The story spent WAY too much time writing about sex in detail.
Leave out the smut.
The writing is good and interesting.
I started getting interested in time travel books after I read "The Rose Garden" which I liked very much. I was going to read the sequel to "The Outlander" until I read a reader's review that says Claire sews up a man's testicles.....No, thanks...I'll pass on anymore of these books in the series. While I found "The Outlander" held my attention, I really didn't like reading about all the sex scenes or the torture. I was surprised that more reviewers didnt mention that part of the book. So...if you like reading about other's sex lives in detail, sexual torture...then this is the book for you. I guess in my old age Ive become somewhat conservative ( still not a prude though). I would have enjoyed it so much more if she had toned down that part....I dont hink it was necessary...for me, anyway...Thats it for me....no more in this series...
I went back and forth on this book. I both read it and listened to it. It was very well written for the most part. The narrator was wonderful. And I loved the concept of accidental time travel. But there were times when the conflict between the reality of life for women in 1740s Scotland and a woman raised in 1920-1940s England was glossed over. The author did make a plausible explanation still there were something's that required suspension of belief. I enjoyed the history. I particularly enjoyed some of the explanations of the Catholic faith. I would say my biggest objection is the romance. None of it was graphic. But it was just over the top at times and I believe the story could have stood a little less.
From other reviews I know I am odd man out in this, but that is my take.
The story of Claire Elizabeth Beauchamp Randall Fraser is very interesting.
Performance breaks in the recording are noticeable to the listener
Reader. Wannabe writer. That's a picture of me standing in line to see Stephen King!
I got this book on the recommendation of a friend who validated its current wild popularity. I’m not a romance fan, but my friend’s retelling of the story made it sound interesting and like something I might enjoy. Wow, I should have stuck with her version of the story! I like action, mysteries and thrillers. My favorite authors range from Agatha Christie to Michael Chrichton to Stephen King -- just so you know where I’m coming from. With that background I was unprepared for the plodding narrative of this story. After the first section, I found it extremely boring.
Gabaldon’s love scenes were hot, but everything else? Dry as dust. And I found myself not liking the primary character, Claire, very much. There’s something about her initial situation – accidentally traveling back in time – that didn’t ring true for me. She was a little too eager to go along with what was happening to her. She was a little too savvy, and her internal conflict – getting back to her own time vs. going along to keep her secret – didn’t last long. Soon she finds herself married and dragged along into her new husband’s familial and political dilemmas.
Perhaps if I found 18th century Scottish history more interesting I’d be more into the story and it’s historical aspects. Perhaps I’m too American. Pre Civil War American history – shoot, pre Revolutionary War American history! – is far more interesting to me than Scottish clan squabbles. And the writing could have done with a stricter editor. Gabaldon loves to linger on scenes that have nothing to do with anything – a difficult child birthing scene, a long, graphic description of Jamie’s broken hand, a romp on horseback – nothing that happened in these scenes did anything to move the story along. In fact, I skipped close to 20 hours and went straight to the last hour, and found I hadn’t really missed anything. Hearing the names of characters I didn’t know didn’t bother me. It was easy to get the gist of who they were to Claire fairly quickly. Hearing the end result of events summed up pretty tidily and without confusion the events that happened. It was enough to know “there was a war and people got hurt” than to go through the long, laborious description of the war and then the aftermath. I find it telling of the writing that one doesn’t have to hear the whole story to know the story and know exactly how it ends. This type of storytelling is just not my cup of tea.
I wanted to like this book because it is wildly popular. I wanted to be on the bandwagon for change, but I’m afraid that I won’t be continuing with this series. I’ll binge watch the first season when it comes out on Amazon, and probably get more out of the show than I would the books anyway.
Yes, but with the caveat that it's really a romance novel.
There were a lot of memorable moments since the protagonists are constantly in peril. I found myself often disgusted with Claire because of her pig-headedness and unwillingness to take the advice of people who are sincerely trying to keep her safe. I felt like her sense of values were too modern for WWII era nurse.
Excellent character differentiation in voice and accent
No, it was definitely entertaining, but also very cheesy.
Great story, if a bit slow at some points.
I'm assuming the Duke has some sort of purpose in the next novels other than to get Jamie out of the castle so Claire could get into more trouble on her own.
Starting around Chapter 31, I noticed a slight murmuring sound behind the narrator's voice. I couldn't tell if it was an echo or people talking in the background. Not a huge issue, but distracting nonetheless.
Well told story that wouldn't have had many complications if Claire had simply done as Jamie said.
If I listen to the next book, it will be largely due to Davina Porter's superb performance.