As both an animal lover and vegetarian I'd like to disassociate myself with another review on here claiming this series is "not for those who care about animals" I feel fortunate enough to live in a time that affords me a choice weather to eat meat or not...irrespective of when the "vegetarian society" was formed. People in the Victorian countryside would have had little choice, these times, in this location at this social standing it would have been about survival.The series itself is a wonderful journey into a time of change and invention. Ruth, Alex and Peter take us on their journey in at 19th century farm from hay-making, brewing cider and ale, ploughing, planting, laundry even toilet requirements.Fantastic cinematography and score it leaves you wanting to experience the time itself although leaves you under no illusions as how challenging these times were and how essential it was that every resource was utilised.A real educational series for all ages and if you like this check out the prequel "Tales from the Green Valley" (Tudor Times) and the various squeals starting with "Edwardian Farm".10/10 Fantastic viewing.

There have been plenty of reviews of "Victorian Farm", so I don't feel compelled to review it on its entire merits. But for the following matter, I'd gladly give the show a 9. But I just want to focus on one aspect of the show: the hypocrisy of the actors about the animals on the farm, which pulls their rating down to a 5.Before anyone tries to excuse it with "yes, but they're just being historically accurate" -- I would suggest that they're not. I think that Victorian (and Edwardian, since the same thing afflicts "Edwardian Farm") farmers had a detachment from their "livestock" that Peter, Alex and Ruth don't share.That is why it's very disconcerting to see them at first treating (for example) the lambs, piglets, calves and chicks with affection, and hear them praising their intelligence and personableness one day, and then being fine with killing, butchering and eating them another day.Was this a reality in Victorian farms? Well, yes and no. Yes, most of the time. But the Victorian era was one of a burgeoning vegetarian movement. The Vegetarian Society was founded in Britain in 1847, early in Victoria's reign. By 1855, there were a thousand members in Britain. By the end of the century, still within Victoria's reign, it had over 5,000 members, and that doesn't count ALL vegetarians within Britain, just those who became members of one society. During the Victorian era such British luminaries as George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Charlotte Bronte and Mary Shelley were all vegetarians, so it's not like it was a novelty.But there is something pathetically hypocritical about people demonstrating such affection for creatures -- to the point of naming them, petting them, and so on -- and then killing and eating them. If they carried on with a dog or cat the way that the cast of Victorian Farm do with their "livestock", no one would think it at all unusual. But if they killed, butchered and ate a cat or dog, 99.999% of their audience would be revulsed and outraged. How can a person feel like a pet guardian with a creature one day and kill and eat it the next? I seems to me that it would require a type of compartmentalization that would border on schizophrenia.I don't have a solution for such shows. I don't think it's likely that the BBC is going to make a show called "Vegetarian Historic Farm". But at the same time, I cannot watch these "reality shows" without feeling a sense of disgust and disdain for the cast who are either killing animals against their ethics, or are outright mistreating them.

Three people of the team that made "Tales of the Green Valley" in 2004 came back and recreated the Victorian Age (2nd half of the 19th century). Just like in "Tales", the three reenact the period with the help of experts in the field, dressing like the period and mainly using tools from that age.If you liked Tales of the Green Valley, you will probably also like this series (which was broadcast on the BBC in the winter months of 2009). The protagonists, script and formula are about the same, which yields a fun and enlightening experience. It's a pity though, that Chloe is not working in this series. She was quite the fun note in "Tales".