I’ve been thinking about this post for awhile and exactly what points I wanted to make in it. I’ll start from the beginning. Clearly I am a sucker for YA literature, in particular YA fantasy/sci fi literature, I’ve mentioned this before I believe. One series I never appreciated or understood was the Twilight series. Now I will come clean immediately and say I have not read these books. I was turned off by the premise (vampires aren’t usually my thing) and I also happened to read parts of these books. After experiencing prose which I considered excruciating on every level imaginable, not to mention a dull and infuriating female protagonist, I did not further investigate the series. When all hell broke loose over them I did reacquaint myself with the books via the first few movies and by reading a few more chapters here and there.Needless to say listless, uncharismatic K-stew, mime-like constipated Robert Pattinson, and the horrible screenwriting featured in the movie did not in the least win me over.
BUT all that aside, after watching the first movie and reading several passages of the books something else was bothering me. I know there’s been much discussed and written over the drawbacks of Bella as a female role model (i.e. she’s a horrible one), so I won’t go into it much here, but let’s just say I found her extremely lacking. It didn’t help that at the time I was also caught up in The Hunger Games, and Katniss wouldn’t have hesitated to smack Bella in the face until she could muster some sort of reasonable opinion.
I can understand this whole romance vampire appeal. I was a 12 – 15 year old girl once too. You want someone who desperately loves you, who can protect you and understand you, but at the same time sex is scary, and at this point you’re learning that boys really really want to have sex. So in Twilight this problem is “solved”, since Edward can’t have sex with Bella… I can see why it’s attractive to teenage girls, a soul mate who will love you unconditionally, but who at the same time won’t pressure you into sleeping with him. Add in the fact he’s a shiny vampire (which, I just want to note here that a glittering buff dude would NOT be a plus for me, but I’m weird) and you can see why people go bonkers over it. EXCEPT the thing is, they can’t have sex until they’re MARRIED which in my opinion is not realistic sex education. AND then, here comes the kicker, if they do have sex HE COULD KILL HER. Not really reassuring to a teenage girl who is probably already apprehensive about the whole thing. “Ok, be totally submissive and passive in my life, wait until marriage, and then possibly be mauled to death on my honeymoon night by a blood hungry beast”. What a fantastic message.
I could go on, but I don’t really want to because I didn’t set out to talk about Twilight, I set out to talk about the book I’m almost done listening to: Outlander by Diana Gabaldon. This book just celebrated its 20th anniversary and Audible has been insistently telling me I would like it, so I went ahead and took the plunge. “Have you read this?” I asked my roommate as I was starting it. She had, and sort of swooned “I did like it. But I was at that age.” “What age?” I ask. “You know…” she sighs”All that romance”.
Being only ten minutes into the book I didn’t quite know what she meant, but it doesn’t take long to become apparent. Outlander begins in Scotland in 1945, following a couple– Claire and Frank Randall– on their second honeymoon in the Highlands. World War II has just ended, and the two have spent 6 years apart over the course of the fighting, and so they are naturally a bit estranged. Claire was a nurse at various combat hospitals and Frank is more secretive about his role in the war, but the two seem mostly eager to move on with their lives and are trying desperately to have a baby. The characters are immediately likable. Claire is a bit brash for 1945 and is clearly an intelligent woman who wants to have a say in how things are. This fast becomes problematic as the book changes settings. Claire passes through a large standing stone out in the highlands and finds herself transported to the year 1774, and immediately must face the challenge of trying to survive in a completely alien world, while still hoping to some day get back to her own.
The history is great. Being Scottish descended myself I’ve been lapping up the time and setting and all the various accoutrements. The writing is engaging and full of spark, the book is read sympathetically by Davina Porter. In short, it’s enjoyable.
Now about this whole woman role model for young girls thing… Claire herself is fantastic. She’s an extremely strong and heroic character, and her bravery and unflinching determination to survive in her new setting is completely believable, both through her voice and also because we know her past experiences as a nurse in WWII must have been horrific. Anyone who lived through that, we know, wouldn’t be flinching about bandaging up gun shot wounds or spending uncomfortable nights on floors. She’s smart, pragmatic and for the most part stubbornly self sufficient. She has a hard time accepting help and protection from the Highlander men she ends up entangled with, even though on a practical level she knows it’s necessary.
So as a strong female character, Claire certainly kicks Bella’s ass. However there are a few problems.
Gabaldon does not flinch from portraying 1745 as full of brutal, very rapey men. Most of the time Claire is ignored entirely while the men folk are making plans. There is one scene where an oath taking occurs in a castle, and the ladies of the castle are sequestered onto a locked balcony to watch the proceedings. As the ceremony goes on the men become more and more drunk and rowdy. Eventually the oath taking ends and the ladies begin to leave the balcony. At this point the housekeeper, another strong female figure, turns sharply to all the young women. She warns them to go to their rooms immediately and lock the doors, because there is no protection for them tonight with all these men in such a state.
It’s a startling scene, and one that rings of truth. It’s a reminder just how fragile a woman’s position is in this world.
But then there are “rapey” scenes that are glossed over a bit, at least, Claire doesn’t seem too disturbed at being nearly raped on several occasions. Some of them even come off as jokey which is a bit troubling. However in keeping with the historical setting this is certainly not an unreasonable portrayal, and though Claire may not seem completely undone by these attempts, she fights back and stands up for herself at every turn, which is great to see.
And then we come to the heart, quite literally, of this book, which is the love story. Through various circumstances (slight spoiler ahead) Claire ends up marrying James Fraser, a Highlander sort-of-outlaw-lordling, for her own protection. Though the marriage is one of necessity, it’s pretty clear we’re headed into full blown bodice ripper territory. And it doesn’t disappoint on that level. There’s a lot of sex. Lots of sex. Usually it’s healthy, consensual, loving and fun sex, which personally I think is great for a teenage girl to read about. Certainly far better than creepy ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE AND THEN I WILL DESTROY YOU sex. Let’s face it, your 14 year old knows what sex is (if she doesn’t she damn well should) so reading about it between two people who care about each other, one of them a strong woman who has won her partner’s respect as well as love, can do nothing but good. There’s also the factor that Claire is actually already married- to Frank in 1945. Technically she’s being unfaithful to him, but in her position she could never explain or make anyone in 1745 understand. It adds another layer to the romance, and tension… will she have to choose? *Swoon*
I would love for this to be a ringing endorsement with no caveats but the fact is it really is 1745 in the Highlands. At one point when Claire disobeys her husband he beats her brutally with his belt as punishment. While Claire protests this and tries to maintain her dignity, it’s still rather disturbing. There’s a lot of talk about “Possessing” each other, which is a bit troubling but I suppose fits into that whole sappy romance idea. Jamie is handsome, kind, intelligent and willing to die for Claire to protect her. These are traits that would certainly be appealing to any 14 year old girl. And I must admit they’re appealing to me too.
I don’t usually read romance stories with such a critical eye, I think it’s just because I’ve been considering this book in relation to the Twilight Saga, as it were. By now I’ve certainly been drawn into Claire and Jamie’s romance, problematic though it may be at times. It’s still interesting and nuanced and… errr… romantic. They are people brought up in two completely different realities, and it’s fun to see them come together and develop real friendship and love.
There’s also political issues among clans, suspected witchcraft, evil British garrison commanders, and plenty of burly Scottish men bashing each other with big heavy swords. It’s a long book, and a lot happens in it. One aspect I really enjoyed is how little the author reveals about Jamie’s back story. The slow way pieces of information are revealed both make the reader re-evaluate past scenes, and feel like they’re getting to know Jamie along with Claire. It’s a really nice effect, and perfectly executed.
So if you’re kid wants to read Twilight, maybe suggest this instead, or at least in addition to. Yes it suggests that some men want to rape women… but newsflash… some men do. Yes it has sex in it but newsflash… your teenage girl has probably read much worse. Isn’t it better to read about sex between two strong, well developed characters who possess mutual respect, than vapid husks of character traits moping about wondering when one will need to eat a baby out of his 18 year old wife’s belly? So um yeah, I would say Outlander and others like it, all the way.
Also there are lots of horses in it too. Extra Bonus!
Out Loud Writing 