The Burton – Churchill Kerfuffle

The airwaves and Twitterverse are full of Churchill bile following recent sad events that have nothing to do with him. Surfacing again are attacks half a century old by the famed actor Richard Burton. Film critic John Beaufort first reported these in the Christian Science Monitor in 1972:

December 9th, 1972— Richard Burton has just given two of the oddest and most contradictory performances of his career. Both involved his portrayal of Winston Churchill in film The Gathering Storm. The prologue consisted of two articles by the actor in TV Guide and The New York  Times. Mr. Burton put on a good show as Winston Churchill, a bad show as Richard Burton.

Burton had previously expressed only admiration for Churchill. Their encounters at the Old Vic, when Burton played Hamlet, were legendary. Burton called Churchill “this religion, this flag, this insignia.” Lady Williams of Elvel, a former Churchill secretary, remembered him well: “Richard came down to the front of the stage to speak the great Shakespearean words with Churchill. The audience was ecstatic. I had the impression that Richard worshipped Sir Winston.”

“To play Churchill is to hate him…”

…was now suddenly Burton’s refrain. “Churchill and all his kind…have stalked down the corridors of endless power all through history,”  he wrote. He was the “son of a Welsh miner.” Meeting Churchill was “like a blow under the heart…. My class and his hate each other to the seething point.”

The actor’s words are in vogue again. They fit well. Journalism seems largely to have parted company with old stand-by rules like “have multiple sources” or “verify your quotations.” Burton’s outburst fits today’s narrative. Churchill was a war-mongering racist imperialist who despised the poor, brown and black. Here is Burton, bending quotes a half century ago:

Churchill quote, Burton version: “They [Germans] must bleed and burn, they must be crushed into a mass of smouldering ruins.” Churchill’s actual words: “It is our interest to engage the enemy’s air power at as many points as possible to make him bleed and burn and waste on the widest fronts” (23 April 1942).

Burton: “That morbid creature, Hitler, of ferocious genius, that repository of human crime.”  (Burton adds: “He might have been talking about himself.”) Churchill’s actual words: “…a maniac of ferocious genius, the repository and expression of the most virulent hatreds that have ever corroded the human breast” (The Gathering Storm, 9).

Doubling down

Burton correctly quoted “We are revolved to destroy Hitler and every vestige of the Nazi regime” (broadcast, 22 June 1941). Then he interpreted it: “What he was really saying was that ‘every vestige of the Nazi regime’ included the entire German race.” Churchill wrote of his visit to Berlin in 1945: “My hate had died with their surrender” (Triumph and Tragedy, 545).

We should be glad these were the only Churchill “quotes” in Burton’s catalogue of disdain. The rest consisted of boilerplate condemnation. Everything from despising Clement Attlee to WSC’s “baby-like, hairless, effeminate right hand, slowly slamming the table, that bizarre cadence of his curious voice: ‘We were right to fight, we were right to fight,’ I went home and had a few nightmares.” Readers possessed of reason might have had a few nightmares themselves.

Reactions

In those days we felt more confidence toward our heroes, and Burton reaped the whirlwind. The BBC Drama Department banned him for life. (Today they would probably be offering him a TV special.) In Parliament, Norman Tebbit spoke of “an actor past his peak indulging in a fit of pique, jealousy and ignorant comment.” More pointedly, Neville Trotter said: “If there were more Churchills and fewer Burtons we would be in a very much better country.”

The actor received scores of protesting letters. They went unanswered, even from friends like Robert Hardy. Instead, Burton doubled down. “Churchill has fascinated me since childhood,” he retorted—“a bogeyman who hated us, the mining class, motivelessly. He ordered a few of us to be shot, you know, and the orders were carried out.” Historian John Ramsden observed: “The myth of Tonypandy was still around to haunt Churchill’s memory.”

Why did Burton do it?

Richard Burton played to his audience. In 1962 he earned $100,000 for recording Churchill’s words in Jack Le Vien’s television series The Valiant Years. Dr. Ramsden believed he was nominated for that role by Churchill himself: “‘Get that boy from the Old Vic.’ [It was] arguably one of the best things he ever did.” Like Lady Williams, Le Vien saw in Burton only an admirer. A bust of Churchill was his treasured possession. He told both Clementine Churchill and Sir Winston’s grandson how much he admired “the old man.”

To different audiences Burton revealed other opinions. On television chat shows, Dr. Ramsden wrote, he would often emphasize: “‘I’m the son of a Welsh miner.’ Here too he was playing a part, for his lifestyle was way beyond the comprehension of Welsh miners.”

Dr. Ramsden’s final judgment is apposite: “As his career and life deteriorated around him and the fog of alcohol descended, Burton was trying desperately to play the man he had been long ago, and he at least knew what young Welshmen had been expected to believe about Winston Churchill. He was not asked to play either part again.”

Further reading

“Churchill Bio-Pics: The Trouble with the Movies”

John Ramsden quotations are from his thoughtful book Man of the Century: Winston Churchill and his Legend Since 1945 (London: HarperCollins, 2002).

David Franco, reviewing the film Churchill, starring Brian Cox, raises questions he says everyone should be asking. “Isn’t the ability to accept one’s mistakes part of what makes a man a good leader? …. To what extent should we rely [on] past experiences in order to minimize mistakes in the future? These are the questions that make a bad movie like Churchill worth seeing.”

Well, I won’t be seeing this bad movie. Described as “perverse fantasy” by historian Andrew Roberts, it joins a recent spate of sloppy Churchill bio-pics that favor skewed caricatures over historical fact.

Revisionism: A Thriving Industry

Makers of movies might think it novel to criticize Churchill, but this is far from the case. Attacks on his leadership began early after World War II and have continued ever since. There’s a thriving mini-industry in “Churchill revisionism.” But it started with books, not movies.

In 1963, R.W. Thompson’s The Yankee Marlborough portrayed Churchill as a man of flesh and blood, who made mistakes, like anybody else. In his 1970 study, Churchill: A Study in Failure 1900-1939, Robert Rhodes James focused on Churchill’s political gaffes, such as his dogged support of King Edward VIII in the 1936 Abdication crisis. Edward, later Duke of Windsor, gave up the throne to marry an American divorcee. The Duke’s tepid admiration of Hitler, and dismal performance as Governor of the Bahamas, caused Churchill to reflect: “I’m glad I was wrong.”

In 1993, John Charmley’s Churchill: The End of Glory rocked Churchill’s supporters by claiming that he should have backed away from the Hitler war to preserve Britain’s wealth, power, and empire. More recently, Max Hastings criticized Churchill’s war leadership on multiple issues in both World Wars: Catastrophe 1914, on the opening months of WW1, and Winston’s War, 1940-45.

Whatever we make of their assessments, these historians were qualified critics whose thoroughly researched theses merit consideration. Alas, we cannot say the same about the recent round of Churchill movies.

Movies Faithful to Reality

Churchill movies started off well and were honest for decades. Young Winston (1972), starring Simon Ward as WSC and Anne Bancroft as his mother, was a vivid presentation based on Churchill’s own account of his first twenty-five years. Its inaccuracies stemmed from Churchill himself in his autobiography. (In it, Anthony Hopkins played David Lloyd George. Lady Randolph says: “He has the most disconcerting way of looking at women.”)

In 1974, Lee Remick brilliantly reprised the role of Lady Randolph the television series Jennie: as accurate a portrayal as ever existed. We Churchlllians gave her an award for it—the dying Lee’s last public appearance. It was attended by Gregory Peck, who co-starred with her in The Omen, who praised her “depth of womanliness.”

That same year, Richard Burton played a believable Churchill in The Gathering Storm, about the years leading up to World War II. Again, it didn’t deviate from fact, although Burton spoiled the effect by denouncing Churchill for fictitious acts against Welsh miners, including Burton’s father. Privately, Burton had expressed his admiration for “the old boy”.…but later, the cameras were on.

The 1981 TV series Churchill: The Wilderness Years, remains the model Churchill bio-pic. Herein Robert Hardy showed us both Churchill’s human frailties and his greatness. Hardy and his writers partnered with Churchill’s official biographer, Sir Martin Gilbert to portray the anxious politician of the 1930s, out of power, vainly warning of the Nazi menace. Brilliantly cast, the result was a masterpiece.

More Recently…

Albert Finney was a solid Churchill in the second Gathering Storm (2002), a 90-minute film for television. As skillfully cast as The Wilderness Years, it featured Vanessa Redgrave in a bavura performance as Clementine Churchill. The story line, while not uncritical, did not deviate from fact. Even in the cynical, anti-heroic 21st century, it seemed, filmmakers could still tell his story without reducing Churchill to a flawed burlesque or godlike caricature. Then came “Into the Storm,” a 2009 television drama broadcast by the BBC and HBO. Here in a series set in 1945 with 1940 flashbacks, Brendan Gleeson gave us the most accurate Churchill since Robert Hardy. Things were looking good.

Or so I thought. Alas, in the last couple of years, we’ve had three films which can only be described as “fake history,” and a one-dimensional documentary that fails to tell the full story.

A Turn to the Worse

The Crown, a 2016 Netflix series covering the early reign of Queen Elizabeth II, was well acted. But John Lithgow portrayed a senile prime minister who hides his 1953 stroke from the Queen and repeatedly paints his goldfish pond in a muddle of depression. Factually, the Queen knew of Churchill’s stroke three days after it happened—and he was never so dotty as to make repeated paintings of his fish pond. The Duke of Windsor resurfaces here, promising that he will get the new Queen to move into Buckingham Palace if Churchill restores his royal allowance. Where do they think of this stuff?

Viceroy’s House has not been seen yet in the US, and we’re missing nothing. A visually elaborate production, it covers the end of British rule in India, under the last Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, whitewashing the latter at Churchill’s expense. Mountbatten’s insistence that Britain leave before the India-Pakistan boundaries were settled led to violent strife and the massacre of millions. Somehow, the film manages to blame this on Churchill, who was not even in power at the time.

* * *

Churchill starring Brian Cox is built around the myth that Churchill opposed D-Day virtually to the moment of the Normandy landings. In reality, Churchill had sought “a lodgment on the continent” since the British were thrown out of Dunkirk in 1940. His concept of floating “Mulberry Harbors” for landing tanks and equipment dated back to 1917. This hasn’t prevented Mr. Cox from flaunting his ignorance in interviews repeating a host of canards, including the notion that Churchill wanted to invade Germany over the Alps.

I held my breath when the film Dunkirk appeared, hoping it would not be another dose of lame propaganda. Churchill doesn’t appear in it. But his absence, along with other heroes of the Dunkirk evacuation, reduces the film to a one-dimensional portrait. It’s war on a beach, with moving scenes of heroism and survival. Who was the enemy? A viewer has no idea why Churchill said after Dunkirk, “We shall never surrender”—though his words are read movingly by a soldier in the final scenes.

Hope Ahead? We’ll See

There’s no question that fictitious scenes and conversations are legitimate devices in bio-pics. But they must not depart from what we know. And thanks to historians like Martin Gilbert and the Hillsdale College Churchill Project, we know a lot.

There is cause for hope. This autumn, Gary Oldman will star as Churchill in another bio-pic, Darkest Hour, about facing Hitler’s armies in 1940. Promisingly, Oldman has consulted with qualified historians, striving to find “a way in” to the real Churchill. Colleagues who’ve seen previews say he has Churchill down perfectly. But his script contains some bizarre counterfactuals.

One can only wish him success. Perhaps this film will answer David Franco’s questions. Yes, accepting one’s mistakes does make a person a good leader. Yes, Churchill did learn from his mistakes. He was a man of quality—a good guide for our troubled decade. And after a long lapse, he deserves a film that does him justice.

Written for a birthday tribute in October 2010….

We have all heard about the art of Timothy Robert Hardy, even though we don’t need to do so, since it is self-evident. But that really doesn’t matter, does it? His three-decade involvement with the Churchill saga provides a balsamic reiteration of what we know, are glad that we know, pity those who do not know, and are proud to be associated with.

It began with his peerless portrayals of Sir Winston in the 1981 “Wilderness Years” TV documentary; David Susskind’s 1986 “Leaders” series; a London stage play; the mini-series “War and Remembrance”; and—just this August 20th—a brilliant reading from Churchill’s tribute to “The Few” on its 70th annniversary. (Click here for the video.)

We can only begin to imagine the prodigious effort Tim made to master the role of Winston Churchill—to find, as he put it, “a way in.” Yet playing Churchill, he said, was “one of the best things that has ever happened to me.” Speaking to us in 1986, he likened the job to scaling Everest: “I shall never look down from the peak, but as long as I live I shall delight in gazing upwards toward those towering rocks.” The Churchill Society thought enough of his mountaineering to offer him the Blenheim Award, its highest accolade. But his acceptance honored us much more.

Robert Hardy has the distinction of having been on both sides in the Churchill story—for in 1974 he played von Ribbentrop toRichard Burton’s Churchill in “The Gathering Storm.” He told me he yearned to direct the great Anthony Hopkins as Churchill, but I said this must never occur until he is too old. And he still isn’t!

Long before he played Winston Churchill, this devoted student of Shakespeare played many of the Bard’s heroes and villains—roles he savored. He once remarked to an interviewer: “I have to keep saying to myself, ‘To play Hamlet at your age is out of the question. Stop it!’”

Others know him best for his superb role as Siegfried Farnon in “All Creatures Great and Small.” My wife once said to him, “You’ll always be Siegfried to me.” Tim quickly replied, “You’ll always be Barbara to me.”

Nowadays, we know him as Minister of Magic Cornelius Fudge in the Harry Potter films. He admitted to Barbara that his only regret in that role is that he was not equipped with his personal owl.

His knowledge of archery and his scholarly book, Longbow, led to his becoming archery consultant to the Mary Rose Trust: studying the longbows and arrows found in the famous ship, now being restored in Portsmouth. Through his intervention, one of our Churchill tour parties was given a private tour of the ship by its curator, who explained the lengthy process of drying ancient timbers.

The unfailing quality of Robert Hardy’s work is equaled by the unfailing courtesy of his manner. Those who meet him for the first time are struck by his gentility, as of course by his wit and erudition. There is something about him that is a dramatic betrayal of the persona one expects from a public reputation.

He has said that Winston Churchill was the one man last century who could lead us through the worst of times by the force of his mesmerizing speeches, monumental courage and personal charisma. I say in reply that Robert Hardy’s work expresses all the Churchillian qualities. Through his skill, the true Churchill emerged for out of the blue distance of time, for new generations to contemplate. That is something for which Churchill admirers are deeply grateful and honored—as I am to be part of this tribute to Timothy Robert Hardy, Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire.

Would you happen to have any inside information on when, if ever, the BBC will release “The Valiant Years” documentary in DVD format? Various rumors continue to circulate on the Internet but there doesn’t appear to be any source with definitive information. —H.A.

It has been in the thoughts of many to reproduce Jack Le Vien’s famous documentary. Although a shorter production, “The Finest Hours,” narrated by Orson Welles, has been reproduced on a commercial CD (left), the multiple-part “Valiant Years” was not until just recently. It is now available on DVD from MediaOutlet.com. To go to the ordering site, click here. I have “The Valiant Years” on a set of VCRs which a friend recorded from a 90s re-run on the A&E Network. I guess I should convert them to DVD. Of course they are dated. My impression is that they shade heavily into the hagiographic. But the film footage is fantastic. Richard Burton hated Churchill, but this is not apparent in his narrative, or in his later role as WSC in the original “Gathering Storm” production.