It's how propaganda works. Put one group of people as the good guys, and set the others as the bad guys, it doesn't matter what the historical truths may be, some people will take what's shown as represented in the show as illustrative of who were (and still are) historically the good guys, and who were (and still are) the bad ones.
Taking liberties with history is precisely one reason why Mel Gibson's Braveheart was so successful in boosting Scottish nationalism. Set the English as the nasty brutes and Scots as brave warriors, and voilà, big boost in support for Scottish nationalism.
I am aware that propagandists employ that method, but propagandists have an ulterior agenda to advance, and for them a work of fiction is just a means to an end. Neither Outlander the book series nor Outlander the TV series were/are made by Scots let alone Scottish nationalists. Nor is there any evidence that they harbour an anti-English agenda. In this case, the only people who demonstrate a political agenda are those acting defensively on behalf of England, something which I hardly thinks needs defending against a fantasy TV series that to the extent it touches on English actions towards the Scots touches on ones over a quarter of a millennium old.
I am aware that propagandists employ that method, but propagandists have an ulterior agenda to advance, and for them a work of fiction is just a means to an end. Neither Outlander the book series nor Outlander the TV series were/are made by Scots let alone Scottish nationalists. Nor is there any evidence that they harbour an anti-English agenda. In this case, the only people who demonstrate a political agenda are those acting defensively on behalf of England, something which I hardly thinks needs defending against a fantasy TV series that to the extent it touches on English actions towards the Scots touches on ones over a quarter of a millennium old.
Actually Alex has some valid points. The political situation is really complex and uncomfortable at the moment in Scotland. I found it strange that several of the stars of Outlander, including a couple not even Scottish/living in Scotland, came out publicly supporting a yes vote. I am a cynic and its my personal opinion that Starz were playing on nationalist sentiment to raise the profile of the show. To be honest it was quite distasteful.
I think I acknowledged that he is not wrong about "how propaganda works." In fact, none of his statements strike me as wrong. He didn't actually say Outlander is propaganda, though he may have meant to imply that, and if he did mean that, I explained why I don't think Outlander is propaganda at all. Intent is important, and something isn't propaganda just because certain people in the audience think that the content of a piece of fiction reinforces their politics or ideology.
The political situation is really complex and uncomfortable at the moment in Scotland. I found it strange that several of the stars of Outlander, including a couple not even Scottish/living in Scotland, came out publicly supporting a yes vote. I am a cynic and its my personal opinion that Starz were playing on nationalist sentiment to raise the profile of the show. To be honest it was quite distasteful.
I don't think Starz or any people associated with the series at the "management level" (all of whom are non-Scots, I believe) had anything to do with a few Scottish actors on the series either having the political beliefs they have or expressing them. One may believe otherwise, but I don't think there would have been any logic to such a tactic, and just as a matter of fact, the actors saying they support Scottish independence did nothing to raise the profile of the show above the high level of media and social media interest it already enjoyed.
In this case, the only people who demonstrate a political agenda are those acting defensively on behalf of England,
Not sure what you mean here. If you are trying to imply it's me acting defensively on behalf of England, I'm not English, although I do live in England (but have also lived in Scotland, and do think that Scottish independence is probably a good thing). Simply noting something done commonly in TV and films.
Actually Alex has some valid points. The political situation is really complex and uncomfortable at the moment in Scotland. I found it strange that several of the stars of Outlander, including a couple not even Scottish/living in Scotland, came out publicly supporting a yes vote. I am a cynic and its my personal opinion that Starz were playing on nationalist sentiment to raise the profile of the show. To be honest it was quite distasteful.
I don't think Starz had any particular agenda, although it is common for US films and TV shows to portray the English in a negative light. The English are just an easy target, it evokes sentiments of American Independence among its viewers, and allows the show makers not to be accused of racism when they depict a group of people negatively or patronisingly (unlike, for example, blacks, Chinese, Mexicans or other people which they used to do fairly frequently). The English just make good villain figures, it also helps that English actors are pretty good at playing such roles.
I'm at bit meh at the moment about the show, not for anything to do with the English vs Scots thing, but it just seems too slow and dull. It's exactly the same feeling that I get watching the Twilight series (God, how can a show be so slow and dull when you have vampires and werewolves), seem to be a show more geared towards female viewers. I can't fathom the popularity of Twilight, couldn't finish it, it'll probably be the same for me with this show.
I don't think Starz had any particular agenda, although it is common for US films and TV shows to portray the English in a negative light. The English are just an easy target, it evokes sentiments of American Independence among its viewers, and allows the show makers not to be accused of racism when they depict a group of people negatively or patronisingly (unlike, for example, blacks, Chinese, Mexicans or other people which they used to do fairly frequently). The English just make good villain figures, it also helps that English actors are pretty good at playing such roles.
I am very cynical when it comes to US TV, and I think they timed the release of Outlander on purpose to be around the referendum as with Scotland being in the news so much, it was a bit of free publicity. I think they were genuinly surprised by no UK network picking it up. But on reflection thinking back on the first book and the few episodes I have watched, I think it was the right decision by Sky/BBC/Channel 4 etc to not show it this year.
It would have not been a the right time for it to be shown here, especially considering how inaccurate the history is in it. And before I get jumped on, I am a fan of the books despite their poor historical accuracy - I read them for the romance
I can see it being picked up by Amazon/Netflix next year some time instead.
I can see it being picked up by Amazon/Netflix next year some time instead.
You mean no channel will show it and it will only be streamed online? That's too bad. The show is so pretty. I'm sure it would look best on a bigger TV screen.
You mean no channel will show it and it will only be streamed online? That's too bad. The show is so pretty. I'm sure it would look best on a bigger TV screen.
Yes its what happened with Vikings which ended up on Amazon, it seems a bit out of sync with some of the mainstream channels here at the moment. It is visually stunning though
Yes its what happened with Vikings which ended up on Amazon, it seems a bit out of sync with some of the mainstream channels here at the moment. It is visually stunning though
RTE2 is showing season 2 of Vikings at the moment.
It should turn up on the History Channel as some point as they showed season 1.
s1 on Amazon from March 26 - as predicted upthread.
K
Yup as I thought.
I have now watched all available episodes finally, and I am still a bit underwhelmed by it all.
Casting issues have bothered me all the way through. I did feel wary of having two relative unknowns as the leads and while Catriona has shone as Claire, I cannot say the same thing for Sam Heughan.
Catriona has been very good all round and has really impressed me, I think she has a good career in acting ahead of her. Sam's Jamie seems very one dimensional at the moment, I really have no idea how that is going to go down with all the increasingly dramatic scenes yet to come. I hope he proves me wrong.
On the other hand Tobias Menzies has been fantastic, kudos to him for playing two quite different roles with ease and he seems to have tons of chemistry with Catriona. The pace overall has been fairly slow, borderline tedious at times and I have found myself wishing we had more screen time with Frank/Jack Randall.
And never mind the cliche after cliche with all the evil English, its rather tedious.
I've just watched the first 8 episodes of Outlander on Amazon and enjoyed it.
It's basically an historical romance with the added twist of time travel but it is so well done. It looks beautiful with a fine attention to detail and all the lead actors shine.
Makes me want to return to the Scottish Highlands - not been for over 20 years.
And Sam Heughan in a kilt - and with his shirt off!! What more could I want!
I have netflix not amazon, so I watched the first 3 eps via "other means".
Let me confess now that I thought I was being tortured, when I read the first book, by the lengthy dwelling on very boring topics (long paragraphs about how Claire brushed her hair for eg). I do love a historical romance usually though.
However, I thought the tv show could be good because it would naturally miss all that guff out when transferred to a script. Sure enough it does, which improved it immensely |(for me). Even so, I have found it a bit flat. I thought I would be desperate to see the next episode, but I'm not. I wonder if it depends very much on how well you take to the actor playing Jamie? He doesn't really do it for me, so perhaps that's why I'm not frantically seeking out episode 4...
Edit to add that the scenery is by far the best thing about it, absolutely gorgeous.
I know that the second half starts in the US tomorrow but does this mean that it will also start on Amazon Prime at the same time? I do hope so.
Episode 9, which begins the back half of the first season, starts in the U.S. on Saturday night, April 4, on Starz.
From what I can tell from the U.K. Amazon site, you all will be receiving the new episodes through Amazon Prime the very next day, each week. So, Sundays for the next 8 weeks or so, starting on April 5.
I am very glad I gave it another go because I am enjoying it. Currently on episode 5. As slow as the storytelling is, I can't help but feel the slow storytelling allows us to really get to know the characters and the land we will be apart of for however long the show runs for. I love watching the evolving relationships between Claire and the group of men she is travelling with. I think shows that drop viewers in at the deep end with ever going action and dramatic scenes can sometimes alienate people. I am very much in favor of careful detailed character development and this show does that.
I have just watched episode 9 and enjoyed it. There are controversial elements in the story but, in the context of the time, they fitted in. The scenery is really stunning.
I am looking forward to following Jamie and Claire's story.
Comments
I am aware that propagandists employ that method, but propagandists have an ulterior agenda to advance, and for them a work of fiction is just a means to an end. Neither Outlander the book series nor Outlander the TV series were/are made by Scots let alone Scottish nationalists. Nor is there any evidence that they harbour an anti-English agenda. In this case, the only people who demonstrate a political agenda are those acting defensively on behalf of England, something which I hardly thinks needs defending against a fantasy TV series that to the extent it touches on English actions towards the Scots touches on ones over a quarter of a millennium old.
Actually Alex has some valid points. The political situation is really complex and uncomfortable at the moment in Scotland. I found it strange that several of the stars of Outlander, including a couple not even Scottish/living in Scotland, came out publicly supporting a yes vote. I am a cynic and its my personal opinion that Starz were playing on nationalist sentiment to raise the profile of the show. To be honest it was quite distasteful.
I think I acknowledged that he is not wrong about "how propaganda works." In fact, none of his statements strike me as wrong. He didn't actually say Outlander is propaganda, though he may have meant to imply that, and if he did mean that, I explained why I don't think Outlander is propaganda at all. Intent is important, and something isn't propaganda just because certain people in the audience think that the content of a piece of fiction reinforces their politics or ideology.
I don't think Starz or any people associated with the series at the "management level" (all of whom are non-Scots, I believe) had anything to do with a few Scottish actors on the series either having the political beliefs they have or expressing them. One may believe otherwise, but I don't think there would have been any logic to such a tactic, and just as a matter of fact, the actors saying they support Scottish independence did nothing to raise the profile of the show above the high level of media and social media interest it already enjoyed.
I don't think Starz had any particular agenda, although it is common for US films and TV shows to portray the English in a negative light. The English are just an easy target, it evokes sentiments of American Independence among its viewers, and allows the show makers not to be accused of racism when they depict a group of people negatively or patronisingly (unlike, for example, blacks, Chinese, Mexicans or other people which they used to do fairly frequently). The English just make good villain figures, it also helps that English actors are pretty good at playing such roles.
I'm at bit meh at the moment about the show, not for anything to do with the English vs Scots thing, but it just seems too slow and dull. It's exactly the same feeling that I get watching the Twilight series (God, how can a show be so slow and dull when you have vampires and werewolves), seem to be a show more geared towards female viewers. I can't fathom the popularity of Twilight, couldn't finish it, it'll probably be the same for me with this show.
It was "icestation2" -- as well as English people who have accused Outlander of being "anti-English" elsewhere -- whom I had in mind.
I am very cynical when it comes to US TV, and I think they timed the release of Outlander on purpose to be around the referendum as with Scotland being in the news so much, it was a bit of free publicity. I think they were genuinly surprised by no UK network picking it up. But on reflection thinking back on the first book and the few episodes I have watched, I think it was the right decision by Sky/BBC/Channel 4 etc to not show it this year.
It would have not been a the right time for it to be shown here, especially considering how inaccurate the history is in it. And before I get jumped on, I am a fan of the books despite their poor historical accuracy - I read them for the romance
I can see it being picked up by Amazon/Netflix next year some time instead.
You mean no channel will show it and it will only be streamed online? That's too bad. The show is so pretty. I'm sure it would look best on a bigger TV screen.
Yes its what happened with Vikings which ended up on Amazon, it seems a bit out of sync with some of the mainstream channels here at the moment. It is visually stunning though
I have my V+ box set to record the series.
RTE2 is showing season 2 of Vikings at the moment.
It should turn up on the History Channel as some point as they showed season 1.
K
Yup as I thought.
I have now watched all available episodes finally, and I am still a bit underwhelmed by it all.
Casting issues have bothered me all the way through. I did feel wary of having two relative unknowns as the leads and while Catriona has shone as Claire, I cannot say the same thing for Sam Heughan.
Catriona has been very good all round and has really impressed me, I think she has a good career in acting ahead of her. Sam's Jamie seems very one dimensional at the moment, I really have no idea how that is going to go down with all the increasingly dramatic scenes yet to come. I hope he proves me wrong.
On the other hand Tobias Menzies has been fantastic, kudos to him for playing two quite different roles with ease and he seems to have tons of chemistry with Catriona. The pace overall has been fairly slow, borderline tedious at times and I have found myself wishing we had more screen time with Frank/Jack Randall.
And never mind the cliche after cliche with all the evil English, its rather tedious.
It's basically an historical romance with the added twist of time travel but it is so well done. It looks beautiful with a fine attention to detail and all the lead actors shine.
Makes me want to return to the Scottish Highlands - not been for over 20 years.
And Sam Heughan in a kilt - and with his shirt off!!
Let me confess now that I thought I was being tortured, when I read the first book, by the lengthy dwelling on very boring topics (long paragraphs about how Claire brushed her hair for eg). I do love a historical romance usually though.
However, I thought the tv show could be good because it would naturally miss all that guff out when transferred to a script. Sure enough it does, which improved it immensely |(for me). Even so, I have found it a bit flat. I thought I would be desperate to see the next episode, but I'm not. I wonder if it depends very much on how well you take to the actor playing Jamie? He doesn't really do it for me, so perhaps that's why I'm not frantically seeking out episode 4...
Edit to add that the scenery is by far the best thing about it, absolutely gorgeous.
I know that the second half starts in the US tomorrow but does this mean that it will also start on Amazon Prime at the same time? I do hope so.
Episode 9, which begins the back half of the first season, starts in the U.S. on Saturday night, April 4, on Starz.
From what I can tell from the U.K. Amazon site, you all will be receiving the new episodes through Amazon Prime the very next day, each week. So, Sundays for the next 8 weeks or so, starting on April 5.
I am looking forward to following Jamie and Claire's story.