfast-at-home diorama is deconstructed quickly and completely as his tightly wound emotions bubble to the surface. In a stunning performance of facial expressions and taut body language, their differences are palpable in their painfulness.
Claire’s intolerance of Frank’s touch speaks volumes more than a fratchetty expectant mother on a bad day. Frank exclaims that she’s purposefully using the pregnancy to keep him at a distance. It’s easy to see why Frank feels this way, but my first thought in this scene is that Claire has always been a very bad liar. Claire and Frank can’t help but emotionally act out their respective losses. He’s not forcing her to stay, but it’s a no-fault scenario. Where can she go without hurting Frank by leaving with the baby, by depriving her baby of a father, by dishonoring her promise to Jamie to return to Frank’s care? Claire’s carefully controlled facade gives way, pouring out her grief-fueled anger. And a flying ashtray for good measure. Good girl, Claire. Let it out.
Perambulators and Voiceovers
Bree is born, gloriously and dangerously red-headed, and Claire and Frank’s relationship has pivoted to a baby-centric one, where separate beds mark an uneasy but manageable acceptance of their marriage. They both love Brianna. Tender moments revolve around this child that Frank adores, and while there is that, it’s far from enough. In a brief return to voiceovers, Claire admits that, while she “threw myself into my new role as best I could,” since losing Jamie, something was still missing—“something greater than myself.” And she wanted that again.
Purposeful Claire
Claire’s work as a combat nurse in World War II, and then as a healer in the Jamie’s time secured her role in something greater. The idle glamor of the salons of 18th century Paris merely increased Claire’s thirst for purpose and the need to return to healing. While modern day sexism seemed as archaic as that of the 1700s, Claire is not deterred from entering medical school. Gravitating towards the sole African American male student, an important friendship is forged. As she passes a lone bagpiper on her way to class, she tucks Jamie away in her heart as she begins her new pursuit of something greater than herself.
Claire, you rock. Welcome back.
What do you think of Claire so far in Season 3—do you stand firmly with her?
Great piece Teddie! Agrwe totally.. i don”t feel anger toward any pf them .. more sadmess for all three and kuso tp all three for msking the best they can of a very tough situation
Thanks for commenting, Angela! It is sad for all of them. We have some great stuff to look forward to and I cannot wait!!!
Wonderful assessment of a beyond difficult situation! Yes, I’m with Claire, and Frank, and Jamie. What they go through is heartbreaking and tragic, and they are all doing the best they can to be honorable. I can’t imagine being in this situation and what it would take to live without the one you love, even though the one you’re with is still a decent and kind person.
Thank you Sandie, for your kind words. Yes–Claire IS trying to be honorable. When Claire does anything, she gives her all. I believe she was cognizant of Frank’s pain from the very first moment she returned to this pretty much impossible situation. Thanks for reading and commenting.
If Claire stayed with Frank exclusively because of her promise to Jamie to do so, then I find her actions supremely selfish. It surprises me that Claire being the strong woman she is wouldn’t have been inclined to step up and walk away and spare both herself and Frank the sorrow and embarrassment of being a part of a marriage of convenience. They both deserved better. I know that it would have been difficult to be an independent single mother in the times in which she was living, but with all her knowledge, street smarts, and savvy, if anyone could have done it, Claire could have. I think I would have preferred to see her take this route for the sake of all involved.
Ahhh. But that isn’t the exclusive reason. There’s her vow and desire to give Brianna a father, her respect for Frank as a person and as her first love. Certainly she could have made it on her own; but it would have hurt Frank, Brianna, her vow to Jamie, and yes, herself as well. It was the best she could have done.
Ms. V; thanks for sharing your thoughts and for taking the time to comment.
True she promised Jamie, she wanted a father for Bree, she didnt have any money. They are all valid reasons, but it wouldnt be enough for her to stay. She loved Frank even if she wasnt in love with him anymore, She didnt have friends, family, relatives, she only had Frank. I think despite everything Frank was her home.
Teddie can I just say I LOVE YOU and I stand with Claire.
Like I said: love is a cosmic thing :). Thanks for reading and sharing your love!
And all the while, Frank looks exactly like Black Jack Randall…
How could she bear to be touched by him? Not his fault, but there it is.
I agree. Black Jack was a horrible character and it would be hard to not think of him while looking Frank in the eye.
I’m with Claire.X
I think the book clearly states that Claire could forgot Black Jack because Frank is a good person and he behaves very differently then Jack. Also thanks to Tobias acting skill I could never confuse the two character, and the actor truly could show even if the characters are looking like twins , they are totally different people
Yes! For theatrical purposes Tobias Menzies in a dual role was a coup. But to wake up to BJR in your bed ? Yikes! Thanks, Belle, for pointing that out and for taking the time to come here.
Perfect summary of the situation. I feel sympathy for all of them, and I stand with Claire.
Thanks, Waverly. I believe that more sympathy is needed for all parties here. Claire does have sympathy for Frank, but loses it in face of his impatient insistence. Poor Claire and poor Frank. Glad that you commented.
100% unequivocally spot on. I’ve pretty much always been on Claire’s side and thank you for stating it so clearly and completely. As a reader & watcher, I love both representations very much. Claire isn’t without flaw, but I see no fault…. for either Claire or Frank. Just an unfortunately shitting situation.
Thanks a bunch, LyD, for reading and commenting. The film adaptation’s ability to give us another angle to this part of the story enriches my Outlander life!
Brilliant article. I have been feeling very badly for Frank, indeed. But your writing with its excellent observations really opened my eyes. Thank you.
Cristina, thanks for your kind words about my work. Poor Frank and poor Claire! So sad because each felt they were trying their best. Thanks for reading and commenting.
I totally understand Claire’s position. She is mourning Jaime, the love of her life whom she believes is dead. Every person is permitted time to grieve the loss of a loved one. Add that fact to her pregnancy as well as the return to a husband who strongly resembles a man who tortured and sodomized her husband and punched her in the stomach. Amazing that she could look at him with any sense of affection, not loathing. Frank is basically a highly intelligent man who takes his sexual gratification where he can find it. He asked Claire in the very beginning if she had taken a lover during their long separation. He seemed to imply that he had done so and he would not blame her if she did likewise. That was after he spotted the Highlander looking up at her window in the rooming house. She replied furiously that she had remained true to him. He blustered through the exchange and changed the subject.
Thanks, Susan for your observations. I really felt for Claire when Frank casually posed that infidelity question to her, and it certainly made me wonder exactly what Frank was up to during the war. Mourning takes a long time for most people; she wasn’t given the “luxury” to do so. Thanks for commenting!
Obviously Frank was handsome and bright man, so he had opportunities during the war, but he really loved Claire.
In that scene when he asked claire about cheating I have always felt sympathy for Frank, because the whole situation went wrong. Fran saw someone watching Claire, and he got jealous and didnt think clearly. ( Did he even tell her that he saw someone?) He loved Claire and he wanted to be with her no matter what He acted casual and cool , so Claire would know that he accepts the cheating and they could start over. But the whole situation looked like as if he cheated . I dont think he did but from that scene impossible to tell.
Claire, you rock, and Teddy, you rock also! Your posts are well thought out and logically presented, and I couldn’t agree more with what you wrote. Claire was in a tragic situation, and Frank just forced the issue by not allowing Claire time to grieve in her own way. As I heard on the Listener Feedback podcast today, Frank wanted to possess Claire, body and soul (especially the post-dinner party sex), something that Claire was ready to give (at least not at that point). Had he been patient and understanding (not demanding her to “open her eyes”), perhaps things would have turned out differently for them.
Susan Manor’s post above reminds us that Frank asked Claire if she had been faithful during the war years apart, and telling her it made no difference. Why the change now? Was he assuming that unfaithfulness was permissible as long as you don’t fall in love? I’m not buying it.
So glad we have this forum to discuss Outlander!
Boy, I wish I had proofread that post better! I meant to say that Claire WASN’T ready to give herself completely to Frank even though he wanted and expected it. 😉
I knew what you meant 🙂
Thank you so much, Tammy; I appreciate your compliments more than you know. If only Frank had the ability to control his impatience, which to me is a function of his own losses in the situation. I love having this forum as well, and I’m so glad you’re a part of it.
I stand with you Teddie – and Claire! Not that I want to throw Frank carelessly to the wind either…
Frank really doesn’t understand what Claire experienced – nor will he; having told Claire that she can’t speak of Jamie or the past again….maybe he’d have done better to let her tell the whole story and THEN told her to forget…but whatever… moving on…
I stand with Claire!
Leslie, I stand with you–you are so right that permitting the expression of grief go a long way in the healing process. Not sure that Frank’s ego could have withstood it, though. He’s only (fictionally) human. Thanks for replying!
I stand with Claire too. Book Frank and season one Frank was a nice guy but he seemed very self-absorbed. They were on a second honeymoon and he spent more time with Rev. Wakefield. When Claire decided to stay with Jamie rather than return to Frank and modern conveniences she followed her heart. Going back to Frank was not what her heart desired. You pointed out that she was not putting any expectations on Frank upon her return. He cut the deal. She agreed and tried to make the best of it. The writing, acting and directing of this series is superb or we would not be seeing so many discussions about the characters. I stand with Claire, Jamie, and true love. Thanks for a great article.
Shirley, thank YOU for reading and taking the time to reply. I like to think of Frank as “bookish” and I think Claire is accepting of that. I so agree that the film adaptation is brilliantly done. The few story deviations have mostly worked for me, and I adore having more Outlander in my life. Thanks again.
Thanks. I agreee with you. I was screaming during the fireside sex scene with Claire and Frank. “Let it go, Frank! Enjoy it while you can.” If he had, maybe it would have grown into something more. Made me crazy.
Singerlor, yes you are so right. Frank spoiled that moment, but I don’t think he could really help it–hence their respective dilemmas: she couldn’t completely give herself to him, at least, not yet. He l
Continued:
He couldn’t see that she needed time. Thanks for reading and responding!
I heartily agree with you. And one point no one that I have read has noted out – how hard THIS pregnancy is on Claire. She has already lost one child and there has to be a lingering fear about this happening again. The fact that she can not or does not want to share that part of her story with Frank makes it even harder . That is until it gets brought up by the doctor’s question in the hospital. Would also have been a perfect time for Claire to express that the miscarriage is what has been throwing off her emotions throughout the pregnancy to help deflect the coldness Frank as sensing – though we know that was not most of it for her. But it has to have affected her life even returning to the modern era, that she could still lose this child too, then what???
Judy11, what an excellent point you make–Claire’s fear of losing yet another child has not been explored. Maybe Claire was simply determined to think positively, or maybe the loss of Faith was simply too painfully personal to share with Frank. Knowing that she is carrying Jamie’s child had to be a blessing and a curse in her relationship with Frank. He was decent enough of a man to stay with Claire and wanting to raise Bree. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
Tammy, it is so good to see your agreement with Claire’s actions. From reading some posts I was beginning to think I was not being as open to Frank as I should have been. I have been vindicated as I think Claire is doing and acting as well, if not better, as she could. What she has been through has been heartbreaking at times and Frank has not helped her. I am a fan of Claire’s!
Frank tried for sure, but for an intelligent man, more sensivity was in order for Claire’s predicament, as she clearly lost something important to her. Sad that he lacked the patience and a better insight into what Claire was going through. I agree of course, that Claire gave it her all.
Barbara Thomas
barbys@ymail.com
This article is wonderful ,and all she talks about are true. I support Claire for all of her wonderful work.
Thanks so much, Barbara! Claire is my hero.
Not a matter of taking sides. For those of us who have been there, it takes YEARS to get over the death of a loved one, all time traveling aside, it is simply chemically IMPOSSIBLE to shift emotional gears that quickly. Add pregnancy to that? In the book Frank wisely keeps his distance till 3 months after the birth before they resume “relations”. Even if he doesn’t believe her story he must believe there was a devastating loss in there somewhere so why push her at all? Claire has moved on and apparently Frank hasn’t which is too bad for him as he becomes stuck in emotional time. Always yearning for what he’ll never have and what she can’t give him. A recurring theme it would seem between many of the characters. Hard choices demand hard realities. Claire is giving it the old college try and Frank is calling her on what he perceives are the shortfalls. Recipe for tragedy.
Thanks, Evelyn. It made me so angry when I read disparaging comments about Claire’s character after Ep 2 aired. L
Thanks, Evelyn. It made me so angry when I read disparaging comments about Claire’s character after Ep 2 aired. I felt they lacked the most basic empathy, especially considering her pregnancy and her losses. Non readers will appreciate your “recurring theme ” as the story unfolds. Really appreciate your observations!
YES, I stand with Claire!! Of course! This is, after all, her story. While Jamie & Frank have their drama, Claire’s always in the middle. I wish I could adapt as she does, rising above unbearable situations. I never felt she was a good match for Frank even before her “adventure.” Sorry, but Frank’s intellect is no match for Jamie’s…EVERYTHING!
I never have seen this as Claire’s story. I see her as a narrator of a story, in which she is one of the principal participants, but the story for the most part is Jamie’s, and then theirs together. (It is hers in the very beginning, but as a device to get her to the 18th century.) And as to being in the middle while Jamie and Frank have their drama — most of the time it was Claire’s actions that brought that drama upon them and she’s not in the middle, she’s front and center. I guess we’ve read the books very differently indeed.
Sally, thank you for reading and replying. I do think this is Claire’s story (it even bears her name), but I’ll leave that debate to the books’ author. Either way, Claire does have a knack for finding herself in predicaments, although she didn’t create nor ask for this particular one. Thanks for sharing your perspective!
Annie, it IS Claire’s story. Also, it’s hard to top The King of Men, lol! Thanks for replying 🙂
I stand with Claire. Really enjoyed reading the article and finding other kindred souls.
Thanks so much, Vicky. There’s quite a few of us kindred souls out there! Be well, and your comment is appreciated.
I certainly do stand with Claire. It’s also pretty hard for her to have worked as an equal with Jamie and then return to modern (?) times and be treated Ada second class citizen. ( not by Frank but by his colleagues!) “A woman’s place is at home caring for her husband, baby and home because (implied) she’s not smart enough to understand politics or to have an opinion! I stand with Claire.
CRunning, yes! She seemed to have garnered more respect in the 1700s than in 1948! So ironic. Frank knew that his boss was treating Claire intolerably. That was a bad spot that both Frank and Claire shared, but for different reasons. Maddening!! Thanks for taking the time to respond.
YES, YES, YES, Teddie!!! I stand with Claire & with you for this Great piece!! Thank You!
Myrnama, thanks so much! I loved writing about Claire; she is a wonderful character.
Wow, you really do have it bad for Claire.
I’m afraid I see her (and always have done since reading the first book in 1991) as a self-centered woman whose every act (or nearly so) — in whatever century she is in — is in her own interests without having the wherewithal to even consider consequences for other people, even those she cares for. Not saying she’s all bad – on the contrary, she’s all human and has many good qualities. But her defining one (again, for me) is self-interest.
I don’t “stand” necessarily for Frank either in their 1940s to 1960s situation. He had choices and made them, just as she did, from his own motivations. A good person for the most part (as is Claire), who also doesn’t always make selfless choices. Circumstance beyond their control established the situation, but how they dealt with it was, for the most part, on them, and their choices in doing so did not always show their best sides.
Hi Sally –I mistakenly replied to your comment that you made in response to Anne above; apologies.
I do have it bad for Claire, lol. I can’t say that I’ve ever considered her to act selfishly; in fact, most of her more impulsive acts have to do with putting her patients/others first in meeting their needs, whether they are health related or otherwise. Maybe because I am also a nurse, my views take on a different angle when it comes to Claire. The fact that she is a nurse was one of the reasons I was so attracted to the story in the first place.
Thanks for reading and sharing your reactions.
I Stand With Claire.
I think we sometimes forget Claire’s background and it’s impact on her young adulthood: “home-schooled” or “world-schooled” by Uncle Lam thus always somewhat alone, never part of a crowd, never around kids of her own age, no BFFs, no girlfriends, proms or sleepovers. We don’t know much about how Claire met Frank except that it was through Uncle Lam…she possibly never dated anyone other than Frank.
I do think that Claire and Frank had always intended to marry, but that they meant to do so at a later date, after meeting his parents. Either way, Claire’s two weddings begin to highlight the differences btwn her husband’s. To Frank she is “Mrs. Frank Randall”, kind of like his property, whereas to Jamie she is “Claire Fraser a woman of grace…”, an individual separate from himself.
Frank dismisses Claire’s 3 years in the past..it doesn’t matter, he doesn’t need to know. Really he doesn’t want to know…he only wants things to be as they were before. He doesn’t have the slightest notion about what Claire experienced and cannot acknowledge that she is in mourning simply bc he would rather not know. Burn the clothes, fly to Boston, la di dah, life should be great. Sorry Frank…sad but true that this is a new world for you and Claire. And one thing you can be certain of in life is change, even without a time-traveling wife.
Frank does not give Claire the time and space she needs to heal, to mourn and to find a way back to him. He wants it all and he wants it now. Even when she makes small attempts to connect with him, he is unable to be grateful for those small steps forward. He can touch her shoulder, but he wants her belly. They make love with her eyes closed but he wants her to look at him. Give her time. Give her space. She is trying.
I also think Claire stays with Frank in part bc that was part of her promise to Jamie.
Ellen, I love what you’ve shared here, and I really love your noting the difference between Frank and Jamie’s reference to Claire as their (respective) wife. 1700s more progressive than 1900s!!! Who would have thought? Denial is a deep and complex thing. Combine it with Frank’s underlying anger and feelings of betrayal, his impatience, and his ego and kaboom! Still, not his fault. Nor Claire’s.
Thanks again!
Standing with Claire. Yes. And when you write “Either way, Claire’s two weddings begin to highlight the differences between her husband’s. To Frank she is “Mrs. Frank Randall”, kind of like his property, whereas to Jamie she is “Claire Fraser a woman of grace…”, an individual separate from himself” you are absolutely right. She is “his” and belongs to him, to Frank. But he has taken that decision. Later she is Jamie’s and belongs to him too. It was a forced marriage, but Jamie loved her at first sight and he gives her a kind of freedom, a 1700’s liberty. Things have to be “different between him and her”. He says it when they make up after the spanking. He admits that she may have an opinion, a strong will – the woman of strength – as he said when they have their first drink in the bedroom. He let her be herself and “belong” to something more important – the battle for Scotland and all the risks and consequences – because she needs this. Frank did not like her studying to be a doctor (you feel it in the series and it is said in the books) and he takes her place in Brianna’s heart as she is not always available for her daughter. He will take her daughter from her. Jamie would never do such a thing. He is good natured and his love is acceptance of the other party’s wishes and happines, even without him.
When Claire was pregnant the first time – Faith – Jamie was taking care of her, even with Prince Charlie’s problems all around, and he was tender and gentle. He would have been the same if not more, caring for his second child. There was a deep bond between them. This never existed between Frank and Claire. They had never expected a child together. No bond there and Frank was eager to take Claire back because he loved her, but also eager for this child which he could not have himself. He admitted to be sterile to M. Wakefield.
There is so much to be said about this and I thank everybody for writing their oinions and ideas.
Holy cow! You took the words right out of my head. Totally agree with everything you said. I sympathize with Frank’s situation but only to a point. I have my own theories on what jolly ole Frank was up to while Claire was AWOF (absent without fault?) I feel like we, as readers and viewers, are going to be jaw dropped when THAT back story is revealed. But I think at the end of the day(or series)it will always be a love/hate thing with Frank(sort of like Dougal?) for me anyway? Thank you for a great article?
You are most welcome, Babs, and thanks for reading and responding. I agree that there’s a story to be told when it comes to Frank, and I am sure it’s going to be fascinating!
Holy cow! You took the words right out of my head. Totally agree with everything you said. I sympathize with Frank’s situation but only to a point. I have my own theories on what jolly ole Frank was up to while Claire was AWOF (absent without fault?) I feel like we, as readers and viewers, are going to be jaw dropped when THAT back story is revealed. But I think at the end of the day(or series)it will always be a love/hate thing with Frank(sort of like Dougal?) for me anyway? Thank you for a great article?
Holy cow! You took the words right out of my head. Totally agree with everything you said. I sympathize with Frank’s situation but only to a point. I have my own theories on what jolly ole Frank was up to while Claire was AWOF (absent without fault?) I feel like we, as readers and viewers, are going to be jaw dropped when THAT back story is revealed. But I think at the end of the day(or series)it will always be a love/hate thing with Frank(sort of like Dougal?) for me anyway? Thank you for a great article?
I stand with Claire and so will all of you. Having read the books I know what Frank is all about and it isn’t pretty.
Ruth, thanks for your reply. As a long time book reader, I’m not 100% convinced about Frank the Baddie. DG says, “wait and see”. I’ll bide. Thanks for reading and commenting.
So agree about Claire. I hate the bashing. Thanks for expressing how I feel and then some. Add to that, he told her he was taking Bree with him to his new position and did not include her. I’m sure she would have stood up to him if he tried before his untimely death. Claire has suffered so much loss. She risked her life trying to get back to him. She fought Jamie to be sure he would be born. I do not understand the negativity towards Claire.
Lottie, sometimes women are hard on women, and I will never understand exactly why. You raise very good examples from the story. Looking forward to the next episode! Thanks for taking the time to respond. 🙂
Beautiful article and I too, stand with Claire.
It really is a very sad triangle. Claire is trying hard to begin again, she tries on many levels, but it’s not meant to be. I feel the loss for Frank too. He remembers the “old” Claire who loved him dearly. They had been through a war together & she had eyes only for him. Then that herb expedition back to the stones rocked her & his world on many levels.
I appreciate the collaborative effort of Cait & Tobias with their characterizations of these 2 people when Claire returns to him. They stayed together for 20 years. There had to have been moments they liked each other. That their life wasn’t always a hell hole. They focused on Bree, their work & eaked out some kind of life for 2 decades. Think about it? If they hated each others guts, SOMEBODY would have checked out. True love wasn’t in the picture…except for Bree.
Jamie has lost his heart. He really doesn’t know who he is. He’s on that journey now, but when you’re missing the love of your life, I can understand why he lived in that cave for 7 years. I really feel he was on the edge of madness. The incident with Fergus was a wake-up call. He chose to go back to prison, but this is another leg of his journey to finding who he is. My heart really breaks for all 3.
Thanks, Angie. I agree that Fergus’s injury was the limit for Jamie; in the book, Jamie was reaching the point of having difficulty with the transition from cave to house, also. As for Claire, resuming her medical calling was her salvation. She and Frank may have lived companionable lives together, going their own ways professionally, and meeting in the middle for Bree. Let’s see how RDM and crew handle it all. Thank you for reading and replying!
Claire will always have my support. I think you leave a bit out however. I think she may be suffering from some PTSD when she sees BJR in Frank’s visage. It must be horrifying to see the monster in the man she used to love. I think that Cate does a great job showing this revulsion.
Thanks, Marc. She sure may be suffering some PTSD. I think Claire tried very hard to not show her feelings, but we know that besides being a terrible liar, she also has a “glass face”. Cait’s facial expressions are amazing, aren’t they? I appreciate you reading and commenting.
Great article…and like you I Stand with Claire..she rocks!!
Tammy, thanks! Claire is a unique and powerful character. I adore her.
Loved this very insightful review. I am 110% team Claire. No matter how much she loves Jamie and her live for Frank (yes she does love Frank) she is always true to herself, she stands in her power, she is passionate, loyal, honest with herself and all persons she comes in contact with, even when that honesty is hard to accept. She is devoted to Jamie, Brianna, her career and insofar as she can be to Frank. Oh yes I am Definately team Claire, she is the reason I love the books and the tv series.
Ginny, thank you, and thanks very much for describing Claire so well. Claire does love Frank, and respects him deeply. This article is not about Team Claire vs Team Frank–I stand with Claire for what she is enduring, but it’s a sadder story for her because Frank unknowingly made it harder for the both of them. Thanks for the great comment.
I absolutely stand with Claire. for me the bottom line is that Claire never lied to Frank. She told him exactly how she felt. He knew she was in love with someone else. It is not her fault that he chooses to believes he can make her forget about her soulmate and be happy with him just like that. When a woman goes into a relationship with a man thinking she is going to change him other women shake their heads and say “what does she except? You can’t change them.”. That is exactly what Frank did. A recurring theme in the Outlander series is that you can’t give what you don’t have. Claire is doing what she can to make their live work but Frank can’t make her feel the way he wants her to and it frustrates him. All I can say to Frank is What did you except?
Amanda, thanks for your comment. I agree; Claire never lied to Frank, and the arrangement was on his terms. I don’t think for one second that Claire wasn’t mindful of the hurt that Frank endured, but she was essentially powerless to forget Jamie, and I think Frank knew that.
I love this story!
I think Claire has been given an unbearable burden by Frank. I actually think of late ’40s as really the repressed ’50s. She had no choice but to stay with Frank, who she no longer loved, had a child out of wedlock (scandalous) and I thought never was in love with. She can’t discuss her true feelings; Frank set that up as part of his conditions. She has no one to share her grief with. Frank knowing he could not father a kid, he used Claire to get the child he wanted, and Claire could only suffer inwardly. You think she had ulcers? He forbid her to get her American citizenship. You think she got it anyway? She was finally able to go to Harvard Medical School, probably for free since Frank worked there. Can’t figure out when she started because her hair went back and forth, and no idea how old Bree is. To top it off, Frank starts researching Jamie, as further brought out in Ep213 DIA. He did what he forbade her to do, and did not share his findings with her. I have no sympathy for Frank and such empathy for Claire.
Jamie was tortourously suffering, painstakingly, but so was Claire, with a few more amenities.
Raquel, you bring up some excellent points. I do have empathy for Frank, though, because I think he had no idea how else to handle it. The wife that returned was no longer truly his, and he was utterly unequipped emotionally. His bitterness is what showed when his behavior was less than stellar. Thanks for reading and commenting!
I support Claire 100%. I venture to guess that those who don’t, have not read the books.
Hi Connie,
I’ve met a ton of book readers who are critical of Claire, and yet I cannot understand how some can stick with the books without liking her! It’s her story; it’s told from her viewpoint. Why torture oneself, lol? The cool part is that we have the book view, and now the film rendition, which gives us even more angles to explore. Yes! Thanks for reading and replying.
I could never stand with Frank…he is such a disagreeable character…..but, so far, Claire seems selfish at times. She is going to do what she want as to do no matter what the consequences are to the Highlanders or Jamie…she is an independent woman. But, with that said, I do stand with Claire in the Claire/Frank relationship. She’s trying and thats all anyone could ask for!!
Hi Sherrie,
Regarding Frank, I think the situation made him disagreeable, more than him being intrinsically disagreeable 🙂
What ever Claire did or didn’t do couldn’t impact the outcome at Culloden. I’m thinking that she did inadvertently cause Jamie to appear at the oath-taking, a potentially dangerous endeavor; she tried to steal a goat, she tried to care for a changeling infant, and worked to prevent an sick sailor from infecting Le Havre. I don’t like what she said to Alex Randall to keep him from Mary, and I really didn’t like that she prevented Jamie from getting his revenge on BJR. Even that was based in good intention, and I am sure I am missing much more than I cite, but like you, I still stand with Claire! Thanks for reading and commenting.
I stand with Claire. TV Frank is definitely more sympathetic than book Frank. A lot of this is a testament to Tobias Menzies’ acting. From the books, I’ve never had the impression that Claire and Frank were a marriage of equals. Wasn’t she about 18 when she married him and he was about 30? That’s a big age difference. After the spanking incident, Jamie and Claire’s marriage became one of equals. If TV Frank hadn’t insisted that Claire “open her eyes”, maybe things would have gone better in time. Remember when Jamie and Claire got married, he didn’t insist that they have sex immediately. On TV he reassures her he’s not going to force himself on her. In the book she says she knows he won’t touch her until and unless invited to. He waits until she’s ready. How much better might things have gone with Claire and frank if he had followed a similar path? Claire and Frank are in an impossible situation and I don’t think there are any villains, but I stand with Claire. I would like to find out more about book Frank. Does anyone else think he might still be a spy when they’re in Boston?
Arlene,
I’d love to see Frank’s backstory, although he was truly Claire’s first love. I also agree that espionage may very well have been an ongoing activity in Frank’s life. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Teddie, YOU rock!
Aw; thanks very much, Julie!
This is a great article. I agree with what you’ve said here, as well as with what many of those replying have already said.
I’d like to point out another difference between the two men. When Claire told Jamie she was from the 20th century and told her story, he believed her. He said it “explained much” about what he’d seen, which was almost exclusively the way she behaved. He was willing to bring her to the stones and go back to Frank, even whenWhen Claire came back and told Frank about living in the 18th century, he clearly refused to believe her, even though he had objective evidence to suggest she was telling the truth: her clothing, which, when analyzed, proved to be “genuine, yet in almost-new condition.”
Frank’s extraction of the promise to leave everything go and not talk about Jamie reflects his belief that she’s lying about where she was. He obviously thinks she either left her lover or was discarded by him. This is the root of his insistence she open her eyes and be in the moment with him, and not remembering her other lover, when they are making love before the fire, even though he must have had some doubts about her veracity if he’d even considered writing to the Reverend Wakefield about researching a James Fraser at Culloden.
I do feel for Frank’s pain, but he certainly made it all worse by not revealing he MIGHT have changed his mind about her truthfulness regarding Jamie. In contrast, in the eighteenth century, Jamie accepted what she’d told him on faith, instead of branding her a witch, as Dougal did with Geillis. While Frank may not have been as overt as his boss in regards to the place of a woman, he wasn’t exactly enthusiastic about Claire’s decision to study for a medical degree (in the book…I haven’t seen episode 3 yet to see how the show handles this). To his credit, Frank went along with her desire, however, and did support her by providing care for their daughter. How surprising was that, however, since we know how completely he loved Bree from the very beginning? While Jamie was upset with Claire when she began to work with Mother Hildegarde at the hospital in Paris, he expressed his fear that she would damage their unborn child by her duties there — and ultimately, he accepted her need to provide medical care to others.
So, while this truly was a tragedy all three of them had to endure, I have to say “Hurrah, Claire!” Frank did get the short end of the stick, but if he’d been able to make the leap of faith Jamie did when told of Claire’s time traveling, he might have salvaged his marriage to be something more than the shell of what it once was.
Janet, YOU rock by pointing out these excellent points of contrast between Jamie and Frank. Why couldn’t Frank accept what Jamie so readily accept? This is is a fascinating topic! Thank you so much for sharing your reactions here.
What the series misses is the fact that Frank had other sexual encounters before Claire reappeared and was fairly active with them, at least at the beginning; and there is the hint that he continued throughout. Add the fact that he looks exactly like BlackJack Randall, Claire’s problem with him is almost insurmountable. She didn’t want to go back but she tries to make it work.
Hi Aimee,
I tend to agree that Frank probably wasn’t celibate during Claire’s absence; his wife was gone and it didn’t look like she was coming back, so that’s not so unusual. We haven’t gotten to any point in the series yet to know of any infidelities *after* her return, and I believe Diana Gabaldon doesn’t say exactly yes or exactly no on that topic. I guess we will need to see how this plays out on screen. Here’s the link to her famous treatise “In Defense of Frank”, in case you haven’t seen it before. Thanks for reading and responding!
https://timeslipsblog.com/diana-gabaldons-defense-of-frank-randall/
Teddie, this is spot on! I agree with you 100%! I stand with Claire! ??????
Sorry for all the ??? lol
Thanks, Donna–and don’t worry about the ????? 🙂
Sorry for all the ??? lol
Wonderful viewpoint, Teddie, and I so agree. My heart breaks for all three…there is so much love, hurt, grief. Frank, I think, confuses me the most. He is so thrilled about having a baby (another man’s baby) and completely loves and accepts Brianna unconditionally. He accepts Brianna, but can’t accept Claire’s feelings of grief, confusion, and that she is trying so hard. Since before Brianna’s birth he accepted her as his child, but really couldn’t accept Claire. Although I really love Frank, I wonder if his motive (consciously our unconsciously) for taking Claire back is to have a child. Just a thought.
Their lives are so tormented, plus there is nowhere for them to go. Nobody, as far as they know, has even been close to being in their circumstance.
Thank you so much for your writings and perceptive.
Debbie
Debbie, thanks so much for responding. You raise an excellent point–how could Frank, with so much compassion towards Brianna, treat Claire in that manner? Was Frank so fixated on his genealogy in spite of the genetics? Sadly, he had had an inkling that there might be some truth to Claire’s story, but he couldn’t bring himself to share this with her. The only rationale I can come up with for the latter, is that his anger and sense of betrayal that Claire was in love with another man was a hurdle to high for him to climb.
Thanks for sharing your observations.
Oh, forgot to add in previous post. I said I stood for all three, but I stand a little taller for Claire!
Can’t say much that hasn’t been said. I defiantly stand for Claire. I was having a hard time with some posts that were so negative about Claire. I think maybe some of that is because they didn’t read the books and maybe they are younger than I am… (I was Bree’s age in the 60’s). I see her as a strong woman surviving the best she can in two worlds. Things weren’t easy for women in either of those worlds, but she was able to overcome things when most of us would have just crawled in a corner and given up. I don’t dislike Frank, he’s a product of his upbringing and time. I’m not against the addition of Claire and Frank’s life that wasn’t in the books, because I’m happy to see the characters come to life before my eyes. However, I can’t say that the “character” of Loaghaire, is one I look forward to seeing more of. Thanks for the great post, I feel vindicate for previous comments on other posts!!
Hahaha, Gretchen! I’m definitely with you on that regarding one of our least favorite character. I am also thrilled to see other aspects of the story as presented by Ron D Moore and company. I love Voyager, and can’t wait as the rest of the season unfolds. Thanks for responding.
exceptional I stand with Claire!
Thank you so much, Nancy…Claire is indeed a wonderful character.
I too stand with Claire, how could you go from the love of your life to back to Frank in the blink of an eye. I would be grieving forever. Also, I would still see captain Jonathan Randall in Frank’s face every time I looked at him.
Go Claire!! I love you!!
Helen, thank you. The demand from Frank was unhealthy and unrealistic. I wonder how much the British “stiff upper lip” characteristic was a part of that? I love Claire, too.
Thank you so much for your observations and insights! I totally agree and appreciate your putting the feelings of many of us into words. Seasons one and two were wonderful, but I think season three is going to be even stronger. Can’t wait until episodes 5 and 6, which I believe brings the return of Claire and the reunion in the print shop. The anticipation is building with each week!
Thank you Susan…I knew when some of the negative comments began to surface, I just had to respond in some way. I’m sensing that this season will move so quickly: we want to get to the print shop, but we won’t want the season to end either. We’re a needy group 🙂
You are all s lucky! You follow the 3rd season on STARZ or whatever. You write remarks, you are standing on Claire/Franks/Jamie’s side, you agree on opinions or not… Admirable! I would like to participate, but n Belgium we are going – maybe, or maybe not – see the 3rd season in February 2018. Who has been talking about spoilers? And trailers? I am sometimes sad and feel a little frustrated, but reading your articles – yours or others – gives me a tiny taste, a glimpse of what could be coming next year for us. I love it, imagine it and am reading VOYAGER to compensate the long hungry waiting period. And as far as I can estimate, I love Claire as a woman, be it the 1940’s or the 1700’s. Sometimes she acts without thinking of the consequences, but always with passion and she loves Jamie fiercely. How can Frank give her this passion in our modern world with stiff rules and relations, in a hurry, not giving time to Claire to survive her loss. I will see the series later and in the light of all your observations. Thank you for the article and to all the persons who responded or who found other explanations or conclusions. I really enjoy it and it helps me to try to be patient.
Diane, thanks so much for replying; so far I believe S 3 will be worth the wait; I’m only sorry for you to have to wait that long for it! I’m glad that the blog helps you get through it. I agree on all the points you make about Claire. Good luck and hope your Droughtlander moves quickly for you.
Another point I don’t see a lot of people making: Frank wears the same face as Black Jack Randall. While he’s obviously a better, kinder, more loving person, he still looks like his ancestor. No wonder Claire keeps her eyes shut when they make love. How hard would it be to touch someone who looks like the man who beat her, threatened her life ,and tortured and raped her husband?
Yep, Suze. Not exactly what Claire wants for a bedmate! Thanks for mentioning that.
Bravo! Outstanding piece! Thank you … hopefully, the Claire bashers will finally “get it”. I do and always stand with Claire (and Jamie together).
Thanks, Robin. The Claire bashing never did make sense to me. Your comments are appreciated!
Excellent article, Teddie! I can see both sides, whether I agree or not, with their actions. Claire, I feel, had a much larger loss than Frank. She found her soulmate, purely by accident. And the part that I would have trouble with is the fact that Frank looks so much like Black Jack! I commend Claire for all she has gone through, all she has lost and all she has accepted. I stand with Claire!
Thank you, Denise. It was so sad that Claire wasn’t allowed to grieve for Jamie in a more normal way. I think Frank asked too much of her in that!
Yes, I am with Claire in Season 3.
The only time I haven’t liked Claire was Season 2 in France and her manipulations with Mary Hawkins and Alex Randall. As we learn in all time travel stories, what is meant to be is meant to be. If she had left it alone, who knows how many happy days Alex and Mary would have had and a baby would have been a year older. But she does go back into the past, and her part is played out for history to see. Her name as a witness to short lived marriage of convenience and her name on a deed to Lallybroch. The paradox of time travel.
My husband says he doesn’t like the character because “she’s a know it all”. Since it’s Her story, I say that’s really too bad. I do like the TV series as it gives more than the single perspective. I enjoyed the books I’ve read so far. So, yes I get Claire in just about all her situations.
Gigi83, thanks for reading and commenting. I also feel that Claire was wrong in interfering with Alex and Mary. “Book” Claire would not have done something so hurtful; at least I don’t think she would have. Funny how some men see Claire on the show. Your hubs isn’t the only one 🙂
Oh and to add to that. Claire and Franks marriage was already rocky by the war. There was no way of knowing how they would have ended up if she hadn’t gone through the stones. Childless and unhappy? I get the feeling from the books and series, he probably cheated during the war time since they were away from each other so much and he gave her pass if she had done that, too.
Now add that Frank and Jack Randall look so much alike, and the pain inflicted by BJR, yeah it would be hard to forget, someone like that. Then a child that looks like your lost love. No wonder she dived into what she was good at medicine, it was the most constructive and sane thing to do. To compartmentalize your life, so you manage. I think we all do that in some form or another.
Spot on! Agree with all your perspectives on Claire!
Very nice info and straight to the point. I am not sure if this is truly the best place to ask but do you folks have any thoughts on where to employ some professional writers? Thx 🙂
Thank you, Felipe!
If Claire stayed with Frank exclusively because of her promise to Jamie to do so, then I find her actions supremely selfish. It surprises me that Claire being the strong woman she is wouldn’t have been inclined to step up and walk away and spare both herself and Frank the sorrow and embarrassment of being a part of a marriage of convenience. They both deserved better. I know that it would have been difficult to be an independent single mother in the times in which she was living, but with all her knowledge, street smarts, and savvy, if anyone could have done it, Claire could have. I think I would have preferred to see her take this route for the sake of all involved.
Ahhh. But that isn’t the exclusive reason. There’s her vow and desire to give Brianna a father, and her respect for Frank as both a person and as her first love. Certainly she could have made it on her own, but it would have hurt Frank, Brianna, and her vow to Jamie, and yes; herself as well. It was the best she could have done. Thanks, Ms. V, for sharing your thoughts and taking the time to comment.
Personally, I’ve never been a Claire fan. I don’t find her that interesting. To me the story is driven by Jamie and Claire runs behind him fixing him and other people up. Jamie can’t walk 200 ft without getting into trouble and Claire sweeps up the pieces. My biggest reason for not being a fan is that I find it hard to believe that any modern independent woman would leave their only child, particularly a girl, to chase after a man with no guarantee that he still exists. That is the height of selfish disregard at the cost of your child. I don’t buy it. Having read the series, I think Voyager could have easily been the last book as subsequent books are not that interesting. Clearly the first two books were the best partly because Scotland played a pivotal part, a character itself. But after that, I lost interest in everything except Sam Heughan.
Thanks, BB, for taking the time to read and respond. You may discern that Claire’s my fictional hero; she is the titular “Outlander” of the entire series, book and film. That being said, I myself have gained so much joy from both.
Thanks for that great writing. Now I can continue to day dream my day through work about things to come for Claire and Jaime.
Bonnie my friend, thanks so much for your kind words. After last night’s episode, I think all Voyager-lovers are daydreaming right along with you!
I am glad that I am not the only one who thinks Claire has not had a chance to accept the loss of Jamie and that maybe Frank is asking too much too soon. So I am also on Clairs side.
Definitely too much too soon, Linda. It was completely unreasonable and unrealistic. Poor Claire. Thanks much.
Really you stand by Claire. Most of Claire’s actions are self serving. She want to ensure BJR has children with Mary so Frank will be born thus allowing her to be with Jamie, so she deceives Mary and Alex. The only reason she goes back to her time is to ensure the survival of her and Jamie child thus in away continuing Jamie’s lineage.
I doubt she would go back if she wasnt with child. Frank stays with her because only a cad would leave his pregnant wife. Claire gets to have her cake and eat it too. I dont believe Claire truly loved Frank because she sacrifices nothing. Frank goes to war which strains their marriage so to rekindle they have a honemoon filled with sexy time (lust). Then fate screws them over again and she is transported to the past and goes through trial and tribulation first to get back then she finds her “true love”.
I will say the author ensures Frank and Claire never have a truly loving marriage first due to the war, then her being teleported to the past and finally when her and her “true love” encounter BJR who looks identical to Frank, poor Frank he never had a chance. She goes back and stays with Frank because she wants Bree to have a father nit out of love for Frank. Frank sacrifices the most because he stays with Claire for almost 20 miserable years, with the only silver lining being he raises Bree as his own, so he got part of the family he wanted. It’s completely a marriage of convenience for Claire.
In summation, I don’t stand with Claire I might’ve had she done the honorable thing and left Frank to allow him to find a loving marriage but again claire is selfish and wants Bree to have a father growing up. No I dront stand with Claire instead I stand at the alter of the sacrificial lamb that is Frank. Seriosly how much does the author hate Frank.
Hello Orfder–Thanks for reading and commenting. This is difficult because most of what I see as selfless, you see as selfish–I’m thinking that we won’t see eye to eye so I won’t go into a point by point rebuttal. I will say that if you read Diana Gabaldon’s “In Defense of Frank” piece, you will get a viewpoint from the author herself. 🙂
https://timeslipsblog.com/diana-gabaldons-defense-of-frank-randall/
A little late to the table. I agree with your spot on analysis and would add that Frank insisted she stay and ignored the truths Claire shared re her life with Jamie, with the expectation that she would “let her fantasy go”. It took years for him to halfway believe her story-hence his letter to Bree. I realize non book readers may never know this. We’ll see, I guess.
Frank’s martyrdom was his own choice. I feel for him in the early years, but he chose his emotional prison as time went on. Claire gave him as much freedom as he was willing to take and blamed her for it. He assumed he could replace Jamie in time and that was his grand mistake.
Sandy martyred herself, as well to be with him. So,I stand with Claire knowing she gave him as much as she could. You can’t fake romantic love, no matter how fond you are of someone. Jamie said it, “Love is when you give someone your heat and soul and they give you theirs in return”.
Thanks, Diane–you’ve expressed Frank’s reactions eloquently. There are many that don’t see eye to eye with my take; I’m with your more in depth take on Frank. So glad you commented.
Loving your defence of Claire! I think people may forget this marriage with frank was never exactly an established marriage…. it didn’t have time to be. They fell in love and were very much in the honeymoon stage when they were separated by war. After the war, they had barely any time to reconnect – and the time they did have was filled not only with each other but remember Frank was busy with the Reverend much of the time. Their marriage never had time to deepen and mature past the honeymoon stage of the relationship. Also it seems likely to me Frank cheated during the war.
So of course when faced with the trauma of Claire’s disappearance, the pregnancy and Claire’s overwhelming grief their marriage didn’t stand a chance, in my opinion.
Frank had very unrealistic expectations of Claire and of the marriage, and blamed Claire when they were not met, when in fact it was really the fault of both of them, and neither of them at the same time.
And finally in my opinion the character of frank suffered from a lack of compassion and self awareness (a remnant from his ancestor BJR possibly?) as illustrated by his inability to understand Claire’s enthusiasm for embracing America and growing into their new life, rather than holding on very tightly to his Britishness.
Thanks as always for your writings!
Tracy, you bring up an often overlooked point: Frank and Claire’s marriage was a fleeting thing, separated by war. I do believe they loved each other very much. But, as Claire said, he wasn’t born as the right person for her. Sad but true. Thanks very much!
I couldn’t agree more. I also stand with Claire.
I totally agree. Forgiveness and love share this one trait: they must be chosen each day. Frank could not keep choosing love and forgiveness every day. On the other hand, Claire was choosing love every day and making strides towards making a happy loving life with Frank. Frank stopped the forgiving and loving process when Claire wasn’t able to move forward at his pace instead of hers.
If Claire had not returned to Frank she would never have gone to the State’s. Which as we know is important for the story. Being raised in the 50’s being single with a child was unheard of back then. If divorced you were the divorcee. Which made you wild and easy to all men.
Sharon, thanks for responding. I agree that it was difficult at that time to be a single mother; moreover, divorce amongst Catholics was rats back then. I do believe that Claire did not want to deprive frank and Brianna of each other and that was a big sacrifice that she made.
Frank and Clair both changed during WWII and were not the same. Clair found true love in Jamie, much like her in today’s life where she found true love in Tony. They both had something different the others did not. Frank, truly loved Clair and tried to do the right thing. I felt sorry for Frank. While Clair did love Frank at one time, things had changed, but she was still married to him and felt obligated, and she was pregnant. Clair could not let go of Jamie, it was more that just a physical attraction, but a feeling of security, strength, confidence, they were like one person. Frank did his best but was, over time, left without love from Clair and raising a baby that was not his and “Found someone else.” Clair did love Frank, he was her first love, but that was then and this is now. She longed for Jamie, but it was like that song, “So far away…” across town, or across time, he was unreachable. The love written is deeper than the deepest ocean and can never be separated, because, they are like one person.
Thanks, Don, for responding!
Excellent. New TV fan, so this is my first read of your analysis. I really appreciate it. Well done.
Kim, thanks for reading and commenting! It is so appreciated.
I was a little miffed with Frank when he got mad at her during sex. I mean she was trying, for crying out loud. I blame him for that completely. Thank you for voicing my same feelings!
Yes!! He was impatient and unrealistic. And quite a bit selfish there.
I completely agree with you, Teddie! I stand with Claire, although I do have some sympathy for Frank, especially just after she returns. But I felt that she really tried to make the marriage work, even though she’d never get over Jamie. And on the show, I hated Frank for allowing his girlfriend to pick him up the night of Claire’s graduation – that really upset me. And Claire did give him the chance to get a divorce but he wouldn’t take it, because he was afraid that Claire would keep Bree from him. But I still don’t accept that, and I stand with Claire! Thanks for articulating my feelings so well!!
Oh yes, Judy! That was so un-Frank like, at least to me. Thanks for commenting.
Thanks, Judy! She tried very hard indeed. I also agree that it was just awful that his girlfriend came to the house, and felt it was very un-Frank like that he did not plan to attend the celebration with Brianna and Claire. She did love him–once.
I agree with everything you said. I have been quite resentful of “fans” trashing Claire. It was mentioned in one of the above comments that Claire needed to stay with Frank because she had no money. I don’t remember if it was mentioned in the show, but in the book she had money she inherited from her Uncle Lamb – enough to support her and her baby. Thank you for pointing out how Claire was better than many fans gave her credit for.
Thanks, Helen. Money never crossed my mind.
I have been with Claire most of the time. Not sure if there was a lot who were not. The only time I had a problem (there may have been others) is season 2 when she lost Faith and Jamie was talking to her about the death of Faith. It was his child too. It seems she did not have any understanding for his grief. It seemed she should have if she loved him.
Ann, I hear what you’re saying but I think Claire was experiencing such a uniquely maternal grief, I’m not sure Jamie (or any other male) is able to experience that kind of loss in quite the same way. The author provided a beautifully effective metaphor for Claire’s grief in the terms of shadows and darkness finally giving way to light. You can’t get there without experiencing the journey. Thanks for commenting. Teddie
I blame Claire for committing both adultery and bigamy. I blame Frank for insisting that they stay married, when divorce would have been the more logical choice. I blame them both for staying in a marriage that should have ended a long time ago. It was tits up all the way. I heard that Diana Gabaldon’s husband once told her that she didn’t understand men. I’m beginning to see why he he had made this comment, if it is true.
I stand with Claire, all the way, but not with Frank !!!