Churchill: Visionary, Statesman, Historian

by John Lukacs

Book Overview

A clear-eyed view of Winston Churchill, the workings of his historical imagination, and his successes and failures as a statesman, by the celebrated historian of World War II and best-selling author... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0300097697
• ISBN13: 9780300097696
• Release Date: October 2002
• Publisher: Yale University Press
• Length: 202 Pages
• Weight: 0.65 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 5.8" x 8.6"

Customer Reviews

A "great man" or merely the roar of a great people?

America and the world is fortunate to have a gifted historian such as Lukacs to astutely examine the early World War II times of Sir Winston Churchill. Churchill is much like Abraham Lincoln. He did not seek greatness, it was thrust upon him and his response was magnificent. Who would Lincoln have been had the Confederacy not dared a war to assert its secession? Who would Churchill have been had Adolf Hitler not dared a war to establish his Thousand Year Reich? Lukacs is clearly of the "great man" school of history, and this book is an examination of the triumphs and tragedies of Churchill's career that led him to his five days of greatness in May 1940. It sets the foundation for Lukacs's more recent detailed examinations of Churchill's career. Anyone who wants to understand Churchill and World War II can't do better than to start with this book. The counter to "great man" history is the "great people" -- for want of a better term -- idea. In the 1930s, Benito Mussolini was a "great man" with similar thoughts and words (but not morality). However, most Italians didn't share Mussolini's visions. Like Lincoln and his understanding of Americans, Churchill had a profound insight to British attitudes. In response to being called a lion, Churchill replied the British people were the "lion" and he merely gave the roar. Mussolini also roared loud and often, but Italians responded with merely the soft purr of a cuddly kitten. Neither view of history detracts from Lukacs' work. Without the British stubborness, a mood amply shared by Americans, Churchill would have been only another puffed up Mussolini. Without Churchill, the British might have been betrayed by nervous politicians. Without Lukacs, this era of history would be hard to understand except as a string of dates and heroic events. Lukacs cites one of Churchill's most interesting quotes, predicting East Europe would be free of communism. Why? Did Churchill foresee the rise of Ronald Reagan, who conservatives credit? Or did he truly understand tyranny will inevitably collapse if left to its follies? Either Churchill foresaw the coming of a "great" American president who caused communism to collapse, as in the "great man" approach to history favoured by the Reaganites; or he understood the nature of "great people" and relevant leaders in contrast to the weakness of ideologues. Did Churchill shape history or give it a rare eloquence? It's the eternal debate in history. Lukacs, in this relatively brief biography of Churchill, offers plenty of thought for both views.

The Ever-Lasting Appeal of Churchill

John Lukas clearly states at the beginning of his short book that his collection of essays is neither a biography nor a scholarly study of Winston Spencer Churchill (pg. xiii). Therefore, potential readers of Lukas' book who do not know anything about the key milestones in the life and career of Churchill should not start here. These readers can read books such as "Churchill a Life", "Churchill a Study in Greatness", "Clementine Churchill The Biography of a Marriage", "Winston and Clementine The Personal Letters of the Churchills" or "The Wit & Wisdom of Winston Churchill" to fill in the most glaring gaps in their knowledge of Churchill for that purpose. Lukas writes to the attention of an audience who has an unquenchable thirst to know more and more about an individual who remains a source of inspiration to many men and women who stand in the way of barbarity and illiberalism around the world. Although Lukas is generally sympathetic to Churchill, he is not blind to his major shortcomings: impetuosity, impatience, stubbornness and fancifulness (pg. 4, 154). Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in his essay "His Failures. His Critics" that Churchill had accumulated errors and mistakes that Churchill critics and detractors were attributing to his flawed character (pg. 129). For example, Churchill's futile fight against granting Dominion status to India from 1929 to 1935 was perhaps compatible with his imperialist credentials but certainly a clear blemish on his record. As a very experienced politician and knowledgeable historian at that time, Churchill should have known much better (pg. 14-15, 24, 135-136). Therefore, Lukas' collection of essays should not be construed as a shameful hagiography.Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in "Churchill's historianship" and "Churchill the visionary" that Churchill was generally cognizant of the lessons that he could draw from past events to articulate his often-visionary policies while reflecting on and shaping history on his turn (pg. 1-18, 47). Churchill was not only a spectator, but also a key actor and play writer of human comedy (pg. 102). Lukas also explores the ups and downs that Churchill had in his relationships with other history shapers such as Charles De Gaulle, Dwight Eisenhower, Adolf Hitler, Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin (pg. 19-20). Lukas convincingly explains that Churchill was facing an unpalatable choice between a Europe entirely ruled by Nazi Germany or half of Europe dominated by the Communists in case of allied victory (pg. 11, 27-28, 35). Churchill rightly first gave top priority to successfully fighting Hitler to death before trying in vain to stop Stalin in 1944-1945. Unlike some unimaginative people, Churchill understood right at the birth of the Soviet Union that the Bolsheviks should be stopped immediately before they grew into a gathering threat to the world. War-weary, the victors of WWI, unfortunately, gave only half-hearty support to the White

Historian as politician and vice versa

About halfway through Lukacs' chapter on Churchill and Eisenhower, I wrote down the phrase I used to title this review. One of the author's missions is to explore how Churchill's study and writing of history shaped his politics, statesmanship, and "vision." And sure enough, just a few dozen pages later, Lukacs himself, modifying a phrase of J.H. Plumb, described Churchill as "a historian-statesman and a statesman-historian" (p. 102).John Lukacs is himself a great writer and interpreter of history. And though I've read lots of things about Churchill over the years, few historians have impressed me as he has with their ability to synthesize and interpret. By all means, still read the longer biographies -- Gilbert, naturally, as well as Best and Jenkins more recently. But let Lukacs help you sort out what it all means. Among other things, you may well find yourself agreeing with him that Churchill "was not The Last Lion" (p. 17).Lukacs' description of Churchill as a patriot but not a nationalist (as contrasted with Hitler, who was a nationalist but not a patriot) is also a revealing one -- especially in an era when the two are too easily confused.Hundreds or thousands of volumes have been written on Churchill as statesman and war leader. But only one (Maurice Ashley's "Churchill as Historian," 1968), plus a few journal articles, have viewed him as a student and writer of history and tried to assess how that affected his other spheres of life. Lukacs views it as central, giving Churchill, as it did, a philosophy of history (p. 123) as well as a world view that allowed him to place events and ideas in their larger historical context (Lukacs sees this as the essential difference between Churchill and Eisenhower).Given the resurgence of interest in Churchill -- which never entirely wanes, of course -- post-9/11, several of Lukacs' insights and conclusions may come as a surprise, or be considered "controversial": notably, that Churchill's famous "Iron Curtain" speech in Fulton was less about the dangers posed by communism *per se* than about those inherent in a divided Europe; that Churchill's glory was not that he won a great victory, but rather that he prevented a great defeat; and that in his dealings with Stalin during and after the war, he tried "to save what was possible" (p. 182). This last point Lukacs deploys (in an excellent chapter on Churchill's failures and his critics) against those who hold Churchill to blame for the "loss" of Eastern Europe to communism (through the Machiavellian "percentages deal," for example). Lukacs argues that Churchill recognized there were only two real options: All of Europe dominated by Hitler, or half of Europe dominated by Stalin. There was, Lukacs says, no third way.Duff Cooper, a Churchillian, once wrote that one of the problems with democracies is that too few democratic leaders have read any history. Lukacs shows how Churchill's own reading and writing prepared him for the challenges of his century. Reader

An Ode to Greatness

John Lukacs has written a number of books about and involving Winston Churchill. Most deal with his role in World War II. In this little volume, really just an extended essay, he waxes poetic on a man he clearly admires deeply. The book is divided into short chapters in which Lukacs considers a number of different aspects of Churchill's character and personality. First he considers Churchill as a visionary by examining some of Churchill's well known, Cassandra-like predictions such as the danger of Hitler and after the war of Soviet aggression. In the section on Churchill as statesman, Lukacs looks at Churchill's complicated relationships with Stalin, Roosevelt and Eisenhower. Lukacs also discusses Churchill's views on Britain's relationship with Europe and his take on the policy of appeasement. In a chapter on Churchill as historian, Lukacs looks critically at Churchill's most important works, in particular, his "Life of Marlborough", his biography of his father, "Lord Randolph Churchill" and his history of the First World War, the "World Crisis". Lukacs appreciates Churchill's talents as an artist of the written word. He demonstrates why Churchill's work succeeds not just as history but as literature. In the next section, Lukacs effectively refutes Churchill's severest revisionist critics in a chapter entitled "His Failures, His Critics". It may interest the reader to know that their exist so-called historians whose purpose in life seems to be to blame Churchill either for fighting Hitler or for losing the empire and world leadership to the United States. As Lukacs argues, this is ridiculous. Finally, in a beautiful essay that is alone worth the price of the book, Lukacs describes his feelings while attending Churchill's state funeral in 1965. Quite a bit is covered in such a small book but as a Churchillphile, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Lukacs has a true appreciation of human greatness and this book demonstrates why Churchill was a great man, one of the greatest of the modern era. Great does not mean perfect of course and Lukacs eloquently explains why Churchill, with all his flaws, was truly great. This is not a book of history or an appropriate reference for a study of Churchill. Nor is it the proper starting point for one seeking to learn about Churchill's life. But for one who already loves and reveres the memory of this great man, this book is balm for the soul. It makes the case, quite clearly for Churchill's greatness. It is at once poignant and eloquent. It is well worth reading.