A New Biography of Churchill
spectator.co.uk
A New Biography of Churchill
1–10 of 40 posts
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#2Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#3The Spectator also have a great podcast with the author about this book: https://audioboom.com/posts/7040039-churchill-andrew-roberts...
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#4Also this new biography was favourably reviewed in the Economist: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/10/06/andrew-r... (probably behind a paywall)
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#5Also this new biography was favourably reviewed in the Economist: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/10/06/andrew-r... (probably behind a paywall)
Andrew Roberts is a pretty well-respected historian, though he's not without his controversies thanks to his political outlook. The Economist has actually been pretty brutal in their critiques of some of his previous books, so it's interesting that this one has been well received by them.
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#6Also this new biography was favourably reviewed in the Economist: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/10/06/andrew-r... (probably behind a paywall)
> His biography demonstrates its subject’s greatness but manages to make him lovable, too
So, nothing about the racist, imperialist side? Yet another hagiography?
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#7Also this new biography was favourably reviewed in the Economist: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/10/06/andrew-r... (probably behind a paywall)
> His biography demonstrates its subject’s greatness but manages to make him lovable, too So, nothing about the racist, imperialist side? Yet another hagiography?
Literally the paragraph below your quote:
> Yet Mr Roberts does not gloss over the many examples of terrible judgment that littered Churchill’s career before (and even after) becoming prime minister, errors which created a widespread perception that, while brilliant, energetic and matchlessly eloquent, he was also unreliable, excessively passionate, even dangerous. The charge sheet is long: his opposition to votes for women (later regretted); as First Lord of the Admiralty during the first world war, pressing on with the Dardanelles operation long after it should have been abandoned; sending the brutal Black and Tans into Ireland as war secretary; re-joining the Gold Standard as chancellor of the exchequer in the 1920s; backing the awful Edward VIII during the abdication crisis (also later regretted); vainly resisting Indian self-government (Churchill held conventional Victorian views about the superiority and obligations of the “white races” that he never truly recanted). And so on.
So I'd say yes, it does address it.
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#8Also this new biography was favourably reviewed in the Economist: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/10/06/andrew-r... (probably behind a paywall)
> His biography demonstrates its subject’s greatness but manages to make him lovable, too So, nothing about the racist, imperialist side? Yet another hagiography?
Even Roy Jenkins (former old Labour cabinet minister) superb biography of Churchill concludes he was the greatest Prime Minister of the 20th century. He draws that conclusion even after pointing out Churchill's many flaws and mistakes. What human isn't flawed? Roosevelt, de Gaulle, Ghandi, all had flaws and racism too.
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> His biography demonstrates its subject’s greatness but manages to make him lovable, too So, nothing about the racist, imperialist side? Yet another hagiography?
Even Roy Jenkins (former old Labour cabinet minister) superb biography of Churchill concludes he was the greatest Prime Minister of the 20th century. He draws that conclusion even after pointing out Churchill's many flaws and mistakes. What human isn't flawed? Roosevelt, de Gaulle, Ghandi, all had flaws and racism too.
Absolutely. The greater the man, the greater the flaws. Yet we still need heroes from history to look up to, and we can't judge solely by modern standards.
By analogy consider the contemporaneous movie The Wizard of Oz (1939). It's enjoyable and arguably morally-improving to watch. We are the better for it. Yet a great deal of immorality existed behind the scenes:
https://www.ranker.com/list/wizard-of-oz-behind-the-scenes-s...
Re: A New Biography of Churchill
#10While we can praise Churchill for many things, we should never gloss over the fact that he favored eugenics and was deeply racist [1]. For instance, he's quoted as saying "I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race... has come in and taken their place."
[1]: https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/ae55v8/winston-church...