Show vs. Book: "Outlander: A Book Made Better"

I wanted to like this book. It came highly recommended and a couple of social media friends were astonished I'd never read it. When I finally started reading Outlander by Diana Gabaldon, I was actually very surprised at how difficult it was for me to feel engaged in the narrative. The story, the plot, is very interesting, but the actual narrative delivery fell woefully flat for me as a reader. I felt as though there was no tension in the text and no heightened emotion experienced by the narrator Claire Randall. I mean, the woman fell through a rock with mystical power and lands 200 years in the past and yet I didn't feel a thing from her emotionally...I didn't care.

I pushed myself to read this book, because I wanted to like it. It's well researched, and the actual history of the English dominion over Scotland and the rebellion that was to follow was appealing. I also enjoyed learning about Clan politics. Claire, who'd been a field nurse for Britain in WWII, has a knowledge of healing and herbal remedies, so I liked that aspect of the book as well. But I had a huge problem with Claire. Even though she'd had an interesting childhood traveling around with her archaeologist uncle, had been a nurse, was sexually aware and had fallen through time after witnessing an ancient Druid ceremony - I found her to be an incredibly one note character.