Churchill commemoration

[aeolium]

There are certain to be a lot of events, including TV and radio programmes, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the death of Churchill in 1965. It will also be the 70th anniversary of his greatest triumph, the Allied victory first against Germany in May and then Japan in August - though also this was the year of a colossal domestic electoral defeat. Unsurprisingly the tone will be predominantly one of celebration, as in this collection of mainly archive programmes from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02gx4g5

But his role in the Second World War was but one part - a hugely significant one - of his long political (and military) career. I am not normally an admirer of Simon Heffer's writings, but this article I think helps to put Churchill's public life in a wider context, and shows inter alia the failures and at times horrendous misjudgements that bedevilled it:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/simon-heffer-why-it-s-time-debunk-churchill-myth

Two strains are I think consistent in Churchill's temperament and philosophy throughout his public life: firstly, an affinity for belligerence, a positive relish for conflict - which Heffer brings out in this article, and which David Reynolds has alluded to in programmes about him - and also a lasting belief in the British Empire, right from his earliest involvements as a soldier in imperial battles in the late C19 (he was in a cavalry charge at Omdurman). Reynolds has even argued that this second obsession distorted Churchill's military strategy in the later stages of the 2nd World War by leading him to focus excessively on the African/Mediterranean "soft underbelly" rather than the preference of his American allies for an earlier frontal assault in western Europe.

It's right that Churchill will be lastingly remembered for his great contribution to the existential struggle against fascism. But I hope that this year's commemorations will also present a more rounded portrayal of this complex figure.

[richardfinegold]

There are certain to be a lot of events, including TV and radio programmes, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the death of Churchill in 1965. It will also be the 70th anniversary of his greatest triumph, the Allied victory first against Germany in May and then Japan in August - though also this was the year of a colossal domestic electoral defeat. Unsurprisingly the tone will be predominantly one of celebration, as in this collection of mainly archive programmes from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02gx4g5

But his role in the Second World War was but one part - a hugely significant one - of his long political (and military) career. I am not normally an admirer of Simon Heffer's writings, but this article I think helps to put Churchill's public life in a wider context, and shows inter alia the failures and at times horrendous misjudgements that bedevilled it:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/simon-heffer-why-it-s-time-debunk-churchill-myth

Two strains are I think consistent in Churchill's temperament and philosophy throughout his public life: firstly, an affinity for belligerence, a positive relish for conflict - which Heffer brings out in this article, and which David Reynolds has alluded to in programmes about him - and also a lasting belief in the British Empire, right from his earliest involvements as a soldier in imperial battles in the late C19 (he was in a cavalry charge at Omdurman). Reynolds has even argued that this second obsession distorted Churchill's military strategy in the later stages of the 2nd World War by leading him to focus excessively on the African/Mediterranean "soft underbelly" rather than the preference of his American allies for an earlier frontal assault in western Europe.

It's right that Churchill will be lastingly remembered for his great contribution to the existential struggle against fascism. But I hope that this year's commemorations will also present a more rounded portrayal of this complex figure.

I am a great admirer of Churchill, but I have been reading a lot about the buildup to WWI in the past year, and I wonder if the sources you cite (I should read them before I post but I have to go out for the day) examine his role as head of the Navy at that time. The British Cabinet was torn between a Peace FAction and a War Faction and he certainly was one of the hawks.

[Karafan]

Good thread, thanks. I think they have restored and are to rebroadcast the full state funeral footage (circa 3 hours?) on BBC4 this month, but I can't seem to find a reference to the TX date. Anyone have an idea please?

K.

[mercia]

Anyone have an idea please?

BBC Parliament, Friday 30 January 9:15am

[Karafan]

Merci, Mercia!

[mercia]

BBC Parliament, Friday 30 January 9:15am

having read the last paragraph of this http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/lat...-state-funeral, it would appear that BBC Parliament broadcast will not be the restored version you were asking about

I wonder if the restored version is in colour

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC1WEdgXKEI

[Petrushka]

BBC Parliament, Friday 30 January 9:15am

I vividly remember the BBC broadcast of the State Funeral (I was 10 at the time) and it started me on my interest in everything to do with the Second World War.

I will be recording the programme for archiving to DVD.

[aeolium]

I vividly remember the BBC broadcast of the State Funeral (I was 10 at the time) and it started me on my interest in everything to do with the Second World War.

I too remember the broadcast (Richard Dimbleby IIRC) which we watched in black-and-white, making the ceremony seem even more archaic, like an event from the distant past.

I am a great admirer of Churchill, but I have been reading a lot about the buildup to WWI in the past year, and I wonder if the sources you cite (I should read them before I post but I have to go out for the day) examine his role as head of the Navy at that time. The British Cabinet was torn between a Peace FAction and a War Faction and he certainly was one of the hawks.

He was indeed, rfg, and had been for some time back. Right up to the cabinet meeting on 1 August 1914, Churchill was the most vocal of a small minority in cabinet in favour of British intervention in the coming European war (and he had previously mobilised the British fleet with the personal agreement of Asquith and without securing the agreement of the cabinet). Only late on the following day was there a decisive swing in favour of British intervention as a result of the German action in Luxemburg and the clear imminence of the violation of Belgian neutrality.

[Honoured Guest]

All this commemorating is getting very confusing. Can't we just remember World War I for the next four years and leave the big man's State Funeral, etc. until later.

I would make an exception for a commemorative second class stamp featuring Graham Sutherland's portrait.

[Petrushka]

All this commemorating is getting very confusing. Can't we just remember World War I for the next four years and leave the big man's State Funeral, etc. until later.

I would make an exception for a commemorative second class stamp featuring Graham Sutherland's portrait.

Well, you can only commemorate a 50th anniversary once! The 1965 State Funeral was one of the defining moments of the decade and of my own life. As for the Sutherland portrait, WSC hated it as I'm sure you well know, and had it destroyed. The commemorative stamp issued at the time featured the famous Karsh of Ottawa photograph (I still have the First Day Cover).

[richardfinegold]

I too remember the broadcast (Richard Dimbleby IIRC) which we watched in black-and-white, making the ceremony seem even more archaic, like an event from the distant past.



He was indeed, rfg, and had been for some time back. Right up to the cabinet meeting on 1 August 1914, Churchill was the most vocal of a small minority in cabinet in favour of British intervention in the coming European war (and he had previously mobilised the British fleet with the personal agreement of Asquith and without securing the agreement of the cabinet). Only late on the following day was there a decisive swing in favour of British intervention as a result of the German action in Luxemburg and the clear imminence of the violation of Belgian neutrality.

From what I could tell by perusing the site, there doesn't seem to be anything devoted to that stage of his career.

[aeolium]

From what I could tell by perusing the site, there doesn't seem to be anything devoted to that stage of his career.

If you mean the BBC site of selected broadcasts, there isn't, but the article by Simon Heffer in the other link has several paragraphs on the 1914-1918 part of his career.

I'm hoping that there will be some properly critical documentary (or series) about his public life, but I imagine that an awful lot of the commemorative stuff will be about his role in the 2nd World War (given that it is also the 70th anniversary of VE day and VJ day).

[mercia]

what do you think of this article ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767

[aeolium]

what do you think of this article ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767

I think Churchill's defenders protest too much. He did really have some unpleasant views (though often, as with his support for eugenics, these were quite widely held and intellectually respectable at the time), and some of his behaviour and policies were indefensible imv. The article could also have mentioned his strident imperialism which I think dominated his ideas about foreign policy right up to the end of his life when few even in his own party were defending it, and his strident anti-Bolshevism which e.g. led him to propose active intervention on the side of the White Russians in the civil war in Russia after 1918 (another controversy not mentioned in the article). If it had not been for the rise of Hitler and the Second World War, Churchill's political career would have been an ignominious one indeed.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I was away at boarding school when the news of Churchill's final illness reached the media. We discussed it at length. Then in the school assembly, the Deputy Head stood up and delivered the following message:
"You will be sorry to hear that Mr G- (the headmaster) has been taken ill and will not be back many weeks."
We thought she had mentioned the headmaster instead of the politician in error, but as she continued, it was apparent that this was a spooky co-incidence. Happily, the headmaster did recover and was able to resume his duties after a few months, but the two events will always be inextricably linked in my memory.