He didn't write the whole thing, but made what Edward called "final brush strokes", e.g "...bred in the constitutional tradition by my father..." and "...one matchless blessing, enjoyed by so many of you and not bestowed on me - a happy home with his wife and hildren."

Paul Courtenay


----- Original Message ----- From: "Stan A. Orchard" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [ChurchillChat] Re: The King's Speech


It should be pointed out that the abdication crisis was not just a political problem. Britain's reigning monarch is also the head of the Church of England, and the proposition of marrying a twice-divorced woman would have created a tremendous uproar within the church. Even in Churchill's role as only a "flying buttress" of the church, he would almost certainly have recognized this fact and respected the church's position as well as forseen the consequences of trying to over-rule church doctrine. Not many years later Princess Margaret was forbidden by Queen Elizabeth to marry a divorced commoner for these same reasons. It doesn't seem to be such a big deal today. Churchill must have held out some vain hope that Edward III would eventually come to his senses and comprehend and embrace his responsibilities as king. Is it true that Churchill wrote the king's abdication speech?

Stan

----- Original Message ----- From: "Quin nBastian" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: [ChurchillChat] Re: The King's Speech


I have not seen 'the King's Speech yet but I am looking forward to doing so soon. As regards WSC's support of Wallis Simpson, the fact is that WSC was a royalist. I believe it is in the historical record that he was supportive of Edward and that included supporting him in his bid to marry Wallis Simpson.
However, it must be remembered that at the time,  WSC knew little about
Simpson's political leanings and was supporting his sovereign as a faithful
servant.

Having said that, I agree that with the perspective of time and events WSC's
comment at the coronation of his brother George VI, would have been
referring to Edward VIII.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Stan A. Orchard
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 12:41 PM
To: ChurchillChat
Subject: Re: [ChurchillChat] Re: The King's Speech

Incidentally, there was a very interesting interview a couple of days ago on CNN with the 73-year-old American screenwriter of 'The King's Speech', David Seidler. He was a child stutterer, not a historian, and has worked on this project for the past 25 years. He believes that only a stutterer could have
written the screenplay in just this way.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/01/25/exp.ps.kings.speech.stu
tter.cnn?iref=allsearch.

It is very hard for me to believe that Winston Churchill could have ever
considered Wallis Simpson to be a suitable or even tolerable addition to the
Royal Family.  So in my opinion, Churchill must have been referring to
Edward VIII in his comment to Clementine at the coronation since it
otherwise seems to fly in the face of Churchill's seemingly life-long
reverence for the institution, dignity and ritual of the British monarchy.

Stan

----- Original Message ----- From: "Editor/Finest Hour" <[email protected]>
To: "ChurchillChat" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 9:38 AM
Subject: [ChurchillChat] Re: The King's Speech


Paul, thanks. Most sources I checked say WSC made this remark "during
the coronation," but Lady Soames in her CLEMENTINE CHURCHILL says he
made it as Queen Elizabeth (the later Queen Mum) was crowned--so I
think your interpretation that he was referring to Walllis could be
right. I

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3408 - Release Date: 01/28/11


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.

Reply via email to