Jamie And Blackjack Randall
Outlander may have bid farewell to evil villain Captain Jonathan “Black Jack” Randall (played by Tobias Menzies) but some fans have been wondering about him. The character died at the Battle of Culloden after he was slain by Highlander Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan). During the three seasons he featured on the Starz show, he proved to be the most dangerous and violent.
Deep breaths, everyone. For months now, Outlander ‘s Black Jack Randall, a sadistic Redcoat who makes Jeffrey Dahmer look like a mewling kitten in comparison, has had Jamie Fraser in his sights. Frank's reasoning for this is that he thinks Claire will someday take Brianna to Scotland and Brianna might go looking for the grave of her ancestor Black Jack Randall. Jamie's gravestone would.
Was Captain Black Jack Randall a real person?
WARNING: This article contains spoilers from the Outlander TV series and Diana Gabaldon’s novels
Black Jack was a looming figure in seasons one to three of Outlander as he terrorised Claire Fraser (Caitriona Balfe) and her husband Jamie.
The character’s cruelty and sadistic ways knew no bounds as he used rape and violence to control others.
Season one featured a horrific sexual assault as Black Jack raped and tortured Jamie in a harrowing and prolonged ordeal.
Jamie was left broken and a shell of the man he used to be, loathed to the touch of his wife after Black Jack used psychological means to harm the Highlander as well as physical.
READ MORE
- Outlander author Diana Gabaldon gives STARK season 5 changes warning
But how much is the character rooted in reality and how much was borne from US author Diana Gabaldon’s imagination?
According to Screen Rant, Gabaldon didn’t base Black Jack on any real-life historical figures unlike Geillis Duncan (Lotte Verbeek) and other Jacobite Lords.
Outlander also featured some real figures including the Duke of Sandringham (Simon Callow) and Bonnie Prince Charlie (Andrew Gower).
The character of Jamie was inspired by an account Gabaldon read with the writer previously telling National Geographic in 2014: “I was reading a book for research called the Prince in the Heather, by Eric Linklater, which described what happened after Culloden.
“It said that, following the battle, 19 wounded Jacobite officers took refuge in the farmhouse by the side of the field.
“There they lay for two days with their wounds, unattended in pain. At the end of that time they were taken out and shot, except one man, a Fraser of the Master of Lovet’s regiment, who survived the slaughter.
“And I was thinking that if I expect Jamie to survive Culloden then his last name better be Fraser.”
The real-life Battle of Culloden did happen was depicted in the show. Historically, there were a number of Redcoats who could fit the bill for Black Jack and his tendencies towards violence and hatred for the Scots.
DON’T MISS…
Outlander: Why did Jamie Fraser put on Redcoat jacket? [ANALYSIS]
Outlander: How many seasons of Outlander will there be? [INSIGHT]
Outlander: When do Jamie and Claire die? Obituary explained [INSIGHT]
Newspaper The Scotsman has suggested several possible candidates who may have been the real-life equivalent of Black Jack.
At the top of the list is Captain Caroline Frederick Scott, who is described by the publication as having a “brutal streak”.
In the book Culloden: Scotland’s Last Battle by historian Trevor Royale, Scott was said to have been led by “visceral dislike of Highlanders” and had a vendetta against Bonnie Prince Charlie.
This Redcoat is said to have roamed the Highlands, pillaging and raping with his men as he went.
READ MORE
- Outlander season 5: Star suffered second degree burns for brutal death
In one account from the laird of Raasay, Scott’s men sexually assaulted a blind woman and two girls.
However, he wasn’t the only one with Captain John Fergusson known for his abuse of prisoners during the 1745 uprising.
In a disquieting account from one prisoner Felix O’Neill, he claimed Ferguson “used me with the barbarity of a pirate”.
The prisoner claims he was stripped and whipped which is reminiscent of the punishment Black Jack inflicted on Jamie.
Other Redcoats from history include Major James Lockhart, Colonel Edward Cornwallis and Colonel John Grant.
These figures were known for their partiality for indiscriminate violence both psychical and sexual as well as burning and stealing from their victims.
Outlander season 5 airs on Starz on Sundays and Amazon Prime on Mondays
Source: Read Full Article
- Netflix’s ‘Selena: The Series’ Unveils First Trailer Starring Christian Serratos
- Jennifer Lawrence and Husband Cooke Maroney Step Out in Style in N.Y.C.
- Real Housewives' Vicki Gunvalson blasts 'irresponsible' Kelly Dodd for ‘storyline’ engagement with Rick Leventhal
- The Crown's Helena Bonham Carter admits feeling 'overwhelmed' by Netflix's Princess Margaret casting shake-up
- Deborah Barak To Depart As CBS President Of Business Operations After 35 Years At The Company
I had a male reader (Justin Brady (@RandomAngst), who runs the Random Angst book review/rating site at www.randomangst.com) on Twitter just today who said he’d just finished reading OUTLANDER and enjoyed it a lot “until the prison chapters.” I tweeted back that I’d be kind of worried about him if he’d _enjoyed_ the Wentworth part {g}, to which he said, “but why put our hero through such pain and suffering? :)”, adding in the next, “I know I’m late to the #Outlander party & you’ve probably already addressed this; but that was intense emotional, physical pain.”
I was on my way out to dinner, so said I’d reply to him later (haven’t done that yet), but have been thinking at brief moments just _how_ to reply to that. The simple answer is just that that’s what I saw happening, but that’s not enough for the reader. There always _is_ a reason why things happen or are necessary, whether I know what that is when I write it or not. So what is it here?
In part, it’s because it’s a High Stakes story. Almost everybody understands that you have to have _something_ at stake for a story to be good. And way too many thrillers and sf/f novels assume that nothing less than the Fate of the Known Universe will do {g}, these authors mistaking scale for intensity. No matter what the background may be, a story that focuses on the impact of events on one or two individual _lives_ will be–generally speaking–much more engaging and emotionally intense than one where everyone is just rushing around trying to save a planet or get their hands on the fortunium bomb that could Destroy Everything!!
So OUTLANDER is a high stakes story–on an individual level–throughout. It’s a love story, sure, and it’s all about what people will _do_ for the sake of love. Claire, for instance, chooses to abandon the life she knew (and was about to reclaim post-War), the safety of the 20th century (and she of all people would value that safety, having come through such a war), and the husband she’d loved. She chooses hardship, danger, and emotional pain, in order to be with Jamie.
But love for these two is always reciprocal. It’s not about one partner making a sacrifice for the other’s sake. Throughout the story, they keep rescuing each other. And the stakes are high. Jamie marries Claire originally in order to save her from Black Jack Randall. Would that be a striking thing to do, if Jack Randall was not, in fact, a serious threat? He _is_ a serious threat; we learn that from Jamie’s backstory. The man’s a genuine sadistic psychopath, who has essentially destroyed Jamie’s family and seriously injured him, both physically and emotionally. And here’s Jamie swearing to give Claire everything he has; the protection of his name and his clan–and the protection of his body–in order to save _her_ from this man.
He then does save her, physically and immediately, from Randall, when Randall captures her and assaults her at Fort William–even though by doing so, he puts not only himself, but everyone with him, in serious danger, _and_ does so at some emotional as well as physical cost. “I was tied to that post, tied like an animal, and whipped ’til my blood ran…Had I not been lucky as the devil this afternoon, that’s the least that would have happened to me. ….[But] when ye screamed, I went to you, wi’ nothing but an empty gun and my two hands.” The stakes are higher; the threat to Jamie (and Claire) from Captain Randall is increased.
One, two, three. The Rule of Three. It’s one of the important underlying patterns of story-telling; one event can be striking.The next (related) event creates resonance.But the third brings it home—WHAM.(That is, btw, why classic fairy tales always involve three brothers, three sisters, three fairies, etc.—and why the most classic form of joke always starts, “A priest, a minister and a rabbi…” The climax of the story, the punchline of the joke, always comes on the third iteration.)The third encounter with Black Jack Randall is the climax, the point where the stakes are highest. Jamie’s been captured and seriously hurt, Claire’s come to save him, but Randall turns up and takes her captive, threatening her life.
OK. This -has- to be a credible threat. Ergo, we have to have seen (and heard about) the real damage Randall has done to Jamie thus far; we have to be in no doubt whatever that he’d do real damage to Claire. We can’t just _say_, “Oh, he’s _such_ a nasty person, you wouldn’t believe…” We _have_ to believe, and therefore appreciate _just_ what Jamie is doing when he trades what’s left of his life for Claire’s.(Show, don’t tell, you know?)
Jamie And Blackjack Randall Walker
And because we do believe that, we share both Jamie’s despair and Claire’s desperation.
So, OK. Throughout the book, we’ve seen that love has a real cost. Jamie and Claire have built a relationship through honest struggle, a relationship that’s _worth_ what it’s cost them. This is the final challenge, and Jamie’s willing to pay what will apparently be the ultimate cost.
Why would I throw that away? To have him escape rape and torture (he–and we–_know_ what’s coming) by the skin of his teeth would be to undercut his sacrifice, to make it of little moment. (It would be like someone turning up in Gethsemane and telling Christ, “Hey, buddy, you don’t _really_ have to do this. Come with me, I got a secret way outta here…”)
So love _has_ a cost, and it’s a real one. But they do rescue each other, and Claire saves not only his life, _but his soul_. (Yes, it is redemption and resurrection, and yes, there’s Christ imagery all through the story–it was my first book, OK?) His soul wouldn’t have been in danger, had he not been really and truly nearly destroyed by his sacrifice.
I.e., had Claire shown up with reinforcements in the nick of time and saved him before he’d been put through such pain and suffering….well, then it would have been a nice, heart-warming story in which Hero and Heroine conquer evil and ride off into the sunset together. But it wouldn’t have half the power of a story in which Jamie and Claire _truly_ conquer _real_ evil, and thus show what real love is. Real love has real costs–and they’re worth it.
Jamie Fraser And Black Jack Randall
I’ve always said all my books have a shape, and OUTLANDER’s internal geometry consists of three slightly overlapping triangles. The apex of each triangle is one of the three emotional climaxes of the book: 1) when Claire makes her wrenching choice at the stones, 2) when she saves Jamie from Wentworth, and 3) when she saves his soul at the Abbey. It would still be a _good_ story, if I’d had only 1 and 2–but (see above), the Rule of Three. A story that goes one, two, _three_ has a lot more impact than just a one-two punch.