The Archers - Freddie is getting OUT: will Russ hop it? Helen is falling DOWN: is Lee still in the frame? Tom is heading UP: will Natasha be the boost his sausage needs? (Thread no. 101

[DadDadDad]

We're still here and still discussing TA (The Archers). We welcome newcomers and old hands, so if you have a question or a point of view, please dive in. No spoilers - if you've seen info on future storylines, there's a separate Radio Addicts thread for that.

I loved all the name changes on the last thread. Don't forget to change back! (If you want to).

Who's going to get Russ out of LL? Freddie? Lily? Elizabeth? Or is it Freddie who will head off?

But having a different religion doesn’t mean you have incompatible beliefs and attitudes.

So now Tom's cancelled the new house, where are they going to live? Spare bedrooms at the farm of mum and dad?

I have never understood the hate for Shula, I much prefer her to Kenton. Criticising her for having an affair is a bit odd, pretty much everyone in TA has done that at one time or another.

But having a different religion doesn’t mean you have incompatible beliefs and attitudes.

With all respect, that's nonsensical. Being a follower of a religion means you hold certain beliefs. If your spouse follows a different religion they have different beliefs. And the teachings of different religions do contradict each other, so that means there will be points of incompatibility.

I think it’s more the fact that Natasha has given the impression of being fairly flush - the extravagant gifts, the flashy car (notsure what it is, but it has been mentioned) and fancy “clobber” (referenced the other night. Tom is dazzled by her success, thinks the sun shines out of her and defers to her in everything to the extent that he no longer has an opinion of his own on the basis that he she is so admirable, marvellous and self-made. If it’s all on credit that puts rather a different perspective on things. He thought she was more successful than him, but in fact she has just borrowed more. It’s all an illusion - which is perhaps not surprising for a marketing expert.

Flat above the village shop for Tom and Natasha.

I partly meant incompatible in the sense that you used it, in that it would put a strain on the relationship. It would only do that if you couldn’t respect the other person’s ‘otherness’, including their different beliefs.

But actually I don’t believe that different beliefs are necessarily incompatible just because they are different. You might have different ideas about god but have a similar outlook on what religion tells you about how to live life. And at a more fundamental level, you have faith itself in common.

"Flat above the village shop for Tom and Natasha."

absolutely. no one ever actually moves to penny hasset, they just toy with the idea before being blessed (or cursed) by the ambridge property fairy. It's like when, years ago, roy and Hayley were looking to buy and found a place "on the other side of felpersham" (always said in a really mournful minor key voice like it was a shack in a favela on the dark side of the moon or something) only for moike to come up with the wheeze of splitting his house in half and save the day.

I can't allow "Shula was never more than lukewarm to Usha" -- they were best mates for ages, and Shula very rapidly stopped worrying about her husband having a woman as his partner at work. It did throw her at first because she found it so unexpected.

It was because they were close friends that Usha was so angry when the man who had moved in on her when she was vulnerable (Richard Locke moved into her house to protect her after she'd had ammonia thrown in her face) moved on after she had lost interest in him but before she threw him out, to another vulnerable woman (Shula's son was very ill, she was distraught, and he was treating the child). Usha had consulted with Shula, her best friend, about how to deal with her relationship with Richard not being much good any more! Usha was doubly betrayed, by the man she had been living with and by her friend. And she blamed Shula exclusively, never apparently noticing that Shula wasn't exclusively to blame for Richard deciding to try for sex elsewhere while living in Usha's house. He got away with it scot-free by simply moving to live somewhere else; Shula was left to carry all the guilt and all the blame.

And "nobody suggested Shula was a racist" isn't right, because Usha specifically did. That was the word she shouted at her when she went over and had the row with her at the Stables while Shula was getting a ride ready.

I don't think Shula was suggesting that Hinduism is inferior to Christianity; she was suggesting that Alan's faith was strong and Usha's wasn't.

DDD, did they find anyone who was a CoE vicar married to a Hindu? I have a vague memory of some organisation like Woman's Hour trying to find one, like they tried to find a real-live Jennifer who'd taken in her husband's son from an affair, but I don't know whether they succeeded. I would have thought it would be very difficult for both parties to the marriage, one being completely bound up in his faith and the other being of a completely different faith I mean, one god and many gods, and so on unless the one who wasn't bound up in the CoE thing wasn't particularly interested their faith. I have only just thought of that so I'm not sure where it leads, but wouldn't they have terrible arguments if they both felt strongly about two incompatible belief systems? And one absolute god as against many gods all coequal is a fairly hefty incompatibility, isn't it?

(Anyone would think I was a Christian, from this lot, and I'm not particularly. Oh well.)

I think Shula’s main objection was to the vicar marrying someone who worshipped many gods. I got the impression she’d have been less bothered if the vicar was marrying someone with a different monotheistic god, but who knows really. She spoke to her mother about it but I cannot recall anything else from that scene.

However, IRL there are many couples with very different religious beliefs who seem to be in happy long-term relationships. I’m related to many such couples. It’s more complicated obviously when one of them is a minister of religion but, in Alan's case, I’d consider the bishop’s view on it to be more important than that of a busybody parishioner. Soz, Shula.

IRL the odious little man Giles Fraser (C of E vicar, often says controversial things on R4, esp about Brexit) is married to a Jewish woman. They have a child together and seem to be bringing him up together. Of course they’ve not been married long so who knows what the future holds. I don’t know if that makes a difference as Judaism is monotheistic. Possibly - I had an oddly godless upbringing and though I’ve read a lot and thought a lot, there are definite gaps in my understanding.

To channel Natasha, my dad was a communist, latterly it really was with a small c.

AskingQuestions - your description of the problem (of a Christian and Hindu being married) makes sense to me. Faith isn't an abstract thing, like a pretty pebble you carry around in your pocket to bring you comfort and focus your mind when you have a tricky moral decision to make. It's faith in something or someone. If I believe that my eternal fate depends on me putting my trust in Jesus because he is the king of the universe and my sin means I can never perfect myself, then what can I say to a spouse who rejects that and wants to teach our children that if they build up enough good deeds they will cycle through many lives and merge their identity into the cosmic oneness? (I apologise if I haven't accurately characterised Hinduism, but it's reasonably clear to me that faith in dharma is at odds with faith in Jesus as taught by the Bible).

Shula's problem with Usha was about so much more than her Hinduism - though this was a convenient objection to reach for and easier to explain to other people (and even to herself) than all the Richard Locke business. In marrying Alan, Usha moved firmly into what St Smugula felt was her sphere - the church - and in doing so made her feel uncomfortable in a place in the village that had always been her refuge and in her role as as vicar's right-hand woman. In making it about her Hinduism she ended up making herself look racist, but really her problem was with the way Usha had got between her and Alan.

Is it true that farmers of David's vintage resist veterinary insurance policies?

I wouldn't have thought veterinary insurance policies are that applicable to farm animals. If it is financially viable to treat the animal, it will be treated. If it is not, it will be humanely dispatched. It's not like with pets where sentiment takes over and bills can run into thousands. Small animal veterinary work is also proportionally more costly, drugs are more expensive etc.

We quoted round a few vets a couple of years ago (and then stayed put) and none of them offered any kind of insurance or pre pay scheme. They just want the bills paid on time!

Alistair's pitch to Josh was pretty ill thought out too. As a block calving herd all of the fertility work and pregnancy diagnoses happen at certain times of the year, unlike all year round calving herds who see a vet for those things most weeks. If Brookfield are like us they budget for those costs at a certain time of year and shouldn't need to spread the cost.

Well in your hypothetical example DDD I still can’t imagine much difference in the kinds of behaviour you and your spouse would be encouraging in your children. Faith is believing in something that can’t be proved and religious faith is taking that and using it as a guide to how to live, which you would both be doing. They would grow up learning that dad believed one thing and mum believed something else, which would give them a very slight head start on other children in discovering that not everyone believes the same thing. If you couldn’t allow for that, then, no, it wouldn’t work for you, but plenty of people manage it, and, indeed, many other disagreements over things that go back to fundamental beliefs, to do with education, money, politics etc.

I thought the vet insurance was odd too - it can’t be priced at a level that would save money on routine stuff because the vet would lose out, and for exceptional stuff it would just be a business decision at the time. I knew someone who worked for an underwriter for livestock insurance and it was mainly insuring animals for travel and ‘loss of use’ for breeding bulls etc who lost the ability to perform as required earlier than expected.

I thought of Giles Fraser too. I find it hard to imagine that a vicar could marry someone outside their religion, especially someone who believed in many gods. The vicarage comes with the job, so a statue of a Hindu god on display could be considered offensive IMO. I like Shula but the Dr Locke business stopped me listening for a while, and the divorce is not in keeping with the character.

I wish the SWs wouldn't perpetuate the myth that husbands become liable for their wives' personal debts and vice versa. The amount of crap advice that gets dished out on MN and elsewhere based on that premise is phenomenal, no need to spread it.

I can't allow "Shula was never more than lukewarm to Usha" -- they were best mates for ages
It did throw her at first because she found it so unexpected

Sorry didn't realise I was supposed to ask your permission before expressing an opinion. .
Shula is a baby boomer not a victorian aunt. The idea that a female partner was a shock is ridiculous. She was a shock because she was an "outsider" and asked all the "but where do you really come from" questions so familiar to anyone with a tinged skin in this country.

They were not best friends, when Shula dropped the passive agressive behaviour they got along together in the way that BME people generally do after experiencing hostility. Usha was a damned sight more gracious than Shula deserved.

[...] Shula was left to carry all the guilt and all the blame

Oh come on - you can't have it both ways. So poor Shula couldn't help herself and she was rescuing Usha from the relationship by shagging her "friend's" partner? My memory of the sequencing is slightly differnt by the way. It doesn't lead to StSmug being awarded some kind of medal for heroically continuing in the village having shagged her "friend's" partner and thereby ending any hope of them working through any issues.

And "nobody suggested Shula was a racist" isn't right, because Usha specifically did

Nobody on this thread. That was pretty clear I think. And actually Shula was racist in the passive, low grade way that MC people often are. She always saw Usha as an outsider. And of course, arrogantly assumed she knew better than either Usha or Alan how each of them valued their faiths.

And one absolute god as against many gods all coequal is a fairly hefty incompatibility, isn't it?

Your remarkable memory seems to have omitted the series of discussions where Usha addressed precisely this point.

it about her Hinduism she ended up making herself look racist, but really her problem was with the way Usha had got between her and Alan

Yes I think there is a lot of truth in this. I do also think there was an undercurrent of Usha being an "outsider" and not fundamentally "one of us".

In marrying Alan, Usha moved firmly into what St Smugula felt was her sphere - the church - and in doing so made her feel uncomfortable in a place in the village that had always been her refuge and in her role as as vicar's right-hand woman. In making it about her Hinduism she ended up making herself look racist, but really her problem was with the way Usha had got between her and Alan.

On the nail, Lil'G (admiring glances). Sorry, can't seem to make bolding work.

On compatability of faiths in interfaith marriages, I guess the point is not what you or I or D3 thinks what might work in our own situations, but what works for the couples involved. In the case of Alan and Usha, there's never been a hint that it causes them any difficulties. Their marriage, their faiths, their decision. As I see in the examples of the happy, interfaith marriages among my own peers.

But being on the same page about money, attitudes to debt, saving and spending, openness about such issues - now that would be a deal-breaker for me! I have financial date nights with my mister, and am explicit with my children about financial goals and budgeting. Natasha and Tom are shaping up to be the Lydgate and Rosamund of Ambridge...

I’ve known vicars be married to atheists or at least agnostics - surely what is important is their own faith and a partner who does not get in the way of their practising it. Shula and Alan have always had a bond in that they were both widowed young. Shula is the ideal parishioner in many ways - devout, committed to the works of the church and with a genuine faith (rather than just a social member). Not someone Alan could afford to lose. It is interesting that Usha has been virtually written out by the SWs so Shula and Alan can continue their relationship as if she were not there. Not suggesting for a moment by the way that Shula has any romantic ambitions towards Alan - he is very much her priest she wouldn’t want anything to get in the way of that which is why she didn’t want him to marry Usha. I would liken it to that moment when someone you have seriously fallen out with and who you want to avoid at all costs joins your tennis club/book club/insert something you really love doing and consider a refuge from all the others worries of the world. Suddenly you feel you can’t go anymore, all the pleasure and comfort you took from it is gone. If Alan’s new wife had been anyone but Usha Shula would have had no problem welcoming them on board and getting to know them whatever their beliefs.

I did a quick google and it appears that vets do offer this sort of service:
Dairy Health Scheme (edited)
The scheme is monthly clinic sessions which are also an opportunity to see problem cows, carry out on-going monitoring of herd problems and a chance to discuss any issues you may have with us. You can include:
-6 monthly locomotion scoring
-Quarterly consultancy visits assessing fresh cow performance and production with you nutritionist/advisor if wished
-Key performance indicator reviews and anonymous benchmarking against other herds within the scheme.

Didn't Johnny ask Alistair to teach him the basics of herd health (for free) a couple of weeks ago? (so that's a potential 'sale' lost).

f you are committing to marriage to someone, surely it's going to put a strain on the relationship if you have totally incompatible beliefs and attitudes?

It can be but I've seen it work very successfully as well. Most of the world's major religions have core values in common. The successful relationships I've seen focus on the common values and look at different point beliefs as different pathways to the same ultimate end goal.

Its also the case that Usha/Alan were unlikely to have children so the issue of raising children in a multifaith house didn't arise.

Regarding religious artefacts in the vicarage - I've seen artefacts of other faiths in the local ministers's home/offices across both Christian and non-Christian faiths.

If Shula was such a great friend to Usha i'd have thought she would have understood the importance of the home shrine for puja as she would have seen it in her previous homes. Alan obviously did understand this.

Ah, well, there I disagree. I do think Shula has a possessiveness about Alan which goes beyond his role as her priest and which does have a sexual motivation (not acknowledged and she wouldn't act on it, but it's a muddying of the waters).