Rating: 
Summary: Magisterial
Review: William Manchester's first Churchill volume is one of those books that makes you just love to read.This clearly isn't a book for all those who are fascinated by the mediocre and skeptical of the possibilities for true greatness. This is an unreconstructed and unapologetic look at a leader whose instincts often cut against the grain of the 20th century, but who would emerge as one of the great heroes of it, just when extraordinary leadership was needed the most. Manchester is the rare gifted writer who has mastered the biographical craft as well as the sweeping narrative needed to succinctly encapsulate the mores and habits of an entire nation at a particular moment in time. He does this brilliantly in his introduction, about one hundred pages long, which sets the stage with a lavish description of Victorian England. This is one of the best parts of the book. Early on, it is clear that the ambitious young Winston is headed for big things. This wasn't only because he came from one of Britain's most prominent families -- his father rose to become the second most powerful man in the government, and his mother was romantically linked to the Prince of Wales. Despite this, Manchester convinces us, successfully, that Churchill was the best of his generation, that he would have risen even from less auspicious circumstances (admittedly, this interpretation has its limits, since entire social classes were excluded from Parliament at the time). Churchill made his career as a political maverick, changing parties not once, but twice, consistently taking positions that brought him close to political death. Yet Churchill survived -- and what's more, he turned out to be one of the most enduring political presences any democracy has ever seen. What is striking about Churchill's career is that it didn't simply culminate in 1940 after a plodding journey up the political ladder. No -- Churchill had first been elected to Parliament forty years earlier, and he rose quickly within a few years of his election. But then his career plateaud for about a quarter of a century. Here you had a man who was considered a future Prime Minister at age 30, who was in a position to be considered the heir apparent in governments of two different parties at various points from World War I until the late 1920s, and yet didn't take the next step. What happened? The Great War and its aftermath, more than anything, foreordained Churchill's postponed "rendezvous with destiny." It was here where Churchill was the most out of step with prevailing political attitudes. Churchill held close to his heart a heroic vision of Britain, and believed deeply in the nobility of a war fought for a just cause. He also believed in the Empire, and did not think that Britain should relinquish what was already hers, even in a time of relative decline vis a vis the United States. Where most saw senseless slaughter in the trenches of France, he saw selfless heroism, a nation at its best. The nation, or at least the political classes, did not agree with this interpretation. In a time that Walter Lippman proclaimed was "tired of greatness" and where the great fear was that Britain had overextended herself, Churchill defended greatness and Empire. In his view, strength in the service of democracy, and not blind disarmament, would prevent future wars. This view, ascendant in World War II, and in many ways, ascendant again in America today, was seen as discredited at the time, and Churchill in the 1920's repeatedly butted heads with a Conservative leadership over disarmament and withdrawal from India. The trend was so strong in the other direction that Churchill was effectively cast out of his party by the end of the 20's, and looked destined to repeat the fate of his iconoclastic father, who was cast permanently out into the political wilderness for his own apostasies. But with this son, there would always be a second act.
| 
