Journal of the International Churchill Society - Winston Churchill

More documents

Recommendations

Info

John G. Plumpton The Writing of "Lord Randolph Churchill" An Immense Literary Value British historian E. H. Carr's dictum to study the historian before we study his history is particularly appropriate in the case of Winston Churchill's biography of his father, Lord Randolph Churchill. One cannot fully appreciate either the biography or the biographer without understanding the relationship between the father and son. Violet Bonham Carter, a close friend of young Winston's tells us that ... it was the image of his father which dominated and obsessed his being . . . and even the icy detachment and indifference of Lord Randolph failed to destroy the proud and passionate allegiance of his son . . . Until the end he worshipped at the altar of his Unknown Father. 1 In his own writings Winston provides us with considerable evidence of filial hero-worship. In Thoughts and Adventures, he writes: The greatest and most powerful influence in my early life was of course my father. . . . I conceived an intense admiration and affection for him; and, after his death, for his memory. I read industriously almost every word he had ever spoken and learnt by heart large portions of his speeches. 2 In My Early Life, he relates that his father "seemed to own the key to everything or almost everything worth having." 3 If Lord Randolph Churchill had lived a normal lifespan, he might have smothered his more illustrious son's political career in its infancy but, as it was, the father's premature death was a major motivating factor in Winston's decision to "pursue his [father's] aims and vindicate his memory." In a cogent study of Churchill's personality, psychoanalyst Anthony Storr offers a psychological theory for understanding Winston's heroworship of his father: "Children whose emotional needs have been insufficiently satisfied react to the lack with idealization on the one hand, and hostility on the other." 4 Winston Churchill's life was an example of that paradox. His aggression, stubbornness, resentment of authority and rebelliousness were apparent early in his life and continued throughout a tumultuous political career, culminating in the 1940 cry of "we shall never surrender." On the other hand, his filial idealization was obsessive and his early life was devoted to exonerating his father politically. The political careers of father and son followed similar paths. Winston adopted much of his father's political philosophy and pursued the same capricious and independent relationship toward the discipline of political parties. One of his proudest moments occurred when he took the oath as Chancellor of the Exchequer, wearing the same robes worn by his father in that office. Early in his career he performed an essentially cathartic exercise which helped ". . .to know my father, which would have been a joy to me." That exercise was to write the two-volume biography, Lord Randolph Churchill (Woods A8). With the help of Lord Rosebery, Winston persuaded his father's literary executors to entrust the task of producing the official biography to him. Rosebery, a close friend of Lord Randolph's and a valued counsellor of Winston's, perceptively noted that ... the plan was beset with difficulties. A son, who hardly knew his father as a public man or not at all, writing his father's life; the story only ten years old and full of delicacies and resentments; many survivors of those times whose toes it was impossible to avoid treading upon, still in existence. . . . And the author had normal animosities by leaving the party, and had to write with delicacy about both parties in view of past and present connections. . . . 5 Winston's position within society and political circles gave him unique access to his father's political friends and foes, most of whom still lived. Notwithstanding Lord Rosebery's caveat, a number of those "toes" assisted the author, Joseph Chamberlain provided immeasurable assistance. Arthur Balfour, then Prime Minister, offered to help in 1902 but, two years later, he wrote an apology for providing nothing and claimed he had conducted an unsuccessful hunt for correspondence. He The Balfourian Parliament (1906) Cartoon by E. T. Reed, 1901 did, however, ask Winston to delete a passage about his involvement in an exchange between Salisbury and Gladstone in 1885 over the possibility of granting some measure of self-government to Ireland. Churchill agreed but the substance of the incident remained in the book. Lord Salisbury, with little time left to live, and Sir Michael Hicks- Beach, gave Winston access to their correspondence with Lord Randolph. W. St. John Brodrick, Secretary of State for India, allowed the use of state papers on India but suggested that Winston obtain the permission of King Edward VII to use papers and letters on Lord Randolph's correspondence with and about members of the Royal Family. Churchill agreed and subsequently received permission to use the relevant documents. Winston had hoped that his greatest assistance would come from the Earl of Rosebery. He later wrote in My Early Life: I used to go to see Lord Rosebery in the later years of his life because apart from the respect I bore this distinguished man, I loved to hear him talk about my father. I had the feeling of getting nearer my father when 1 talked with his intimate and illustrious friend. 3 But Winston's relationship with Rosebery was not always smooth. Ambivalent about the entire project, Rosebery reneged on some of his promises and engaged in a "tiff" with Winston over the use of the word "scug" in a planned introductory essay to the biography. "Scug" was an Eton slang term that Winston considered derogatory and unsuited to the biography written by a son. Rosebery's essay was subsequently published as a separate volume. 6 On publication in January 1906, Lord Randolph Churchill received considerable attention as might be expected of a work by a rising young politician with an established literary reputation about one of the most 14
emarkable leaders of the previous generation. Readers were eager to know whether filial bias would distort the author's judgment and whether Winston's own political jousts with Balfour and Joseph Chamberlain would distort his perspective. The biography was both admired and denounced because it showed Lord Randolph participating in the game of politics for the sheer pleasure of it. Admiration was extended for the clear and frank portrayal of its subject's extravagent behavior, but the biography's claim that Lord Randolph made the Conservative Party more democratic and popular was challenged. To many readers Lord Randolph was a cynical politician who believed that the gyrations of political parties had value for their own sake. "Had he been in America, he would have proved himself a 'boss' among ward-politicians." 7 American reviewers liked the inside story aspect of the book — how it explored the way in which a nation is governed, and how it was based on letters and documents unavailable to the public. Winston was given credit for using the documents honestly and with openly portraying his father's faults and errors. It was, to many observers, one of the great political biographies of the age. From the perspective of time, however, scholars have been less enthusiastic. British historian J.H. Plumb has charged that Churchill deliberately doctored the evidence in order to whitewash Lord Randolph's actions, that he quietly suppressed some documents and made little effort to obtain documents in the possession of others, and that he smothered Randolph's prose in order to place his father in a better light. 8 Although Winston claimed that "there is nothing more to tell," many feel that the biography lacks balance because it dwells so much on the political machinations and touches too lightly on the personal and psychological aspects of Lord Randolph's life. This approach is quite consistent with the tradition of 19th century historians, who were chroniclers and not primarily interpreters of psychological factors. It also results from Winston's propinquity of time and status to the events and persons involved. Many protaganists in the story were still alive and active, and belonged to the society in which Winston moved. Indeed, Balfour was Prime Minsiter and Edward was King! Churchill's interpretation of specific events are open to challenge. The entire story of the snubbing of Randolph by the then-Prince of Wales is passed off with: "Lord Randolph incurred the deep displeasure of a great personage." It is also claimed that while . . . this misfortune produced in Lord Randolph characteristics which afterwards hindered or injured his public work, it was also his spur. Without it he might have wasted a dozen years in frivolous and expensive pursuit of a silly world of fashion; without it he would probably never have developed popular sympathies or the courage to champion democratic causes. 9 While modern historians agree that the incident left Lord Randolph with a contempt for "society," they hesitate to accept the argument that it converted him into a champion of democratic causes. A modern reader, who requires the historian to ask the question "why," will note that there are many areas into which Winston did not delve. He did not consider why his father's behavior was so at variance with Lord Randolph's claim that "public life has not great charm for me, as I am naturally very quiet, and hate bother and publicity." He did not attempt to reconcile the paradox of the newly-enfranchised masses, working-class men on the edge of poverty, voting for the party of aristocrats, landowners and bankers. Nor did he study the steady growth of Toryism in radical Birmingham. He did, however, deal with a number of issues in detail and the reader can evaluate the book's worth through consideration of some of these issues in light of more recent evidence. There is little disagreement with Winston over his father's contributions in popularizing the ideas of "Tory Democracy." Although critics are less kind regarding the merits of the Fourth Party, they do agree that Lord Randolph's personal popularity caused the Tories to become more acceptable to the masses. While Churchill cites the Dartford speech of 2 October 1886 as a reliable source of his father's commitment to a Tory Democratic program, others have had difficulty in delineating any integrated political philosophy from Lord Randolph's speeches. Robert Blake is one of the most critical commentators: The truth is that Churchill had no real policy. He talked about Tory Democracy and the importance of the working-class Tories, but he showed no sign of having any program for them. 10 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? Sir Michael Hicks-Beach was an influential member of the Salisbury government, so powerful, according to Winston, that "had he made common cause with Churchill, the Ministry would surely have fallen." But Winston makes no attempt to deal with Randolph's failure to appreciate the potential influence of his friend. What may have been a fatal miscalculation by Randolph was a major omission by his biographer. Its exclusion may have resulted from the fact that in the event of a withdrawal by Lord Rosebery, Hicks-Beach would have been Arthur Balfour (below) and the legendary Joe Chamberlain (right) gave WSC significant assistance, although both had been political opponents. Rosebery later published his own "Lord Randolph" 15
Page 1 and 2: Journal of the International Church
Page 3 and 4: BUSINESS OFFICES Australia: Peter M
Page 5 and 6: YOUR INVITATION TO VANCOUVER: OCTOB
Page 7 and 8: "Let Us Command the Moment to Remai
Page 9 and 10: memories of my parents are chiefly
Page 11 and 12: CHARTWELL Bold Rockwork and Falls D
Page 13: The New Bibliography In the new Bib
Page 17 and 18: Edited by John G. Plumplom 130 Coll
Page 19 and 20: k AFRICAN VISION KEYNOTES AT MALTA
Page 21 and 22: and unofficial histories, memoirs,
Page 23 and 24: "prime cause" of World War I, and s
Page 25 and 26: Q. Can you determine if Churchill s
Page 27 and 28: NEW CHURCHILL NEEDLEPOINT ICS STORE

Journal of the International Churchill Society - Winston Churchill

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?