Sunday, 25 October 2026

James Herriot - and the increasingly important matter of "the man behind the books"

Another huge Herriot success, indeed his best-selling book; which led to scores of copycat volumes of 
Fill in the celebrity name's someplace-or-another. 

James Herriot was an extremely popular author of the 1970s. He was a vet who wrote humourous books about his life ministering to farm animals and pets in Yorkshire. 

The books were known by everybody, from age about ten years onwards, and led to a tremendous growth in the demand for vet qualifications (to the point that now vets are paid less than school teachers), and a significant expansion in tourism in the Yorkshire Dales, where the fictional tales were set. 

The books were also adapted (and quite faithfully!) into two movies, and a Sunday evening TV series "All Creatures Great and Small" which was probably the most popular and beloved British family drama of all time.  


As well as their many laughs, skillful writing, and fascinating subject matter; one of the pleasures of reading James Herriot is the likeability and goodness of the actual man behind the books - whose name was Alf Wight.

As well as the evidence of the books themselves; my evaluation of JH's character came from the biography by his son, and a visit to the The World of James Herriot - museum in Thirsk, built in the real-life practice (actually serving the North York Moors, much more than the Yorkshire Dales).  

I have found that, as I get older, my inference as to the ultimate personal quality of an author has become ever more important an element in my reading. 

When I believe that an author is "a good chap" (or "chapess") then I am much more likely to enjoy and re-read; and when I beleive the opposite, I am increasingly unwilling to read, and likely to discard the volume into the rubbish bin.  


In other words, I am less and less inclined to try and separate the author and the work - at the ultimate level. 

This does not mean I expect a "good" author to have only what I regard as "good" opinions and behaviours; but it does mean that I choose to read those who I regard as deep down and primarily "on the right side". 

And that I am less and less inclined to enjoy and seek wisdom from those who are, at bottom, against God, Divine Creation, The Good etc - even when such people may have considerable skill and surface appeal. 


This has led to a good deal of re-evaluation and rejection, and a greater concentration upon relatively fewer individual writers.

It's not that I avoid Bad authors entirely - after all I continue to explore...

But once it has become clear that the character and intent behind the work is malign, I tend to quit swiftly; and move-onto something else more wholesome! 


Note added: I suppose it should be clarified that the most important aspect of "the man behind the books" is the author's "state of mind" at the time of writing - because this may change subsequently, for better or for worse. For example JK Rowling seems to have been a different and better person at the time she wrote the Harry Potter series, than she has been subsequently. Another possibility, which I will do no more than mention, is that an author subsequently died; and (intuitively) post-mortally seems to have become a resurrected Heavenly denizen - and that some kind of contact with the author's current self happens via the process of reading.

9 comments:

  1. Well I couldn't help but comment when I saw the name James Herriot. I read every book, in detail, many times over. What an excellent story teller the man was, and his knowledge, which he was often disparaging of, was quite accurate, even today.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was just thinking of the 70s tv show, how bland Christopher Timothy is as Herriot, but how well it works anyway. There are some works where the protagonist is relatively bland but the supporting cast are flamboyant (e.g. Withnail & I). Herriot the character is a good man, in the ordinary unobtrusive way, through instinct and action rather than ideology. There's nothing sentimental there: farmers and the like usually have that driven out of them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Dileas - Yes, I appreciate how well Herriot sets-up, structures, and paces his stories. Quite an achievement!

    @Walter A - Yes, Christopher Timothy works very well in the part, although everybody always remembers the characters of Siegfried and Tristan. According to his family, the actor most like the real Herriot of the early depictions, was John Alderton in the second movie.

    I have said nothing of the mediocre Channel 5/ PBS TV series that began in 2020, because it is not a real adaptation of the books - having different characters, mostly different (and often absurd) plotlines, and is permeated with politically correct preaching.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's the same for me. When I was younger I thought "outlaw" authors like William Burroughs were cool but now that I've grown older and closer to God I finding their work revolting, abominable even.

    Except for Polanski's MacBeth. It's my favorite adaptation of that play. That final scene where Jon Finch swaggers out onto the balcony and cries out

    "What's he that was not born of woman? Such a one am I to fear, or none!"

    Makes my hair stand on end. He maintains his kingly stride until his death

    ReplyDelete
  5. @SWC - I actually always found Burroughs just too obviously evil, even for my young and trendy self!

    But there are plenty of other authors for whom I cut way too much slack, despite that I could feel that they were doing me no good - or maybe *because* of that reason! I remember thinking that I would enjoy life more if I could learn to ignore my "puritanical" instincts, and cease to feel guilt about self-indulgence.

    My impression is that things are different about interpreters such as actors and directors, conductors and musicians. They are nearly all appalling people, and some (like Polanski) are really bad; yet it does not seem to taint and spoil "the final product" in the way that badness does with the primary creators: the authors or composers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is why I won't even consider watching the new adaptation of *The Chronicles of Narnia* on Netflix. The director and co-producer is a woman named Greta Gerwig, who recently told an interviewer that faith in Jesus Christ is "creepy".

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Stephen M - I put that project into the "Not even trying" category; when something masquerades as an adaptation, but is actually a subversion and/or a platform for political preaching.

    Why would I want to watch that!

    It also leads to bad dramas, because the people involved are not trying their best to make a good drama.

    Since it is Very Difficult to make a good TV programme or movie, when the people involved are Not Even Trying to do their best dramatically, then a good drama Will Not be made.

    Then there is a different product, that merely shares a title, shares a few names (but not characters) and (maybe) plot elements. Disney started doing this way back, eg with Jungle Book - which was a good movie in its own right, but had nothing to do with the Kipling source. Some recent BBC dramas with titles taken from Agatha Christie are of this sort.

    Part of this is that our culture now is extremely evil pervasively and by nature, so that what was doable 40 years ago is not any more. For instance Blade Runner is one of the best movies ever made, but wrt its source Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and its core moral argument, Blade Runner is an inversion.

    Ridley Scot acknowledged this openly to PKD when they met. Dick was satisfied, since Blade Runner was such a very good movie, and PKD knew (because he had made the necessary arragements) that Blade Runner would lead to more people (such as myself!) reading "Androids" and discovering PKD's work.

    But it is noticeable that effective subversion always (I think always) deploys passive and immersive media such as TV and movies, which have a tendency (especially by their visuals) to overwhelm and over-write, and thereby distort, the impact and memories of books. It does not seem to work the other way around (i.e books don't overwhelm movies).

    This is one reason (as well as because it was easier) why the evil overlords took-over and ideologically controlled movies and TV First and as priority, and books and written materials only more recently

    ReplyDelete
  8. It doesn’t matter how often I remind myself that Lucy in Narnia is blonde- because I watched some movies (show?) of Narnia as a child she’s dark-haired in my mind. The audio-visual format is just so compelling.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @Mia - I wrote about this fairly early in the blog's history:

    https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2014/03/movies-are-always-worse-than-good-books.html

    Narnia gets a mention in the comments.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated. "Anonymous" comments are deleted without being read.