Chapter 22: Reckonings — Outlander Recaps

In this chapter, cultures collide, characters develop.

So here we are. The famous "spanking scene." Though, in fact, Jamie beats Claire with a belt, non-consensually, while she tries to fight him off. So let's call it the "beating scene."

I have avoided reading think pieces about this episode of the TV show, but, judging by the comments of friends and family, there has been a lot of discussion about this scene. There seem to be two main questions:

Is this offensive?
Is this necessary?

After reading this chapter, I am inclined to answer "Yes" to both.

To the chapter!

Claire, Jamie, and the MacKenzie party make it to an inn. The men ignore Claire in a pointed manner, making it plain that she is "in disgrace."

After dinner, Claire and Jamie go upstairs. Claire starts to get ready for bed, but Jamie stops her.

"He came to stand by the bed, swinging the belt gently back and forth.

"Well, lass, I'm afraid we've a matter still to settle between us before we sleep tonight." I felt a sudden stab of apprehension."

Jamie tries to explain that Claire's decision to run away "put the rest in danger," and she must pay for it. Again, it seems worth pointing out that Claire didn't put anyone but herself in danger. Jamie is the one who went after her and brought the other men with him. I am very skeptical of his line about how a man would be even more severely punished for the same offense. So, if one of the other men wandered away from the camp and gotten captured, you would rescue him and then execute him for endangering the group? That sounds unlikely.

But it is true that they are in a bad situation. The English soldiers are after them and Black Jack Randall is unlikely to forgive and forget.

"I'll tell ye that it near killed me to see that animal with his hands on you."

Please, Jamie, tell us more about how the assault on Claire was terrible for you. I'm sure we're all fascinated.

Jamie insists that he must beat Claire because she disobeyed orders, but Claire is having none of it. In trying to explain his position, he stumbles through some general observations about Claire's behavior:

"Ye dinna take things as serious as they are. Ye come from a place where things are easier, I think. 'Tis not a matter of life or death where ye come from, to disobey orders or take matters into your own hands. At worst, ye might cause someone discomfort, or be a bit of a nuisance, but it isna likely to get someone killed."

This is a good point. For a 20th-century time traveler, one of the most disorienting things about the 18th century would probably be the powerful bonds of hierarchy and deference that bound women and men alike. Though it isn't as if Claire has never had to take orders before — she was in the army for heaven's sake. The disconnect is that Claire does not recognize Jamie as a legitimate authority, whereas he plainly expects that marriage places her under his command.

Reluctantly, Claire agrees to obey orders, "even if I don't agree with them." This does not, however, gain her a reprieve from the imminent beating. Why? Here, Jamie articulates his own understanding of the ongoing mind/body argument:

"Ye understand me, ye say, and I believe it. But there's a difference between understandin' something with your mind and really knowing it, deep down."

I wish there were a flag or something I could put in this quotation. If Jamie really believes this— that the truths embodied in physical experience trump the superficial understandings of the rational mind— what will happen at the end of this book? Will he persist in that belief? It is going to lead him down a pretty dark road.

I felt deeply betrayed that the man I depended on as friend, protector, and lover intended to do such a thing to me. And my sense of self-preservation was quietly terrified at the thought of submitting myself to the mercies of someone who handled a fifteen-pound claymore as though it were a flywhisk.

At this point, I just feel sick. Yes, this is a terrible scene to read. But I don't think Gabaldon soft-pedals just how revolting it is. Claire's fear and humiliation is clear. Whatever goodwill Jamie had earned from the reader in the past few chapters is draining fast, taking the shine off of the possibility of Claire staying in the 18th century. Claire's determination to get back to the standing stones has seemed anemic at times, but as Jamie goes on and on explaining the near-complete control he has over her body and her freedom, I can feel the urgency for an escape building.

There are scenes like this in the Song of Ice and Fire series, where Ramsay Snow/Bolton tortures Lady Hornwood to death. The difference is that this novel is showing the violence and humiliation from Claire's point of view. It's gross. But, I would argue, necessary for reminding us that Claire is not in a theme park. There are real cultural conflicts between her and Jamie. If she decides to stay, she will have to accommodate his expectations or alter her own.

Still, some of this is awful to read. Especially when he starts joking about it. God, fuck you, Jamie. I don't even want to write about this any more. It is making me angry. The mocking reminds me of the impotent rage of arguing with a man and having him undercut your points by suggesting that you must be on your period. Ihave never actually struck someone in anger (at least not since I was a child), but I can think of several times in my own life where only extreme self-control kept me from putting a knife (or a stapler, or whatever was handy) through the face of some smug asshole who has said that to me. Self-control and running away and crying.

Taking a break for a little while.

Ok, back now.

How are we to read this scene? I think that there are a variety of valid readings, all informed by individual readers' own experiences with violence, humiliation, and powerlessness. At one extreme, some people read this scene as humorous — the Starz show did, going so far as to give it a playful soundtrack. They certainly lightened the mood, choosing not to adhere closely to Claire's own description ("half smothered in the greasy quilts with a knee in my back, being beaten within an inch of my life"). That makes some sense from a pragmatic standpoint — Starz needs to keep ratings up and watching the love interest beat the female protagonist seems like a good way to lose viewers.

I can't give a definitive or objective reading. No one can. I can only say that, for me, this scene is disturbing enough that I'm pretty much off Team Jamie at this point. Fuck that guy. I know that's not fair — he is an 18th-century dude doing his 18th-century thing. It's true that 18th-century ideas about deference and obedience were terrible. And, insofar as Jamie adheres to them, so is he. It is perfectly appropriate for an 18th-century character to beat and humiliate a woman. Other things 18th-century characters might be ok with: Enslaving people! Committing genocide in the service of imperial conquest! Executing children! Marital rape! Enslaving people and then raping them! Actually, pretty much any sort of rape! Including not believing that rape is something that exists! All of those are believable positions for an 18th-century character. The fact that Jamie is not as awful as his peers is not enough for me to be on his side. Like fucking Thomas Jefferson. They should have a club.

I do appreciate that we do not actually "see" the beating in the novel. There's a lot of buildup and some oblique descriptions after it has happened, but we aren't subjected to a prurient blow-by-blow. That goes some way toward making it feel less exploitative of Claire. We still see all her rage and embarrassment, which is important. It's a direct contrast to the way Diana Gabaldon handles the sex scenes — there are plenty of those that do not cut away. But Jamie beating Claire is not really played for the reader's titillation, despite the explicit acknowledgement that Jamie finds it arousing. Seriously, fuck that guy. Non-consensual beating. SMH.

It's the next morning, and shit is still awful.

"Chin up." He chucked me under the chin, and I bit his hand, sharply but not deep.

Redoubling my desire for Claire to run away. Every time he belittles her or dismisses her anger, I step closer to wanting her to slip a knife through his guts on her way out the door.

Claire goes downstairs to breakfast and everything is horrible on top of unbearable. All the men are teasing her and joking like this is funny and I would be fairly happy if this inn just fucking exploded at this point. I cannot even quote this bullshit. Floggings all around and see if I care at all, you bastards.

Jamie followed me to our room, but I shut the door firmly in his face. Let him sleep on the floor again.

There can be no satisfactory retaliation for the humiliation Claire has suffered. This is a good start, though, showing that she is not cowed.

Were I being objective, which I was in no mood to be, I might admit that he was right when he said I didn't take things with the proper seriousness. He was wrong, though, when he said it was because things were less precarious in my own place — wherever that was. In fact, I thought, it was more likely the opposite was true. This time was in many ways still unreal to me; something from a play or a fancy-dress pageant . . . I was having trouble with the scale of things.

This is a good point. Even after years of study, it is always a shock for me to read about famous 18th-century battles that resulted in dozens of casualties, rather than tens of thousands. Or 18th-century cities like Boston, population 15,000. I grew up in a town of 15,000 people, and it was a small town. I can see how it would be difficult to adjust your expectations to that intimate scale.

It's not just that Claire finds the past "picturesque" — it's also impermanent. If she's leaving, there is no reason to adjust her thinking to suit her new circumstances. And after this chapter, I am 100% in favor of her leaving.

There's a lot more here about Claire trying to come to terms with the "realness" of her situation. The important point seemed to be this:

Jamie filled my senses so completely that his surroundings seemed almost irrelevant. But I could no longer afford to ignore them.

Staying with Jamie means staying in the 18th century. Fuck the 18th century.

Claire endures a very uncomfortable horseback ride for several hours before the pain from being beaten forces her to dismount and walk.

Jamie immediately swung down.

"I'll walk with her," he said quietly . . .

Several hours of torture by saddle had not improved my temper. Let him walk with me. I was damned if I'd speak to him.

Unfortunately, this resolve does not last very long. Jamie begins to tell Claire about all the times he was beaten as a child, which he seems to think is helping the situation, but just underscores how ghastly all of this is. Beating a child is awful. So is treating a woman as a perpetual child.

Jamie explains all his childhood mischiefs and the beatings he got for them. We are to understand that Jamie sees physical humiliation as justice, doled out in fairness for minor offenses. Whatever a 21st-century reader might think of that philosophy, it is, at least, coherent. If you believed, as Jamie does, in both the justice of corporal punishment and the fundamental inferiority of women, beating Claire would make sense.

This makes me wonder about Jamie's thinking about his own flogging. His offense was akin to Claire's — refusing to follow orders from someone whose authority he did not recognize, despite Captain Randall's strong claim on deference from the teenaged son of a minor landowner. Does Jamie feel that his beating and floggings were fair punishment for his defiance? Seems like maybe he does.

At this point, it becomes clear that Diana Gabaldon does not take quite as dim a view of corporal punishment as I do. Claire is relaxing and forgiving Jamie, and Gabaldon puts some fairly standard pro-corporal punishment arguments in Brian Fraser's mouth:

"Once I told him I thought beating your son was a most uncivilized method of getting your own way. He said I'd about as much sense as the post I was standing next to, if as much. He said respect for your elders was one of the cornerstones of civilized behavior, and until I learned that, I'd better get used to looking at my toes while one of my barbaric elders thrashed my arse off."

Since Claire responds to this with laughter, rather than with a considered argument for positive parenting (an anachronism for her as well as for Jamie), I gather that we are supposed to be ok with all this logic. Maybe it's that this book is dated. Maybe I'm just a naive hippie who doesn't beat her kids. But I find all this chummy acceptance of corporal punishment off-putting. It's not the characters — I can live with an 18th-century character advocating corporal punishment. If they didn't, that would be suspicious. But at this point in the chapter, Claire is forgiving Jamie a bit too quickly for my tastes. I will hang around a bit longer only because the TV show gives me some reason to hope that this subplot has not been completely resolved yet.

He paused and glanced at me. "I seldom lose my temper, Sassenach, and generally regret it when I do." And that, I thought, was likely to be as close to an apology as I'd get.

This has me wondering about the character arcs in these books. At this point, Jamie has not made any progress toward accommodating Claire's beliefs and values. As Claire notes, citing Dougal as an authority, "all the Frasers are stubborn as rocks, and you're the worst of the lot." Claire has acclimated to the 18th century by necessity and has made some concessions, including her attempt to see where Jamie was coming from in this chapter. If they're going to stay together, what concessions will he make?

The horses are frightened of something, so Jamie goes off to investigate, leaving Claire alone.

Only you, I thought crossly to myself, could work yourself up into being afraid of a lot of trees.

Treat yourself kindly, Claire. You've survived two attempted rapes, a harsh beating, and your very first time knifing a guy to death, all in about 72 hours. Don't be hard on yourself for being jumpy.

Know what will make you feel better? Wolves!

Wait, were there still wolves in the UK in the 1740s? That seems fairly late. I remember reading once that one of the things that redcoats hated about the American colonies was the wildlife. Wolves and bears were the boogeymen of childhood fables to them, not common animals. And then here they were, bumbling around upstate New York, with black bears rooting through their camp middens and wolves howling in the night. I'll have to look for that reference — I think it was a letter from a British soldier describing the American forest as a terrifying hellscape.

Claire and Jamie observe this unlikely wolfpack for a while. For some reason, this has a calming effect on them.

What has Claire taken away from this conversation?

As we walked, considering the stories he had told me, I couldn't help but admire the job he had done. Without one word of direct explanation or apology, he had given me the message he intended. I gave you justice, it said, as I was taught it. And I gave you mercy, too, so far as I could. While I could not spare you pain and humiliation, I make you a gift of my own pains and humiliations, that yours might be easier to bear.

Two things:

Direct apologies are nice, too.
Equating the punishments you endured as a child with the punishment you just inflicted on your grown-ass wife highlights the fact that you think of her as a dependent, not an equal.

Jamie then tells a story about the last time he was beaten with a strap, when he was 16. Just in case the point has been lost on anyone, he is explicit in distinguishing between a man's punishment (beaten with fists) and a child's punishment (beaten with a strap). To wit:

"Then Colum said no, if I was going to behave like a child, I'd be punished like one. He gave a nod, and before I could move, Angus bent me across his knee, turned up the edge of my kilt, and blistered me with his strap, in front of the entire Hall."

Very humiliating, to be sure. There's more to it — he had to apologize and then Colum wouldn't let him leave, and he almost pissed himself waiting in Hall for a long time, etc.

"So," he spread his hands deprecatingly, dropping the clump of pine needles, now you know the worst thing that ever happened to me."

I couldn't help it; I laughed until I had to sit down at the side of the road.

Things have taken a decided turn for the lighthearted. They talk about Laoghaire and how Jamie took her punishment in the Hall to save her from the same humiliation he endured at sixteen. Then they're back to talking about sex and Claire has pretty much forgotten about the beating. Everything's all giggly and intimate again. In a fit of laughter, Claire busts out with,

Oh, Jamie, I do love you!

Which sends him into fits in turn.

At long last, he sat up, wiping his streaming eyes. He shook his head, gasping.

"Murtagh was right about women. Sassenach, I risked my life for ye, committing theft, arson, assault, and murder into the bargain. In return for which ye call me names, insult my manhood, kick me in the ballocks and claw my face. Then I beat you half to death and tell ye all the most humiliating things have ever happened to me, and you say you love me." He laid his head on his knees and laughed some more. Finally he rose and held out a hand to me, wiping his eyes with the other.

"You're no verra sensible, Sassenach, but I like ye fine. Let's go."

And so ends a long chapter about negotiating cultural conflicts and differing expectations . . .

. . . holy shit, there is more to this chapter. I just checked on my audiobook and the narration takes 1 hour, 11 minutes, and 40 seconds. What. Excuse me for a moment.

Riding along, Claire takes stock of her feelings:

Married to him by coercion and dependent on him from necessity, I had undeniably grown very fond of Jamie.

She professes to be unsure about Jamie's affection for her, since he "had never made even a casual statement to me about his feelings." But, of course, he has spent the last several hours telling Claire all about himself, "admitt[ing] me to his emotions and his personal life, warts and all." But she's still thinking about running away.

Then, Jamie decides to tell Claire about his father's death. This chapter is quite the infodump.

Long story short: Brian Fraser died of a stroke while watching Black Jack Randall flog Jamie apparently to death.

We learn some important things about Jamie's relationship with Brian, specifically that Brian was an affectionate father who promised to stand by Jamie no matter what, and that Jamie blames himself for Brian's death?

Why? Because Randall offered to spare Jamie the flogging if Jamie would "make him free of my body." Jamie refused, and thinks that if he had spared his father from seeing the flogging, he might not have died.

A note here: In light of the ongoing conversation about Black Jack Randall and the Trope of the Depraved Homosexual, I wanted to pause here and notice both Jamie's and Claire's reactions to this story.

Jamie's reaction is mostly pragmatic. He refuses Randall's offer, but doesn't convey overt disgust at the idea. There is one point where Jamie "shudder[s]" during the story, but it's when he's thinking about the flogging. Here is what Jamie actually says about his own reactions:

he was scared and in pain from his first flogging ("if I hadna been sitting, my knees would have knocked together.")
he did not dismiss the offer outright ("I'll no lie to ye, Sassenach. I considered it.")
his reasons were practical (rape would hurt less, the flogging might kill him)
his emotional reactions were not immediate disgust (worried his father would be hurt, stubbornly didn't want to submit to the man who had raped Jenny)
he called Randall "filthy names" not because he was outraged, but because he was afraid he would change his mind and "wanted to make sure there was no chance of going back."

Compare that to Claire's reaction to this story:

"I started so violently that the horse tossed its head and whickered reproachfully."
"I felt quite sick."
"My voice was hoarse . . ."
"I didn't find this amusing. I was seeing Jack Randall again, in a new and revolting light."

Given this evidence, I think it's fair to wonder whether, in other circumstances, Jamie might experience same-sex attraction. Obviously, Black Jack Randall is odious. And he wasn't trying to seduce Jamie — consent is impossible in that situation. But Jamie's reaction to Randall's "indecent proposal" was not, "eeew, gross, get away from me," but "no, you bastard." Claire, on the other hand, seems disgusted. It's not entirely clear whether she's just upset about Jamie possibly being raped, or if she is reacting strongly to Randall's homosexuality. But I think it's the latter. Claire now sees Randall in "a new and revolting light." She already knew he was a sadistic rapist. His lust for Jamie is the only "new" information in this story.

There are a few more details to this story. One is a Bible belonging to a dead prisoner named Alexander MacGregor. The doctor at Fort William gave it to Jamie, who keeps it, meaning to someday "collect" on "a debt owing to Alex MacGregor." Not sure what that's all about.

The whole point of telling this story at this point is so that Claire will understand why Jamie felt he had to beat her. It is effective.

I began to forgive him for what he had done to me.

Does this feel a little emotional blackmail-y to anyone else? Like, quit yer whining about being beaten, woman! I have a vewy vewy sad backstory and I know that you will forgive me if I make you a gift of my pain because you are way into me and also a healer by both nature and profession? No? Just me? Maybe it's not that bad. I don't think he's manipulating her with malicious intent. But I'm wary.

Whether or not I approve of this development, Claire has has decided to adjust her expectations for Jamie him. For good or ill.

"I understand," I said. "And so far as that goes, I forgive you. What I can't forgive," I said, my voice rising slightly in spite of myself, "is that you enjoyed it" . . .

"Enjoyed it! Sassenach," he said, gasping, "you don't know just how much I enjoyed it. You were so . . . God, you looked so lovely. I was so angry, and you fought me so fierce. I hated to hurt you, but I wanted to do it at the same time. . . Jesus," he said, breaking off and wiping his nose, "yes. Yes, I did enjoy it."

These two need to have a serious, non-naked talk about the ground rules of their sex life.

Claire is angry, but agrees to a reconciliation. With one condition:

I whipped my hand from the concealed pocket in my skirt, and the dawn light struck sparks from the blade of the dagger pressed against his chest.

"If," I said through my teeth, "you ever raise a hand to me again, James Fraser, I'll cut your heart out and fry it for breakfast!"

That is a good start. I normally wouldn't condone threats of violence, but since that is the language we're all speaking here, at least Claire is making her boundaries clear.

And, in the end, Jamie promises to change. He swears an oath on the dirk that he will never raise a hand against Claire, similar to the loyalty oaths the MacKenzies pledged to Colum.

Will he keep that oath? On the one hand, he's a romantic hero and is bound to keep all oaths he makes. On the other, I'm not convinced that his idea of unacceptable violence is precisely congruent with Claire's.

So there we have it. The Beating Chapter. It was ugly. I had to take breaks. I am not as ready to forgive Jamie as Claire is. But I'm not overly upset with Diana Gabaldon. If the characters are going to grow, they have to have faults. And this isn't just an arbitrary quirk — the problem of reconciling oneself to the alien expectations of a past century is central to Claire's dilemma. The truth is, time travel to any era is going to be rough on a 20th-century woman. And Claire doesn't even have it that bad — her race, appearance, and education make people treat her as a "lady," and she got stuck with a spouse who is basically kind. This chapter comes at a point in the book where it was important to show just how shitty 18th-century Britain was for women (and for poor people and ethnic/racial/religious minorities, which hasn't come up much yet), and it did that effectively. At the end, I am wary of Jamie, but I'm interested to see whether he will actually change as a result of this incident.

Body Count:

Jamie: 5 + assorted redcoats + two years as mercenary in France

Claire: 1