Some people are Outlander book purists; others swear by the show. Here are 4 reasons why you should read the Outlander books and watch the Outlander TV series.
As a book reader first and multiple time Outlander re-reader, I came to Outlander the TV show intellectually understanding the show would have to be something different. They are different mediums after all. They should be different. And, as book readers know, the showrunners and writers took that option to new lengths in Outlander Seasons 3 and 4, keeping Murtagh alive, a butterfly effect that will affect the TV show for the rest of its run. And that’s just one not-so-small example.
But what I’ve realized four seasons into the Outlander TV series in ways that I never imagined possible is how enjoying both mediums is actually the way to go for the ultimate Outlander experience. Now I know some people just don’t read. I don’t understand it, but I accept it. These people need or prefer to see it — whatever it is — to enjoy it. Conversely, I know some people hang onto a book version of anything like a dog with a juicy bone; nothing other than that bone will do. Do not even try to hand them a dog biscuit.
But I’m going to give it a shot anyway and offer up some reasons why if you’ve stayed strong and hard to your one lane, you might consider taking a drive on the other side. Droughtlander is going to be here for a very long time, my friends, so why not try something new? Here are 4 reasons you should consider putting aside your previous thoughts and try whatever option — books or Outlander TV show — you’ve heretofore rejected. I can guarantee you won’t be sorry. (As an aside, I want to point out that audio books also count as reading and the Outlander series is read by reading genius, Davina Porter, so that’s another option if picking up a book hundreds of pages long gives you pause.)
Caveat: I’m not going to get into a spitting match on which is better written. The TV show writers are almost universally good at their craft while Diana Gabaldon is, well, Diana Gabaldon. So this is not about which is better written. We’re all just going to take that as a given.
Pacing
If you’ve felt a little like you’re in a whirlwind that might even morph into a mini-tornado as each TV season has continued, here’s a reason to consider adding the books to your to-do list: they are slower. With each hundreds and hundreds of pages long — Outlander is 640 while The Fiery Cross is 990, for instance — the books can take dozens and dozens of pages for details that whirl by in the TV show. And that means room for more nuances. Some TV viewers, for instance, found the slavery issue in Outlander Season 4 frustratingly shallow. In the book, a much longer storyline occurs that provides depth and expands character development. I get why the TV version couldn’t really go there given allll the information that had to occur to have the story make sense, but if you want more and you want it slower, if you want background and historical details that just can’t be found in a 13-episode season, crack open the books.
Character DevelopmentÂ
I personally, so far anyway, dislike TV Roger and TV Bree, both as a couple and as individuals. The details the TV show has chosen to focus on for their storyline make them seem, for the most part, like spoiled brats. In the books, they are both more complex. Book Roger is more multi-dimensional. His choices are more clearly agonizing about going back to Bree. He is honorable in ways that don’t come across in the show. The list could go on. Bree, meanwhile, actually has emotions beyond whining and complaining. This couple alone is a reason to give the books a chance because — spoiler alert — they’re going to take up more story real estate as this series continues. In other words, TV Roger and Bree may never live up to the book characters. Reading the books may make that more bearable for you, just sayin’.
But while the TV show has made some choices that work against the book characters, the producers have also made some wonderful additions and changes that have brought the series as a whole alive in ways I never imagined and have made my re-reads more enjoyable. Take Rupert and Angus. In the book, they are bit players. I’m not sure Gabaldon devotes even a page’s worth of words to either one of them, much less as a couple. In the show, they are wonderful comic relief, acting as foils to Claire as she tries to escape and to Jamie. They add depth to some of the series’ themes, such as loyalty. Rupert, who is allowed to live rather than be killed as happens in the book, has that wonderful death bed scene with Jamie after Culloden. Now when I re-read the book, I see them with more understanding and value.
And then there’s Murtagh. TV Murtagh is a much more developed character. As such he brings more depth to understanding Jamie that we don’t see in the same way in the books. The godfather relationship shows Jamie’s capacity to love and also it informs his decision-making in the show. That complexity is only going to be further enhanced in Outlander Season 5 as Jamie and Murtagh are clearly going to be tested. Having made Murtagh the de facto head of the regulators (rather than how it plays out in the book), the producers have ensured that the line Jamie was going to have to walk anyway when he agreed to Gov. Tryon’s land pact becomes, as decisions often do, one about love and family. Beyond the fact that we all love Murtagh and Duncan Lacroix, the actor who brought him to life, this development as a tool to create TV tension is brilliant even as it’s wildly different from the books.
TV Murtagh also enhances Claire’s character as we see their relationship develop in the show in ways not seen in the books. “The Search” in Season 1 is a notable example. Whether that episode is near the bottom of your list of episode favorites aside, we do see and understand Claire in ways that we might not just from the reading the book. Besides, Murtagh gives the best hugs.
One final example occurs earlier in the series, when the show introduces the idea of Claire and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), something that’s not in the books at all. When it first happened, I wasn’t sure it was the right step. But then as that subtext continued, I thought, this is brilliant. Of course she would have a PTSD reaction as the impending stress of Culloden and the increasingly obvious future that they were not going to be able to stop this horrendous battle. It brought more to her character and made me read the books differently after seeing that part of the show.
Scotland
I don’t know how good your imagination is, but I realized the inadequacy of mine when I actually saw Scotland in the show. I thought I had a general sense of this beautiful country and its people as I read the books. Nope. Not even close. Scotland is a visual feast and, thanks to the show, I now have a new appreciation for how this rugged country impacts the characters themselves and can now read the books with that visual backdrop. Result? My read is even more pleasurable now that I watched the show. Didn’t even think that could be a thing.
Conversely, if you want to luxuriate in the ways of the people with more historical tidbits, head to the books. Result? You’ve got the best of both worlds.
Sex and Intimacy
If you’ve only watched the show, you know full well how the sex and intimacy between Jamie and Claire has dwindled ever since Outlander Season 1. And if you follow any social media at all, you have likely heard book readers complain long and loud. Why? Because they know what’s missing. They know sex and intimacy are as critical to Jamie and Claire’s relationship and to whom they are as an individuals as breathing.
Which is not to belittle the sex we do see in the show. Dear God these two humans are beautiful individually and as a couple. The chemistry between Sam Heughan and Caitriona Balfe is unicorn-like. We could not ask for a better couple to bring Gabaldon’s words to life.
But they can only make their magic when they are given scenes and with whatever words they are provided. And the bottom line of the show is, due to a chock-full, complicated storyline, there just isn’t that much time. Nor is that likely to change as we enter the American Revolution and all that’s coming.
So if you want more intimacy, consider adding the books to your life. If you head over to the books, for instance, you can read the amazing scene with Jamie and Claire in the grotto at the end of Outlander (a scene that leaves you no doubt these two are well on the way to recovery as a couple). Now I get the logic of why they couldn’t recreate that amazingly expensive scene for TV. But the TV producers took it a step further and decided in Outlander Season 2 to make Jamie and Claire more at odds than they are in the books. That was a mistake IMO. It wasn’t just about the lack of sex. It was about how their coupledom was not at the center of the second season. While Jamie and Claire had moments of difference, in the books there is no doubt they are working together. The show went a different route. The good news is after bitching about it (and choosing to only rewatch that season in its entirety once because I found it so irritating) I can instead go back to the source and my happy place. And that means I can stop being as irritated at the show. This is a good thing.
And finally one more reason to consider the books: Diana Gabaldon is hands down the best writer of sex scenes ever. Think I’m kidding? Here’s snippet from Drums of Autumn that did not make it to the screen: the riverbank scene. Jamie and Claire have agreed to meet by the water for a little rendezvous after days of traveling in a group. Claire is getting impatient and starts to take care of herself:
A breath of warm breeze slipped past me, and all the tiny down hairs on my body prickled with its passing. No hurry now, and no one to hear. I drew a hand down the soft curve of my belly and the softer skin inside my thighs, where the blood pulsed slowly to the beat of my heart. I cupped my hand, feeling the swollen moist ache of urgent desire.Â
I closed my eyes, rubbing lightly, enjoying the feeling of increasing urgency.
“And where the hell are you, Jamie Fraser?” I murmured.
“Here,” came a husky answer.
Startled, my eyes popped open. He was standing in the stream, six feet away, thigh-deep in the water, his genitals stiff and dark against the pallid glow of his body. His hair lay loose around his shoulders, framing a face white as bone, eyes unblinking and intent as those of the wolf-dog. Utter wildness, utter stillness.
Then he stirred and came toward me, still intent, but still no longer. His thighs were cold as water when he touched me, but within seconds he warmed and grew hot. Sweat sprang up at once where his hands touched my skin, and a flush of hot moisture dampened my breasts once more, making them round and slick against the hardness of his chest.
Then his mouth moved to mine and I melted—almost literally—into him. I didn’t care how hot it was, or whether the dampness on my skin was my sweat or his. Even the clouds of insects faded into insignificance. I raised my hips and he slid home, slick and solid, the last faint coolness of him quenched by my heat, like the cold metal of a sword, slaked in hot blood.
My hands glided on a film of moisture over the curves of his back, and my breasts wobbled against his chest, a rivulet trickling between them to oil the friction of belly and thigh.
“Christ your mouth is slick and salty as your quim,” he murmured, and his tongue started out to taste the tiny beads of salt on my face, butterfly wings on temple and eyelids.Â
I was vaguely conscious of the hard rock under me. The stored heat of the day rose up and through me, and the rough surface scraped my back and buttocks, but I didn’t care.
”I can’t wait,” he said, breathless.
“Don’t,” I said and wrapped my legs tight around his hips, flesh bonded to flesh in the brief madness of dissolution…
This goes on in various stages, including intimate conversation, for FOUR MORE PAGES until it ends with “then the fiery sword severed me from consciousness and set fire to my body. We blazed up together, bright as stars in the summer night, and then sank back burnt and limbless, ashes dissolved in a primordial sea of warm salt, stirring with the nascent throbbings of life.”
Tony Graphia and Maril Davis, both avid book fans, said they were sorry they couldn’t get that into Outlander Season 4. No worries, say I. I’ve got the book—and the show.
Do you agree? Do you think reading the books and watching the show is the way to get the full Outlander experience?
Or do you still prefer to stick to reading or watching?
Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!! This is EXACTLY what I’ve experienced, reading all 8 books (with Davina Porter) then experiencing the four seasons on TV, now re-reading the book series. I was very hesitant to watch the show, having the characters ingrained in my mind. I was, however, extremely pleased with the casting of Sam Heughan and Caitronia Balfe and their chemistry is incredible. Most of the other cast members are quite good, especially David Barry and Richard Rankin, Duncan Macroix and Graham McTavish. The do enhance my reading of the books again, envisioning these actors in their respective roles. I’m excited for seasons 5 & 6, and happy for both Sam and Cait as producers going forward. My life has changed with the reading of these books. I see so much in humankind that can be learned from Diana Gabaldon’s writing.
Davina Porter added another whole dimension of my “reading” the books. I had never listened to an audio book before and decided to give it a shot after reading the series twice because my sister=in-law was a diehard Davina fan. SO glad I did! Hearing the books changed my thoughts about the story yet again.
Thank you, Janet. It is amazing how closely your article mirrors my own feelings. While season 4 was airing, if I was disappointed in the way a scene was portrayed or if it was left out, I would seek solace in the book. Now that Droughtlander is here, I started the books again. I read by day and watch the related episode at night.
You are right. My only thought to throw into the mix-some say the reason the show doesn’t get the critical interest it deserves is its reputation as a “bodice ripper”. So the show might be trying to balance it out a bit. But I’m still crushed about not having the grotto scene! I read all the books and went to Scotland before they started filming. Missed it by a few days. The opening credits made my heart almost stop and hooked my husband immediately. I mutter about some of the changes, but accept them just so I can watch Sam/Jamie on the screen! I reread the current volume after the season ( except DOA) to be less frustrated by the changes. That’s just my style. I find it keeps me from getting upset at something small and lets me go with the show as it is.
The books work the same for me Cheryl. They bring me back to my happy place if I’m frustrated with the show. On the other hand, the show has brought me insights as well. The two together are perfect! 🙂
Love both for their own merits! Agree how the show gives you the visuals to go with the books. Just finished reading the series for the 3rd time. Never gets old! Thanks!
Very well written. I started as a show watcher, binging seasons 1 & 2. But I needed more!! So of course I devoured all the books. The details in the books do help fill in the cracks that TV can’t. Sam and Cait will always be Jamie and Claire for me, but it does get tough watching the show after I’ve read the book. I still enjoy the show but I do have to step back when there are details that don’t fit for me. Oddly some of the most obvious changes in the storyline don’t bother me and I enjoy the changes. I think it’s the lack of depth, humor and intimacy of the characters that’s sometimes sacrificed to get all of the story in that annoys. But it is a different medium and there are always the books. I think Bree is becoming more “likeable” as we see more of her story. As much as I love Richard’s acting, the way it’s written some of the motivation of his character doesn’t work for me, I prefer book Roger. In episode 12 that most people loved, I really didn’t like Roger’s attempt to convince himself and the priest that it was time for him to give up and just care about himself. This just didn’t capture the essence of that character or his understanding of the priest due to Roger’s religious background. We’ll see how season 5 develops and will need to give it some room to breath, but I am looking forward to it.
I’m with you, Felice. I will always be a Book Roger fan unless they do some serious changes in the show in upcoming seasons.
I have read the books twice, and I find the TV show disappointing at times. The TV writers have put a modern “feminist” slant on the production to the detriment of the main characters in Diana’s story, in my opinion.
How can you take one of the most likable, honourable, and brave characters in the book seem shallow, wimpy, and misogynistic? That’s what the TV writers did to Roger. They have done this to the Jamie character at times as well. Why?
And, thinking of Bree as a spoiled, bratty child always bothers me. She finds out she has been LIED to all her life about her father. Her mother basically abandons her, and leaves her without any family in the 20th century. She goes back to help her parents, gets brutally raped, and finds herself pregnant. Then, she discovers her family have beaten and SOLD her love (husband) into slavery. SOLD. Good God, who wouldn’t be traumatized and a wee bit angry? Spoiled? I think not. Please give Roger and Brianna a break.
I will continue to watch the TV show as I do enjoy may aspects of it. However, I do wish they would stick to Diana’s story and characterizations a bit more.
Theresa. I agree about Roger and Bree. I don’t like the TV versions at all. I’m hoping, hoping, hoping Season 5 gets them a bit back on track but we shall see. I do, however, want to say that Richard Rankin is an amazing actor and does a terrific job with what he’s given.
Thank you for replying. I totally agree with you about Richard Rankin. He IS an amazing actor! And, his sweet, fun-loving personality adds a lot to the publicity tours the cast does. I hope they get back on track in Season 5 as well. Fingers crossed.
Janet Reynolds has written a very clear reflection concerning this issue. I think, though, she was too generous with the assessment of the TV show. I know I feel this way because I am a massive lover of the books and I think Diane Gabaldon is such a brilliant writer that it really is wrong to diverge so much from the books. I don’t mind such additions as Murtagh returning, or a change like Bree’s birth scene, but I am almost hurt by some changes that are not compatible or do not reinforce the tenor of the characters’ moral sense, deep feelings, and uniqueness. I have read all of the books three times and find additional aspects to love within each reading. There is a dependable soulfulness to the books and I am never disappointed. I do understand the constraints and needs of different media, but I really don’t like it when the writers take such intimate liberties.
Virginia–totally get your point. I think the only reason I hold back a bit on some of the TV changes is because I still would love for them to do the whole series and I worry that the TV folks might get irritated if the public criticism is too harsh. I suspect season 6 will be our last but it is one reason I hold back a bit.
Yes Absolutely,the combination is important. I also find that as a devoted book reader I like the TV series episodes a lot more the second time I watch them because I can putaside all the “why didn’t they…?” and just sit back and enjoy.
So true on the rewatching….although I will admit a few things still stick in my craw a bit…..and then I just re-read the books. 🙂
Hi Janet:
You know what? I totally agree with you on all the points you have made.
Right now, I am just a show watcher. I haven’t read any of Diana’s books yet. (I love books, yet haven’t gotten around to the series yet)
But that being said, I see a definite difference between the seasons in regards to the writing. I see it in the characters of Bree and Roger. In Season 2, I enjoyed Roger being so mature, and scholarly and I loved the way that he and Bree complimented each other.
I was looking forward to seeing their romance. Yet this season gave us a totally different Roger, and I really disliked it.
It almost feels like a bait and switch.
I agree with Felice that I thought Roger’s scene with the Father Alexander was a total disservice to the character, and just rang totally false to me.
I don’t find Bree “spoiled”, she is quite a beleaguered character though.
And this was just from me watching the show…
When I do read the books (as I am eagerly anticipating) it will be a treat!
Dawn
Dawn….oh yes you ARE in for a treat! I can’t wait to hear what you think and then how it impacts your TV watching. Are you going to start reading now during Droughtlander or wait?
I enjoy both the TV series and the books, but I do find TV Claire less likeable that book Claire. I think the writers are concentrating in making her such a strong character, that it distracts from her more caring side seen in the books.
That’s interesting Julie. Claire is one character I hadn’t given as much thought to in how TV Claire differs from Book Claire. I’m going to now think about that more so thanks for bringing it up.
Completely agree! Especially about Roger and Bree. I was so disappointed in the way Jamie and Bree’s relationship was portrayed in season 4.
I watched Season 1 of Outlander before I read the books. Now I have read each book at least 2-3 times. I appreciated your comparison regarding the books and the tv series, Janet. You captured so beautifully the difference experiences with the books and tv series. Love Jamie, Claire, Murtaugh, and others. I too struggle with the actors playing Roger and Bree. Perhaps because of their physical characteristics are different than in the book. I was extremely disappointed (And a bit angry) when the left out the carving of initials on the bottom of their thumbs before Claire when back into the stones. I have had to continually tell myself to “let it go”. However, in my opinion they should have included the character carving the first letter of their names in each other’s flesh. In my opinion this act was heartbreaking. This act of devotion is mentioned in Diana’s later books. When Claire and Jamie touched the scar on their hand they feel intimately close to one another even when they are apart. But I am grateful to have to books to read this act of love over and over again!
Rebecca–I agree that the carving was a big TV loss. I think it would have played well on the screen and yes, it could have been used in later seasons too. I forget why Maril Davis and Toni Graphia said they couldn’t do it but so it goes….I’ll just reread that part in the books. 🙂
Totally agree. I have read all of the books. Only started a year ago. I have reread Outlander & am now reading Fiery Cross again. (Prepping for the next season) I didn’t care for it much on the first read through. Appreciating it much more this go round. I agree with your assessment of Roger & Brianna. I hope that they fix that. The whole pouty, self absorbed Brianna, blaming Jamie for beating up Roger when she did not reveal the truth to her loved ones was very frustrating. Yes more sex between Jamie & Claire can be found in the books. After watching the series you can now imagine Sam & Cait in your mind & Dianna does write it so well. I am an advocate of both the books & the series!
Very nicely done article…thought provoking!! I am an avid series READER and I have watched all 4 seasons of Outlander. The bridges forged between the two, especially in season 1, are strong. However they have been subsequently undermined and weakened, particularly in season 4, for various reasons and purposes repeatedly and aptly & accurately expressed and described on here and elsewhere on social media. It’s distressing, to say the least! The collective “ blended society” of reader viewers are justifiably struggling after this season.
Regarding the “sex and intimacy” between Claire & Jamie…the book series never waivers. This character couple have more than “hot sex”. To even label this series as “bodice ripping” is a disservice to Galbaldon’s character development of this couple, the grotto scene being a prime example of the sexual PASSION these 2 characters possess and hold dear. They are SOUL MATES and the LOVE they possess for each other is rare, healing and precious…and constant. What the books are able to convey to the readers will continue to present “challanges” at the visual level and the shortcomings are and will become even more glaringly obvious if continued in the same trajectory in seasons 5 and 6. It is my hope that the producers, directors, actors and others can creatively find ways to capture the J & C essence, including them and not omitting them ( Rebecca’s reference to the carving of the initials…small, yet so powerful and contributory to reflect that essence!) or leaving them on the cutting room floor.
My apologies….I have no idea why the word “reader” in my above post is in all caps.
What a perfect explanation of reading and TV viewing of Outlander. I am a late arriver to Outlander but my love for Scotland brought me to Diana’s books and the TV series. I binge watched all 4 seasons before my 3rd trip to Scotland and had ordered Diana’s complete book series to read upon my return. I am now on my second reading of the series and at book 5 presently. My first trip took me to my grandmother’s birthplace of Portsoy and then to Aberdeen to lay some of my mother’s ashes in a family burial plot. I simply can’t let Scotland go so I keep returning! And yes, I am so glad I watched Outlander and read the series. I am biased and prefer the books but the show definitely enhanced all my reading. Oh my…the visuals of Jamie and his wonderful interactions with Claire are breathtaking! The books are so intense and are simply delicious reading! I keep tweeting Diana and thanking her for her gift of storytelling. I am completely addicted and proudly so. The books are the full meal and then dessert is the TV show. Back to reading…
Wonderful analysis. I love the books and seem to find something I never realized in a previous reading each time I re-read the series, but I love the TV series as well, most of it anyway. I do acknowledge that only two episodes of the series have made me emotional but reading the books has me reaching for tissues every few pages. Diana’s dialog, especially from Jamie’s mouth, which is now always in the gentle Scots burr of Sam Heughan’s voice brings me to tears over and over. I do not consider the mediums in competition but as companions. My hope is that I live long enough to read the final two books in the series and watch their transition from page to screen. I shall be very disappointed not to learn the outcome of the story and the significance of Jamie’s ghost’s appearance on that stormy night outside Mrs. Baird’s in Inverness.
I am so with you Judith on making it to the final book. That goes for Diana Gabaldon too. She needs to wrap herself in bubble wrap and keep writing!
Enjoyed your article. One thing I will say is watch the show first and then read the books. That way no irritation at what is left out/changed.
I will disagree on a couple of things. No Angus and Rupert weren’t improved. They were annoying as heck, not funny. To this day I can’t stand show Angus. Book Angus was a man of dignity, show Angus was a horse’s rear.
As much as I like Duncan Lacroix, Murtagh should have died. I’m beginning to think that in spite of RDM saying they kept Murtagh alive because he was a fan favorite, they kept him alive so they wouldn’t have to follow Diana’s books. So many story lines have now been screwed up by Murtagh staying I’m not sure how they can even follow large chunks of the later books. That goes along with not having Duncan Innes. Murtagh isn’t filling that role and that means lots of book 5 and six will have to be eliminated or changed so as not to be recognizable.
While the show is visually gorgeous and the actor are fine to great it gets very hard to appreciate it when they lied to the book readers by telling us they would remain faithful to the books and then broke their word.
Interesting point about that idea of keeping Murtagh alive so that they wouldn’t have to follow the books so closely. Hadn’t thought of that but it’s intriguing. I think one reason they could have kept him alive is because they know it’s going to end after season 6. In other words, they won’t be doing books 7 and 8. But we shall see.
Dear Janet,
I just stumbled across this terrific and well written piece. I agree with most of your points. The only one where I diverge is the Murtagh change.
While his character is wonderful, and I love the depth and complexity Duncan brought to Murtagh, I feel he needed to go. (Just as I LOVED Angus, but he too needed to go when he did for the story)
I think Murtagh’s presence, especially in the way they have elevated him into a big hero status, takes over and steps on emerging characters’ development. I feel his presence hurt the purpose of Jamie’s Ardsmuir time, and in S4, he monopolized nearly every episode.
I pray S5 is his last, so our story can get back on track. The male story focus of S5 should be about Jamie and Roger’s relationship growth and trust, Roger becoming Jamie’s trusted right hand and “son of the house” .. It should not focus on Jamie and Murtagh, and that’s what they set up in that bastardized finale.
Roger (and Roger and Bree’s relationship development) got very shortchanged last season to support the Murtagh focus. From his return episode, he was thrust into every storyline along with his own inventions. They can’t help themselves. It’s like they’re kids playing with a shiny but dangerous toy. And they recklessly hurt Roger in the process. That will keep happening as long “hero Murtagh” is taking precedence over Roger’s story in the show.
Murtagh was gone now for a reason. Even Ian was gone for most of Fiery Cross for a reason…
To create space and need for Roger’s position and growth … his connection to Jamie and role for the family and community. His relationship with Bree and Jem needed to be nurtured and given priority focus. It’s why so much space was cleared for him in Fiery Cross.
So I worry they will turn this into the Murtagh and Jamie story. There is only so much room for key focal. Points and relationship development.
I have to say though, Diana put my mind at ease a bit in our recent “sit-down” (which you will see in the piece). She and Rik let their feelings be known to the writers about Roger, and she thinks we will love him this season.
I trust Diana, so fingers crossed. 🙂
I really enjoyed this article and the comments. It encapsulated a lot of what I have been thinking having both read the books and watched the TV series multiple times. I read the books first. When I started watching the TV series, I was thinking things like; this isn’t right, this isn’t how it is done in the books, etc. Then I came to the realization that they are two different stories involving the same characters and many similar plot points, but different stories none the less. Both are enjoyable, but I do like the books better and can’t wait to find out how it all ends (if I live long enough).
I love the books and show equally. I believe that both the show and books are fantastic. I discovered show first then books. Now I am obsessed with both. So grateful for having the total Outlander world in my life. I have had more fun, joy , adventure and friendships brought to me because of it. Thank you Diana Gabaldon and Ron D. Moore.
Dear Janet,
I just stumbled across this terrific and well written piece. I agree with most of your points. The only one where I diverge is the Murtagh change.
While his character is wonderful, and I love the depth and complexity Duncan brought to Murtagh, I feel he needed to go. (Just as I LOVED Angus, but he too needed to go when he did for the story)
I think Murtagh’s presence, especially in the way they have elevated him into a big hero status, takes over and steps on emerging characters’ development. I feel his presence hurt the purpose of Jamie’s Ardsmuir time, and in S4, he monopolized nearly every episode.
I pray S5 is his last, so our story can get back on track. The male story focus of S5 should be about Jamie and Roger’s relationship growth and trust, Roger becoming Jamie’s trusted right hand and “son of the house” .. It should not focus on Jamie and Murtagh, and that’s what they set up in that bastardized finale.
Roger (and Roger and Bree’s relationship development) got very shortchanged last season to support the Murtagh focus. From his return episode, he was thrust into every storyline along with his own inventions. They can’t help themselves. It’s like they’re kids playing with a shiny but dangerous toy. And they recklessly hurt Roger in the process. That will keep happening as long “hero Murtagh” is taking precedence over Roger’s story in the show.
Murtagh was gone now for a reason. Even Ian was gone for most of Fiery Cross for a reason…
To create space and need for Roger’s position and growth … his connection to Jamie and role for the family and community. His relationship with Bree and Jem needed to be nurtured and given priority focus. It’s why so much space was cleared for him in Fiery Cross.
So I worry they will turn this into the Murtagh and Jamie story. There is only so much room for key focal. Points and relationship development.
I have to say though, Diana put my mind at ease a bit in our recent “sit-down” (which you will see in the piece). She and Rik let their feelings be known to the writers about Roger, and she thinks we will love him this season.
I trust Diana, so fingers crossed. 🙂
Thank you for your post. I have been hdiing under a rock and have only recently found the series, book and TV. I started by watch the first 5 episodes then decided to read Outlander before watching more. I am reading Dragonfly in Amber now. I can’t decide if it would be better to watch then read or read then watch. Season 2 has surprised me so far at all the details they have changed and as you said how they have changed the intimacy details of Jamie and Claire. There are definitely some moments in the book I was really hoping to see acted out by the amazing Sam and Cait. Oh, and I completley agree, I so wish they could have added the more details from the last two chapter of Outlander to season 1. So should I just watch and read later, or keep reading and watch later?
Hi Janet!
Here I am a really LATE bloomer! Started binging the series during COVID and LOVED all 5 seasons! Naturally, we are now in a really really long Droughtlander, so I decided to read the books. Can’t put them down. Now in The Fiery Cross. Janet, your reflection and reasons to do both are absolutely spot on. Since I saw the series first, there was no disappoint of alterations in series. I do realize they can’t get it all in the show, whether it be time, locations, etc. So, I do appreciate having the books.
My question is: Should I continue reading book 6, 7, 8 while waiting for season 6? or will it ruin for me to have the book knowledge first?
Julie So glad you’ve discovered the books! They are the gift that keeps on giving. I would absolutely recommend that you keep going. I don’t think it will hurt your TV viewing and I suspect we may see aspects of book 7 in season 6. Besides, who knows if they will even do any seasons beyond 6? You might as well keep enjoying the books! Plus then you’ll be ready when book nine comes out hopefully early in 2021….
I am also a newcomer to Outlander, both show and books. I binged all 5 seasons this fall–a definite silver lining from being stuck at home in a pandemic. Now I am reading the books (halfway through Drums of Autumn now), listening to all the podcasts, and trying not to go down too many internet rabbit holes.
As a show watcher first, what I’ve liked most about reading the books is getting new side stories, little vignettes that wouldn’t fit or make sense in the show. I go back and forth between reading and listening to the audiobooks–one plus of the books being published 20+ years ago is that they’re usually available at the library. I see how certain characters are developed, or come across, differently, but so far, none of the differences bother me. I appreciate the books’ more frequent (and often more explicit) intimate scenes as well; they complement what is and isn’t included in the show. I truly appreciate both TV and books as distinct forms of entertainment, so I’m trying to get my friends hooked as well so I’ll have more people to obsess with.
All to say, I liked your blog post and appreciate that I can catch up with this discussion 2 years after the fact.