What I did with Dragonfly in Amber, to take care of what you might call the segue to the backstory, to sort of explain what was going on without losing people, was to use this framing story, and then we dropped back into Claire's point of view and told the story linearly from there."Įven Gabaldon's description of her own novel sounds confusing, and the book really is a shock. "I don't like to do things that I've done before, so I experiment with the structure. "The book was a son of a bitch to write," Gabaldon tells E! News, referring mostly to the complicated structure she decided to use. Moore and the rest of the great minds behind the Starz hit obviously knew what fans were expecting, but there were more than a few reasons that the show could not follow the same path that is taken in the books-partly because Gabaldon told them so. It would have involved some age makeup and the introduction of two characters book fans have been absolutely dying to meet, and it would have probably been more confusing to watch than it was to read for the first time.Įxecutive producer Ronald D. It also does not begin with Jamie and Claire in Paris. If you haven't read the books, all we'll say is that the second book, Dragonfly in Amber, does not begin with Frank in the 1940s. If you're a fan of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander novels, you may have been a little shocked just moments into this weekend's premiere.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |