What do you think?
Rate this book
The Second World War #1
The Gathering Storm
Winston Churchill was not only a statesman and leader of historic proportions, he also possessed substantial literary talents. These two factors combine to make The Gathering Storm a unique work. The first volume of Churchill's memoirs, this selection is broken into two parts. The first, From War to War, consists of Churchill's critical observations on the settlement of World War I and its place in the causes of the Second World War. The second volume contains letters and memoranda from the British government--of which Churchill was part--as the country plunged unprepared into war. This stands as the best of history: written as it was made, by the man who made it.
752 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1948
About the author
Winston S. Churchill
1,212 books2,337 followersSir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can) was a British politician who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1940 to 1945, and again from 1951 to 1955. A noted statesman, orator and strategist, Churchill was also an officer in the British Army. A prolific author, he won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1953 for his own historical writings, "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."
Out of respect for the well-known American author, Winston Churchill, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial in any works that he authored.
Out of respect for the well-known American author, Winston Churchill, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial in any works that he authored.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 456 reviews
December 20, 2009
My favourite moment in any James Bond film occurs near the end of Octopussy. Roger Moore has figured out that the tactical nuclear weapon is hidden at the circus and is about to go off, killing hundreds of thousands of people. The event might also trigger World War III. He has a few minutes to act.
He charges into the ring during the middle of the performance, dressed as a clown, and tries to get to the bomb. The bad guys, also dressed as circus performers, do what they can to stop him. The audience assumes it's all part of the act, and roars its appreciation. Then, suddenly, they see the very business-like device, and realise that it's not a joke. There's total silence as Bond desperately works to disarm it.
In the first volume of Churchill's history of World War II, we get the real-life version. Churchill can see Germany rearming and becoming stronger, and he understands what Hitler's policies will lead to. He tries to warn Britain and the rest of the world, and no one pays him any attention. He's being alarmist. There's little evidence that Hitler wants anything more than what, really, is Germany's right. It's not clear that Nazism is all bad. (I once found a rather startling book at a yard sale, called Germany: Fascist or Soviet?. The author, writing in the mid-30s, had considerable problems deciding which was the lesser evil). Various things happen, which in hindsight could hardly have been plainer indicators of what was to come, and Churchill still can't get anyone to take him seriously.
History has now, of course, determined that Churchill was a hero, and he is routinely invoked to justify any number of decisions. He was wheeled out again before the start of the Iraq war. A Chamberlain-style policy of appeasement isn't going to help, explained Dubya. What would Churchill do? (Maybe his speech-writers also considered "What would Jesus do?", and decided it was the wrong occasion). Personally, I rather doubt that the mature Churchill, who always had an eye for the big picture, would have allowed himself to be diverted by this comparative sideshow. But why don't you read the book and decide for yourself? It's astonishingly gripping stuff.
He charges into the ring during the middle of the performance, dressed as a clown, and tries to get to the bomb. The bad guys, also dressed as circus performers, do what they can to stop him. The audience assumes it's all part of the act, and roars its appreciation. Then, suddenly, they see the very business-like device, and realise that it's not a joke. There's total silence as Bond desperately works to disarm it.
In the first volume of Churchill's history of World War II, we get the real-life version. Churchill can see Germany rearming and becoming stronger, and he understands what Hitler's policies will lead to. He tries to warn Britain and the rest of the world, and no one pays him any attention. He's being alarmist. There's little evidence that Hitler wants anything more than what, really, is Germany's right. It's not clear that Nazism is all bad. (I once found a rather startling book at a yard sale, called Germany: Fascist or Soviet?. The author, writing in the mid-30s, had considerable problems deciding which was the lesser evil). Various things happen, which in hindsight could hardly have been plainer indicators of what was to come, and Churchill still can't get anyone to take him seriously.
History has now, of course, determined that Churchill was a hero, and he is routinely invoked to justify any number of decisions. He was wheeled out again before the start of the Iraq war. A Chamberlain-style policy of appeasement isn't going to help, explained Dubya. What would Churchill do? (Maybe his speech-writers also considered "What would Jesus do?", and decided it was the wrong occasion). Personally, I rather doubt that the mature Churchill, who always had an eye for the big picture, would have allowed himself to be diverted by this comparative sideshow. But why don't you read the book and decide for yourself? It's astonishingly gripping stuff.
June 20, 2008
First, some background: I found this entire series at a garage sale in the original hardcover book-of-the-month club format for $1.00 each, and decided to give them a try. Both of the World Wars have always held a philosophical interest for me, but at the same time, I had little interest in the actual course and strategies of particular battles or in the nature of equipment and machinery used. Since these seemed to be the primary subject matter of most books about either of the wars, I have always shied away from them.
But I have always had lots of questions about both wars. As far as the first, what was it about? Any thinking person would have to admit there's a lot more to these millions of dead soldiers than the assassination of an archduke, or some vague statement about tensions being high.
As far as the second, I've always wanted to know how Germany, in such a state of defeat after the first world war, came to be such a dominant, threatening power again so quickly. More importantly, I have never been able to understand the mindset of the Nazis, or how they came to power in the first place. But especially the mindset.
Without going into too much detail here, I will say that I think this is extremely important, both to our future and our present. There is a quantitative difference in Nazi Germany and anyone else you want to categorize as evil. When I try to think about them and really understand them, I find myself facing a mindset that I just can't penetrate. Yet these people were as human as I am. I think until we really learn to understand how an entire group of people came to be like this, we cannot seriously believe we are doing anything to prevent it happening again, to any or all of us. And by "seriously understand," I do not mean saying over and over again that we hate them and we will never allow this to happen again. After all, history never repeats itself in exactly the same way. Yes, we can all avow that we hate the Nazis, but the next time this mindset reasserts itself, it won't be called "Nazism."
So, all that being said, I have to say that this book answered many of my questions and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. I'm not going to pretend that I wasn't bored sometimes and in need of some straight fiction: after all, the book is over 700 pages and some of the diplomatic maneuverings, particularly, get rather boring.
The book is a detailed account of how it came to be that Germany, defeated after WW1, came to be the major power it was at the beginning of WW2. Churchill describes the attitudes of the different victor countries of WW1, the beginnings of the threats from Germany and how they were regarded by these victor countries, who had vowed that "never again" would so much blood be shed as in WW1.
He describes the state of Germany after the first war, the kind of government that was installed there, and, as best he can, the attitude of its people. He describes how the presence of a huge Communist state, Russia, affected the mindset of every country in Western and Eastern Europe. He describes, more in an indirect way, how the catastrophic evil of all the lives lost in WW1 had a profound effect on the way people thought about things, and how this eventually led to the even greater evil of WW2.
And, of course, he describes the steps, small at first, but increasingly bold as time went on, whereby Germany grew herself from an easily defeated rebel state into the powerhouse that it was at the beginning of WW2. The steps are interesting because, for each one, there are always strong arguments for not doing anything about Germany's actions. Churchill gives the arguments, despite he himself not believing them at the time.
This, to me, is the mark of a great history. Churchill could have easily given only his own arguments and stopped there. Instead, he gives us all of the perspectives. True, he calls attention more to his own, which he of course considers to be right. But he never really belittles his opponents by refusing to give any credence to their point of view.
Neville Chamberlain, for instance, is regarded in popular culture today as a complete and utter fool. Never mind that in Churchill's history we see that, if he was such a fool, the English people were the bigger fools for cheering on all of the actions for which he is today excoriated. Yes, Churchill disagreed with him vigorously and publicly, but he never lost respect for the man, and he always understood that he was doing what he thought was right.
Churchill gives a much truer picture of him than popular culture does. He shows, in particular, that there did come a point when Chamberlain realized that something had to be done, and at that point Chamberlain swung into action. And Churchill supported him through the whole thing. It bears noting, by the way, that when Chamberlain did begin to change his policies, he was by no means wholly supported by the British electorate. It was a tough battle, and he fought it.
Meanwhile, things are changing everywhere. The free countries are not really united, neither within themselves nor with the other free countries. No one really knows what the best course of action, what the right and fair course of action, should be. And all the while Germany keeps her own counsel, and gives good, or at least arguable, reasons to the world for everything she does. Without some sort of firm philosophical outlook, the free countries are stuck in a kind of tireless vacillation.
The book ends with Germany's invasion of Norway, and the inability of the English military to do anything about it, despite promises to the contrary. Immediately afterward, Germany begins its invasion of France, England's last remaining ally. Chamberlain is voted out of office, and Churchill is installed as Prime Minister. So go the last pages.
So far as criticisms go, the book is simply very long. I don't know if anything can be done about this, as there is clearly a lot of ground to cover if you want to be thorough about the whole thing. Especially for a subject matter like this, it is very important to understand that everything was done in "baby steps."
Another criticism I have is along similar lines. Obviously, there are a lot of important people involved in every facet of the politics and relationships between all the countries. There are diplomats from each country, members of the government for all the countries, persons in the military, and people of general interest. Each of them plays a part. But coming to the whole affair from a state of almost absolute ignorance, as I did, it is hard to get a grasp on who, exactly, these people are. They seem to appear, be described briefly, play some important role in the current event Churchill's describing, and then disappear again.
Of course, it is hard to fault Churchill for this. What else could he do? He certainly couldn't make the book longer. Nor could he leave out each of the contributions made by these personages. Still, I have to list it as a criticism because after a few hundred pages of this, you find yourself wondering where you are, or who you're talking to. Have I seen this person before, or are they entirely new? Who are they, really?
It was because of this that, picking the book up again after a month long break, it took me several minutes to find my place (my son had lost my bookmark). I flipped through page after page, trying to remember if I'd read a certain passage or not. Perhaps this speaks more to my poor reading skills than Churchill's writing, I don't know.
To summarize, I think that this book is certainly worth reading, but I don't know how many people will be able to maintain enough endurance to read the entire thing. However, if they do, they will be rewarded with perhaps the most complete and compelling picture of this time period on record. If you have a question, Churchill will most likely answer it. The answer just may be more long-winded than you hoped for.
Though I do not really believe the old saw about history repeating itself, I do believe that we can learn about ourselves through trying to understand how other people have behaved in the past. This book is a shining example of exactly that kind of endeavor.
But I have always had lots of questions about both wars. As far as the first, what was it about? Any thinking person would have to admit there's a lot more to these millions of dead soldiers than the assassination of an archduke, or some vague statement about tensions being high.
As far as the second, I've always wanted to know how Germany, in such a state of defeat after the first world war, came to be such a dominant, threatening power again so quickly. More importantly, I have never been able to understand the mindset of the Nazis, or how they came to power in the first place. But especially the mindset.
Without going into too much detail here, I will say that I think this is extremely important, both to our future and our present. There is a quantitative difference in Nazi Germany and anyone else you want to categorize as evil. When I try to think about them and really understand them, I find myself facing a mindset that I just can't penetrate. Yet these people were as human as I am. I think until we really learn to understand how an entire group of people came to be like this, we cannot seriously believe we are doing anything to prevent it happening again, to any or all of us. And by "seriously understand," I do not mean saying over and over again that we hate them and we will never allow this to happen again. After all, history never repeats itself in exactly the same way. Yes, we can all avow that we hate the Nazis, but the next time this mindset reasserts itself, it won't be called "Nazism."
So, all that being said, I have to say that this book answered many of my questions and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. I'm not going to pretend that I wasn't bored sometimes and in need of some straight fiction: after all, the book is over 700 pages and some of the diplomatic maneuverings, particularly, get rather boring.
The book is a detailed account of how it came to be that Germany, defeated after WW1, came to be the major power it was at the beginning of WW2. Churchill describes the attitudes of the different victor countries of WW1, the beginnings of the threats from Germany and how they were regarded by these victor countries, who had vowed that "never again" would so much blood be shed as in WW1.
He describes the state of Germany after the first war, the kind of government that was installed there, and, as best he can, the attitude of its people. He describes how the presence of a huge Communist state, Russia, affected the mindset of every country in Western and Eastern Europe. He describes, more in an indirect way, how the catastrophic evil of all the lives lost in WW1 had a profound effect on the way people thought about things, and how this eventually led to the even greater evil of WW2.
And, of course, he describes the steps, small at first, but increasingly bold as time went on, whereby Germany grew herself from an easily defeated rebel state into the powerhouse that it was at the beginning of WW2. The steps are interesting because, for each one, there are always strong arguments for not doing anything about Germany's actions. Churchill gives the arguments, despite he himself not believing them at the time.
This, to me, is the mark of a great history. Churchill could have easily given only his own arguments and stopped there. Instead, he gives us all of the perspectives. True, he calls attention more to his own, which he of course considers to be right. But he never really belittles his opponents by refusing to give any credence to their point of view.
Neville Chamberlain, for instance, is regarded in popular culture today as a complete and utter fool. Never mind that in Churchill's history we see that, if he was such a fool, the English people were the bigger fools for cheering on all of the actions for which he is today excoriated. Yes, Churchill disagreed with him vigorously and publicly, but he never lost respect for the man, and he always understood that he was doing what he thought was right.
Churchill gives a much truer picture of him than popular culture does. He shows, in particular, that there did come a point when Chamberlain realized that something had to be done, and at that point Chamberlain swung into action. And Churchill supported him through the whole thing. It bears noting, by the way, that when Chamberlain did begin to change his policies, he was by no means wholly supported by the British electorate. It was a tough battle, and he fought it.
Meanwhile, things are changing everywhere. The free countries are not really united, neither within themselves nor with the other free countries. No one really knows what the best course of action, what the right and fair course of action, should be. And all the while Germany keeps her own counsel, and gives good, or at least arguable, reasons to the world for everything she does. Without some sort of firm philosophical outlook, the free countries are stuck in a kind of tireless vacillation.
The book ends with Germany's invasion of Norway, and the inability of the English military to do anything about it, despite promises to the contrary. Immediately afterward, Germany begins its invasion of France, England's last remaining ally. Chamberlain is voted out of office, and Churchill is installed as Prime Minister. So go the last pages.
So far as criticisms go, the book is simply very long. I don't know if anything can be done about this, as there is clearly a lot of ground to cover if you want to be thorough about the whole thing. Especially for a subject matter like this, it is very important to understand that everything was done in "baby steps."
Another criticism I have is along similar lines. Obviously, there are a lot of important people involved in every facet of the politics and relationships between all the countries. There are diplomats from each country, members of the government for all the countries, persons in the military, and people of general interest. Each of them plays a part. But coming to the whole affair from a state of almost absolute ignorance, as I did, it is hard to get a grasp on who, exactly, these people are. They seem to appear, be described briefly, play some important role in the current event Churchill's describing, and then disappear again.
Of course, it is hard to fault Churchill for this. What else could he do? He certainly couldn't make the book longer. Nor could he leave out each of the contributions made by these personages. Still, I have to list it as a criticism because after a few hundred pages of this, you find yourself wondering where you are, or who you're talking to. Have I seen this person before, or are they entirely new? Who are they, really?
It was because of this that, picking the book up again after a month long break, it took me several minutes to find my place (my son had lost my bookmark). I flipped through page after page, trying to remember if I'd read a certain passage or not. Perhaps this speaks more to my poor reading skills than Churchill's writing, I don't know.
To summarize, I think that this book is certainly worth reading, but I don't know how many people will be able to maintain enough endurance to read the entire thing. However, if they do, they will be rewarded with perhaps the most complete and compelling picture of this time period on record. If you have a question, Churchill will most likely answer it. The answer just may be more long-winded than you hoped for.
Though I do not really believe the old saw about history repeating itself, I do believe that we can learn about ourselves through trying to understand how other people have behaved in the past. This book is a shining example of exactly that kind of endeavor.
May 22, 2017
I am reading a few chapters at a time to keep pace with events as I work on the sequel to A Flood of Evil. Churchill's chapter on the re-occupation of the Rhineland was complete, concise and beautifully written.
UPDATE 5/22/17 ... the chapters on the Austrian Anschluss and Hitler's plan to invade Czechoslovakia are equally splendid reading. What is not always clear is what Churchill knew at the time as opposed to what he knew later.
The description of Roosevelt's January 1938 offer to convene a conference including Britain, France, Germany and Italy, and Chamberlain's rebuff of that offer, is stunning. Would it have made a difference? Churchill thinks so.
... FDR's offer ... Sumner Welles, the US Under-Secretary of State, called upon the British Ambassador in Washington … the bearer of a confidential message from FDR to Mr. Chamberlain … FDR proposed to take the initiative to invite various governments to come to Washington to discuss the underlying causes of present differences ... before doing so, and before informing any other government, he wished to consult with the British as to their view of such a plan ... he asked for a response by Jan 17 (6 days) and would go forward only with the wholehearted support of His Majesty's Government ... if this was forthcoming, he would then approach the governments of France, Germany and Italy
... Chamberlain's response … he was already engaged in efforts to reach agreement with Germany and Italy … perhaps the President might consider whether his proposal might not cut against the British efforts … would it not, therefore, be wiser to postpone the launching of the American plan?
... Churchill: that Mr. Chamberlain, with his limited outlook and inexperience of the European scene, should have waved away the proffered hand stretched across the Atlantic, leaves one breathless with amazement … One cannot imagine the state of mind which would render such an appalling response
MORE TO FOLLOW ...
UPDATE 5/22/17 ... the chapters on the Austrian Anschluss and Hitler's plan to invade Czechoslovakia are equally splendid reading. What is not always clear is what Churchill knew at the time as opposed to what he knew later.
The description of Roosevelt's January 1938 offer to convene a conference including Britain, France, Germany and Italy, and Chamberlain's rebuff of that offer, is stunning. Would it have made a difference? Churchill thinks so.
... FDR's offer ... Sumner Welles, the US Under-Secretary of State, called upon the British Ambassador in Washington … the bearer of a confidential message from FDR to Mr. Chamberlain … FDR proposed to take the initiative to invite various governments to come to Washington to discuss the underlying causes of present differences ... before doing so, and before informing any other government, he wished to consult with the British as to their view of such a plan ... he asked for a response by Jan 17 (6 days) and would go forward only with the wholehearted support of His Majesty's Government ... if this was forthcoming, he would then approach the governments of France, Germany and Italy
... Chamberlain's response … he was already engaged in efforts to reach agreement with Germany and Italy … perhaps the President might consider whether his proposal might not cut against the British efforts … would it not, therefore, be wiser to postpone the launching of the American plan?
... Churchill: that Mr. Chamberlain, with his limited outlook and inexperience of the European scene, should have waved away the proffered hand stretched across the Atlantic, leaves one breathless with amazement … One cannot imagine the state of mind which would render such an appalling response
MORE TO FOLLOW ...
June 1, 2023
Winston Churchill was arguably the most influential figure in the Twentieth Century. As English soldier, statesman, and Prime Minister he served on the world stage for the better part of 60 years. As a Nobel Prize winner for Literature he wrote about the two World Wars, the History of the English speaking people and his ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough. Having participated in so much history he had his share of successes and setbacks. In The Great War he was tarred with the fiasco at Gallipoli. But after the war he served with great distinction in the Lloyd George government and in various other government posts.
Churchill picks up his career around this time in his brilliant book "The Gathering Storm". The Treaty of Versailles punished Germany with crushing reparations for starting The Great War. Rebuilding the country and the economy with inflation rampant proved impossible for Germany and scant thought was given to loosening the burdens on the German people. Rising poverty led to the rise of Hitler and his excesses. Most English leaders ignored the problem of Germany but Churchill, out of power at the time, sounded like the prophet of doom crying in the wilderness to ease up on German sanctions. To no avail.
Hitler slowly rose to power by crying victimhood for the German people and appealing to their spirit of nationalism. Hitler surreptitiously flouted the Versailles sanctions by gradually building up Germany's military. He also made noises about picking up German land taken away by the treaty. These noises became reality as he seized the Sudetenland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia. Where were the European governments, led by England and France, in all this? All European leaders fell for Hitler's bland assurances that each seizure would be his last. They drew the line with Poland, however, forming a united front that they would come to Poland's defense if it were seized.
Churchill, through his astonishing network of contacts, points out that at any given point before Poland Hitler could have been stopped. Hitler's army was not fully formed, it still lacked manufacturing capabilities and the necessary raw materials. Although not on a war footing England and France still possessed enough manpower and firepower to thwart Hitler. But its leadership was weak. After losing so much of its youth in the Great War the European powers had no stomach for war, contorted themselves to preserve peace, and deluded itself that appeasement would stop Hitler.
When Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 the English Prime Minister Chamberlain at last included Churchill in his government as Lord of the Admiralty, a position he held in World War I. Churchill was a whirlwind of activity and plans and secured England's command of the seas. The contrast between an old defeated Prime Minister like Chamberlain and a vibrant, full of ideas Churchill was apparent to the King who, after a year of the Twilight War where there was little fighting, and a disappointing outcome in the fight for Norway, asked Churchill to form a government. As Churchill points out, he was to serve as Prime Minister for the duration of the war only to be voted out of office when victory was won.
"The Gathering Storm" is the first of Churchill's six part masterpiece on the history of the Second World War. Since he was involved in the war almost from Day 1 his is the last word on the subject. Over time I hope to review all six but it's a foregone conclusion they will all be rated five stars.
Churchill picks up his career around this time in his brilliant book "The Gathering Storm". The Treaty of Versailles punished Germany with crushing reparations for starting The Great War. Rebuilding the country and the economy with inflation rampant proved impossible for Germany and scant thought was given to loosening the burdens on the German people. Rising poverty led to the rise of Hitler and his excesses. Most English leaders ignored the problem of Germany but Churchill, out of power at the time, sounded like the prophet of doom crying in the wilderness to ease up on German sanctions. To no avail.
Hitler slowly rose to power by crying victimhood for the German people and appealing to their spirit of nationalism. Hitler surreptitiously flouted the Versailles sanctions by gradually building up Germany's military. He also made noises about picking up German land taken away by the treaty. These noises became reality as he seized the Sudetenland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia. Where were the European governments, led by England and France, in all this? All European leaders fell for Hitler's bland assurances that each seizure would be his last. They drew the line with Poland, however, forming a united front that they would come to Poland's defense if it were seized.
Churchill, through his astonishing network of contacts, points out that at any given point before Poland Hitler could have been stopped. Hitler's army was not fully formed, it still lacked manufacturing capabilities and the necessary raw materials. Although not on a war footing England and France still possessed enough manpower and firepower to thwart Hitler. But its leadership was weak. After losing so much of its youth in the Great War the European powers had no stomach for war, contorted themselves to preserve peace, and deluded itself that appeasement would stop Hitler.
When Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 the English Prime Minister Chamberlain at last included Churchill in his government as Lord of the Admiralty, a position he held in World War I. Churchill was a whirlwind of activity and plans and secured England's command of the seas. The contrast between an old defeated Prime Minister like Chamberlain and a vibrant, full of ideas Churchill was apparent to the King who, after a year of the Twilight War where there was little fighting, and a disappointing outcome in the fight for Norway, asked Churchill to form a government. As Churchill points out, he was to serve as Prime Minister for the duration of the war only to be voted out of office when victory was won.
"The Gathering Storm" is the first of Churchill's six part masterpiece on the history of the Second World War. Since he was involved in the war almost from Day 1 his is the last word on the subject. Over time I hope to review all six but it's a foregone conclusion they will all be rated five stars.
September 5, 2021
"The fierce anger of all Germany at the French occupation of the Ruhr in 1923 brought what was now called the National-Socialist [Nazi] Party a broad wave of adherents. The collapse of the mark destroyed the basis of the German middle class, of whom many in their despair became recruits of the new party and found relief from their misery in hatred, vengeance, and patriotic fervour."
In a speech in 1933 to Parliament, Churchill noted this about Germany....
"....the pitiless ill-treatment of minorities, the denial of the normal protections of civilised society, the persecution of large numbers of individuals solely on the ground of race —we see all that occurring in one of the most gifted, learned, scientific, and formidable nations in the world."
The resurgence of cruelty in Nazi Germany was marked by the re-introduction of sword dueling in the colleges and caning in the elementary schools.
=========
Sound familiar?
"Every soldier took the oath, not, as formerly, to the Constitution, but to the person of Adolf Hitler."
Rather like having a convention without a platform, but a person to declare allegiance to.
=========
On the last page of the first volume of Churchill's history of WW II, after he became Prime Minister, he wrote....
"As I went to bed at about 3 a.m. I was conscious of a profound sense of relief. At last I had the authority to give directions over the whole scene. I felt as if I were walking with destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial."
In a speech in 1933 to Parliament, Churchill noted this about Germany....
"....the pitiless ill-treatment of minorities, the denial of the normal protections of civilised society, the persecution of large numbers of individuals solely on the ground of race —we see all that occurring in one of the most gifted, learned, scientific, and formidable nations in the world."
The resurgence of cruelty in Nazi Germany was marked by the re-introduction of sword dueling in the colleges and caning in the elementary schools.
=========
Sound familiar?
"Every soldier took the oath, not, as formerly, to the Constitution, but to the person of Adolf Hitler."
Rather like having a convention without a platform, but a person to declare allegiance to.
=========
On the last page of the first volume of Churchill's history of WW II, after he became Prime Minister, he wrote....
"As I went to bed at about 3 a.m. I was conscious of a profound sense of relief. At last I had the authority to give directions over the whole scene. I felt as if I were walking with destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial."
February 17, 2020
Čerčilova istoriografsko-memoarska knjiga je fascinatna, stilski raznovrsna i raspričana od Kulina bana i dobrih dana. Doduše, Čerčil i ja smo se često razilazi usled različitih životnih interesovanja; često je drvio o stvarima koje me nisu preterano zanimale.
Prvi, od ukupno šest tomova, obuhvata međuratni period, sa detaljnom analizom okolnosti koje su prouzrokovale Drugi svetski rat, kao i ratni period od 1. septembra 1939. do marta 1940. godine. Čerčil je smatrao da je Drugi svetski rat bio „nepotreban” rat i da se njegovo izbijanje lako moglo zaustaviti, ali da, eto, njega niko nije hteo da sluša (Čerčil u međuratnom periodu nije bio deo britanske vlade). Posmatrano iz bezbedne i ušuškane udaljenosti, čini mi se da je u pravu i da su zemlje članice Atante učinile svakojake gluposti i da nisu ništa konkretno učinile da do novog sukoba ne dođe. Pošto sam paraleno čitao i „Vinjete Londona”, Virdžinija Vulf pri poseti Britanskom parlamentu ističe da joj okupljeni političari ne izgledaju ništa razboritije i dostojanstvenije od seoske skupine za izbor najboljeg vola, iako su to oni koji kroje sudbinu sveta. Posmatrano iz onoga što Čerčil i Vulf pišu, možda ne postoje nikakve zavere, nikakvi iluminati, duboke vlade, masoni, lobiji, Rotšildi i slični koji rade svetu o glavu. Svet, možda, jednostavno vode glupi ljudi, te zato iz jedne krize upadamo u drugu krizu.
Čerčilova knjiga je najjača na polju stila; on superirono vlada jezikom i sa lakoćom prelazi iz jednog stilskog registra u drugi; od humora, preko hladnog izraza do patosa; od memoara, preko eseja do suvoparne istoriografije. Njemu čak ni lirizacija nije strana i to neretko na potpuno neočekivanim mestima. Tipa, kada daje upečatljiv portret Vjačeslava Molotova, sovjetskog ministra spoljnih poslova, Čerčil ga sa nipodaštavanjem opisuje kao robota, a onda, iz reda u red, postaje sve mekši, nadahnuto govoreći o njegovom kurtuaznom ponašanju i „osmehu sibirske zime”. Nasuprot, tim nadahnutim delovima, postoje i nekoliko poglavlja koja su mi bila baš, baš dosadna, ali to je već do mene i do onoga šta su moja lična interesovanja vezana za Drugi svetski rat, te se ne mogu objektivno žaliti na poglavlje o skupštinskoj raspravi za vojni budžet, jer naposletku, ovo jesu vojni memoari.
Čerčil zna ponekad da zvuči kao pravi arogatni engleski seronja. Za njega su Englezi najbolji u svemu, njihova je dužnost da vode Evropu i jedini su sposobni (pored Amerikanaca) da rešavaju sranja kontinentalnih Evropljana. Čerčil će za italijansku okupaciju Abisinije da istakne da su to ostaci mračnih vremena kolonijalizma i rasizma. To je, naravno, nešto sa čime bi se svako normalan složio, ali isti Čerčil nekoliko stranica ranije piše kako Indija mora da ostane pod britanskom upravom i kako im nikada ne treba dati nezavisnot. U knjizi stalno provejava taj odvratani stav da „male” zemlje moraju da slušaju „velike” i da se pokoravaju njihovim odlukama. Čerčil veruje u nacionalni lanac bića, a na njegovom vrhu su Englezi.
Ne znam da li ću nastaviti sa čitanjem drugih pet tomova. Videću kada se utisci malo slegnu.
Prvi, od ukupno šest tomova, obuhvata međuratni period, sa detaljnom analizom okolnosti koje su prouzrokovale Drugi svetski rat, kao i ratni period od 1. septembra 1939. do marta 1940. godine. Čerčil je smatrao da je Drugi svetski rat bio „nepotreban” rat i da se njegovo izbijanje lako moglo zaustaviti, ali da, eto, njega niko nije hteo da sluša (Čerčil u međuratnom periodu nije bio deo britanske vlade). Posmatrano iz bezbedne i ušuškane udaljenosti, čini mi se da je u pravu i da su zemlje članice Atante učinile svakojake gluposti i da nisu ništa konkretno učinile da do novog sukoba ne dođe. Pošto sam paraleno čitao i „Vinjete Londona”, Virdžinija Vulf pri poseti Britanskom parlamentu ističe da joj okupljeni političari ne izgledaju ništa razboritije i dostojanstvenije od seoske skupine za izbor najboljeg vola, iako su to oni koji kroje sudbinu sveta. Posmatrano iz onoga što Čerčil i Vulf pišu, možda ne postoje nikakve zavere, nikakvi iluminati, duboke vlade, masoni, lobiji, Rotšildi i slični koji rade svetu o glavu. Svet, možda, jednostavno vode glupi ljudi, te zato iz jedne krize upadamo u drugu krizu.
Čerčilova knjiga je najjača na polju stila; on superirono vlada jezikom i sa lakoćom prelazi iz jednog stilskog registra u drugi; od humora, preko hladnog izraza do patosa; od memoara, preko eseja do suvoparne istoriografije. Njemu čak ni lirizacija nije strana i to neretko na potpuno neočekivanim mestima. Tipa, kada daje upečatljiv portret Vjačeslava Molotova, sovjetskog ministra spoljnih poslova, Čerčil ga sa nipodaštavanjem opisuje kao robota, a onda, iz reda u red, postaje sve mekši, nadahnuto govoreći o njegovom kurtuaznom ponašanju i „osmehu sibirske zime”. Nasuprot, tim nadahnutim delovima, postoje i nekoliko poglavlja koja su mi bila baš, baš dosadna, ali to je već do mene i do onoga šta su moja lična interesovanja vezana za Drugi svetski rat, te se ne mogu objektivno žaliti na poglavlje o skupštinskoj raspravi za vojni budžet, jer naposletku, ovo jesu vojni memoari.
Čerčil zna ponekad da zvuči kao pravi arogatni engleski seronja. Za njega su Englezi najbolji u svemu, njihova je dužnost da vode Evropu i jedini su sposobni (pored Amerikanaca) da rešavaju sranja kontinentalnih Evropljana. Čerčil će za italijansku okupaciju Abisinije da istakne da su to ostaci mračnih vremena kolonijalizma i rasizma. To je, naravno, nešto sa čime bi se svako normalan složio, ali isti Čerčil nekoliko stranica ranije piše kako Indija mora da ostane pod britanskom upravom i kako im nikada ne treba dati nezavisnot. U knjizi stalno provejava taj odvratani stav da „male” zemlje moraju da slušaju „velike” i da se pokoravaju njihovim odlukama. Čerčil veruje u nacionalni lanac bića, a na njegovom vrhu su Englezi.
Ne znam da li ću nastaviti sa čitanjem drugih pet tomova. Videću kada se utisci malo slegnu.
May 1, 2020
Știați că, în 1953, Winston Churchill a luat Premiul Nobel pentru literatură? Nu pentru pace, ci pentru literatură, lucrarea la care s-a făcut referire fiind "Al doilea război mondial". Versiunea originală are 6 volume, dar ediția românească, apărută în 1998, este concentrată în 2 volume. Mai multe despre Winston Churchill, motivația juriului Nobel și lista scrierilor sale pe linkul de mai jos.
http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_...
http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_...
May 14, 2016
Page 500 (my book)
The veils of the future are lifted one by one, and mortals must act from day to day.
Page 512
The stroke of catastrophe and the spur of peril were needed to call forth the dormant might of the British nation. The tocsin was about to sound.
I had read all six volumes of Churchill’s War Memoirs over twenty years ago – so I thought I would give them another go. I was wondering how I would take to them on a re-read.
This first one is simply wonderful, exquisite, superlative ...I could go on! The eloquence flows off each page and is captivating. The clarity resonates. It is as if the author is speaking personally to you. The reading flows effortlessly with a stunning use of language.
A number of features stand out. Winston is full of energy. I believe it is in the first volume of William Manchester’s trilogy of his Churchill biographies that he states something along the line that there are thousands upon thousands of photos of Churchill and in not one does he appear bored. Also Churchill had no qualms of intervening into any domain – he had no use for jurisdictional limitations. And he demanded answers. I can imagine how irritating this could be to the recipient.
He relentlessly warned Britain – and Europe, of the impending danger of Hitler’s Germany. This passage from a speech in 1936 on the Nazi seizure of the Rhineland is particularly prescient.
Page 159
Herr Hitler has torn up the Treaties and garrisoned the Rhineland. His troops are there, and there they are going to stay. All this means the Nazi regime has gained a new prestige in Germany and in all the neighbouring countries. But more than that, Germany is now fortifying the Rhine zone.
The creation of a line of forts opposite the French frontier will enable the German troops to be economized on that line, and will enable the main forces to swing round through Belgium and Holland...Then look East. There the consequences of the Rhineland fortifications may be more immediate. That is to us a less direct danger, but it is a more imminent danger. The moment these fortifications are completed, and in proportion as they are completed, the whole aspect of middle Europe is changed.
The Baltic States, Poland, Czechoslovakia with which must be associated Yugoslavia, Romania, Austria and some other countries, are all affected very decisively the moment this great work of construction has been completed.
Churchill had carefully read Hitler’s Mein Kampf .
Page 55
He[Hitler] had called from the depths of defeat the dark and savage furies latent in the most numerous, most serviceable, ruthless, contradictory and ill-starred race in Europe. He had conjured up the fearful idol of an all-devouring Moloch of which he was the priest and incarnation.
Page 80
A Dictator based on terror and reeking with blood had confronted the world. Anti-Semitism was ferocious and brazen... invested with a ruthless, lurid tinge. It glittered and it glared.
On British passivity:
Page 69-70
Delight in smooth-sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, desire for popularity and electoral success irrespective of the vital interests of the State, genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation, obvious lack of intellectual vigour in both leaders of the British Coalition Government, marked ignorance of Europe and aversion from its problems in Mr. Baldwin [PM from 1935 to 1937]... all these constituted a picture of British fatuity and fecklessness which though devoid of guile, was not devoid of guilt, and though free from wickedness or evil design, played a definite part in the unleashing upon the world of horrors and miseries... already beyond comparison in human experience.
Churchill provides us with an interesting summation of Neville Chamberlain.
Page 173-74
Neville Chamberlain conceived himself able to comprehend the whole field of Europe, and indeed the world...He had formed decided judgements about all the political figures of the day, both at home and abroad, and felt himself capable of dealing with them. His all pervading hope was to go down in history as the Great Peacemaker; and for this he was prepared to strive continually in the teeth of facts, and face great risks for himself and his country. Unhappily he ran into tides the force of which he could not measure, and met hurricanes from which he did not flinch, but with which he could not cope.
But Churchill, however, never lets us forget that Chamberlain, after Hitler’s subjugation of Czechoslovakia in March, 1939, abandoned his policies of appeasement with the dictators – which ultimately led to the declaration of war in September, 1939.
Page 269
If Chamberlain failed to understand Hitler, Hitler completely underrated the nature of the British Prime Minister...He did not realize that Chamberlain had a very hard core, and that he did not like being cheated.
And I will move unto Volume II after an interlude of a few books.
The veils of the future are lifted one by one, and mortals must act from day to day.
Page 512
The stroke of catastrophe and the spur of peril were needed to call forth the dormant might of the British nation. The tocsin was about to sound.
I had read all six volumes of Churchill’s War Memoirs over twenty years ago – so I thought I would give them another go. I was wondering how I would take to them on a re-read.
This first one is simply wonderful, exquisite, superlative ...I could go on! The eloquence flows off each page and is captivating. The clarity resonates. It is as if the author is speaking personally to you. The reading flows effortlessly with a stunning use of language.
A number of features stand out. Winston is full of energy. I believe it is in the first volume of William Manchester’s trilogy of his Churchill biographies that he states something along the line that there are thousands upon thousands of photos of Churchill and in not one does he appear bored. Also Churchill had no qualms of intervening into any domain – he had no use for jurisdictional limitations. And he demanded answers. I can imagine how irritating this could be to the recipient.
He relentlessly warned Britain – and Europe, of the impending danger of Hitler’s Germany. This passage from a speech in 1936 on the Nazi seizure of the Rhineland is particularly prescient.
Page 159
Herr Hitler has torn up the Treaties and garrisoned the Rhineland. His troops are there, and there they are going to stay. All this means the Nazi regime has gained a new prestige in Germany and in all the neighbouring countries. But more than that, Germany is now fortifying the Rhine zone.
The creation of a line of forts opposite the French frontier will enable the German troops to be economized on that line, and will enable the main forces to swing round through Belgium and Holland...Then look East. There the consequences of the Rhineland fortifications may be more immediate. That is to us a less direct danger, but it is a more imminent danger. The moment these fortifications are completed, and in proportion as they are completed, the whole aspect of middle Europe is changed.
The Baltic States, Poland, Czechoslovakia with which must be associated Yugoslavia, Romania, Austria and some other countries, are all affected very decisively the moment this great work of construction has been completed.
Churchill had carefully read Hitler’s Mein Kampf .
Page 55
He[Hitler] had called from the depths of defeat the dark and savage furies latent in the most numerous, most serviceable, ruthless, contradictory and ill-starred race in Europe. He had conjured up the fearful idol of an all-devouring Moloch of which he was the priest and incarnation.
Page 80
A Dictator based on terror and reeking with blood had confronted the world. Anti-Semitism was ferocious and brazen... invested with a ruthless, lurid tinge. It glittered and it glared.
On British passivity:
Page 69-70
Delight in smooth-sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, desire for popularity and electoral success irrespective of the vital interests of the State, genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation, obvious lack of intellectual vigour in both leaders of the British Coalition Government, marked ignorance of Europe and aversion from its problems in Mr. Baldwin [PM from 1935 to 1937]... all these constituted a picture of British fatuity and fecklessness which though devoid of guile, was not devoid of guilt, and though free from wickedness or evil design, played a definite part in the unleashing upon the world of horrors and miseries... already beyond comparison in human experience.
Churchill provides us with an interesting summation of Neville Chamberlain.
Page 173-74
Neville Chamberlain conceived himself able to comprehend the whole field of Europe, and indeed the world...He had formed decided judgements about all the political figures of the day, both at home and abroad, and felt himself capable of dealing with them. His all pervading hope was to go down in history as the Great Peacemaker; and for this he was prepared to strive continually in the teeth of facts, and face great risks for himself and his country. Unhappily he ran into tides the force of which he could not measure, and met hurricanes from which he did not flinch, but with which he could not cope.
But Churchill, however, never lets us forget that Chamberlain, after Hitler’s subjugation of Czechoslovakia in March, 1939, abandoned his policies of appeasement with the dictators – which ultimately led to the declaration of war in September, 1939.
Page 269
If Chamberlain failed to understand Hitler, Hitler completely underrated the nature of the British Prime Minister...He did not realize that Chamberlain had a very hard core, and that he did not like being cheated.
And I will move unto Volume II after an interlude of a few books.
June 9, 2010
This is Volume 1 of the Churchill series of WWII, prior and post. As a master of the English language, the Prime Minister works his magic as he puts the events leading up to the War into perspective. As Lord of the Admiralty in WWI, Churchill knew of what he spoke.....he was a participant in the defeat of Imperial Germany and an opponent of the infamous Treaty of Versailles.....a treaty which may well have led to the rise of the Nazi ideology. Sir Winston provides an insiders look at the machinations of government which blindly moved toward a second war and appeased Hitler shamelessly. In my opinion, this is a masterwork and a must read for all who are interested in the period when England would find itself standing alone against the madness of Hitler's Germany.
June 2, 2023
Moral of the work: How the democracies allowed the wicked to rearm. This first volume of the SECOND WORLD WAR quintet features Churchill in his "Wilderness years", when he alone among British statesmen, better still Western statesmen, warned that Hitler was rearming Germany at a furious pace and could not be appeased into not using those weapons. Nobody listened until it was too late. The prose is both laconic and eloquent, like the man himself.
December 31, 2020
It makes no sense to me that a five-star admiration for the author's linguistic mastery and a five-star interest in the period he is describing should result in a ho-hum three-star review. Yet here we are.
Maybe he spent the bulk of his rhetorical energy during the war. This book seems to be the memoir-like efforts to tie up loose ends. At least to this reader, it has none of the verve of someone rejoicing that he got to "give the roar" for the British people in their finest hour. Of course, that was, in the main, as prime minister. This book covers his serving under Chamberlain, so if he sounds like a bureaucrat, perhaps it's because he was.
Maybe he spent the bulk of his rhetorical energy during the war. This book seems to be the memoir-like efforts to tie up loose ends. At least to this reader, it has none of the verve of someone rejoicing that he got to "give the roar" for the British people in their finest hour. Of course, that was, in the main, as prime minister. This book covers his serving under Chamberlain, so if he sounds like a bureaucrat, perhaps it's because he was.
January 10, 2016
Few world leaders have been as competent at documenting their own contribution to world events as Winston Churchill. And few world leaders can claim as important a contribution. For those reasons alone, the series he published on the Second World War remains in print and readily available for historians and history buffs. A serious researcher will want to confirm his claims by checking primary sources, but one of the strengths of this series is the heavy use it makes of government memoranda and other documents to sharpen its author’s memory.
Of the three I have read so far, I found this to be the most interesting in the series. I think that is in part because much of the story he has to tell here is of the period when he was in opposition, outside of the government, or playing a subordinate role. For that reason, the prose is more varied, the stance less defensive, and the events seen from a more interesting variety of perspectives. After he becomes Prime Minister, the story becomes one of a unified identity between himself and the government, and there is less controversy and friction.
The thesis of this particular book (far less for the others) is that World War Two was “The Unnecessary War” and he is constantly arguing for ways in which it could have been prevented. From the Treaty of Versailles to its enforcement, to the Munich Conference to the Polish crisis, at each step Churchill suggests ways the international community could have, in his view, prevented or forestalled the conflagration. Some of these arguments are more convincing than others, while some seem to be unfair to his predecessors (especially Chamberlain) who were reacting to situations whose outcomes they could not possibly have known. I was in fact surprised at how much kinder Churchill is toward the Labour government of Ramsey MacDonald than his fellow Conservative, Chamberlain.
It would be impossible to touch on all of the subjects Churchill covers in this book in the space of this review. Suffice to say that it is nearly exhaustive in scope and detail. One example is the detailed discussion of research into the development of radar, protection of that secret from the enemy, and its use in warfare. As always, Churchill provides detailed documentation of his own involvement and decision-making processes, as well as passing along the materials presented to him by the researchers and the reports from the air force on its use.
Churchill’s writing can be dry at times, but I find this to be the most readable of his works that I’ve seen. It is a trove of information for those willing to invest the time.
Of the three I have read so far, I found this to be the most interesting in the series. I think that is in part because much of the story he has to tell here is of the period when he was in opposition, outside of the government, or playing a subordinate role. For that reason, the prose is more varied, the stance less defensive, and the events seen from a more interesting variety of perspectives. After he becomes Prime Minister, the story becomes one of a unified identity between himself and the government, and there is less controversy and friction.
The thesis of this particular book (far less for the others) is that World War Two was “The Unnecessary War” and he is constantly arguing for ways in which it could have been prevented. From the Treaty of Versailles to its enforcement, to the Munich Conference to the Polish crisis, at each step Churchill suggests ways the international community could have, in his view, prevented or forestalled the conflagration. Some of these arguments are more convincing than others, while some seem to be unfair to his predecessors (especially Chamberlain) who were reacting to situations whose outcomes they could not possibly have known. I was in fact surprised at how much kinder Churchill is toward the Labour government of Ramsey MacDonald than his fellow Conservative, Chamberlain.
It would be impossible to touch on all of the subjects Churchill covers in this book in the space of this review. Suffice to say that it is nearly exhaustive in scope and detail. One example is the detailed discussion of research into the development of radar, protection of that secret from the enemy, and its use in warfare. As always, Churchill provides detailed documentation of his own involvement and decision-making processes, as well as passing along the materials presented to him by the researchers and the reports from the air force on its use.
Churchill’s writing can be dry at times, but I find this to be the most readable of his works that I’ve seen. It is a trove of information for those willing to invest the time.
June 12, 2012
I had always read that Winston Churchill was an excellent writer. I also knew that he was right in the thick of things in the history-making events for the first half of the 20th century. In fact, I had owned his set of histories for a number of years - courtesy of the Book of the Month Club. Finally I got down to reading. This is an amazingly clear and lucid account of what led to the Second World War written by someone never further from the action than a front-row seat and often in the midst of the goings-on.
Churchill's encyclopedic mind sifts through the myriad of facts and events and sorts them into a compelling and insightful narrative. I already knew that the short-sightedness of the allies in putting together the Treaty of Versailles set up a clockwork of events that led to Hitler and the evil of Naziism, but now it is visible from the inside. The desire of the American Congress to stay uninvolved and isolated, the intransigence of the British, the passion for vengeance of the France all eventually came back to bite them. This all brings to mind George Santayana's dictum that those who fail to remember history are condemned to repeat it.
Churchill's encyclopedic mind sifts through the myriad of facts and events and sorts them into a compelling and insightful narrative. I already knew that the short-sightedness of the allies in putting together the Treaty of Versailles set up a clockwork of events that led to Hitler and the evil of Naziism, but now it is visible from the inside. The desire of the American Congress to stay uninvolved and isolated, the intransigence of the British, the passion for vengeance of the France all eventually came back to bite them. This all brings to mind George Santayana's dictum that those who fail to remember history are condemned to repeat it.
March 28, 2015
Description: The story of British prime minister Winston Churchill, focusing on his place in British life just prior to World War II.
Starring: Richard Burton, Virginia McKenna, Robert Hardy, Ian Bannen
Directed by: Herbert Wise
Music: ”Symphony No. 3 in C minor, 'Organ' Op. 78 (1990 Remastered Version): Maestoso - Allegro” av Georges Prêtre/Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire/Maurice Duruflé
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZh2S...
Churchill: Do you know why the british bulldog's nose slants backwards?
Ribbentrop: No!
Churchill: So it can breathe, and not let go!
Starring: Richard Burton, Virginia McKenna, Robert Hardy, Ian Bannen
Directed by: Herbert Wise
Music: ”Symphony No. 3 in C minor, 'Organ' Op. 78 (1990 Remastered Version): Maestoso - Allegro” av Georges Prêtre/Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire/Maurice Duruflé
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZh2S...Churchill: Do you know why the british bulldog's nose slants backwards?
Ribbentrop: No!
Churchill: So it can breathe, and not let go!
March 19, 2024
Written with great retorical skill, but of course very prejudiced. More a work of literature than history. I guess that's why he never received the Nobel for history? :)
July 16, 2012
Winston Churchill may slowly be being forgotten as one of the twentieth century's most prolific writers. Those who learn about him today, if they hear his name at all, usually discover that he was a British Prime Minister, and little more. Even the fact that it was he who put the War Cabinet together in 1940, which managed to hold out both strategically and psychologically against Hitler, is slowly fading. "We will fight them on the beaches..." is slowly becoming merged with the sounds of popular music, and the original sense being lost. Whether that is a good thing or not, I hardly know. Yet there was so much more to this long-lived British soldier, journalist, novelist, parliamentarian, artist, statesman and historian, than mere good generalship.
In "The Gathering Storm," we are evidently preparing for the disaster of 1939. Churchill was not in office during those years, and indeed, although it is probably becoming a more obscure fact than ever as time goes on, he was something of a political pariah. The trend of British politics in the thirties, and to some extent within the influential part of British society, was toward pacifism and a consequent reduction in armaments and defence expenditure. Churchill was on the outside, voicing his concern from time to time as a private Member of Parliament, but unable to make himself heard. So this is the background to the book, a time of political intrigue at the international level, and of unwillingness to face up to the facts of the rise of fascism, in Britain. Perhaps it may be said, in fairness, that until Czechoslovakia turned ugly, war with Germany was not to be thought of, for all sorts of reasons. The decisions that were perhaps ill made in those dying days at the end of the 30s, were nevertheless of the tallest order.
It is perhaps true that Churchill is unable to give us a completely unbiased version of events. However, in the main he sticks to history and what is coloured in the text is probably what is left out rather than anything reported as fact. One of the interesting snippets in the book (and of course, there are many), is the fact that Churchill, while still out of office, was invited to meet Hitler in the Rhineland in 1937, declined to do so, and subsequently never met him at all. His son Randolph, on the other hand, did meet him in Berlin in the 30s.
This is history, first and foremost, and as it intends to cover the war and not just Churchill's part in it, it strays into all sorts of odd corners of international foreign policy. Yet none of it is tedious in the hands of such a gifted writer, and when it becomes a question of the central facts touching upon the lives of so many millions, this point of view is a critical one indeed.
In "The Gathering Storm," we are evidently preparing for the disaster of 1939. Churchill was not in office during those years, and indeed, although it is probably becoming a more obscure fact than ever as time goes on, he was something of a political pariah. The trend of British politics in the thirties, and to some extent within the influential part of British society, was toward pacifism and a consequent reduction in armaments and defence expenditure. Churchill was on the outside, voicing his concern from time to time as a private Member of Parliament, but unable to make himself heard. So this is the background to the book, a time of political intrigue at the international level, and of unwillingness to face up to the facts of the rise of fascism, in Britain. Perhaps it may be said, in fairness, that until Czechoslovakia turned ugly, war with Germany was not to be thought of, for all sorts of reasons. The decisions that were perhaps ill made in those dying days at the end of the 30s, were nevertheless of the tallest order.
It is perhaps true that Churchill is unable to give us a completely unbiased version of events. However, in the main he sticks to history and what is coloured in the text is probably what is left out rather than anything reported as fact. One of the interesting snippets in the book (and of course, there are many), is the fact that Churchill, while still out of office, was invited to meet Hitler in the Rhineland in 1937, declined to do so, and subsequently never met him at all. His son Randolph, on the other hand, did meet him in Berlin in the 30s.
This is history, first and foremost, and as it intends to cover the war and not just Churchill's part in it, it strays into all sorts of odd corners of international foreign policy. Yet none of it is tedious in the hands of such a gifted writer, and when it becomes a question of the central facts touching upon the lives of so many millions, this point of view is a critical one indeed.
March 5, 2010
Incredibly detailed but incredibly readable and fascinating first volume of Winston Churchill's history of World War II, for most of which he served as Prime Minister of Great Britain. From the mass of notes Churchill must have kept, it's hard to believe he had time to run the nation. He has always seemed an impressive figure to me, but reading this volume has multiplied my respect for him by a factor of ten. Yet Churchill writes with confidence but virtually no braggadocio. I look forward to reading the rest of this major work.
December 20, 2012
I've had the goal of reading Winton Churchill's six-volume "History of World War II" for some time. I read and thoroughly enjoyed this first volume, from Mariner Books. These are among the least expensive editions. It shows in places. The typeset looks as if it has been recycled for a long time. Therefore, you read one page printed in solid, dark type and the next page looks faded. Some letters are almost completely washed out on some words, though this is very sporadic. It's easy, though, to get engrossed in the narrative from a master storyteller and forget the little printing imperfections.
Winston Churchill was already famous in England before the events in this book, which transpire from the end of World War I to the early months of World War II. He had had a distinguished military career, serving in India, Sudan and in the Boer War, and was a member of Parliament since before the First World War. He wrote well known books about his exploits and those of his ancestor, the 1st Duke of Marlborough. During WWI, he was First Lord of the Admiralty, later Minister of Munitions, Secretary of State for War and Secretary of State for Air in the early air age. He also commanded a battalion in the British Army in the war. After the war, he was Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Conservative government of Ramsey MacDonald. His military, governmental and political connections were considerable, making him the ultimate insider to the workings of the British government between the wars. During most of this time, however, he was formally out of government office (except for continuing to hold his seat in the House of Commons), marking time in what he described as a political wilderness, resulting mainly from his open split with the Conservative leadership on Indian Home Rule. During this time, he constantly issued warnings about the coming consequences of the frittering away of the WWI allies' military strength while ignoring the growing threat of Germany. Readers today would be surprised to learn that this position marked Churchill as a pariah by both the political establishment and the public during these times.
A final word about the book series before discussing this volume. It's not taking any suspense away from the book to discuss the well-known historical fact that Churchill took the reins of government as Prime Minister in 1940, largely because his absence from the cabinets of the previous two governments left him untainted with the stink of incompetence which hung heavy when two decades of ignoring the controls contained in the 1918 Versailles Treaty, coupled with British governmental timidity toward the brazen aggressiveness of the German Nazi government brought Europe into the second World War in the same century. After leading Great Britain throughout the war, Churchill was turned out of office in 1945 (he returned as PM for another term, from 1951 to 1955).
Winston had time to write this series in the late 1940's, when he was back in the opposition and had time to put his incomparable wartime experiences into writing. This series is therefore a great historical treasure trove, although it is not written by a historian. Churchill, with his astute political sense, made no attempt to
hide the fact that he wanted to be the first to get facts on record about the causes leading to the war, and his government's leadership of the war effort, before others would second-guess these events. He had vast sources of information available to him. First, as a member of the opposition to the pre-war Baldwin and Chamberlin governments, he nevertheless had access to huge amounts of official military data concerning British, French, and German military preparedness and defenses. As PM during the war, of course he had a say in every military decision. After the war, when he was out of government, he was given the privileged access to unlimited amounts of government documents by the Atlee Labour government. The result is a highly authoritative work which added to Churchill's stature as a statesman and leader, and made him wealthy.
Churchill had been allied with Conservative leader Stanley Baldwin, who succeeded MacDonald, in the 1920's, but his opposition to Indian independence prevented him from being offered a cabinet seat. However, his interwar efforts became increasingly focused on the dangerous mistakes he saw occurring on the international arena, especially Baldwin's early position on favoring unilateral British disarmament. Observers of modern politics, with its hard edges, would be amused by the role of an opposition leader in 1930's Britain. Churchill railed against the government's policies in Parliament, making articulate points, sometimes very vehemently, but there was never any character assassination. He also wrote some newspaper articles, and many letters to colleagues with detailed, well-stated arguments to back them up. Most of what he was saying then had become painfully apparent by 1939, and his writings from that time form an important basis to the structure of his book.
Thus, Churchill leads the reader through the deeply troubling unfolding of events surrounding German rearmament in violation of the Versailles Treaty, without consequences imposed by the victorious allies; the air superiority of the British and French allowed to become overshadowed by the Germans; the Rhineland forceable occupation while Britain and France stood by and watched; the building of a German Siegfried Line of defense; establishment of a Berlin-Rome (Hitler-Mussolini) axis; Austria gobbled up by Germany; and most shameful, Czechoslovakia left to be destroyed by Germany, while Britain ignored the pleadings of Russia to form an alliance to intervene. After all of this cowardly diplomacy by the allied powers (including the United States, which kept its hands clean of the mess by turning ostrich while European events reached the boiling point), Great Britain dragged France into a treaty guaranteeing the integrity of Poland, the next obvious target of Germany.
Churchill provides detailed, first-hand accounting of these events, and more, including the diplomatic vacillations and double-dealings that unfolded as World War approached. These include the ironic fact that the allied powers, in the early 1930's, originally saw the Italian dictator as a possible stabilizing influence. Mussolini early on presented the picture of a benevolent fascist, if there can be such a thing. Democratic leaders were impressed by his very early distrust and dislike of the new German dictator, Hitler; Mussolini was even courted to provide the threat of Italy's growing military as a possible warning against Hitler's designs on taking over the Rhineland. Then there was Stalin's communist regime, which was never given the trust accorded Mussolini by the allies. Finding no willingness to share diplomatic solutions from Britain and France, his and Hitler's foreign ministers, Molotov and Ribbentrop, shocked the world by signing a non-aggression pact.
This history thus relates the sordid history of governmental and public disillusionment as Germany gobbled up whole countries without challenge (before its attack on Poland); the allied decision to stand by without challenging Italy's invasion of Abyssinia (Ethiopia); the Polish grab of spoils in Czechoslovakia in the wake of Germany's take-over; the Russian invasion of Finland and later sharing the spoils, with Germany, of Poland.
All of these developments were cause for increased anxiety throughout Europe, but the average Britton remained blissfully confident in continued peace right up to the end. Neville Chamberlain, in one of the most self-delusional acts of any government leader in history, culminated a series of three meetings with Hitler in 1938 by signing the Munich pact, which sold the Czechs down the river, much to the chagrin of Churchill and his Conservative friends. Chamberlain received rock-star treatment at home, being mobbed by admiring citizens when his airplane arrived in England from Munich. What's interesting is that Churchill publicly denounced this action in Parliament, but, on a personal level, maintained cordial relations with Chamberlain. This is why Churchill was invited to take over the Admiralty after Germany attacked Poland in September 1939, and the war started. Churchill clearly writes that the public pandering by Chamberlain was ruinous to Britain's eventual response to the start of the war, but he became a loyal colleague of Chamberlain in its early months.
The latter part of the book describes these early months, which Churchill calls the "Twilight War", otherwise known as the "Phony War." This description comes from the lack of open warfare from the start of the war until Spring, 1940. To the average British, Belgian or French citizen, it was a creepy time of knowing all hell was ready to break loose but very few bullets were being fired. Most of the action during this time (with the exception of the busy German activity of consolidating its defeat of Poland's army and air force, and institution of a reign of terror against the Polish population),
occurred on the sea; this put Winston at the front as the cabinet officer most involved in making daily decisions on the progress of the war. German commerce raiders were causing consternation and U-Boats were beginning to incur serious losses against British shipping, supplemented by German sea-mining of British ports. The Phony War ended in April, 1940, according to Churchill
when Britain attempted to land forces in Norway to repel an expected German invasion of that country. The British and Allied forces were totally unprepared for the seriously brutal German type of modern warfare and suffered a humiliating rebuff.
Churchill remained the loyal cabinet leader, freely acknowledging that he was among the war planners who shared blame for Britain's poor preparation for this campaign. The public was having nothing of this. Public opinion finally came around to embracing the reality of the odds which were now stacked against Britain and France, and the truth was not lost on anyone about the warnings Churchill had been issuing for years. It did not help matters for Chamberlain that he gave a speech in April, 1940 in which he seriously misjudged the lack of a German land invasion of England to date, which actually was caused by the time needed for planning by the German military for its upcoming "Blitskrieg" against Holland and France, for timidity. His famous quote: "one thing is certain: he (Hitler) missed the bus" (p. 526) would later help to drive him out of office.
Churchill gives an interesting account of the manner in which the Chamberlain government collapsed and the King invited Churchill to form a coalition government in the wake of the Norway fiasco. He took office when his country was in extreme peril. He had received correspondence from President Franklin Roosevelt expressing his belief in the common destinies of the two countries, but the President was powerless to act due to the dominance of the isolationists in the U.S. Congress. Powerful, potential ally Russia was making nice with the Germans. Mussolini, who had not declared war yet, was cagily biding his time to act while egging Hitler on. Poland, Norway and Denmark were under Nazi occupation. British attempts to build aircraft and ships, which increased after Munich, were woefully short of what the Germans had built; worse yet, during the seven months of the phony war, British industry had not stepped up production according to pressing wartime needs. France, the great military power after World War I, had seen its land and air dominance eroded in favor of Germany during the 1930's, partly at the instigation of Great Britain, and spent the entire phony war period with its army's morale steadily eroding behind an elaborate defensive line while everyone waited for Hitler to move. Britain was sending all of the forces it could muster to France in anticipation of a planned German invasion, but British and French forces were hamstrung by the refusal of Belgium to allow them on Belgian soil; incredibly, Belgian intelligence had received the detailed plans, in advance of the planned German invasion, which clearly showed the proposed penetration of neutral Belgium first on the way to invading Holland and France, but the Belgian government still would take no actions to defend against these events.
Winston did not have time to ponder all of this. On May 10, 1940, the same day as his appointment, Germany invaded Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Alarmed but calm, Churchill immediately formed his war cabinet and set to work on the business at hand, confident that he was meant to take on this responsibility by reason of temperament and experience.
Winston Churchill was already famous in England before the events in this book, which transpire from the end of World War I to the early months of World War II. He had had a distinguished military career, serving in India, Sudan and in the Boer War, and was a member of Parliament since before the First World War. He wrote well known books about his exploits and those of his ancestor, the 1st Duke of Marlborough. During WWI, he was First Lord of the Admiralty, later Minister of Munitions, Secretary of State for War and Secretary of State for Air in the early air age. He also commanded a battalion in the British Army in the war. After the war, he was Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Conservative government of Ramsey MacDonald. His military, governmental and political connections were considerable, making him the ultimate insider to the workings of the British government between the wars. During most of this time, however, he was formally out of government office (except for continuing to hold his seat in the House of Commons), marking time in what he described as a political wilderness, resulting mainly from his open split with the Conservative leadership on Indian Home Rule. During this time, he constantly issued warnings about the coming consequences of the frittering away of the WWI allies' military strength while ignoring the growing threat of Germany. Readers today would be surprised to learn that this position marked Churchill as a pariah by both the political establishment and the public during these times.
A final word about the book series before discussing this volume. It's not taking any suspense away from the book to discuss the well-known historical fact that Churchill took the reins of government as Prime Minister in 1940, largely because his absence from the cabinets of the previous two governments left him untainted with the stink of incompetence which hung heavy when two decades of ignoring the controls contained in the 1918 Versailles Treaty, coupled with British governmental timidity toward the brazen aggressiveness of the German Nazi government brought Europe into the second World War in the same century. After leading Great Britain throughout the war, Churchill was turned out of office in 1945 (he returned as PM for another term, from 1951 to 1955).
Winston had time to write this series in the late 1940's, when he was back in the opposition and had time to put his incomparable wartime experiences into writing. This series is therefore a great historical treasure trove, although it is not written by a historian. Churchill, with his astute political sense, made no attempt to
hide the fact that he wanted to be the first to get facts on record about the causes leading to the war, and his government's leadership of the war effort, before others would second-guess these events. He had vast sources of information available to him. First, as a member of the opposition to the pre-war Baldwin and Chamberlin governments, he nevertheless had access to huge amounts of official military data concerning British, French, and German military preparedness and defenses. As PM during the war, of course he had a say in every military decision. After the war, when he was out of government, he was given the privileged access to unlimited amounts of government documents by the Atlee Labour government. The result is a highly authoritative work which added to Churchill's stature as a statesman and leader, and made him wealthy.
Churchill had been allied with Conservative leader Stanley Baldwin, who succeeded MacDonald, in the 1920's, but his opposition to Indian independence prevented him from being offered a cabinet seat. However, his interwar efforts became increasingly focused on the dangerous mistakes he saw occurring on the international arena, especially Baldwin's early position on favoring unilateral British disarmament. Observers of modern politics, with its hard edges, would be amused by the role of an opposition leader in 1930's Britain. Churchill railed against the government's policies in Parliament, making articulate points, sometimes very vehemently, but there was never any character assassination. He also wrote some newspaper articles, and many letters to colleagues with detailed, well-stated arguments to back them up. Most of what he was saying then had become painfully apparent by 1939, and his writings from that time form an important basis to the structure of his book.
Thus, Churchill leads the reader through the deeply troubling unfolding of events surrounding German rearmament in violation of the Versailles Treaty, without consequences imposed by the victorious allies; the air superiority of the British and French allowed to become overshadowed by the Germans; the Rhineland forceable occupation while Britain and France stood by and watched; the building of a German Siegfried Line of defense; establishment of a Berlin-Rome (Hitler-Mussolini) axis; Austria gobbled up by Germany; and most shameful, Czechoslovakia left to be destroyed by Germany, while Britain ignored the pleadings of Russia to form an alliance to intervene. After all of this cowardly diplomacy by the allied powers (including the United States, which kept its hands clean of the mess by turning ostrich while European events reached the boiling point), Great Britain dragged France into a treaty guaranteeing the integrity of Poland, the next obvious target of Germany.
Churchill provides detailed, first-hand accounting of these events, and more, including the diplomatic vacillations and double-dealings that unfolded as World War approached. These include the ironic fact that the allied powers, in the early 1930's, originally saw the Italian dictator as a possible stabilizing influence. Mussolini early on presented the picture of a benevolent fascist, if there can be such a thing. Democratic leaders were impressed by his very early distrust and dislike of the new German dictator, Hitler; Mussolini was even courted to provide the threat of Italy's growing military as a possible warning against Hitler's designs on taking over the Rhineland. Then there was Stalin's communist regime, which was never given the trust accorded Mussolini by the allies. Finding no willingness to share diplomatic solutions from Britain and France, his and Hitler's foreign ministers, Molotov and Ribbentrop, shocked the world by signing a non-aggression pact.
This history thus relates the sordid history of governmental and public disillusionment as Germany gobbled up whole countries without challenge (before its attack on Poland); the allied decision to stand by without challenging Italy's invasion of Abyssinia (Ethiopia); the Polish grab of spoils in Czechoslovakia in the wake of Germany's take-over; the Russian invasion of Finland and later sharing the spoils, with Germany, of Poland.
All of these developments were cause for increased anxiety throughout Europe, but the average Britton remained blissfully confident in continued peace right up to the end. Neville Chamberlain, in one of the most self-delusional acts of any government leader in history, culminated a series of three meetings with Hitler in 1938 by signing the Munich pact, which sold the Czechs down the river, much to the chagrin of Churchill and his Conservative friends. Chamberlain received rock-star treatment at home, being mobbed by admiring citizens when his airplane arrived in England from Munich. What's interesting is that Churchill publicly denounced this action in Parliament, but, on a personal level, maintained cordial relations with Chamberlain. This is why Churchill was invited to take over the Admiralty after Germany attacked Poland in September 1939, and the war started. Churchill clearly writes that the public pandering by Chamberlain was ruinous to Britain's eventual response to the start of the war, but he became a loyal colleague of Chamberlain in its early months.
The latter part of the book describes these early months, which Churchill calls the "Twilight War", otherwise known as the "Phony War." This description comes from the lack of open warfare from the start of the war until Spring, 1940. To the average British, Belgian or French citizen, it was a creepy time of knowing all hell was ready to break loose but very few bullets were being fired. Most of the action during this time (with the exception of the busy German activity of consolidating its defeat of Poland's army and air force, and institution of a reign of terror against the Polish population),
occurred on the sea; this put Winston at the front as the cabinet officer most involved in making daily decisions on the progress of the war. German commerce raiders were causing consternation and U-Boats were beginning to incur serious losses against British shipping, supplemented by German sea-mining of British ports. The Phony War ended in April, 1940, according to Churchill
when Britain attempted to land forces in Norway to repel an expected German invasion of that country. The British and Allied forces were totally unprepared for the seriously brutal German type of modern warfare and suffered a humiliating rebuff.
Churchill remained the loyal cabinet leader, freely acknowledging that he was among the war planners who shared blame for Britain's poor preparation for this campaign. The public was having nothing of this. Public opinion finally came around to embracing the reality of the odds which were now stacked against Britain and France, and the truth was not lost on anyone about the warnings Churchill had been issuing for years. It did not help matters for Chamberlain that he gave a speech in April, 1940 in which he seriously misjudged the lack of a German land invasion of England to date, which actually was caused by the time needed for planning by the German military for its upcoming "Blitskrieg" against Holland and France, for timidity. His famous quote: "one thing is certain: he (Hitler) missed the bus" (p. 526) would later help to drive him out of office.
Churchill gives an interesting account of the manner in which the Chamberlain government collapsed and the King invited Churchill to form a coalition government in the wake of the Norway fiasco. He took office when his country was in extreme peril. He had received correspondence from President Franklin Roosevelt expressing his belief in the common destinies of the two countries, but the President was powerless to act due to the dominance of the isolationists in the U.S. Congress. Powerful, potential ally Russia was making nice with the Germans. Mussolini, who had not declared war yet, was cagily biding his time to act while egging Hitler on. Poland, Norway and Denmark were under Nazi occupation. British attempts to build aircraft and ships, which increased after Munich, were woefully short of what the Germans had built; worse yet, during the seven months of the phony war, British industry had not stepped up production according to pressing wartime needs. France, the great military power after World War I, had seen its land and air dominance eroded in favor of Germany during the 1930's, partly at the instigation of Great Britain, and spent the entire phony war period with its army's morale steadily eroding behind an elaborate defensive line while everyone waited for Hitler to move. Britain was sending all of the forces it could muster to France in anticipation of a planned German invasion, but British and French forces were hamstrung by the refusal of Belgium to allow them on Belgian soil; incredibly, Belgian intelligence had received the detailed plans, in advance of the planned German invasion, which clearly showed the proposed penetration of neutral Belgium first on the way to invading Holland and France, but the Belgian government still would take no actions to defend against these events.
Winston did not have time to ponder all of this. On May 10, 1940, the same day as his appointment, Germany invaded Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Alarmed but calm, Churchill immediately formed his war cabinet and set to work on the business at hand, confident that he was meant to take on this responsibility by reason of temperament and experience.
May 24, 2013
The Gathering Storm
Winston Churchill
Haughton Mifflin, 1948
As with many books and movies, I am driven to read or see them based on their titles. Such was the case with "The Gathering Storm". Of course, I had a good idea of what it was about, and that certainly played its part. I enjoyed the experience though, and perhaps in large part because, it was the fulfillment of a pleasure deferred for over 50 years.
Being the first of six volumes on the subject of the second World War, it covers a period, which while part of my life, included four of my first - 1936 to 1940; and two prior to me 1934 - 1936: encompassing the rise and consolidation of the Third Reich. (This sentence reminds me of Thomas Wolfe setting the stage in "Look Homeward, Angel" for his own apparition by recalling all of human history as but prelude.) Or, using a less personal metric, from the time of his fall (Churchill's) into the "political wilderness" until being told by the king himself, "I want you to form a Government." And then reveling: "I felt as if I were walking with Destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial." (p. 667). Ah !!! what a feeling of worth and exuberance at the age of 65, when most of us are looking forward to retirement and Medicare.
But the book is ultimately about the nature of the buildup, to that time, of the Third Reich, against all probability, to become the most potent threat to the very continued existence of both Judeo-Christian and Secular-Humanist culture which until then had evolved. It is the narrative of how the Allied powers fresh from the total destruction of Germany thus ending the first World War, squandered opportunity after opportunity to avoid, and Churchill would insist, prevent, the second. And in light of this failure, when asked by President Roosevelt, what name should we give to this war, Churchill said at once: "The Unnecessary War." (p. iv). Churchill details how time after time, both France and Great Britain, caught in war weariness, and trusting in the collective will of peaceful nations as expected to be expressed in the League of Nations, temporized through inaction and sought to appease "the Beast".
Yet, Churchill is fair, and sympathetic to all. While he portrays himself as eager to take action and stand up to the Fuehrer, he acknowledges the legitimacy of arguments to the contrary posed by many. His portrayal is one of disappointment rather than recrimination. For example, while I always imagined Neville Chamberlin as something of a dithering idiot, I found that Churchill held him in high regard in many ways, for a long time. It was not until the fall of Norway (April-May, 1940) almost two years after "Munich" (September, 1938 - "peace in our time"), that he, Churchill, expressed dismay over Chamberlin's interpretation of the situation. In a speech Chamberlin made on April 5, 1940 he expressed "unusual optimism" (p. 583) with respect to the Allies' war readiness compared with what Hitler had accomplished. And in an almost perverted way managed to conclude in that respect (war readiness) Hitler had "missed the bus." In fact, Chamberlin had completely misread the state of affairs. By late April the British and French had been forced to evacuate Norway, and on May 10 Hitler's blitzkrieg hit both Holland and Belgium. That very day Chamberlin: acquiesced; looked to Churchill as successor; and proposed to the king that Churchill be prime minister. By 7:00 PM the king asked Churchill to form a Government; and "at about 3 A.M." after selecting and notifying his new cabinet, he went to bed, sure that he should not fail, "...slept soundly and had no need for cheering dreams..."
One of the continuing questions I have had over the years was about Hitler's Mein Kampf. I never read it and wondered just what significance it had in subsequent events. Churchill provided a two page summation (p. 55ff). I have no idea how accurate his interpretation is but it was compelling. To quote him. "The main thesis of Mein Kampf is simple. Man is a fighting animal;" This axiom leads to the assertion that a nation is destined to fight not only for its survival but for dominance of all others - uber alles. The most effective form of government is that of a dictator who will pursue this mandate with utter ruthlessness. No one can question or gainsay the leader. With this belief system Hitler wiped out his own entire contingent of Brown Shirts in one day. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, were eliminated in the "Night of the long knives", June 30, 1934. If he could do this to his own, the message was clear for his enemies.
A point worth considering, as we citizens of the United States, today (2013), reexamine our role in the world, is that of national morality, ethics. Churchill addressed one iteration of this conundrum when helping to develop a strategy with respect to Norway. Norway and Sweden had declared themselves neutrals. Yet, Sweden provided the principle source of iron ore for Germany; and one of Norway's harbors, Narvik, was the principle shipping point for that ore. Further, Narvik would make a first class harbor for the British fleet. Churchill diligently lays out the moral dilemma. Initiate military action in Norway, and perhaps in Sweden to prevent shipments to Germany. Thus, inflicting a major blow to the German military buildup; but on the other hand, violating not only another country but also violating solemn commitments to the League of Nations. Yet, is it not the case that both nations, Norway and Sweden, are trying to have it both ways - neutral, but profiting? Perhaps, but their neutrality is all that is saving them from being overrun by Germany. And if Britain were to take action, would that not itself provoke the Germans to launch an attack on them? In a finely nuanced skirmish between realpolitik and guiding principle he affirms that Britain must act since it is "...bound in duty, to abrogate for a space some of the conventions of the very laws we seek to consolidate and reaffirm. ... The letter of the law must not in supreme emergency obstruct those who are charged with its protection and enforcement. ... Humanity, rather than legality, must be our guide." Ruthlessness in the name of humanity.
Winston Churchill
Haughton Mifflin, 1948
As with many books and movies, I am driven to read or see them based on their titles. Such was the case with "The Gathering Storm". Of course, I had a good idea of what it was about, and that certainly played its part. I enjoyed the experience though, and perhaps in large part because, it was the fulfillment of a pleasure deferred for over 50 years.
Being the first of six volumes on the subject of the second World War, it covers a period, which while part of my life, included four of my first - 1936 to 1940; and two prior to me 1934 - 1936: encompassing the rise and consolidation of the Third Reich. (This sentence reminds me of Thomas Wolfe setting the stage in "Look Homeward, Angel" for his own apparition by recalling all of human history as but prelude.) Or, using a less personal metric, from the time of his fall (Churchill's) into the "political wilderness" until being told by the king himself, "I want you to form a Government." And then reveling: "I felt as if I were walking with Destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial." (p. 667). Ah !!! what a feeling of worth and exuberance at the age of 65, when most of us are looking forward to retirement and Medicare.
But the book is ultimately about the nature of the buildup, to that time, of the Third Reich, against all probability, to become the most potent threat to the very continued existence of both Judeo-Christian and Secular-Humanist culture which until then had evolved. It is the narrative of how the Allied powers fresh from the total destruction of Germany thus ending the first World War, squandered opportunity after opportunity to avoid, and Churchill would insist, prevent, the second. And in light of this failure, when asked by President Roosevelt, what name should we give to this war, Churchill said at once: "The Unnecessary War." (p. iv). Churchill details how time after time, both France and Great Britain, caught in war weariness, and trusting in the collective will of peaceful nations as expected to be expressed in the League of Nations, temporized through inaction and sought to appease "the Beast".
Yet, Churchill is fair, and sympathetic to all. While he portrays himself as eager to take action and stand up to the Fuehrer, he acknowledges the legitimacy of arguments to the contrary posed by many. His portrayal is one of disappointment rather than recrimination. For example, while I always imagined Neville Chamberlin as something of a dithering idiot, I found that Churchill held him in high regard in many ways, for a long time. It was not until the fall of Norway (April-May, 1940) almost two years after "Munich" (September, 1938 - "peace in our time"), that he, Churchill, expressed dismay over Chamberlin's interpretation of the situation. In a speech Chamberlin made on April 5, 1940 he expressed "unusual optimism" (p. 583) with respect to the Allies' war readiness compared with what Hitler had accomplished. And in an almost perverted way managed to conclude in that respect (war readiness) Hitler had "missed the bus." In fact, Chamberlin had completely misread the state of affairs. By late April the British and French had been forced to evacuate Norway, and on May 10 Hitler's blitzkrieg hit both Holland and Belgium. That very day Chamberlin: acquiesced; looked to Churchill as successor; and proposed to the king that Churchill be prime minister. By 7:00 PM the king asked Churchill to form a Government; and "at about 3 A.M." after selecting and notifying his new cabinet, he went to bed, sure that he should not fail, "...slept soundly and had no need for cheering dreams..."
One of the continuing questions I have had over the years was about Hitler's Mein Kampf. I never read it and wondered just what significance it had in subsequent events. Churchill provided a two page summation (p. 55ff). I have no idea how accurate his interpretation is but it was compelling. To quote him. "The main thesis of Mein Kampf is simple. Man is a fighting animal;" This axiom leads to the assertion that a nation is destined to fight not only for its survival but for dominance of all others - uber alles. The most effective form of government is that of a dictator who will pursue this mandate with utter ruthlessness. No one can question or gainsay the leader. With this belief system Hitler wiped out his own entire contingent of Brown Shirts in one day. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, were eliminated in the "Night of the long knives", June 30, 1934. If he could do this to his own, the message was clear for his enemies.
A point worth considering, as we citizens of the United States, today (2013), reexamine our role in the world, is that of national morality, ethics. Churchill addressed one iteration of this conundrum when helping to develop a strategy with respect to Norway. Norway and Sweden had declared themselves neutrals. Yet, Sweden provided the principle source of iron ore for Germany; and one of Norway's harbors, Narvik, was the principle shipping point for that ore. Further, Narvik would make a first class harbor for the British fleet. Churchill diligently lays out the moral dilemma. Initiate military action in Norway, and perhaps in Sweden to prevent shipments to Germany. Thus, inflicting a major blow to the German military buildup; but on the other hand, violating not only another country but also violating solemn commitments to the League of Nations. Yet, is it not the case that both nations, Norway and Sweden, are trying to have it both ways - neutral, but profiting? Perhaps, but their neutrality is all that is saving them from being overrun by Germany. And if Britain were to take action, would that not itself provoke the Germans to launch an attack on them? In a finely nuanced skirmish between realpolitik and guiding principle he affirms that Britain must act since it is "...bound in duty, to abrogate for a space some of the conventions of the very laws we seek to consolidate and reaffirm. ... The letter of the law must not in supreme emergency obstruct those who are charged with its protection and enforcement. ... Humanity, rather than legality, must be our guide." Ruthlessness in the name of humanity.
February 28, 2021
"If necessary, alone..."
The first book in Churchill’s massive six-volume history of the Second World War, this covers the period from the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 to the day when Churchill became Prime Minister in May 1940. The series, among his other writings, won Churchill the Nobel Prize for Literature, although the liberal intellectual snobberati like to suggest that that was out of gratitude for his wartime leadership rather than for its literary merits. The snobberati, as usual, are wrong. This is a superbly written account of the period from one man’s viewpoint – that man happening to be one of the handful of important men who decided the fate of the world for the second half of the twentieth century at least.
Despite recent attempts at revisionist history, it is still, I think, generally accepted that the conditions that allowed for the rise of Hitler and the Nazis were seeded in the Treaty of Versailles that formally ended the First World War, and then fertilized by the failures of the Allies, mainly the US, France and Britain, to act at an early stage to prevent Germany from re-arming. Exhausted from WW1 and with no appetite for further war, appeasement seemed the easier option, and the old men who ran the world dithered as Hitler began to forge a massive fighting machine and revived German pride and resentment at their treatment by the victors of the 1914-18 war. Churchill was the main opponent of appeasement, arguing consistently that Germany must be dealt with before they became too powerful for the Allies to control. Alas! How different history may have been if only his views had prevailed in the mid-1930s.
Of course, in this book Churchill shows that Churchill thinks Churchill was right all along, but I tend to agree with him about that so his bias in his own favour didn’t become an issue. He is remarkably personally generous to those individuals with whom he disagreed, even as he condemns their weakness and failure to act. He tries to give their side of the arguments as fairly as he can, considering that they were proved wrong time and time again.
But he is pretty brutal about failures of the national policies of the WW1 allies, especially the US’s self-interested and isolationist position of neutrality. He points out that the Allies reluctantly agreed to Wilson’s League of Nations after WW1, only for the American government then to refuse to ratify it, immediately making it a toothless tiger. He talks about the damage done, economically and politically, by the reparations forced on Germany, and how the US was unwilling to cancel debt to allow the German economy to recover, not to mention the economies of America’s erstwhile allies.
But France and Britain come in for plenty of criticism too, for continuing to attempt to mollify and compromise with Hitler’s Germany long after, in Churchill’s opinion, such attempts were obviously dangerous. He talks in depth about Germany’s open and secret build-up of their army, naval power and, most frighteningly, air force, while Britain and France lagged behind, hoping that somehow war could be avoided. He barely hides his disgust at the Munich agreement and the betrayal of the Allies’ commitment to Czechoslovakia. He shows how he argued forcefully for the Allies to take a military stand before Germany overtook France and Britain in terms of military force, but to no avail. And therefore, when even the appeasers finally agreed that Germany must be stopped, the Germans had built up a huge military advantage; and the British, quickly left alone as one ally, France, was defeated, and the other, the US, sat on its haunches doing nothing, had to try to fend off an invasion long enough to allow for a massive expansion in manpower, munitions, and the vital air power – defensive and offensive – that had been allowed to fall so badly behind.
Although the story is told from a personal perspective, with Churchill more than most the personal is political, and so this reads like a formal history far more than a personal memoir. Churchill claims, and I have no reason to doubt him, that he asked other people to rigorously check the facts in the book, so that there is a solid historical foundation below the upper layer of Churchill’s own opinion. One sees his mastery over detail, his ability to look at the full chessboard of war, his willingness to throw away a pawn or two to capture the queen, his courage to be open about the dangers ahead, his inspirational belief in Britain’s eventual ability to prevail which meant so much to the national psyche during the war’s darkest days. We see him pull all the political levers at his command, all the contacts and loyalties he had built up over his already long lifetime in the spotlight on the world’s stage, to bring people and nations round to his views – a long task and often seemingly futile, but he never weakened or turned away, never decided to let his reputation rest on his past achievements as many men of his age may have done. Was he perfect? Absolutely not. Opinionated, demanding, a risk taker, an imperialist to the core – I imagine the people around him found him maddening and exhausting. But he also commanded deep personal loyalty and respect from those who worked closely with him, and was admired and increasingly revered by a large majority of the general public for his steadfastness and patriotism in these early days of the war. He was the right man at the right time, and how often does that happen?
I really thought this might be a turgid read, but it’s actually a first-rate history with just enough of the personal to bring out the emotional drama of war. I also realised while reading it how influential it must have been on the early interpretations of the history of the period, since it chimed in almost every particular with what I was taught about the war in school in the 1970s. I will certainly go on to read the other five volumes in the series.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
The first book in Churchill’s massive six-volume history of the Second World War, this covers the period from the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 to the day when Churchill became Prime Minister in May 1940. The series, among his other writings, won Churchill the Nobel Prize for Literature, although the liberal intellectual snobberati like to suggest that that was out of gratitude for his wartime leadership rather than for its literary merits. The snobberati, as usual, are wrong. This is a superbly written account of the period from one man’s viewpoint – that man happening to be one of the handful of important men who decided the fate of the world for the second half of the twentieth century at least.
Despite recent attempts at revisionist history, it is still, I think, generally accepted that the conditions that allowed for the rise of Hitler and the Nazis were seeded in the Treaty of Versailles that formally ended the First World War, and then fertilized by the failures of the Allies, mainly the US, France and Britain, to act at an early stage to prevent Germany from re-arming. Exhausted from WW1 and with no appetite for further war, appeasement seemed the easier option, and the old men who ran the world dithered as Hitler began to forge a massive fighting machine and revived German pride and resentment at their treatment by the victors of the 1914-18 war. Churchill was the main opponent of appeasement, arguing consistently that Germany must be dealt with before they became too powerful for the Allies to control. Alas! How different history may have been if only his views had prevailed in the mid-1930s.
Of course, in this book Churchill shows that Churchill thinks Churchill was right all along, but I tend to agree with him about that so his bias in his own favour didn’t become an issue. He is remarkably personally generous to those individuals with whom he disagreed, even as he condemns their weakness and failure to act. He tries to give their side of the arguments as fairly as he can, considering that they were proved wrong time and time again.
But he is pretty brutal about failures of the national policies of the WW1 allies, especially the US’s self-interested and isolationist position of neutrality. He points out that the Allies reluctantly agreed to Wilson’s League of Nations after WW1, only for the American government then to refuse to ratify it, immediately making it a toothless tiger. He talks about the damage done, economically and politically, by the reparations forced on Germany, and how the US was unwilling to cancel debt to allow the German economy to recover, not to mention the economies of America’s erstwhile allies.
But France and Britain come in for plenty of criticism too, for continuing to attempt to mollify and compromise with Hitler’s Germany long after, in Churchill’s opinion, such attempts were obviously dangerous. He talks in depth about Germany’s open and secret build-up of their army, naval power and, most frighteningly, air force, while Britain and France lagged behind, hoping that somehow war could be avoided. He barely hides his disgust at the Munich agreement and the betrayal of the Allies’ commitment to Czechoslovakia. He shows how he argued forcefully for the Allies to take a military stand before Germany overtook France and Britain in terms of military force, but to no avail. And therefore, when even the appeasers finally agreed that Germany must be stopped, the Germans had built up a huge military advantage; and the British, quickly left alone as one ally, France, was defeated, and the other, the US, sat on its haunches doing nothing, had to try to fend off an invasion long enough to allow for a massive expansion in manpower, munitions, and the vital air power – defensive and offensive – that had been allowed to fall so badly behind.
Although the story is told from a personal perspective, with Churchill more than most the personal is political, and so this reads like a formal history far more than a personal memoir. Churchill claims, and I have no reason to doubt him, that he asked other people to rigorously check the facts in the book, so that there is a solid historical foundation below the upper layer of Churchill’s own opinion. One sees his mastery over detail, his ability to look at the full chessboard of war, his willingness to throw away a pawn or two to capture the queen, his courage to be open about the dangers ahead, his inspirational belief in Britain’s eventual ability to prevail which meant so much to the national psyche during the war’s darkest days. We see him pull all the political levers at his command, all the contacts and loyalties he had built up over his already long lifetime in the spotlight on the world’s stage, to bring people and nations round to his views – a long task and often seemingly futile, but he never weakened or turned away, never decided to let his reputation rest on his past achievements as many men of his age may have done. Was he perfect? Absolutely not. Opinionated, demanding, a risk taker, an imperialist to the core – I imagine the people around him found him maddening and exhausting. But he also commanded deep personal loyalty and respect from those who worked closely with him, and was admired and increasingly revered by a large majority of the general public for his steadfastness and patriotism in these early days of the war. He was the right man at the right time, and how often does that happen?
I really thought this might be a turgid read, but it’s actually a first-rate history with just enough of the personal to bring out the emotional drama of war. I also realised while reading it how influential it must have been on the early interpretations of the history of the period, since it chimed in almost every particular with what I was taught about the war in school in the 1970s. I will certainly go on to read the other five volumes in the series.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
December 23, 2007
I love Churchill's writing style and his humor. Yes, he doesn't talk about absolutely everything that happened between the two world wars (his not-so-politically-correct opinion on India is conveniently nonexistent) but the highlights of the political turmoils which lead to the fascist takeover of Italy and Germany were enlightening and the downfall of Europ and the impotence of France and England to prevent the war were detailed marvelously.
I enjoy reading Churchill's Second World War series and I recommend them.
I enjoy reading Churchill's Second World War series and I recommend them.
Read
February 11, 2022Audiobook pe scribd.
Este foarte interesanta perspectiva lui Churchill asupra politicii interne si externe a WWII.
Trebuie sa recunosc ca a fost dificil de ascultat, si cred ca ar fi potrivita celor cu niste cunostinte istorice si politice solide. Altfel..e greu de urmarit.
Este foarte interesanta perspectiva lui Churchill asupra politicii interne si externe a WWII.
Trebuie sa recunosc ca a fost dificil de ascultat, si cred ca ar fi potrivita celor cu niste cunostinte istorice si politice solide. Altfel..e greu de urmarit.
May 1, 2021
Masterful prose. Exciting narration. Fearful subject. I listened to the condensed version of the first volume and intend to later go slowly through the unabridged one. Highly recommended for serious students of history and virtue.
January 17, 2024
If you’re going to read history, this is the way to do it. Churchill is an excellent historian and writer, and also happens to be the preeminent figure of this time period.
He uses a massive amount of primary source material — speeches in the House of Commons, letters between ministers, minutes of meetings on the allied and axis sides, etc. - to take you blow by blow through the tension of the interwar years. As one would expect, the source material is tied together by insightful commentary, hindsight reflections, and big picture summaries elegantly written with Churchillian grandeur.
The narrative is detailed, but Churchill writes in such a way that you always maintain sight of the big picture (although he does tend to get carried away with the technicalities of naval battles). He makes his opinions known but also explains in good faith the views and motives of his opposition.
I can’t recommend this book enough for anyone with an interest in this period. A very enjoyable and educational read.
He uses a massive amount of primary source material — speeches in the House of Commons, letters between ministers, minutes of meetings on the allied and axis sides, etc. - to take you blow by blow through the tension of the interwar years. As one would expect, the source material is tied together by insightful commentary, hindsight reflections, and big picture summaries elegantly written with Churchillian grandeur.
The narrative is detailed, but Churchill writes in such a way that you always maintain sight of the big picture (although he does tend to get carried away with the technicalities of naval battles). He makes his opinions known but also explains in good faith the views and motives of his opposition.
I can’t recommend this book enough for anyone with an interest in this period. A very enjoyable and educational read.
July 10, 2019
I am a big fan of Churchill, and this first volume of six lived up to the hype. Beyond the amazing life he lived, Churchill was an outstanding writer and this history of the lead up to - and start of - World War II in Europe was fascinating. It is part history, part memoir, and part primary sources. Put it all together and it reads like a novel in many ways. I fully realize that this paints Churchill in the best light as he is the writer, but as a student of history, this was fantastic. Looking forward to the rest of the volumes.
December 25, 2021
Masterful, but not entirely easy if you do not have a grasp of the era.
And it is written by someone who sees the storm coming, but like Cassandra, noone heeds. Democracies are really gullible. Denial of the threats coming, and it is painful how all the democratic nations all the time hopes they will not be involved and the wolf eats them one by one. Strong forces and views for peace make Britain and France horribly unprepared for what is coming. Democracies are always at least two years behind the dictators.
And it is written by someone who sees the storm coming, but like Cassandra, noone heeds. Democracies are really gullible. Denial of the threats coming, and it is painful how all the democratic nations all the time hopes they will not be involved and the wolf eats them one by one. Strong forces and views for peace make Britain and France horribly unprepared for what is coming. Democracies are always at least two years behind the dictators.
December 28, 2023
Luin tämän (näin yllättäen) Nobel-podcastia varten, mutta ilokseni kirja oli myös sangen jees. Churchill kirjoittaa toisen maailmansodan alkamisesta kiinnostavasti ja vetävästi, ja nyt kun maailmantila on Ukrainan sodan ja Palestiinan kansanmurhan vuoksi jännitteinen ja raskas, tämän lukeminen tuntui myös aika ajankohtaiselta. Koko sarjaa en kyllä varmaan lue, kun itse sotamähinät olisivat liian raskaita, mutta tätä ekaa osaa voin suositella monenlaisille lukijoille.
January 9, 2023
One can't help seeing parallels between the Gathering Storm of 1922-1940 and the ongoing appeasement in the West's relationships with China and Russia. I hope we can learn from this fascinating prime witness history without having to fully repeat the tragedy the West had to endure back then. This is the real deal.
May 20, 2019
Free download available at FadedPage
This book is in the public domain in Canada, and is made available to you DRM-free.
I made the SR of this book for DPC and it will be published by FadedPage.
Pages 163-64:
After the loss of air parity, we were liable to be blackmailed by Hitler. If we had taken steps betimes to create an air force half as strong again, or twice as strong, as any that Germany could produce in
breach of the Treaty, we should have kept control of the future. But even air parity, which no one could say was aggressive, would have given us a solid measure of defensive confidence in these critical years, and a broad basis from which to conduct our diplomacy or expand our air force. But we had lost air parity.
Page 165:
It is only in the twentieth century that this hateful conception of inducing nations to surrender by terrorising the helpless civil population by massacring the women and children has gained acceptance and countenance among men.
This book is in the public domain in Canada, and is made available to you DRM-free.
I made the SR of this book for DPC and it will be published by FadedPage.
Pages 163-64:
After the loss of air parity, we were liable to be blackmailed by Hitler. If we had taken steps betimes to create an air force half as strong again, or twice as strong, as any that Germany could produce in
breach of the Treaty, we should have kept control of the future. But even air parity, which no one could say was aggressive, would have given us a solid measure of defensive confidence in these critical years, and a broad basis from which to conduct our diplomacy or expand our air force. But we had lost air parity.
Page 165:
It is only in the twentieth century that this hateful conception of inducing nations to surrender by terrorising the helpless civil population by massacring the women and children has gained acceptance and countenance among men.
February 8, 2018
Don’t you just love this title? I never even considered reading Churchill’s work before (although, he IS a Nobel prize winner for literature!), because I’ve seen the long line of his volumes in my grandparents’ home when I was little, I’ve seen them on flea market sales and I’ve seen the number of pages of each volume, here on GR. It stuck with me - if you want to read Churchill, you really have to commit! But something about this title was so compelling. Whenever I saw it, I just thought about the dark sky, the low resonating sound of thunder and the feeling of destruction. That’s what the storm is, dark and destructive, just like everything related to WWII. I decided - what the hell, I can read this one volume and decide about the next ones later. I made a great decision!
What is interesting right now about this book is that people are now buzzing about Gary Oldman’s portrayal of Churchill in The Darkest hour. Even the Hollywood is pulling focus to this book! I recommend the movie, because it portrays accurately what I felt the book is about - danger approaching silently and quickly.
Churchill held many high positions before WWI and during the peaceful period in between two wars, so his access to all the classified materials was a big plus for me. He discredits himself for being biased sometimes, but nevertheless, as a reader in 2018, I wasn’t so worried about little politics between parties. I wanted to know more about the decisions and the data that led the world to this war. He is very detailed, sometimes too much, I didn’t really have to know all about Maritime science and the force of ALL British ships. I couldn’t really blame him since I enjoyed that same precision when it came to diplomatic relations and pettiness of politicians.
Churchill has amazing writing style, believe it or not! He is almost poetic, but still precise and to the point. I loved his obvious respect for his peers, who didn’t always get along with him. Even in their most heated correspondence, they remained polite and respectful.
I would recommend this book only to serious history buffs. It is not a novel, so you should not expect to have an easy time reading it. It requires dedication, so I had to split the number of pages that I had to read every day in order to keep reading. Once I found my pace, it was easier and almost exciting, the expectation of what is about to happen next (don’t worry, I knew the ending). Overall, a nice surprise from Mr Nobel prize winner!
What is interesting right now about this book is that people are now buzzing about Gary Oldman’s portrayal of Churchill in The Darkest hour. Even the Hollywood is pulling focus to this book! I recommend the movie, because it portrays accurately what I felt the book is about - danger approaching silently and quickly.
Churchill held many high positions before WWI and during the peaceful period in between two wars, so his access to all the classified materials was a big plus for me. He discredits himself for being biased sometimes, but nevertheless, as a reader in 2018, I wasn’t so worried about little politics between parties. I wanted to know more about the decisions and the data that led the world to this war. He is very detailed, sometimes too much, I didn’t really have to know all about Maritime science and the force of ALL British ships. I couldn’t really blame him since I enjoyed that same precision when it came to diplomatic relations and pettiness of politicians.
Churchill has amazing writing style, believe it or not! He is almost poetic, but still precise and to the point. I loved his obvious respect for his peers, who didn’t always get along with him. Even in their most heated correspondence, they remained polite and respectful.
I would recommend this book only to serious history buffs. It is not a novel, so you should not expect to have an easy time reading it. It requires dedication, so I had to split the number of pages that I had to read every day in order to keep reading. Once I found my pace, it was easier and almost exciting, the expectation of what is about to happen next (don’t worry, I knew the ending). Overall, a nice surprise from Mr Nobel prize winner!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 456 reviews