Outlander
By Diana Gabaldon
ISBN: 0-7704-2879-7
Seal Books, 1991
850 pages
Mass market paperback
Historical adventure/Romance
Buy now at my Amazon.com store
Buy now at my Amazon.ca store
It’s 1945, and the war is over. Field nurse Claire Randall is holidaying in the Scottish Highlands while reconnecting with her scholarly husband, Frank. She’s an amateur botanist, and as Claire is searching for a particular flower alongside an ancient stone circle, she stumbles upon a gateway to the past. Ripped from her own time, the bewildered English woman is mistaken for a Sassenach, or Outlander, by a raiding border clan.
Now it’s 1743. And Claire is not only in danger of losing her life–she may also lose her heart. Jamie Fraser is a dashing warrior who shows her a love so absolute that Claire becomes torn between fidelity to Frank and her desire for the gallant young Scot. Two loves, two different times. Who and when will Claire choose?
Outlander was recommended to me by a good friend. As it is an 850 page romance, the book is not one I would otherwise have read. But there’s a reason Diana Gabaldon’s 1991 historical romance is still kept in stock at bookstores like Chapters and Amazon: Outlander is much more than a romance. This novel is a time travel, historical adventure so full of sizzling romance and interesting characters it’s almost impossible to put down.
The book has been criticized for its length (repetitive and some scenes aren’t necessary) and for its sex scenes (erotic rather than traditional romance). My own dislike is that Gabaldon’s writing is more formal than one would expect from a mainstream or genre novel; her style is almost literary.
Such criticisms aside, Outlander provides tremendous entertainment for your money, and the romance between Jamie and Claire is one I’ll never forget. In fact, I can’t remember reading any other book where I wanted to be two characters at the same time. Gabaldon drew me so deeply into her fictional world I put aside my reviewer’s hat and gave her a couple of days of my life (and there’s the justification for both the detail in and the length of the story). Well done!
There are six books in the Outlander series, with a seventh coming out September 22, 2009. I’m looking forward to reading them all.
Copyright © Clayton Clifford Bye 2009
This is some text prior to the author information. You can change this text from the admin section of WP-Gravatar Clayton Bye is a long-time writer, editor and publisher. He has authored 8 books, published an anthology called Writers on the Wrong Side of the Road and reviewed many hundreds of other books. He offers a wide range of writing & editing services. Visit www.claytonbye.com. Read more from this author
Did I miss the mark with my review of Outlander?
I just received an email from Diana Gabaldon regarding the above review. As the letter was appreciative and her comments completely valid, I thought I’d share some of them with my readers.
“I, um, do not, in fact write romance novels. OUTLANDER wasn’t intended to be one. Hence the general disregard of genre conventions and the sort of language one would more characteristically see in a genre novel.
…and the further novels of the series are even less in line with the conventions of romance than this one (for one thing, romance novels don’t have sequels. Once the two parties have come together, the story’s over). I generally try to avoid having the book(s) labeled as “romance,” because doing so automatically cuts off half my potential audience. As you doubtless noticed, I’m not writing women’s fiction, anymore than James Clavell was writing male fiction.
The series as a whole is an exploration of the whole second half of the eighteenth century, an exegesis on the nature of time, family, obligation, warfare, masculinity, religion, spirituality, and–of course–sex and violence…
I used to be a scientist in my previous life; an ethologist, for the most part. I’m interested in what makes animals and systems–including people–tick.”
A good lesson for me, I think. And a solid reminder to reviewers and readers alike: book reviews are just opinions. Don’t substitute them for your own judgment.
Pingback: Diana Gabaldon Weighs In On The Deepening | world of fiction
I absolutely loved Outlander and while I thought it was much more than a romance, I would still classify it as more romance than not. This is because the romantic part of the story was so important that if it had been removed, the story, IMO, would not have been able to stand on its own. Since Gabaldon explores lasting relationships that go beyond the “romance” genre, I would agree that to classify it as purely romance would do it a disservice. But for me to deny it’s a romance, would be to deny its heart.