Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109) OFF-TOPIC



bentley wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:
Yes, Bentley, I see what you're saying. Churchill definitely describes war as a game. It's hard to understand in this day and age. I think it will be interesting to see how China develops now that they only have one child per family.

I'll have to find this off-topic cafe. I'm still learning my way around here, obviously.




Timbuktu,

Glad you found the off topic cafe; one note:

I loved the words from one of his speeches, etc.

In War
RESOLUTION

In Defeat
DEFIANCE

In Victory
MAGNANIMITY

In Peace
GOODWILL

I thought you would appreciate them too. It sums him up.




Ah, you know me well! Love it!
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?




You make an interesting point Timbuktu; maybe what Winston was showing with this impudent act was that he wanted more time with his father not a watch; the watch wasn't giving him the right kind of time he needed. You may be right, he may have been yanking Randolph's chain. But I seem to think that maybe he was just careless as he was with so many things. Maybe it was his ADD or hyperactivity which made him a little obtuse when it came to these kinds of choices as a young person; he wasn't even getting his basic needs met by his parents and maybe this was a chance to act out unwittingly.
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



bentley wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?




You make an interesting point Timbuktu; maybe what Winston was showing with this impudent act was that he wanted more time with his father not a watch; the watch wasn't giving him the right kind of time he needed. You may be right, he may have been yanking Randolph's chain. But I seem to think that maybe he was just careless as he was with so many things. Maybe it was his ADD or hyperactivity which made him a little obtuse when it came to these kinds of choices as a young person; he wasn't even getting his basic needs met by his parents and maybe this was a chance to act out unwittingly.





Bentley! That's BRILLIANT! I'm one big goosebump! I hadn't thought of the symbolism of a WATCH. Yes, I think he wanted his TIME! Wow! I wonder if he even knew what he was doing or why.
Contributor
Juniperus
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎06-14-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?

Perhaps Winston was telling us that since his father did not have the time for him, the watch (a gift of time) was not of value to Winston. I agree kids sometimes do find other ways to express themselves, it may have been Winston’s form of rebellion against his father.
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



Juniperus wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?

Perhaps Winston was telling us that since his father did not have the time for him, the watch (a gift of time) was not of value to Winston. I agree kids sometimes do find other ways to express themselves, it may have been Winston’s form of rebellion against his father.






Yes, I'd thought of that too. The first question is why would he do it. The second question is why is he telling us this? How many times, in how many ways has he written that he wanted his father's time? So sad!
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch

Just want to mention that I've begun watching a series on DVD about Churchill. It's narrated by Martin Gilbert and it's fabulous.

I've changed my mind about his parents just from watching the first five minutes. His letters to his mother, begging for a letter or a visit are pathetic.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?

Perhaps Winston was telling us that since his father did not have the time for him, the watch (a gift of time) was not of value to Winston. I agree kids sometimes do find other ways to express themselves, it may have been Winston’s form of rebellion against his father.






Yes, I'd thought of that too. The first question is why would he do it. The second question is why is he telling us this? How many times, in how many ways has he written that he wanted his father's time? So sad!




Like both yours and Juniperus'thoughts on this and thx for kind words. I think that Churchill was filled with self loathing in his darkest moments which probably started when he was a young child with an active mind who nobody was visiting and bringing home for Christmas. What was wrong with him which made his so unwelcome by his own parents (I am sure he was asking himself this over and over); in his own words he said that he was a troublesome child; was he and what made him that way I wondered. There is so much wit in the book but beneath it many times is sadness beneath the surface. Children often blame themselves for all sorts of things and just do not understand why.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch


Timbuktu1 wrote:
Just want to mention that I've begun watching a series on DVD about Churchill. It's narrated by Martin Gilbert and it's fabulous.

I've changed my mind about his parents just from watching the first five minutes. His letters to his mother, begging for a letter or a visit are pathetic.




In the Churchill Centre there are letters to his father who he hadn't seen in months begging for a visit when he heard that the was visiting in the same town that Winston was at school in. How bad is that? I do think that this kind of upbringing was fostered by Lord Randolph and not by Lady Randolph and whereas he was the head of the household his dictates ruled. I think she was very close to Winston once Lord Randolph was on his way.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

[ Edited ]
UNDERSTANDING PAGE 95 - PART ONE:

To understand page 95, you have to understand what is going on in Winston’s mind when he is writing it; at first I thought it was written tongue in cheek and then I heard something else: derision and the fact that he was getting in his shots at the Conservatives and Lord Salisbury and even Chamberlain.

If Winston was an American, I think he would have been an Independent or maybe even a Republican. But I think that the thing you have to understand first is the different parties in England and that Churchill for whatever reason changed sides when he decided that his party was on the wrong side of the issue. I bet he was cited for being disloyal more than once.

He definitely had his spears out on this page and was trying to settle a few scores; why he was doing it I do not know; but that is exactly what I came away with. So I will have to deal with this in segments. First, what party was Winston in anyhow? It seemed whatever one served his purpose at the time (I do not think it was as political as some may have thought; but more a matter of principle and what he deeply felt about the major issue at hand). But despite the above, you would have gotten whiplash with his moving from one side to the other. He sure didn’t stick around until the last guns were fired. If he felt you were on the wrong side of the issue, adios.

Churchill started out as a Conservative in 1900; became a Liberal over Tariff Reform proposed by Chamberlain and then went back to being a Conservative in 1924 and then criticized the Conservatives (1929-1939) for their policy on India and Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler and Mussolini. World War II breaks out and Churchill returns to the Admiralty, Chamberlain resigns or is forced to, things turn ugly again. The King summons him and requests that he Churchill form a special government with himself as Prime Minister and Churchill takes charge of the mess in 1940. From 1940 until 1945, it was Churchill who steered the way and everyone in England should be very glad he did and they had him in charge.

The Germans surrendered on May 8th, War over, coalition government not needed so it was dissolved; he is surprisingly defeated; becomes the leader for the opposition until 1951 and he is made Prime Minister again until 1955 when he resigns. OK that is the first segment to understand about page 95.

Message Edited by bentley on 07-12-2008 10:40 PM
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

[ Edited ]
UNDERSTANDING PAGE 95 - PART II:

The next thing you have to ask yourself is when was this written: the answer 1930. Winston was born on November 30, 1874. So he was 56 years old when this was written and published though it covered only his first 30 years of life. So Churchill when he was writing this was in the second period of discontent with the Conservatives and Salisbury and Chamberlain were well on their way towards getting the country in hot water again with India, South Africa and then trying to appease Hitler and Mussolini which would lead to Chamberlain stepping down or getting fired, the King calling for Churchill personally to lead England out of this mess and form a special coalition government to prepare for an all out war defensive (1940). So the year would have been 1929 thereabouts when he was beginning to be vocally critical of the disastrous alleged strategies coming out of Chamberlain and Salisbury and company and when he was all heated up and getting in his shots at Chamberlain and Salisbury.

And this downward spiral would go on for another ten years from 1929 until 1939 culminating in Chamberlain being ridden out of town, forced to step down and in 1940 Churchill taking charge at the King's request. Knowing where we are in time is what is key in understanding how fuming Winston was beginning to be and for us to be able to read between the lines.

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-12-2008 10:40 PM
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

UNDERSTANDING PAGE 95 - PART THREE

When reading page 95, it was apparent to me that there were old scores with Salisbury and Chamberlain that were not strictly Winston's; I felt that on page 94 he was trying to settle scores for his father and that was the abstraction in the way that last paragraph on page 94 was written to continually try to cover up for his father's hand in things.

There were old scores (Lord Randolph's old scores):

Here is an excerpt for the Churchill Centre which explains the difficulties Lord Randolph had with Chamberlain and Salisbury, Winston would have been 13 years old when this was going on:

SPRING 1888 (AGE 13)

Lord and Lady Randolph returned to England from a tour of Russia. His loyalty to the Tory Party was fragile and he was still greatly feared by Salisbury, Balfour and the Queen.
On 25 April Lord Randolph's opposition to his own party came into the open. When Balfour spoke in favour of a Private Member's Bill to extend Local Government in Ireland, Churchill was strongly critical of him. He thought he had the support of Joseph Chamberlain to oppose the Government but Chamberlain found the criticisms a little too sharp. Lord Randolph deeply resented what he considered a betrayal by his friend. When they made up, Chamberlain suggested that Lord Randolph must overcome his habit of making things so difficult for his friends.
In the main, Churchill remained silent in the House but it was apparent that he was becoming increasingly disillusioned with politics. When he was greeted by a supporter in St. James's Park with the wish that he hoped to see him again in the Cabinet, Lord Randolph replied: "I sincerely hope that you will not."


So I think this sounds familiar for us in America but I think Winston was still trying to fight the battles that his father was not able to finish (part of the undercurrent of resentment against these two men, I think). And I think Winston picked up on this with what was going on with his father going all the way back to 1888 when he was 13 years old (over 43 years earlier - boy he could hold a grudge and wait patiently I think).
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



bentley wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:


Timbuktu1 wrote:


Juniperus wrote:

Hi Bentley,

If I were in Winston’s circumstances, I probably would not have pawned the watch, I would have gone hungry. But, I believe Winston loved his food! In another letter that Jennie wrote to Winston (pg 161, Jennie) she writes: “I really think that Papa gives you a very fair allowance & you ought to make it do – he would be very X if he knew that I gave you money. It is yr own fault if you spend all yr money on food & then have nothing for other wants…”

I agree it was a bit disrespectful to pawn the watch, but Winston was young and hungry. As Oldesq stated, Winston probably got the watch out of hoc and lost it again.

Juniperus






Sometimes when kids can't speak up to their parents they find other ways to express themselves. That's the feeling I got about the watch incident. It may have been just an impulsive and foolish act but I did find it shocking.


It also made me think of Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of lentils.

I'm not sure what he was trying to say. How hungry he gets? The foolishness of youth? Or something more significant?

Perhaps Winston was telling us that since his father did not have the time for him, the watch (a gift of time) was not of value to Winston. I agree kids sometimes do find other ways to express themselves, it may have been Winston’s form of rebellion against his father.






Yes, I'd thought of that too. The first question is why would he do it. The second question is why is he telling us this? How many times, in how many ways has he written that he wanted his father's time? So sad!




Like both yours and Juniperus'thoughts on this and thx for kind words. I think that Churchill was filled with self loathing in his darkest moments which probably started when he was a young child with an active mind who nobody was visiting and bringing home for Christmas. What was wrong with him which made his so unwelcome by his own parents (I am sure he was asking himself this over and over); in his own words he said that he was a troublesome child; was he and what made him that way I wondered. There is so much wit in the book but beneath it many times is sadness beneath the surface. Children often blame themselves for all sorts of things and just do not understand why.




He finally mentions his brother Jack. I hadn't realized he had a brother! I wonder what's up with that? I wonder if his parents behaved the same way with Jack?
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



bentley wrote:

Timbuktu1 wrote:
Just want to mention that I've begun watching a series on DVD about Churchill. It's narrated by Martin Gilbert and it's fabulous.

I've changed my mind about his parents just from watching the first five minutes. His letters to his mother, begging for a letter or a visit are pathetic.




In the Churchill Centre there are letters to his father who he hadn't seen in months begging for a visit when he heard that the was visiting in the same town that Winston was at school in. How bad is that? I do think that this kind of upbringing was fostered by Lord Randolph and not by Lady Randolph and whereas he was the head of the household his dictates ruled. I think she was very close to Winston once Lord Randolph was on his way.




Lord Randolph sounds really frosty. It doesn't seem to be just the mores of the day as Winston compares his relationship to his father with other boys and their fathers and feels the lack of love and caring. Thank goodness for Mrs. Everest. As he says, he owes her everything.

BTW, I didn't quite understand why his father wanted him in the cavalry but not the hussars.
Does anybody understand what that was about? Sounds as though the cavalry had more status.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

UNDERSTANDING PAGE 95 - PART FOUR

The next thing you have to ask yourself is what time period is the 56 year old Winston writing about in 1929-1930 on pages 94 through 101?

On page 94 (last paragraph), Winston starts out talking about December 1895 and then in three sentences goes back 10 years to 1885. On page 95 he digresses again and goes back to 1886 up through 1892 and then up to 1895 which was the first date he mentioned; then he goes back to 1881 on page 96 and back to 1895, on page 97 he talks about Rhodes in two different positions which would have occurred between 1889 and 1890, on page 98 and 99 it looks like we are back to 1895 because he mentions that he Winston was 21 during the times he is describing; then on page 101 he is off to India (1896) So it looks like from page 94 through page 101 we are covering the years of 1881 - 1896! (backwards and forwards) - A period of 16 years.

This is another reason why it is confusing. It is well known that Salisbury and Rhodes died in the same 1902-1903 timeframe so we know it doesn't go beyond then.

Salisbury upon the death of Benjamin Disraeli in 1878 became leader of the Conservative Party. However, he had to wait until the general election of 1885 before he became Prime Minister. He was replaced by William Gladstone briefly in 1886 but also headed the Conservative governments between 1886-92 and 1895-1902. It is well known that Salisbury supported the policies that led to the Boer War (1899-1902). But he retired from public life in July 1902 and died the following year.

Timeframe for pages 94 through 101 - (1881 - 1896)
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Winston's Watch



Timbuktu1 wrote:


bentley wrote:

Timbuktu1 wrote:
Just want to mention that I've begun watching a series on DVD about Churchill. It's narrated by Martin Gilbert and it's fabulous.

I've changed my mind about his parents just from watching the first five minutes. His letters to his mother, begging for a letter or a visit are pathetic.




In the Churchill Centre there are letters to his father who he hadn't seen in months begging for a visit when he heard that the was visiting in the same town that Winston was at school in. How bad is that? I do think that this kind of upbringing was fostered by Lord Randolph and not by Lady Randolph and whereas he was the head of the household his dictates ruled. I think she was very close to Winston once Lord Randolph was on his way.




Lord Randolph sounds really frosty. It doesn't seem to be just the mores of the day as Winston compares his relationship to his father with other boys and their fathers and feels the lack of love and caring. Thank goodness for Mrs. Everest. As he says, he owes her everything.

BTW, I didn't quite understand why his father wanted him in the cavalry but not the hussars.
Does anybody understand what that was about? Sounds as though the cavalry had more status.




I think that was the case. I do not know if you saw the quote of Teddy Roosevelt about Lord Randolph but it was not nice.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

Have to go to bed now but will go on to Part V tomorrow to explain what is going on from 95 through end of 100.

But in the meantime: (when Winston talks about Tories he is talking about Conservatives).

Conservative instead of the traditional term, Tory, was first used in Britain by George Canning in 1824. The term became more popular after it was used by Sir Robert Peel in his Tamworth Manifesto in 1834. In the Tamworth Manifesto Peel attempted to combine the idea of moderate reform with a strong belief in traditional institutions. After Peel became Prime Minister in 1834, his followers tended to describe themselves as Conservatives rather than Tories.
Frequent Contributor
Oldesq
Posts: 373
Registered: ‎10-07-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th (Chapters IV, V, VI, VII, VIII - pages 51 - 109)

[ Edited ]


bentley wrote:
UNDERSTANDING PAGE 95 - PART II:

The next thing you have to ask yourself is when was this written: the answer 1930. Winston was born on November 30, 1874. So he was 56 years old when this was written and published though it covered only his first 30 years of life. So Churchill when he was writing this was in the second period of discontent with the Conservatives and Salisbury and Chamberlain were well on their way towards getting the country in hot water again with India, South Africa and then trying to appease Hitler and Mussolini which would lead to Chamberlain stepping down or getting fired, the King calling for Churchill personally to lead England out of this mess and form a special coalition government to prepare for an all out war defensive (1940). So the year would have been 1929 thereabouts when he was beginning to be vocally critical of the disastrous alleged strategies coming out of Chamberlain and Salisbury and company and when he was all heated up and getting in his shots at Chamberlain and Salisbury.

And this downward spiral would go on for another ten years from 1929 until 1939 culminating in Chamberlain being ridden out of town, forced to step down and in 1940 Churchill taking charge at the King's request. Knowing where we are in time is what is key in understanding how fuming Winston was beginning to be and for us to be able to read between the lines.

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-12-2008 10:40 PM
 
Thanks for this Bentley.  In considering the time, we also need to consider when in WSC's life he wrote My Early Life.  It was published just after the Conservative party had lost the election of 1929- so Churchill was not a member of government at the time of publication and income from his books and speaking engagements were his only means of income.  Although much of My Early Life was written in the summer of 1928 (he writes in a letter to Stanley Baldwin, "I have had a delightful month - building a cottage and dictating a boo: 200 bricks and 2000 words per day" )  This may account for the tone of MEL and the how short it was compared to WSC's other works- a work more entertaining and more suitable for speaking engagements.


Message Edited by Oldesq on 07-13-2008 08:34 AM
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th POTENTIAL SPOILER

[ Edited ]

Oldesq wrote:
Thanks for this Bentley.  In considering the time, we also need to consider when in WSC's life he wrote My Early Life.  It was published just after the Conservative party had lost the election of 1929- so Churchill was not a member of government at the time of publication and income from his books and speaking engagements were his only means of income.  Although much of My Early Life was written in the summer of 1928 (he writes in a letter to Stanley Baldwin, "I have had a delightful month - building a cottage and dictating a boo: 200 bricks and 2000 words per day" )  This may account for the tone of MEL and the how short it was compared to WSC's other works- a work more entertaining and more suitable for speaking engagements.





POTENTIAL SPOILER (PAGES 94 THROUGH 100 - HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE)

Yes, that is what I pointed out already; 1929 was when he wrote this (published 1930) when he was 56 years old and had already swung back and forth between parties (yes, he wasn't serving for a time); but the time period from 1929 - 1939 got Britain and the Conservatives deeper and deeper into problems which would lead to further messes in South Africa and other parts of the world (maybe Winston's vanity was showing a bit here, that he could have done better than Chamberlain/Salisbury - who knows). What did happen though was a steady path being made straight to a world war (although appeasement was the tactic that the Conservative leadership was trying first and this was alluded to on page 95); but all of what he is describing in these few pages would culminate in 1940 with Churchill taking charge at the King's command and the Conservatives stepping down and out. Why Churchill after the dissolution of the war time government ordered by the King chose to go with the Conseratives at the end of the War is beyond me (except possibly because he was against socialistic policies and saw that as the greater evil); since he had done so much for the working class and working man in the meantime is curious. Maybe he felt that their approach would be better in the long run; but that choice I think is what spelled his defeat at the end of the war; even his wife Clementine had warned him about this decision.

It is also true that Churchill though he came from an established family with money; never had a great deal himself to support himself and his family in the manner he was accustomed even though Chartwell is a splendid place; he had to have help supporting it; so whatever amount of financing and monetary contributions he could make on the side was critically needed to keep his lifestyle up and support his "beloved family". I believe that is one of the reasons that he may have become such a prolific writer too. Churchill did know about to enjoy life, his home, his children and his surroundings; unlike his parents to a very large extent.

There is a lot in pages 94 through 100 which sets up and really explains for the reader what is coming and why.

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-13-2008 09:55 AM
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th

[ Edited ]
OK guys I will get back to pages 94 - 100 soon; but before I do I just want to say that once you get past these six pages of dense history and interpretation that you come across two delicious chapters full of fun and information called India (chapter VIII) and Education at Bangalore which we start tomorrow on the new chapter thread (chapter IX); both are delights so just keep plowing ahead.

On this thread I will get back to the discussion of history in a bit and try to continue to respond to Oldesq's query. Already have divided some of the response into five parts which are already posted; very dense 6 pages; but very worthwhile in understanding the times and the politics during 1881 and 1895 or so especially since Winston had digested these events and these times and was writing about them when he was 56 (some 35 years later after he certainly had the opportunity to ruminate these opinions and thought patterns for some time).

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-13-2008 05:25 PM
Frequent Contributor
Oldesq
Posts: 373
Registered: ‎10-07-2007
0 Kudos

Re: MY EARLY LIFE~~July 7th to July 13th

It is clear to me how very fondly WSC remembers his days in India.  The "long Indian day" he describes like an endless summer camp for excitable boys- shaved just before dawn, regimental parade, baths and breakfast, trip to the stables and orderly room, home to the bungalow for shade during the fiercest part of the day, luncheon at 1:30, nap until 5:00 and the polo chukkas began, hot baths, rest, and 8:30 dinner (including iced glasses) then card games or quiet amusements until 10:30 or 11:00 and off to bed for the same thing tomorrow and for the next three years! (pp. 107-108)
 
And the idea of building a "large tiled barn" for 30! horses in the middle of nowhere- unbelievable.And the bungalow sounds idyllic.
 
It is disappointing, however, to think of living in such an insulated fashion while in a foreign country.