Courtesy Reminder - Please discuss all books up to and including Voyager only. For discussions including other books in the series, please post in the Spoiler thread. Thanks!
The SPOILER Thread can be found here.



Voyager, by Diana Gabaldon
Chapter 15 ~ By Misadventure


The chapter opens with a stormy day in January. Alex (Jamie) is leisurely enjoying a romance book borrowed from the factor. This fantasy is an interesting continuation of (or contrast to?) the situation in the previous chapter from the previous May (nine months has passed?).

Is DG making fun of romance novels with this scene? Or, just in Jamie’s reaction to the obvious exaggerations of the book?

Although we are led to feel sorry for Jamie’s solitary situation, he seems to be on friendly terms with several people, including the factor, who loans him the book.

Suddenly, Jamie is alerted to a frantic demand to ready the coach. There is an urgent situation at Ellesmere. Interesting that Jamie is counting back nine months… (Can any of us relate?)

The carriage trip is treacherous and difficult over muddy roads, buffeted by wind and rain. They finally arrive at Ellesmere with their passengers. Jamie and Jeffries care for the horses and coach. Then, they seek food and refreshment for themselves.

The cook has alarming news about Lady Geneva Ellesmere’s relationship with the Earl, He has made it known that he does not believe that he is the father of her baby.

The discussion in the kitchen is interrupted by the maid’s summons for both of Dunsany’s men. Jamie responds immediately while Jeffries goes for his pistols in the coach.

Ellesmere is questioning Geneva’s reputation. Ellesmere and Dunsany have both been drinking. They scuffle. Jamie separates them, but Ellesmere takes the baby and threatens to pitch him out the window to the pavement below. Without hesitation, Jamie snatches a pistol from Jeffries and shoots Ellesmere while saving the baby.

Did anyone notice that Lady Dunsany refers to her husband as William twice in this chapter? Is young William named for his grandfather?

Jamie is quite understandably concerned about the outcome of this incident. However, the Dunsanys have kept Jamie out of the investigation. In fact, they are so grateful for Jamie’s actions that Lady Dunsany offers Jamie a chance to go home. Jamie declines, for now. How do you feel about Jamie’s decision?

How fitting is the title of this chapter on several counts, Geneva’s death, Ellesmere’s death, young William’s inheritance, Jamie’s sudden opportunity for freedom?

Did this cover up and subsequent offer of freedom by the Dunsanys surprise you?

Did the reaction by Jamie surprise you?

Nice summary, repoman.

You bet DG is making fun of romance novels. How can she resist?

I hadn't noticed that Mr. Dunsany's first name is William, which would explain how the name was chosen for the little Earl.

The cover up did not surprise me given the disgrace that would have fallen on the Dunsany name, not to mention that of Ellesmere trying to kill the baby. They are lucky Jamie was there to take matters into his own hands and avert another tragedy.

I can understand why Jamie declined the offer of freedom. He would not have wanted to miss the opportunity to see his child grow up, even if it meant he would be seen only as a servant in the eyes of William.

great summary repoman - as usual.

Lots happens here. Earlier in Voyager when Jamie is in Ardsmuir, he and LJG are discussing lengthy books in the form of the book Pamela and the discussion was whether a book can be too long, too wordy, too descriptive and I took that as a jab from HERSELF about the length of her books so I don't doubt a jab at the genre. I think it is in her style since her books are so hard to classify and they are rather long and of course publishers are always after her to change them.

I agree with LJ, no surprise they covered it up. The scandal could have been devastating to all concerned. Great catch on the name, btw, I hadn't noticed that.

As for Jamie's actions, no surprise at all there. He always seems to go through whatever lengths are necessary to protect his own! No like he never killed before, right?

As for going home, I hadn't thought about what LJ surmised. I really more thought that being a convicted felon and still to some extent at the mercy of the crown, he would not want to risk exposing his family to anymore that they already were.

I also didn't pick up the William references so that was a good re-kilt catch, repoman. But Jamie's decision not to leave may be partly to find out about this baby, but I felt from the beginning of the chapter that Jamie quite liked the life he was living there. Surrounded by his men and horses, no Laird responsibilities, and no running from soldiers for the first time in his life. He seemed to finally be content and was in no hurry to leave this comfy nest.

Great summary, Repoman!

Nope, I never did catch that name reference, in any of my now 3 re-kilts of this book, fantastic find! I wonder who made the decision to name him (do we know?)?

Love the idea of a jab at romance novels - this happens twice, in this book, with Claire reading a well-worn romance novel in the doctor's lounge, and Jamie with this one. Equally funny, in either century!

The whole story surrounding William's birth wasn't too surprising, scandals of all types tend to be downplayed/explained/and "hidden" even now, with equally transparent results, people figure out the story, eventually, but it seems like the parties involved feel like they have to try to cover things up, anyway.

Jamie's reaction shocked me at first, but after reading more about him as a beloved Nunkie, it wasn't so surprising that he would do anything he could to protect William , as he did Ian earlier in the book when he hid with him in the closet.

The connection to all the circumstances that occurred in this chapter with the title is a great one - lots of misadventure, and fortunately freedom of a sorts, for Jamie.

I think that DG is poking fun at the "bodice ripper" type of romance novel, not romances in the classical sense as defined by Dictionary.com. IMO the OUTLANDER series does match Dictionary.com's definition of the word "romance" to a tee.

romance
–noun
1. a novel or other prose narrative depicting heroic or marvelous deeds, pageantry, romantic exploits, etc., usually in a historical or imaginary setting.
2. the colorful world, life, or conditions depicted in such tales.
3. a medieval narrative, originally one in verse and in some Romance dialect, treating of heroic, fantastic, or supernatural events, often in the form of allegory.

I, too, find it interesting that both Jamie and Claire have scenes in VOYAGER in which they are enjoying the escapism of romance novels. Was DG trying to tell us something? About Jamie and Claire? About romance novels? (BTW: Claire reading a romance novel is in Chapter 18: Roots. Definitely a bodice ripper!)


Excellent observation! I missed that connection. Of course, we don't know who named the baby. If it was Geneva, thank goodness she didn't name him James!


I think that you can view the Dunsanys' reaction from a couple of points of view. Their behavior towards Jamie may have been entirely based on gratitude. Lord and Lady Dunsany seem to be honorable people. It appears from the scene in Ellesmere's study that Lord Dunsany was clueless as to the gossip circulating about the nature of Geneva's pregnancy and was genuinely affronted by Ellesmere's accusations. They may have seen their offer of freedom to Jamie as the only expression of gratitude sufficient for his actions that saved William's life. On the other hand, the Dunsanys (more to the point Lady Dunsany) knew their daughter. They may have seen the truth in Ellesmere's charges and taken steps to protect their grandson and his inheritance. There was too much at stake: Geneva's reputation, William's title & position in society, vast wealth, Helwater's indebtedness, etc. Thus, a cover up. Lord John seems to have suspected as much when he disclosed the following to Claire (Chapter 59: In Which Much Is Revealed).

"I suspect that my mother-in-law knows, but of course she would never breathe a word."
"She wouldn't."
He stared at me over the rim of his cup.
"No, would you? If it were a choice of your only grandchild being either the ninth Earl of Ellesmere, and heir to one of the wealthiest estates in England, or the penniless b*st*rd of a Scottish criminal?"

I do find it interesting that it was Lady Dunsany who approached Jamie with the offer of freedom. Makes me wonder if she is the "power behind the throne". I found the conversation that she had with Jamie fascinating. It revealed her to be not only deeply pragmatic, but very astute.


No. Jamie was highly conflicted though. It is obvious that he yearned to be free, to go home. He cannot, however, leave his son. I was saddened for Jamie that he could not leave Helwater, but I understand his decision. How could he do otherwise?


I think DG was taking a jab at her critics who say her books are too long while at the same time complimenting her readers! I love the following comments by LJ. (Chapter 11: The Torremolinos Gambit)

"I remember," he continued, sucking fiercely on his cheroot, encouraging it to draw, "a friend of my mother's---saw the book---in Mother's drawing room---" He drew deeply, and blew once more, giving a small grunt of satisfaction as the new ring struck the old, dispersing it into a tiny cloud.
"Lady Hensley (AKA DG's critics/publishers who think her books are too long), it was. She picked up the book, looked at it in that helpless way so many females affect and said, 'Oh, Countess! You are so courageous to attack a novel of such stupendous size. I fear I should never dare to start so lengthy a book myself.'" Grey cleared his throat and lowered his voice from the falsetto he had affected for Lady Hensley.
"To which Mother (AKA DG's faithful readers) replied," he went on in his normal voice, "'Don't worry about it for a moment, my dear; you wouldn't understand it any way.'"

With millions of reader around the world, DG must be laughing all the way to the bank!

Susan, That was a wonderful contribution. I totally agree. I appreciate the definition of the romance genre. As you surmise, I was thinking of the "bodice -ripper" definition in my references. I particularly agree that DG is complimenting her readers. Great references to your points!

Yes, I thought that Jamie was conflicted about taking the offer of freedom and a return to loved ones or staying to watch over his son. I do find it interesting that the offer of freedom came from Lady Dunsany, not that I have a problem with her role, but rather, as discussed here, that she is the real power. I think that Jamie's decision is worth noting in that Jamie had no guarantees that the offer would exist if something happened to Lady Dunsany. I interpret Jamie's decision as a measure of loyalty to his son.

I just finished reading this chapter. Great summary repoman! And, I had also noticed (for, I believe, the first time on this read), that Lord Dunsany's first name was William and so likely his grandson was named for him. I'm not sure who named him, but it might have been Geneva since the maid said she was up holding the baby and laughing before she started bleeding so much more.

I laughed at the bodice-ripper scenes. Definitely DG poking fun there. Thanks for the definition of romance, Susan. Very fitting and it includes aspects I hadn't really thought of in terms of modern romances (though the definition is familiar and something I would have thought of in terms of historical works, if that makes sense). I enjoyed your other comments too. Really great post!

I agree that there were plenty of reasons for the Dunsanys to cover up what actually happened to avoid scandal and maintain William's position and wealth. And, I completely understand why Jamie chose to stay. It really wasn't a bad life for him and it was his only chance to see/know anything about his son. I'm trying to decide whether Lady Dunsany had already guessed that Jamie was William's father (did she know about Geneva's interest in the groom MacKenzie, and requesting him to accompany her on her daily rides before her marriage?). Or whether she guessed as soon as he chose to stay. Why else would he want to stay as a servant far from his family and friends? I think the supposition was that John's family had enough influence to get him pardoned to enable him to go back to Scotland, so I don't think his concern was a risk to his family or being at the mercy of the crown. He'd been pardoned earlier when they were in Paris to enable him to return home safely to Scotland and I think this would have been similar.

Great point about all the misadventure in the chapter.

And, Pauline, I just noticed that you changed to Clan Fraser red. Congratulations!

Please note that Lady Dunsany's original offer was to alter the terms of Jamie's parole (in 1758). In Chapter 17, Roger has found his record of parole. Parole would be a release from prison based on the prisoner's consent to specified conditions. It was a little later that Brianna found his pardon dated 1764. By Jamie delaying his request for freedom, did he obtain better results?

In today's terms, (lawyers, help me here) a parole could be revoked which would send Jamie back to prison or even to transportation. The pardon would be a permanent clearing of his status. I recall that Ian brought up the ink not being dry on Jamie's pardon at one point, i think in noting Jamie's "less legal" activities.

Very interesting point!

What effect would Jamie's acceptance of Lady Dunsany's offer of freedom and return to Scotland have had on the relationship between him and Lord John? Would the friendship have continued? IMO it is the deepening of that friendship and the understanding/respect that develops between the two men, in conjunction with the Dunsanys' gratitude, that ultimately lead to Jamie's pardon in 1764.

My thought was that when Lady Dunsany offered to make it possible for him to go home to Scotland that she intended to get him a pardon and that's what she did later when he requested it. I suppose it could have been a somewhat altered parole, but I thought her gratitude was such that she would have asked John to get him a pardon even then. He had worked for them for more than a year at that point and I think an argument could have been made for a pardon and that John, or his family, likely could have managed it. I suppose we can't know for sure, but my impression is that Lady Dunsany was very grateful (and maybe would also have been happy to have one of the few people who knew the truth about the events of that night away from there to reduce the chance of rumors? - Not as sure about this).


Hmmm. Susan posted while I was typing. Maybe it was their friendship that led to the pardon, but I'm still unconvinced. I think if they were going to let him go at all in 1758 that it was likely to be with a pardon.

Does anyone find it interesting the LJG's middle name is also William??? I know it was not an uncommon name (heck, it still isn't - I have a brother named William though we call him Bill). I know it is just coincidence but still...

BTW - great discussions! Susan, thanks for the definition and for posting the quote. I was listening to it on audio and laughed out loud at it.

"To which Mother (AKA DG's faithful readers) replied," he went on in his normal voice, "'Don't worry about it for a moment, my dear; you wouldn't understand it any way.'"

Well, LJ's middle name is not quite a coincidence because after calling him William at Carryarick, DG decided she wanted Jamie's son to be William, and she didn't want there to be too many Williams around, so she got around it by changing him, in this book, to John William Grey.

And, yes, that line is great. We don't see or hear much about Benedicta, but she is obviously quite an interesting lady.

This is a bit of an aside, but I agree, Benedicta Grey (Lord John's mother) is an interesting lady. A strong female character who enjoys naughty books and poetry and knows how to use a pistol. Curious? Read the Lord John books!

Great summery repoman! Actually you all have made some great points!Verra fine catch regarding William's name. Susan, I agree with repoman that was a wonderful contribution. audiobooklover, I also thought maybe Lady Dunsany's offer was twofold. Yes I think that she was grateful for Alex (Jamie) having saved William, but I think it would also add the security that if he was gone it was one less person who knows the "truth" on the premises. I am not sure she would have suspected Jamie as the father of William so soon. I always got the impression that as William started growing that Lady Dunsany began to see noticeable traits to "The Groomsmen". I wonder if she was ever worried that Alex(Jamie) would try to claim his son?

Side note: Susan I read the Lord Johns books and quite liked them. I can't remember who I was talking to I think it may have been repoman, but I just like the guy. His mother is indeed an interesting character.