The World of Voyager, Article One

Hello, Outlander peeps, and welcome to the first article in our discussion of Voyager (AKA: the one where the sex is back). I should probably start by stating the obvious: we’re going to be talking about the third book in the Outlander series quite extensively, so if you don’t want to know what happens… well, don’t say I didn’t warn you.

We’ll be doing some super fun stuff over the next several weeks in analyzing this book and talking about how it will become the next season of the TV show—well, super fun by my standards, anyway. Admittedly, I don’t get out much these days.

But before we can begin, let’s clear a few things up. There have been a gazillion articles lately about season three, and I would post links to them all, but I’m afraid you would leave me to go read them and I want you to stay here and hang out with me first. Just Google it when you’re done if you want. Or go visit our friends at I Love Outlander. They’ve been on top of that stuff. (No, but seriously, read this first.)

Suffice it to say that everybody is very concerned about a few things, ie: Will Tobias Menzies still be on the show? (Answer: Um, yeah!); and, Will they keep Murtagh alive just because we love him so much? (Answer: Um, I doubt it); Will Sam Heughan really be fat as Old Jamie? (Answer: If you looked like Sam Heughan, would you get fat?); and my personal favorite: Will Sophie Skelton have time to take some acting classes before her character Bree is featured heavily in season four? (Answer: Sorry, gang. She is what she is.)

I actually didn’t hate Sophie Skelton as much as some, but she definitely had an “I’m Acting Now” quality about her that’s going to seem false if you’re going to stick her in a scene with an actress as natural as Caitriona. She’s also doing that “I’m not actually from anywhere” American accent that makes Kate Winslet not quite as good in American films as she is in British ones. But I digress.

Back to Voyager.

Listen, I get it. There are some definite potential problems with translating these books. Diana wrote them as novels, not a TV show. And while it may not have been the furthest thing from her mind that someday they might get adapted, the reality is she wasn’t adhering to the constraints of television when she conceived it. Constraints such as:



Television shows have a place and location with which they are associated. The bar in Cheers, the office in The Office, the American office in the American The Office. You get the idea.

At first, it seemed Scotland would be Outlander’s milieu, and to a certain extent, it is. But Diana wasn’t content to just explore one place with her writing. She’s got her protagonists basically taking us on an 18th century Lonely Planet tour. It’s fun. I like it. But it kind of breaks rule #1 of TV.

This is part of why so many people didn’t like the France segment last year. As beautiful as it was, it couldn’t help but feel like a completely different show than that rustic Scottish thing we had fallen in love with the year before.

And if you were one of those people, I can’t wait to hear what you’re going to think of Hispaniola. Talk about a different world.


With the exception of Game of Thrones, it’s pretty well-established that once you’ve got a set cast of regular characters on a show, you should probably do your best to, you know, keep them alive and stuff… and ideally somewhere on the same continent as the action of the show. Hell, even Game of Thrones, despite its proclivity for killing off main characters, does us the courtesy of leaving some of its regulars alive for us to root for (or hate).

The Outlander books didn’t really concern themselves with all that. Again, in a book you can do whatever the hell you want. In a TV show or a movie, parts are played by actors. And actors become stars. And stars have fans and a personal assistant and 1.3 million followers of their Instagram account. Stars have houses in Bel Air worth more than all my organs. And stars deserve it. Because stars are why people watch TV shows.

217742.max-620x600The Outlander novels have only two stars: Jamie and Claire. That’s it. Sure, there’s a bunch of other people, and we see them from time to time. Some of them are amazing characters, too. But it’s hard to hang out with Jenny and Ian at Lallybroch when you’re on a boat in Haiti. It’s hard to live in mortal fear of one of the best villains in fiction, Black Jack Randall, when he’s dead.

Ron Moore and Co super-glued a couple more regulars together in seasons one and two by giving Frank a lot more screen time, giving Murtagh a lot more to do than in the books, and playing up the importance of certain friends like Louise and Master Raymond last year, or bringing Laoghaire into scenes where she originally didn’t appear.

But the plot of Voyager kind of makes that impossible, simply by virtue of taking our protagonists so far away from home.

Truthfully, though, even if we stayed in Scotland the whole time, all our villains are dead: Colum and Dougal, the Comte St Germain, even Frank (although I guess “villain” is a strong word for “husband”). And of course, Black Jack. (Now as stated, Tobias Menzies will still be on the show, but probably relegated to a bunch of flashback scenes.)

To compensate, Voyager gives us a whole MGM back lot worth of new characters to root for, fear, and question (and one familiar face at the very end). I think they’re great characters, and I can’t wait to meet them. But for those who were already saying that every season of Outlander feels like a completely new show, well, this ain’t gonna change your mind.

And finally…


This issue, also known as “the age problem,” is something we’re just going to have to get used to, folks. Claire and Jamie are supposed to be in their mid-to-late 40s for the rest of this show. Now Caitriona Balfe and Sam Heughan, of course, are not in their mid-to-late 40s. Because they are ageless freaks of nature. They drank that Kool-Aid that gets passed out in British acting schools that makes you look like this when you’re 70:



I don’t know if they sell that Kool-Aid at Marks and Spencer or what, but Sam and Cait have definitely partaken. (They do NOT have it at Walmart, I can tell you that much.)

The makeup team did an absolutely spot-on job of aging Caitriona for episode 213. The whole look, from the eye shadow to the leather riding gloves she gracefully tugs from her spider-like fingers at the Culloden gravesite, was just perfect. (PS, how about that Best Costume Emmy nod! So deserved.)

There’s just one problem. They don’t have eye shadow in 1788. They don’t have bouffant hairstyles that add a hint of age. They don’t have turtlenecks.

And then there’s Jamie, who, as established, will not actually be fat. When I spoke to Ron Moore about this issue, he insisted that they aren’t going to do too much in terms of age makeup. Frankly, I think we’re just going to have to suspend our disbelief and get on with the plot. Which is fine with me.

So speaking of plot, let’s get to the meat of this thing, shall we?

Now for those of us who had a rough time reading Dragonfly in Amber—and I admit that I myself was such a person– Voyager should have been a much easier read, if for no other reason than the sex scenes are back (and the Jacobite revolt is, blissfully, over). But that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have substance to it. And this brings us to something we need to cover before we embark on (see what I did there?) our super-fun Novel-to-Screen Voyager excursion:


In Dragonfly in Amber, Diana Gabaldon did something that I’ve never seen in a novel before. She spent about 450 pages (just half of one of her books, but still a good chunk) detailing the burgeoning pregnancy of her protagonist, preparing both her and, by extension, us, for the baby that was coming.

And then she gave her character a miscarriage.

Why? Why would an author do that? Not only: Why would she do that to us emotionally? But more to the point, from a writing structure standpoint, why spend so much “screen time,” if you will, setting up a plot point only to then pull it away? It was Chekhov who said, “Never introduce a gun in act one unless you plan on firing it in act three.” Diana set up a pregnancy for all of act one, and then never delivered the baby (if you’ll pardon the super morose pun).

On first reading of Dragonfly, I couldn’t figure that one out at all. And then it suddenly became quite clear to me, and I felt like an idiot for not seeing it sooner.

The reason is that the point of Dragonfly in Amber isn’t that a woman has a baby. The point of Dragonfly in Amber is that a woman learns a very, very difficult lesson in “faith.” (The fact that the baby was called “Faith” probably should have tipped me off. Sometimes I’m a slow learner.)

Now every TV show has an overriding theme, and Outlander is no exception. (The overriding theme of The Sopranos, for instance, was “Redemption.” At what point do our sins make us irredeemable? What happens when we cross that point?)

For Outlander, the theme is much more internalized: Faith versus Futility. Do any of our actions make a difference? Are we doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again?

2016-07-09 12.34.24To find faith, we must believe in things that cannot be seen, that cannot be proven. We must break down the things we are “certain” about in order to make room in our hearts for grace; the divine unknown that can only guide us when we let go.

In the first book, Claire loses her “certainty”—the certainty that her life was meant to be lived with Frank, that her course was set, and in the process, finds that there is another path. To her surprise, this other path ends up being the journey to her true self.

In Dragonfly, her “faith” is tested. She was sure that with Jamie’s help, with the foreknowledge of history, she could change the course of events. She was wrong. But in the end, quite unexpectedly, a light—Jamie is alive. Hope remains.

So what is the point of Voyager?

Well, again, on first viewing, it might not seem to have such a clear theme, other than possibly: 18th Century Sea Travel Sucks; Penicillin Is Awesome. But there is another “point,” I assure you, and the job of Ron Moore and his team in season three of the Outlander show will be to illustrate it in every way possible.

The theme of Voyager is Freedom.

Jamie-at-Wentworth-Prison-on-Outlander-e1431836649704Namely: What does it mean to be free? What hinders our freedom? How do we hinder ourselves from feeling free? In Voyager, we will see many different iterations of the Freedom VS Enslavement debate. We have literal enslavement, of course: banishment, imprisonment, indentured servitude and, finally, the slave trade witnessed in the islands. But we also have much more metaphysical and psychological forms of imprisonment. As my grandmother’s old Haggadah taught me, “Man can be enslaved in more ways than one.”

(Is it starting to become clear why so many people have a religious devotion to these books? PS, if you’re wondering what a Haggadah is, don’t worry about it.)

By the end of Dragonfly (and the second season of the show), Claire and Jamie are stronger because they have learned that faith can overcome the weight of futility—belief can be stronger than even the demands of history. When we leave off, Claire has faith that she can return to Jamie; Jamie has faith that he will see Claire in the afterlife.

Now that they’ve learned this lesson in “faith,” how will they use it to find “freedom”?

I hope you’ll follow this blog and be part of our discussion as we explore how the theme of Freedom will play into the 13 episodes of season three! Until next week, try not to walk into any street lights while playing Pokémon Go. 🙂

Follow Rebecca Phelps on Twitter @DownWorldNovel, “like” us on Facebook at Novel2Screen, or just follow this blog for more on your favorite novel-to-screen adaptations.

Up next, Chris Cookson interviews J Ryan Stradal, the author of “Kitchens of the Great Midwest”! Check it out now!

And if you’re looking for Outlander-themed jewelry, here’s the link:  Sassenach Jewelry





16 thoughts on “The World of Voyager, Article One

  1. Started rereading voyager and marking all the passages that are so beautiful between J & C. I’m finding almost the whole book marked. I really felt the writers missed the mark on the connection between J & C in season 2. I’m hopeful they can rectify that next season


  2. Next to Outlander, I think Voyager is my favorite book. It tells us about the time they spent apart, which is fascinating. Then it tells us about their time together and how they reaquaint themselves. I’m actually wearing my A. MAlcolm t-shirt today! I’ve just signed up. Looking forward to these discussions.


  3. I love reading your blog and reading your thoughts on the books themes. I never thought about freedom, but since you bring it up I can see it. Mostly I just love the history and wrighting and everything else in the books!!!!


  4. HMM? Freedom, yeah, when Jamie is taken to Lallybroch after Culloden, he made sure he stayed free and away from the Red Coats and lived in a cave for 7 years. When he gave freedom up to maintain his family safe. That is some sort of freedom, I guess, a conscientious type of freedom. Seeking freedom when he tries to escape Ardsmuir because he thought La Dame Blanche was somewhere close after he learned about the gems by the silkie’s island. Freedom when finally Lord John takes him to Helwater, still considered a traitor, but not in jail, where eventually he gets his pardon after he fathered Willie, who’s starting to look just like him and that would bring problems to Willie’s grandparents, being that Willie is now an Earl. He goes home, opens a business in Edinburgh, a print shop as a cover front for his smuggling true business. Claire finds him, OMG! He fainted when she touched him and I laughed out loud when I read that part. LOL. Now because Claire is back, he frees himself from his wife Loaghaire, ughhhhh, and to be able to pay her alimony they end up on a huge voyage, hence the title Voyager. Yes you are totally right, freedom! Now, how do you see Claire’s freedom? Looking forward to your weekly discussions, this is fun!! Thank you!!!


    1. All great points! Yes, it’s not necessarily that he’s literally free, because obviously he’s not physically free at all when he’s in hiding or a prisoner. It’s more that the theme of the book deals with the struggle between WANTING to be free, yet being imprisoned physically and mentally. So excited to be sharing this conversation with you guys!


  5. Will be looking forward to your blog. A sensible one, if I may say so. But I disagree on your assessment of DIA’s theme. But of course faith being a large part of it, in my opinion the greater theme of DIA is TIME.
    As a continuum, as this mythic cause Claire wanted to change (history), as the nemesis Jamie fights to the very end, the amber to contain everything J & C hold dear in suspension….
    I do love this blog, really tired of others that are nothing but official apology for the show
    Keep it coming!


  6. Thank you for your blog! I love your idea that each book has a theme. Makes sense to me! I’m currently rereading Voyager- bat guano! And yes, that freedom theme. From Claire being trapped in a life she no longer wants, with a child she loves fiercely, but who reminds her daily of Jamie, to Mr Willoughby, exiled from the life he knows and the land he loves, each character yearns for the freedom to be their genuine selves, without censure from those around them. And my young Ian! Ugh! It’s gonna be a long Droughtlander, but with commentary like yours, we’ll have some food for thought, and be ready to dive in to the show next year!


  7. Just a note about Claire and Jamie’s aging. Having just reread Dragonfly, Voyager and some of Drums of Autumn, it would be far more consistent with the books if they didn’t do much aging of Claire and Jamie. The way they are described in the books, they drank that British acting school Kool-aid as well. Claire is described as being the type that would look much the same at 60 as she had at 20. One character says that they know logically she must be at least 40 (she is actually closer to 50) but she doesn’t look it with only a few fine lines by her eyes and very little gray hair. (Maybe they should get rid of those gray streaks.) As for Jamie, Claire says that while most men his age have gone soft around the middle, he didn’t have an extra ounce of fat on him and his bottom hadn’t changed a bit in 20 years. Of course Sam Heughan is much closer in age to Voyager Jamie than he was to Outlander and Dragonfly Jamie anyway.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s