The Outlandish Companion - Diana Gabaldon [223]
In other words, while I hope the existence of such dialogue will not impair your enjoyment of my books, I don’t mean to stop doing it. The use of such expressions is not the result of carelessness or of my own personal preference in usage, but a conscious inclusion—as much a meticulous detail as the description of house furnishings or wardrobe.
I am delighted that the books have brought you pleasure in other respects, particularly the relationship between Jamie and Claire. Speaking of the books, I really must go and write some more, so I trust you will excuse my stopping here. Again, thank you so much for writing, and I trust you will enjoy the next two books. And have a good time on your trip to Scotland!
Best wishes, Diana Gabaldon
HOMOSEXUALITY
Among the occasional controversies, I find that the topic of homosexuality arises now and then. A few readers dislike any reference to homosexuality and simply object to the inclusion of any gay character “I don’t want to see Jamie kiss any more men!” as one letter writer sternly adjured me). That is, of course, their personal preference, but really has nothing to do with either the books or the characters.
I do, however, get a few letters objecting to what the reader sees as my “negative portrayal of homosexuals”—usually with reference to the character of Black Jack Randall.
Black Jack Randall
Well, one swallow does not a summer make, and one pervert scarcely condemns an entire segment of the sexual populace. Black Jack Randall is who he is—an individual—and he fulfills his fictional purpose in Outlander and Dragonfly in Amber without in any way implying a reprehensible view of gay men as a group.
Also, as I point out to the occasional reader who writes me with this concern11—the fact is that Jack Randall isn’t gay; he’s a pervert (and no, those really aren’t the same thing).
Jack Randall is a sadist; he derives sexual pleasure from hurting people. In Outlander, four separate sexual attacks by Randall are described—two on men, two on women (men: Alexander MacGregor and Jamie Fraser; women: Jenny Murray and Claire Fraser). Clearly, he’s not all that particular about the gender of the person he’s hurting; it’s the pain and the act of domination that turns him on.
At the same time, given the society and situation in which he’s operating—he’s an officer in an occupying army—he’s plainly going to have much greater access to males as potential victims. Early in Outlander, Frank Randall reports that there were instances of “insult—unspecified,” laid to his ancestor’s account, and that these resulted in complaints from the populace [Outlander, page 30 (U.S. paperback edition)]. Evidently, going about the countryside attacking women was a risky pastime; abusing male prisoners (or subordinates) in the confines of an English-run prison would be a good deal safer.
Of course, there’s the possibility that his sadistic side would be especially gratified by the response of males, since they might suffer additional pain or horror as a result of homosexual attack, but I don’t think there’s sufficient evidence in the text to adduce that. On the other hand, one could reasonably assume that a male held in a prison where no one cares what happens to him might be much more severely abused than might a woman whose welfare was to some degree the responsibility of the community, as well as of her own relatives. So, we might reasonably assume that Randall did indeed prefer males—but as the result of their increased vulnerability, rather than as a result of a homosexual orientation.
Alexander