Customer Reviews

Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat: The Dire Warning

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Few men have used the English language with such grace and to such good ends as Winston Churchill. John Lukacs focuses on the key phrase in Churchill's first speech before Parliament as Prime Minister to provide some wonderful insights into both Churchill's thinking and the nation's state of mind as continental Europe crumbled before the onslaught of Hitler's armies and Britain began to realize it was the last, lone defender of the free world.

Churchill's speech was little appreciated at the time. In fact, the man was himself Prime Minister almost by default. Chamberlain was still the leader of the Conservative Party, Halifax probably could have had the post had he really wanted it since he was the first choice of King George VI, and it was only through Labour's insistence that they would not join a national government unless it was led by Churchill that the question was finally decided. One of the many telling details Lukacs reveals is that Chamberlain was wildly applauded when he entered the House to hear Churchill speak on May 13, 1940; Churchill's entrance was mostly ignored.

The speech was significant, Lukacs says, not so much for its poetry as for what it tells us about Churchill's vision of history as it shaped his leadership both throughout the war and afterward. Early on, Churchill recognized the power of Hitler's war machine and the strength of the German nation. He also had a truly terrifying vision of a world plunged into darkness by the very possible Nazi victory in Europe. The cold, black science of Fascism would mean the end of civilization, and Churchill knew that Britain was at the very beginning of a long, hard struggle whose outcome was far from certain.

Dave Donelson, author of Heart of Diamonds: A Novel of Scandal, Love and Death in the Congo

Thankfully weighing in at only 147 pages, Lukacs looks at Chuchill's speeches during the desperate days of May and June 1940 , puts them in context, and gives us this Big Idea: only Churchill really understood what was at stake and that defeat would mean a new Dark Age. To fight on, even if defeated, would give hope and be a symbol for those hundreds of years later who might rise up and emerge from the darkness. Also of interest: why the way he treated Chamberlin after he was voted out and Churchill voted in made all the difference in preventing a peace at any price with Germany. Churchill was magnanimous to him, and Chamberlin appreciated it and so became an ally(albeit one who did not so much overtly support Churchill as one who did not obstruct his leadership). Lukacs quotes a bit of the speech that Churchill gave after Chamberlin died. I have read it before and it is powerful, the grasping of the gist of this truth: don't second guess, today's hero is tomorrow's goat, and back again. And then this gem:"The only guide to a man is his conscience; the only shield to his memory is the rectitude and sincerity of his actions." Worthwhile read.

This concise book goes beyond the actual speech of the title and allows for Professor Lukacs' informed and strong views about Prime Minister Churchill's bedrock thinking on the immense issues of civilization that were at stake in 1940.

I think this book will be most enjoyed by those readers having a fair prior understanding of the dismal political realities in Europe and America at the start of World War II.

"Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat" is more a panegyric than an essay in history, so I suppose your response to the book will depend a good deal on your admiration, or lack thereof, for Winston Churchill. I have a spot of trouble with the man, chiefly stimulated by his post-war stances in regards to reimposing the British hegemony and to perpetuating the "Great Game" in the guise of the "Cold War". Still, I'd hardly be eager to quibble with author John Lukacs over Churchill's courage and bulldog tenacity. Britain could hardly have discovered a man better gifted to "bugger through" (his words, not mine) the greatest calamity of history.

Lukacs bases his panegyric on passages from Churchill's speeches in the early years of his prime ministry, before America's entry into the war continuing until just thereafter. His thesis is basically that Churchill alone comprehended the full menace of Hitlerian Germany's military-industrial might -- Churchill the Prophet, Churchill the bulwark of realism, the 'man on horseback' really of Romantic historiography. I'm not very comfortable with the "Great Man" philosophy of world events, though I have to admit that the constellation of Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt all in one decade demands some explanation. In order to render full hagiographic adulation to Churchill, it's interesting that Lukacs has to attribute more potency to Adolph Hitler as a war leader, and more pound-for-pound fighting strength to the German military than many writers have chosen to do. Lukacs would have us believe that Germany could seriously have defeated both the UK and the USSR, by virtue of fanaticism and discipline, if the USA had remained non-combatant, as well as that Churchill uniquely understand the gravity of the menace for the 'future of civilization'. Those are two separate questions, both very significant, both extremely hard either to prove or to dismiss. For one person, I don't find Lukacs's arguments entirely convincing, and I reject several of his assertions concerning FDR. But his writing is elegant and concise, and the book is quite worth while.

The jacket photograph is not what you are used to seeing as Winston. John Lukacs is here making his contribution to the "Basic Ideas" series put out by the Basic Books of the Persens Book Group. This series is right up his alley, because does best and brightest in the short history form. Five Days in London would be another recent example.

He makes the narrow broad rather than what the trendy micro-historians do and do badly. Dr. Lukacs is not timid of the historian to explain, not simply to chronicle. I have great respect for those who chronicle, journal or blog their way through our world. He takes us from his grabber of a title, taken from this now famous speech. I had no idea how little heard it was at the time. BBC made only the shortest quote that evening.

We are taken from that speech to the beginnings of his Prime Ministry. This book makes me reconsider what I had thought was a closed subject, the appeasement of Hitler by Chamberlain. This argument says he was right to do so. That delay bought Britain critical time.

Another point was how often Churchill failed as a politician. Yet he constantly showed magnanimity to such as Chamberlain on those few occasions when he actually won. We have irrefutable evidence that this was no show, no gesture, but practical conviction.

Finally, Lukacs' opening quote from the Odes of Horace, "Behind the Horseman Sits Black Care", is used to great effect overall and at a few crucial points in his work. Only a rare talent and hard working historian may pick such a phrase and make it apt for a whole book.

This book is a friendly focus on the great man, seen through the lens of one speech, really of one sentence in the speech. "I offer you nothing but blood, toil, tears, and sweat." It was a pivotal moment in English history, English elocution, and in the fortunes of the Western democracies. This was a moment when one man seemed to be made for the challenge he faced. Churchill was the anti-Hitler -- the obstacle history threw up in the path of the German dictator's thrust for European, and later world, domination. If you want to see why character matters, read this book.

This marvelous little book captures the essence of what it must have been like in England in 1940 when Churchill became Prime Minister. The British press had not been candid with the citizenry and it fell to Churchill through his fabulous command of the English language to explain just how dire their situation truly was. He started educating his citizens in a speech where he told them that all he had to offer them was "Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat". The author does an excellent job in showing how Churchill turned the tide of not only public opinion, but the opinions of his colleagues in Parliament, and most importantly of Roosevelt, and ultimately the Nazi's themselves. Josef Goebbels, Hitlers propaganda minister noted in his diary that absent Churchill, Germany would have won the war quickly.

One of Churchill's most famous phrases comes from one of his shortest speeches - his first speech as Prime Minister delivered in Parliament as German forces were literally destroying the French army. The first paragraphs are administrative, describing his assembled government.

The last paragraph is gold, pure gold.

Churchill lays out his war aims and makes it clear that it will be hard, "an ordeal of the most grievous kind." He identifies the Nazis as "a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime" and notes the policy as victory no matter the cost because "without victory, there is no survival." He bids any and all allies to come join Britain.

There, in a few powerful sentences written by Churchill himself (oh, if only that were done nowadays...), is a summary of the situation, the goals and a strategy to win.

Unfortunately, it was not broadcast live and only edited snippets were broadcast over the BBC.

"Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat" is a short (147 pages), well-written history of the Churchill's war years. The focus, as the title implies, is his first few days as Prime Minister, but he follows through to the end of the war.

Nicely done.

Lukacs' lively book is a short read that certainly is worth an evening. It relates a history that English-speaking peoples seem to repeat: when politics as usual fails so utterly that no good end can be seen or expected, it stuffs an outlier into office to suffer the consequences--and thereby finds a leader. Nearly 70 years on, Churchill is adored by history while his contemporary, Roosevelt, is increasingly found wanting. America in this election year when politicians of all stripes are in especially low regard needs a true leader, yet neither candidate seems to fit. We can only hope that the magic formula works yet again, that somehow we can screw things up so badly that they come out right.

Once again an astute analysis of the few very grim days in May 1940 when Panzers swept into Western Europe and the British chose a new leader to win the war.

Obviously, it's similar to 'Five Days in London'. The message is similar: The selection of a strong, even though flawed, leader to rally the nation in a time of crisis. The heart of this book is the implied contrast between a leader who promises "blood, toil, tears and sweat" and one who responds with a flippant "let's go to the mall' plea.

Of course, the Brits have an advantage. Instead of suffering four years of incompetence, bragging, folly and hubris, once a failed leader is persuaded to resign the king asks a new leader to form a new government. It doesn't make Lukacs a 'Barack Obama' or 'John McCain' supporter in any sense; there is no mention of current politics in any country. He merely explains a different form of politics.

It marks Lukacs as a great historian with a clear focus on the role of a leader in a democracy. In that, he speaks for all time; his intense focus on Churchill helps explain leadership from the Athens of Pericles to today's world and change we can believe.

My picayune complaint is Lukacs' apparent avoidance of a basic quality of the British (and Americans): their stubborn dedication to fairness. The Munich "appeasement" said Sudeten Germans had a right to be part of Germany (which even Churchill supported); occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia infuriated the British who felt the Czechs and Slovaks had a right to independence.

Britain declared war on Germany because they felt the Royal Navy could blockade Germany into surrender. When this turned out to be an illusion, due to massive imports from the Soviets, new leadership was vital. Besides, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was literally dying on his feet. 'Five Days in London', very worth reading as a companion to this book, examines the infighting to select a new policy and a new leader.

Strangely, he glides over the impact of the Dec. 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbour. The United States declared war on Japan the next day, but not on Germany. Two days later, Hitler declared war on the U.S. If not ... would the U.S. have joined Britain in the European war?

Perhaps this issue will be covered in another volume; Lukacs now has two astute gems analysing the means and impact of Churchill's call to power and greatness. Surely, someone needs to go beyond the Pearl Harbour syndrome and examine the U.S. entry into the European war.

What if Hitler had not declared war on the U.S.? Lukacs has written two gems on the role of Churchill, but what if Roosevelt had not been forced into a European war by the folly of Hitler?

Inquiring minds want to know.