The History Book Club discussion

These are the posts for the final week of the My Early Life discussion - 08/18/08 to 08/24/08.

Topics in discussion for the above week were as follows:

August 18
Chp. XXVIII.The Khaki Election – 355
Chp. XXIX. The House of Commons - 364

At the conclusion, we may want to also discuss the Introduction
By William Manchester and Preface by the Author

Hello Everyone,

THIS IS THE LAST WEEK!

For the week of August 18th through and including August 24th, we are reading the next 50 pages of My Early Life. This thread will discuss the following chapters (XXVIII, XXIX, THE MANCHESTER INTRODUCTION, AND AUTHOR’S PREFACE): pages 355 through 372 AND VII TO XXIII).

Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers.

We are happy to have your participation.

You can always still get your book and post to the specific thread where you happen to be. There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us even after discussion has completed. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

August 18
Chp. XXVIII. The Khaki Election – 355
Chp. XXIX. The House ofCommons - 364

At the conclusion, we may want to also discuss the Introduction
by William Manchester and Preface by the Author (Winston Churchill).

Just as a reminder, this is a no spoiler thread; various supplemental threads are opened up for "open discussion" and there is also the Off-Topic Cafe for discussions that may veer off of Winston Churchill altogether.

Thank you,

Bentley

POSTED BY OLDESQ:

Well, all of you who are making this journey with us- we reach the last week of our sojourn! Feel free to continue to add to the other threads and jump in on this one, but here is the last hurrah.

You have to hand it to Churchill. I think the last Chapter of My Early Life is pitch perfect. First, he leaves us wanting more- especially the comment regarding tariffs; a real cliff hanger if ever there was one. Second, Churchill closes the circle on several experiences in his life. He makes his first forays in speaking before the House (with a nod to the fact that it is from the same place that his father made his resignation). We learn that Churchill is learning about speaking from the heart, about his world view, about political loyalties and we are confident that he will continue learning. He lets us know that Clemmie is just beyond the horizon. He seems to have fully formed his thoughts about agressively pursuing war but just as agressively seeking a just peace- foreshadowing WWI - and even he doesn't know about WWII. Do you agree that this is quite a satisfactory end to this tale?

Oldesq
Message Edited by Oldesq on 08-18-2008 11:07 AM

POSTED BY BENTLEY:

Oldesq wrote:
Well, all of you who are making this journey with us- we reach the last week of our sojourn! Feel free to continue to add to the other threads and jusmp in on this one, but here is the last hurrah.

You have to hand it to Churchill. I think the last Chapter of My Early Life is pitch perfect. First, he leaves us wanting more- especially the comment regarding tariffs; a real cliff hanger if ever there was one. Second, Churchill closes the circle on several experiences in his life. He makes his first forays in speaking before the House (with a nod to the fact that it is from the same place that his father made his resignation). We learn that Churchill is learning about speaking from the heart, about his world view, about political loyalties and we are confident that he will continue learning. He lets us know that Clemmie is just beyond the horizon. He seems to have fully formed his thoughts about agressively pursuing war but just as agressively seeking a just peace- foreshadowing WWI - and even he doesn't know about WWII. Do you agree that this is quite a satisfactory end to this tale?

_______________________________________________________________

Oldesq
Thank you Oldesq for co-championing this journey. It has been a great book. It was terrific that Winston was able to "begin" his own brilliant career where his father had "ended" his. He is like the Phoenix rising from the ashes. And since we know what happened to Winston; we can be assured that his career did not go up in flames like his father's did. I think he learned something from his father here: what not to do.

I want to thank those folks who were on this journey with us and contributed to the chapter and supplemental threads discussions. We have learned a lot together. For those folks who joined for ancillary discussions only on the Off Topic threads; we hope you will join us for The Histories by Herodotus.

It is interesting to have read Winston Churchill's writings and speeches outside of this book and see how his opinions and thoughts mature and modify over time. Oldesq, I often think that how one begins one life makes all of the difference; one way or the other.

~Bentley

POSTED BY TIMBUKTU (VANESSA)

What could be better than a "we lived happily ever after" ending?

Last night, I was thinking of my last post in which I said that Winston's admiration for his father made sense as he had probably inherited a lot of his good points. Then I realized that this may be the point. When I was a child my father would say "those who belittle others only belittle themselves". How true!

My assumption that his father must have had good traits because Winston had good traits, I think, demonstrates the truth of my father's statement. Today judging and denigrating one's parents is common practice. But when you denigrate your parents you are really denigrating yourself. The opposite is true as well. By praising his father Winston is saying he comes from good stock. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. He actually does make it clear that his father was not loving but by not downgrading his ability and worth he builds his own. I think this is a good thing to remember!

Also, if my memory is correct, didn't Randolph give up power for principle? I think I remember that he was sticking to his guns, backing something that he felt was good for the country although not popular. Am I right there? If so, it's a truly admirable quality that Winston emulated.

POSTED BY TIMBUKTU (VANESSA):

And... thank you Bentley and Oldesq for all of your incredible work. It's a wonderful feeling to know absolutely nothing about a topic and then to immerse yourself and come out the other end knowing...well something! It's been fun.

POSTED BY OLDESQ:

Timbuktu1

Thank you for your kind words but the real work was all done by Bentley. On that note, I was telling Bentley how many times in recent weeks I found myself saying to family and friends, "Did you know that Winston Churchill . . . ." This read was a wonderful experience and I learned so much from it. And I think your point Timbuktu1 is very well taken that when you see the best in your parents and emulate that it can only turn out better than placing blame for ruining your life.

POSTED BY BENTLEY:

Timbuktu1 wrote:
What could be better than a "we lived happily ever after" ending?

Last night, I was thinking of my last post in which I said that Winston's admiration for his father made sense as he had probably inherited a lot of his good points. Then I realized that this may be the point. When I was a child my father would say "those who belittle others only belittle themselves". How true!

My assumption that his father must have had good traits because Winston had good traits, I think, demonstrates the truth of my father's statement. Today judging and denigrating one's parents is common practice. But when you denigrate your parents you are really denigrating yourself. The opposite is true as well. By praising his father Winston is saying he comes from good stock. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. He actually does make it clear that his father was not loving but by not downgrading his ability and worth he builds his own. I think this is a good thing to remember!

Also, if my memory is correct, didn't Randolph give up power for principle? I think I remember that he was sticking to his guns, backing something that he felt was good for the country although not popular. Am I right there? If so, it's a truly admirable quality that Winston emulated.
_____________________________________________________________

BENTLEY RESPONDED:

Good points. I am not sure that there wasn't a political motivation for what Randolph did if my memory serves me right.

BENTLEY RESPONDED:

Timbuktu1 wrote:

And... thank you Bentley and Oldesq for all of your incredible work. It's a wonderful feeling to know absolutely nothing about a topic and then to immerse yourself and come out the other end knowing...well something! It's been fun.


Thank you too Timbuktu. I think we all learned so much from reading this book; it actually opened vistas and a new understanding of a variety of subjects beyond Churchill.
I enjoyed the discussion of MEL too.

~Bentley

BENTLEY RESPONDED TO OLDESQ:

Oldesq wrote:
Timbuktu1

Thank you for your kind words but the real work was all done by Bentley. On that note, I was telling Bentley how many times in recent weeks I found myself saying to family and friends, "Did you know that Winston Churchill . . . ." This read was a wonderful experience and I learned so much from it. And I think your point Timbuktu1 is very well taken that when you see the best in your parents and emulate that it can only turn out better than placing blame for ruining your life.

______________________________________________________________

Thank you Oldesq but it was great having a co-volunteer in this together; I actually feel that Timbuktu was even more than the average poster and contributed so much; I think we were a trifecta. What do you think?

~Bentley

TIMBUKTU POSTED:

bentley wrote:
Oldesq wrote:
Timbuktu1

Thank you for your kind words but the real work was all done by Bentley. On that note, I was telling Bentley how many times in recent weeks I found myself saying to family and friends, "Did you know that Winston Churchill . . . ." This read was a wonderful experience and I learned so much from it. And I think your point Timbuktu1 is very well taken that when you see the best in your parents and emulate that it can only turn out better than placing blame for ruining your life.
Thank you Oldesq but it was great having a co-volunteer in this together; I actually feel that Timbuktu was even more than the average poster and contributed so much; I think we were a trifecta. What do you think?
~Bentley

____________________________________________________________

Gee, thanks Bentley but the pleasure was all mine!

I just checked Wikipedia to make sure I remembered correctly what made Lord Randolph resign. It's interesting in light of your comment about the military-industrial complex. He resigned because as Chancellor of the Exchequer he would not rubber stamp the demand for more funds for military expenses. I think Winston saw this as a heroic and self-sacrificing act.

BENTLEY RESPONDED:


Oldesq wrote:
Timbuktu1

Thank you for your kind words but the real work was all done by Bentley. On that note, I was telling Bentley how many times in recent weeks I found myself saying to family and friends, "Did you know that Winston Churchill . . . ." This read was a wonderful experience and I learned so much from it. And I think your point Timbuktu1 is very well taken that when you see the best in your parents and emulate that it can only turn out better than placing blame for ruining your life.

Thank you Oldesq but it was great having a co-volunteer in this together; I actually feel that Timbuktu was even more than the average poster and contributed so much; I think we were a trifecta. What do you think?
~Bentley

___________________________________________________________

TIMBUKTU RESPONDED:

Gee, thanks Bentley but the pleasure was all mine!

I just checked Wikipedia to make sure I remembered correctly what made Lord Randolph resign. It's interesting in light of your comment about the military-industrial complex. He resigned because as Chancellor of the Exchequer he would not rubber stamp the demand for more funds for military expenses. I think Winston saw this as a heroic and self-sacrificing act.

Thank you for the added explanation. Interesting. I think Winston saw it that way too. I am not sure I viewed Lord Randolph and the act in the same way as Winston; but I absolutely understand the point you have made and agree Winston probably felt this way. Who doesn't want to believe the very best about their parents; Winston was not the exception.
~Bentley

TIMBUKTU POSTED:

I'm interested in how you do view it Bentley. What is the other POV?

BENTLEY RESPONDED:

Timbuktu,

My take is that Lord Randolph was a little too big for his britches; I remember the comments that Teddy Roosevelt made about him after he read the book that Winston had written about his father.

Lord Randolph was not untactful on the whole; but was having some problems with his colleagues in terms of policy; he was constantly questioning the leadership of Lord Salisbury (so that also was not going over very well). He was also thwarting Salisbury by trying to achieve some tactical alliances with the Liberal Unionists. Earlier he had been a thorn in Salisbury's management style and he was only allowed in because of his popularity. There was an underlying current in Salisbury's and Randolph's relationship.

Winston's take on what happened: (The Churchill Center)

"Regarding the most traumatic event in Lord Randolph's political life, his resignation from the Cabinet, Winston cites irreconcilable philosophical differences between his father and Tory leader Lord Salisbury, a cynical willingness by Salisbury to sacrifice his opinions to get his way, and tactical miscalculations by Lord Randolph as the principal causes. Winston believed that his father could not have invited the support of potential allies like Joseph Chamberlain because "so strictly did he interpret the idea of Cabinet loyalty." But Winston must have known that Lord Randolph was in secret communication with Chamberlain on budget items. Why did he not divulge this information??

Source: The Churchill Center: The Writing of Lord Randolph Churchill by John G. Plumpton

~Bentley

TIMBUKTU POSTED:

bentley wrote:
Timbuktu,

My take is that Lord Randolph was a little too big for his britches; I remember the comments that Teddy Roosevelt made about him after he read the book that Winston had written about his father.

Lord Randolph was not untactful on the whole; but was having some problems with his colleagues in terms of policy; he was constantly questioning the leadership of Lord Salisbury (so that also was not going over very well). He was also thwarting Salisbury by trying to achieve some tactical alliances with the Liberal Unionists. Earlier he had been a thorn in Salisbury's management style and he was only allowed in because of his popularity. There was an underlying current in Salisbury's and Randolph's relationship.

Winston's take on what happened: (The Churchill Center)

"Regarding the most traumatic event in Lord Randolph's political life, his resignation from the Cabinet, Winston cites irreconcilable philosophical differences between his father and Tory leader Lord Salisbury, a cynical willingness by Salisbury to sacrifice his opinions to get his way, and tactical miscalculations by Lord Randolph as the principal causes. Winston believed that his father could not have invited the support of potential allies like Joseph Chamberlain because "so strictly did he interpret the idea of Cabinet loyalty." But Winston must have known that Lord Randolph was in secret communication with Chamberlain on budget items. Why did he not divulge this information??

Source: The Churchill Center: The Writing of Lord Randolph Churchill by John G. Plumpton

~Bentley

_____________________________________________________________

TIMBUKTU RESPONDED:

I'm not sure I understand. It sounds as though he had political enemies, which I imagine is inevitable in any situation. Was it that he refused to bend on this issue of funding the military? It seems that it might still stand that he was firm in his principles. Was it that he was too liberal to be a Tory? Either way, I can see how his firmness could be admired, in the same way that Winston's resolve was admirable. But of course Winston switched parties.

BENTLEY POSTED:

Timbuktu,

My take is that Lord Randolph was a little too big for his britches; I remember the comments that Teddy Roosevelt made about him after he read the book that Winston had written about his father.

Lord Randolph was not untactful on the whole; but was having some problems with his colleagues in terms of policy; he was constantly questioning the leadership of Lord Salisbury (so that also was not going over very well). He was also thwarting Salisbury by trying to achieve some tactical alliances with the Liberal Unionists. Earlier he had been a thorn in Salisbury's management style and he was only allowed in because of his popularity. There was an underlying current in Salisbury's and Randolph's relationship.

Winston's take on what happened: (The Churchill Center)

"Regarding the most traumatic event in Lord Randolph's political life, his resignation from the Cabinet, Winston cites irreconcilable philosophical differences between his father and Tory leader Lord Salisbury, a cynical willingness by Salisbury to sacrifice his opinions to get his way, and tactical miscalculations by Lord Randolph as the principal causes. Winston believed that his father could not have invited the support of potential allies like Joseph Chamberlain because "so strictly did he interpret the idea of Cabinet loyalty." But Winston must have known that Lord Randolph was in secret communication with Chamberlain on budget items. Why did he not divulge this information??

Source: The Churchill Center: The Writing of Lord Randolph Churchill by John G. Plumpton

~Bentley

I'm not sure I understand. It sounds as though he had political enemies, which I imagine is inevitable in any situation. Was it that he refused to bend on this issue of funding the military? It seems that it might still stand that he was firm in his principles. Was it that he was too liberal to be a Tory? Either way, I can see how his firmness could be admired, in the same way that Winston's resolve was admirable. But of course Winston switched parties.

____________________________________________________________

BENTLEY RESPONDED:

My take is that Lord Randolph was a disagreeable man on all counts. Salisbury did not like him one bit; in fact he hated him and what he was doing behind the scenes undermining his leadership. Military funding was just a ploy; not the real reason for the discontent. I respect your views on Lord Randolph but I do not see anything admirable in the man and disagree with Winston's view too. If a man has syphillis, I think it says it all when they are married and have children. Also, even if you could put that aside, he treated his own son as a pariah and treating a little child like that (not even going across the street to see him when he was in school) is unforgiveable. I think Lord Randolph got what he deserved.

I agree with Theodore Roosevelt when he read Winston Churchill's book trying to vindicate his father, Lord Randolph: "a clever, tactful and rather cheap and vulgar life of that clever, tactful and rather cheap and vulgar egotist".

I too think that Lord Randolph was clever, tactful, cheap, vulgar and an egotist. Aside from that there wasn't much wrong with the fellow Lord Salisbury did what he had to do without being blamed for doing it. He said that he gladly accepted Lord Randolph's resignation; Randolph handed Salisbury what he wanted on a silver platter.

~Bentley



Message Edited by bentley on 08-19-2008 10:23 AM

OLDESQ POSTED:

My take was that Lord Randolph had said one too many times that he was going to take his ball and go home. He was apparently shocked when Salisbury agreed! The Gilbert biography and the Young Winston film potray the event as coming as a complete surprise.

BENTLEY POSTED:

Oldesq wrote:
My take was that Lord Randolph had said one too many times that he was going to take his ball and go home. He was apparently shocked when Salisbury agreed! The Gilbert biography and the Young Winston film potray the event as coming as a complete surprise.

BENTLEY RESPONDED:

It is funny; but Randolph being an egotist would be totally surprised. Egotists always are; they always think they are doing things for others when they are doing things to champion themselves. I love to watch folks who disagree because they are ostensibly championing others; 99% of the time they are doing it to champion themselves and hear themselves talk. It would be so like Lord Randolph (who I have to admit I do not admire).
Randolph thought he was hot stuff and that he had more clout and power than he did; when he did resign and I agree with you he really never thought Salisbury would say gladly; he was shocked at the turn of events and there was no clamoring to bring him back.

These were his tactics and Lord Salisbury read him well and took advantage of the situation. It could not have happened to a better man.

I do think that Salisbury then later on saw the man's demise and maybe felt a little guilty and thought he had a hand in his destruction by taking Randolph's resignation. I think that is why he reached out to his son (Winston Churchill) in the way he did.
~Bentley

TIMBUKTU POSTED:


Thanks for the explanation, Bentley. I really didn't have any idea. I only "knew" him through Winston's description. Now I understand better.

TIMBUKTU POSTED:

Oldesq wrote:
My take was that Lord Randolph had said one too many times that he was going to take his ball and go home. He was apparently shocked when Salisbury agreed! The Gilbert biography and the Young Winston film potray the event as coming as a complete surprise.

_______________________________________________________________

Yes, Oldesq, the Young Winston depiction made it seem as though he was shocked. I had the impression from the film that he was doing a good thing and had been wronged by the Parliament. That's why I was curious about the other POV as these issues always have another pov!

VA-BBOOMER POSTED (VIRGINIA):

Timbuktu1 wrote:
Oldesq wrote:
My take was that Lord Randolph had said one too many times that he was going to take his ball and go home. He was apparently shocked when Salisbury agreed! The Gilbert biography and the Young Winston film potray the event as coming as a complete surprise.

Yes, Oldesq, the Young Winston depiction made it seem as though he was shocked. I had the impression from the film that he was doing a good thing and had been wronged by the Parliament. That's why I was curious about the other POV as these issues always have another pov!
________________________________________________________

I agree with the 'too big for his britches' quote about Lord Randolph; his actions seem to always be motivated by his enormous ego. And he was shocked that anyone, like Salisbury, would challenge him on anything.

I think Winston was caught in the middle of this; his father was so busy doing his 'thing' and flashing that ego that his son was badly neglected and Winston got to see how harmful and destructive an over-inflated ego can be. But any great statesman has to have an ego in order to have the confidence necessary to lead. Winston had that ego. But I feel he never totally forgot how he was brought up, the good spoiled upper-class, and the neglectful bad, and his shaky times at school in non-military subjects, etc. From what I see, without reading further about Lord Randolph, he had no memory or knowledge of anything except his chutzpah on everything!

Am I being too harsh on Lord Randolph?

TIMBUKTU POSTED:

In case anyone is interested...

I rented a DVD from Netflix, The Jack Paar Collection: Disc 3. I wanted something light. Turned out to revolve around Churchill! One episode has Richard Burton reciting Churchill's speeches and telling Churchill anecdotes. Another episode had a very long and drunken interview with Randolph. They also discussed a Churchill centre in Missouri!

The above posts were the week's postings. Only posts of current members will be brought over.