The Skinny: 
 Supposed "epic love story" does a better job of putting me to sleep than counting sheep. 
 The Fat: 
 Now, when I heard about the book Outlander I was only semi-interested. However, when I found out that it was a show on Starz I figured that the book must be good since it has been made into a TV show. Then I kept seeing various bloggers talk about how Jamie is their "dream guy" and is "oh so fantastic" and "lovely" that I knew that I had to read it to see what the fuss is all about. Outlander starts off with an amazing prologue of sorts. I really don't know what to call it because it is shorter than a page and just before Part One begins, but when I read it I was hooked: 
 People disappear all the time. Ask any policeman. Better yet, ask a journalist. Disappearances are bread-and-butter to journalists. 
 Young girls run away from home. Young children stray from their parents and are never seen again. Housewives reach the end of their tether and take the grocery money and a taxi to the station. International financiers change their names and vanish into the smoke of imported cigars. 
 Many of the lost will be found, eventually, dead or alive. Disappearances, after all, have explanations. 
 Usually. 
 With an opener like that, it is no wonder why Outlander drew me in. What's funny is that after reading a few chapters of Scottish accents a majority of my thoughts began having similar accents. Not sure why that happens to me when I read/watch a movie with an accent, but it does. It's pretty funny. 
 In the beginning, Outlander had many laugh out loud moments. I found myself marking the particular pages and lines. Claire and Frank had such good chemistry between the two of them. The two tease each other (and Mrs. Baird). Their relationship seemed to rekindle quickly after so many years apart. Claire is funny and charming. There is a scene on pages 15/16 where Claire accidentally spills tea on Mr. Bainbridge's lap and yells "Bloody fucking hell!" Frank is disappointed in her choice of words, but Claire is able to recover quickly and starts to talk about how when she was a nurse during the war that "Men tend to be very colorful when you're picking shrapnel out of them." I laughed so hard. 
 I especially love how Claire swears even though in both time periods she lives in its unacceptable for women to curse. She is a lady after my own heart. I curse a lot so it comes as no surprise that most of the quotes I marked pertained to Claire's colorful use of language. 
 I loved the way Claire and Jamie's relationship formed. It never felt force and there wasn't some instalove going on. The two just simply understood each other. They had a nice friendship, then (a forced) marriage, that grew into a loving relationship. I loved Jamie. I loved how he was kind to others and looked after Claire (without being overbearing). He was my absolute favorite. Until around page 385. Then I hated Jamie. 
 [TRIGGER WARNING: the rest of the review discusses sexual assault/rape themes that occurs in the book] 
 Jamie blamed Claire for nearly getting raped. Yes, you read that right. Jamie blamed her. Yes, one could argue that Claire didn't stay where he asked her to (um, victim blaming much?), but there is no guarantee that the English wouldn't have found her regardless of where she was left. Then because of some barbaric customs he beat her. Beat her because she was kidnapped. Jamie, this kind, sweet, deadly fella blamed his wife for nearly being raped by a sadistic monster and then beat her as punishment as though nearly being raped wasn't traumatic enough. Jamie later confesses that he enjoyed beating her and slept on the floor so he wouldn't take her against her will (aka rape her). Jamie went from being my favorite character to being a shy step above Jack Randall. I understand that this is a book that takes place in 1743, but nonetheless I do not stand for rape, victim blaming, or abuse. Plus, it all seemed widely out of character for Jamie. 
 Speaking of which, Jamie and Claire have some pretty dubious "consent" scenes (aka rape played off as romance). There are a few times when I struggled to tell if Jamie and Claire were having consensual sex, rough sex, or if it was rape. There were times when Claire said "no" but Jamie wanted to have sex and eventually talked Claire into having sex (aka coercion/rape). By the end of each sex scene between her and Jamie, Claire would be "consenting." But no matter which way Gabaldon tries to spin it, Jamie raped Claire. One of those times the two were arguing, Jamie got mad and wanted to basically "own" Claire (his words, not mine) via sex. The only reason he stopped was because she compared him to his worst enemy Jack Randall. After more arguing the two then ended up having rough, revenge sex (consenting or...?). So that didn't add any points in my Jamie book. 
 Actually, Gabaldon uses rape as a plot device many times. By page 380 Claire had been sexually assaulted/nearly raped at least seven times. SEVEN! And that was just Claire. Three of those times happened in one night. Claire is groped repeatedly, and had been nearly raped a few times by the time the book is finished. It was like Gabaldon didn't know how to add drama to her story so every time it got dull she decided to throw in another attempted rape/sexual assault scene. It was a lot and seldom added to the plot. 
 Outlander wouldn't have been so bad if it was about 300-400 pages shorter and had consenting sex scenes. I was bored most of the book. I kept contemplating if I should finish it or not. But every time I almost stopped there would be something small that would give me hope that it would get better... annnnnnnnd then it wouldn't. Which sucks because it started off with so much promise. I wanted to enjoy Outlander, but it was too long, boring, had too many unnecessary sexual assault scenes, victim blaming, some of the arguments were melodramatic, and Gabaldon would oddly go from first to third person when a character would have a long monologue. 
 Around page 590 I told myself that if the book didn't get any better in 50 pages then I would stop reading. And it got slightly better. So I kept reading. Then it all fell apart. 
 Quite literally. My book actually fell apart. 
 I almost took it as a sign to stop reading. 
 However, (view spoiler)[Jamie had just been taken so I was curious to find out what would happen next. 
 Now, I'll have it been known that I have read books with torture in them before. I've read about a woman flogging a 10-year-old boy to death, I've read about a child getting his arm ripped off and bleeding to death in a gutter, I've read about a guy getting all of his fingers and tongue cut off, but never have I read such a horrible, brutal, unfathomable form of torture. Nor have I ever hated a fictional character with such a passion. Reading about what happened to Jamie was nauseating. It made me lose my appetite. It made me wake up in the middle of the night because I was anxious to find out how anyone could live through such horror. It was more than just the physical torture I am used to reading, it was psychological. It was horrible. It was unfathomable of how anyone can ever live after something like that. There are times when a person reads something sad and there are times when a person reads something soul-crushing sad. This was soul-crushing. Jack Randall found a way to taint everything positive in Jamie's life so that Jamie won't be able to think of what makes him happiest without thinking of how he was tortured. I couldn't even cry because my mind was struggling to comprehend how a person could be so, so sadistic. (hide spoiler)] 
 For how emotional that scene made me, I almost gave Outlander three stars. However, shortly after (view spoiler)[that revelation Claire has some weird way of how to help Jamie heal emotionally (hide spoiler)] that confused me so much that I thought Nah, this is a two star book and then I thought harder about how little enjoyment I got from reading this 800 paged monster and ultimately decided to rate it one star.. Especially after I really thought about how bored I was for most of the book. 
 Outlander showed promise. I enjoyed the beginning of the book and for the most part the end of the book evoked strong emotions, that although I won't say it was necessarily enjoyable to read (if you read it you'll know why), but it made me not want to put the book down. It is just that the book was too long. If Gabaldon cut out some of the sexual assault scenes (many of which added nothing to the plot) and cut down the book by a few hundred pages then I probably would've thoroughly enjoyed Outlander. However, instead I was bored for a majority of the book. I will admit that sometimes felt like banging my head against a wall over the absurdity of the plot and a few times I had trouble putting the book down because I wanted to know what happens next, but mostly I just felt like yawning. 
 A part of me is curious over what will happen in the next book, but a large part of me doesn't want to subject myself to such boredom again. 
 ***TRIGGER WARNINGS: sexual assault/rape, victim blaming, domestic/child abuse, corporal punishment, war, death, torture