I am so enjoying watching folks fall in love w/ the new #AllCreatures. I grew up watching the original w/ my dad & I have to say, my understanding of manhood was pretty much formed by how a man relates to the natural world around him. No offense guys.
Another neat thing watching the show this time around is already knowing the stories & having previous scenes in my head. New series diverges from both book & previous series in some ways but also stays pretty close in core characterization.
You can practically see Samuel West channeling Robert Hardy's Siegfried Farnon in certain stances & phrases. And it's wonderful. West definitely owns the role but also honors previous embodiment.
All that to say, I won't be at all surprised if folks start wearing tweeds & jumpers & mucking about in wellies. These stories capture hearts & imaginations in a deep way. Always have, always will.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's the perfect combination of deep affection for a place, love of people & all their foibles, & respect for the natural world.
I know other folks might have higher ambitions, but I don't need to write the next great novel. I'd just want to write stories that honor place & people as much as All Creatures honors Yorkshire.
I gotta say my favorite type of women are Deborahs who tell the men around them: "There's nothing to fear here. Trust in the Lord & do what's right."
There's something invaluable about a women's ability to break the cycle of intimidation & bullying that men so often try to trap each other in. It is a thing of beauty & a joy for ever.
B/c sometimes the most important thing we do for each other is not to take the responsibility off another person's shoulders; it is to support & enable them as they meet it.
Follow this thread backwards for more clarity on short selling. My thread yesterday was, at best, imprecise & most likely, flat-out wrong. Plus Angela has made graphics!
Here's the benefit of having written books on both humility & discernment: There's just no escaping. I spoke out of ignorance & that ignorance led me to overconfidence in my opinion. You simply can't know what you don't know.
This is a good example of staying in one's lane. One might understand what healthy, ethical dynamics look like in general, but that doesn't mean they can look at a certain phenomenon & pronounce it healthy or unhealthy. To do that, you must have knowledge of phenomenon itself.
We code it in language of stock prices & sell high/buy low, etc. But the entire model is based on the stock price falling--not getting in on the ground floor of a company & rising w/ it. In short selling, you're actively rooting for someone else to lose b/c that's how you profit.
I'm not trying to be precious here. I understand that the stockmarket involves certain amount of risk & that part of healthy growth means accepting that this risk as part of investing. This is something different.
So I'm seeing folks discuss the age-old Q about who is & who isn't an evangelical & it raises another equally significant Q for me:
To whom do the outliers belong then? Who is going yo take responsibility to confront & warn them?
I understand the importance of carefully defining terms & movements, but it strikes me as an exercise w/out a real world purpose or end. Other than perhaps distancing ourselves from certain elements.
It's one thing to say XYZ is no true evangelical & while that might be rhetorically significant, I'm not sure it's pastorally significant especially if it enables us to just ignore or disregard the outlier.