I suspect that for many readers, this pattern is a plus, not a negative. The book is basically a series of vignettes – short, short stories where, for the most part, everything always works out in the end. It’s “Chicken Soup for the Soul,” veterinarian style.
I saw some sexism and what I would call “outdated gender norms,” but I must have been asleep at the switch because I didn’t notice any outright misogyny and wasn’t attuned to the homophobia. I’m sure I’ll see it all – for better or worse! – as we discuss further.
@momofboiler1 and @ignatius , that’s too bad! It’s frustrating to spend time with a book that is ultimately so unsatisfying. I wonder if I viewed some of it through rose-colored glasses – more as a nostalgia trip because I enjoyed it as a young adult.
I honestly thought I’d be the only one to not love the book. The fact that I don’t surprised me for three reasons. 1) I love animals. 2) I always thought of the book as a well-loved classic that I should have already read.
And 3) I visited Herriot’s practice et al.
(I forced myself to finish the book even though, according to Kindle, I only had 25 minutes left.)
This was an interesting experience: going back in time but as a different person the book didn’t have the same impact as it had once. I’m more likely now to read between the lines and come with very different ideas than I did the first time. I also realized that I haven’t read this particular book in more than 20 years so it was almost unfamiliar.
If there was a cogent storyline, I didn’t find it — it was more of a series of episodes in his veterinary work, interspersed with a few human characters that floated in and out at various times.
There wasn’t an attempt at development of the humans in the book for the reader but enough was there to make me dislike Siegfried and Tristan.
There was also little effort to create emotional connections. I read the book and came away with no lasting memories of any one person. Except perhaps Marigold!
Actually, that’s not completely true! The anecdotes about Miss Stubbs and Terry Watson did make an impression. And perhaps Mrs. Pumphrey.
I liked the light touch and his self deprecating humor in the animal stories. His love for his work also seems clear and it made the stories enjoyable. Still, it was a very different book from the one I remembered loving.
So @ignatius, that was the first time you read it? So maybe it really is a book that belongs firmly in 1972 and my brain just traveled back in time to experience some of the initial enjoyment – not catching all the things that would/should be off-putting to a reader in the 21st century.
I read a chapter before bed every night and found it perfectly pleasant. I can’t be alone in this because after all, it IS a beloved classic. I’m curious to hear from other readers.
I thought the self-deprecating humor was really well done. So many memoirs end up with the writer stroking his or her own ego, and Herriot avoided that pitfall.
I haven’t finished the book yet, but I should finish today. I like to read our books at the last minute so they are fresh in my head, but I waited too long to start.
I was a faithful watcher of the original series way back when and I loved the series. As I am reading the stories now I am picturing those original characters, so a bit of a flashback for me. The book reads very similar to the series with many of the different chapters being separate episodes of the show. What has struck me so far is the relationship between Siegfried and Tristan in the book. It seems much more harsh than in the show. Maybe in the show they were able to make it more comedic? I don’t know, but I am getting tired of Siegfried picking on Tristan all the time
I’m with you. Perhaps some of the rose tint stayed with me for this reading but I didn’t find or note any glaring instances of misogyny or homophobia. Sexism, yes. But that was hardly unexpected.
I really liked the book. Not sure if I read it as a kid or not. (I think my memory is more of friends talking about the book, or perhaps the TV series). It was a nice escape from winter doldrums.
No I hadn’t read it. I had recently downloaded it on my Kindle, so was quite pleased when it became the CC book club choice.
Like you I started reading at night before bed. I wasn’t expecting the episodic feel to the book, basically a collection of short stories. I soon grew to dislike the dysfunction that existed between Siegfried and Tristan and then grew to dislike both men. I’m not sure I left the book particularly fond of Herriot himself. I realize the humor intended when James kept the fat pampered dog and took the goodies offered for himself. However, I kept waiting for him to include Mrs. Pumphrey in the “miracle.” Surely he did in practice. But still.
Anyway, enough of that … I look forward to the discussion. Ratings for the book are high on GoodReads, so I know others like it.
I haven’t seen the television series; I didn’t know it existed. But I loved rereading this and All Things Bright and Beautiful.
Each chapter was a delight to me, for the vivid descriptions of the people and the animals. I found humor, affection, and humility in the books, as well as an “all will be well” affirmation, that in this place, in this time, this young veterinarian was learning, listening, observing with an abundance of compassion for the people and animals he encountered, and an appreciation of the place where he landed.
All books don’t have to be the same. There’s a place for gentle observation.
I loved this book, the biography by his son, Jim Wight, and all the other books by him. Sure, his boss was a bit unpredictable and volatile but they all seemed to get along fairly well.
I did note that there was a lot of drinking that I would never be able to handle doing personally but it seemed to work for all those depicted in the books.
I’m going to the library today to pick up my video of the bbc series of the book that just became available to me from the reserve list.
I had PTSD from reading this book. Having been trained in family practice, then a specialty. Always on call. When we went into medicine 70s they always talked about how doctors were lazy (not always on call, house calls like they used to be). Being a large animal vet must be incredibly awful at times. I would think bringing a cow or horse to your office is impossible even now. You have to go to them.
I liked the book because he made humor (almost like gallows humor) where there is none, or most people would not find funny. I especially liked the lightening strikes.
Like others, I got a different impression reading it now than my memories of decades ago. It was very well written with vivid descriptions and colorful characters.
But yes, episodes of self-deprecating humor (golly gosh gee, see how I bumbled into saving the day) interspersed with somewhat mean examples of Seigfried’s hypocrisy (I can understand why the real life Siegfried didn’t like it). To be honest, the way the book is written, I can’t figure out what Helen saw in James. Granted there were slim pickings - perhaps she knew something about the other suitor (Richard?) that ruled him out.
Jumping in to say I’m only up to chapter twenty, not because I’m not enjoying rereading the book, from early 70s, and being horrified about how Vets help birth large animals!
Just dealing with elderly 92 mom issues, and not reading as much as I hoped, but will say the escape ( from all gritty world events ) to All creatures Great and Small has been enjoyable.
Enjoying all comments, I don’t remember the book from the 70s, but have seen enough of the current PBS / BBC show they are imprinted in my imagination as I read.
Yes, I couldn’t get over the 8 or 10 pints he and Tristan put away on their double date. But then I had to remind myself that they were only 23 and 24 years old. I also felt James’ age came into play during scenes where he could not speak up for himself or he allowed others to make silly choices for him (e.g., the outfit for his first date with Helen – although that story did make me laugh).
That’s the risk of self-deprecating humor, I guess – you gotta hide your light under a barrel. But my guess is that Helen saw a man who was incredibly hard-working and committed to a career that required physical strength, resilience, medical expertise, patience, humor and compassion. I do think James had all those qualities, even if he played the fool at times.
Personally, I’m not a fan of beer and doubt I’ve consumed a total of a pint altogether my whole life. I know some others who drink beer but these people put away huge quantities of beer and other alcohol on a pretty frequent basis.
I think Helen saw a very sweet and sincere man who loved animals and treated her dog successfully as well as many of their farm animals. She seems like a wonderful woman.
It seemed like Helen could have had her pick of suitors. I think she like the work ethic and sense of humor. But maybe they just had good chemistry together.
You’re right that sharing a pint or alcoholic beverage was part of the culture and you wouldn’t fit in if you chose not to imbibe. Would definitely have been tough for folks allergic to alcohol or who preferred not to for any reason to be well accepted into such a culture. (That’s my lens since I rarely drink much, booze. It’s never appealed.)
