wt.com | Website: www.dwt.com
>>
>> Anchorage | Bellevue | Los Angeles | New York | Portland | San Francisco |
>> Seattle | Shanghai | Washington, D.C.
>>
>> From: churchillchat@googlegroups.com [mailto:churchillchat@googlegroups.com]
>> On Behalf Of David Riddl
orage | Bellevue | Los Angeles | New York | Portland | San Francisco |
> Seattle | Shanghai | Washington, D.C.
>
> From: churchillchat@googlegroups.com [mailto:churchillchat@googlegroups.com]
> On Behalf Of David Riddle
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 4:19 PM
> To: churchillchat@
David, While indeed the events of the 1953 stroke were "deep-sixed" at the time
as anyone who might check with the papers at the National Archives, Kew, as I
have done, could do. It has not been a secret since Lord Moran's book of now 50
years ago on his caring for WSC at this time. Also Lord
No no no. Randolph Churchill was Lord Brain in disguise and Lord Moran forgot
his "Ps" & "Qs" with his hidden stethoscope while Anthony Eden was only there
in spirit as he was recovery in Boston from serious repeat gallbladder surgery
and OMG only one Amazon nurse to lift WSC to prevent
Egads! You mean I've been duped by the Churchill Centre's myth
busters!!...and that bounder Randolph!!! I do think that it is always
perfectly legitimate to identify the historical errors in a theatrical
production in the same way that we would for a revisionist historians
subjective rant.
Stan, alas, Churchill *did* authorize the use of troops in the miners
strikes, though there were extenuating circumstances. The story forms a
chapter in my next book, *Winston Churchill, Myth and Reality: Tall Tales,
Lies, Fables, Distortions and Things That Go Bump in the Night *(McFarland,
Richard...
There is definitely not one currently on public display, but I'll check with
the House and Collections Manager to see if there is one in the archives
somewhere.
David Riddle
Mobile: 07966 472340
Sent from my iPhone
> On 14 Sep 2016, at 17:20, Richard M. Langworth
David:
There is no case of butterflies at Chartwell? Thought I saw one once.
Churchill's stroke of 23Jun53 was not fiction, though it's true that
dramatizing what went on at C'well in the aftermath, in the absence of
witnesses, must of necessity be fictional. There is value in the
production,
While I can appreciate a genuine piece of fiction is fiction. Yet when the
fiction significantly "garbles" if not specifically "changes" the story line to
comply with a preconceived notion of history rather than a reasonable devotion
to accuracy then the criticism heaped upon it is most
Stan..
I am surprised to hear that the author made any attempt to refer to 'concern
for historical accuracy' when referring to a work of fiction.
One thing I can reliably comment on, whilst trusting I'm not saying something I
shouldn't, is that if a glass case containing butterflies was
I think everyone who has commented to date on this film is treating this film
far too seriously.
It is freely based on a work of fiction 'The Churchill Secret KBO' by Jonathan
Smith. The critical word here is 'fiction'. There is no point in trying to
relate it to the actual facts of the
Bravo Cita,
Thank you for illuminating a further demonstration in this dastardly drama's
gross liberties taken with history and the portrayal of the various
personalities. This drama should be accepted as best a romp through one
author's imagination rather than any serious attempt to ensure
Whether "Churchill's Secret", broadcast in the USA last night, was riveting
television I leave to the critics. But that it was historically inaccurate at
one important point there is no doubt. Lindsay Duncan's beautifully acted
television version of Clemmie as a wife competing with his
13 matches
Mail list logo
