How far was Churchill personably responsible for maintaining national morale?

When Churchill took over from Neville Chamberlin it was at a time when national morale was low, particularly because of the Norway campaign, where although the British sent a task force to prevent invasion in Norway they were swiftly defeated by the Germans. This significantly cut national morale as the public became aware of the well disciplined and advanced nature of the German forces.

Churchill’s appointment in itself was a morale boosting act. Churchill was in political wilderness previously and had not held office in the previous national government, thus he was not associated with their failures. Throughout the 1930s Churchill had criticised appeasement and called for rearmament, this was significant to boost morale at the time of his appointment as the nation recognised he had the right ideas all along. MPs also felt a morale boost at the appointment of Churchill because most agreed that his bullish qualities and self belief meant he had the character for the job.

Churchill’s popularity with the public was a key factor in maintaining national morale. Historian Michael Lynch had found that his popularity with the public at times was as high as eighty eight percent, and even in his darkest moments never dropped below seventy eight percent. This is significant because it shows that the public were happy with Churchill as prime minister and they thought he was doing an adequate job, thus maintaining morale.

Churchill also had the ability to maintain morale by his skills in speeches. While his cabinet saw his speeches as emotional bravado, Churchill’s self confidence meant he convinced most of his cabinet and the population that it was better to fight on and hope America would be persuaded to join the war to support Britain. This was significant as rather than being a weak leader and putting doubts in people’s minds, Churchill was able to unite the country towards the war effort thus maintaining national morale.

However despite his ability to unify the nation Churchill also had his faults. Churchill has been described to be dictatorial and interfering in other governmental departments. This could be seen as morale damaging because Churchill’s nature could have led to alienation within government, leading to wider public doubts about his effectiveness as leader. This was similar with Churchill’s liaisons with army generals as he thought he knew more about tactics and strategy then the generals did. Similarly this could have alienated generals causing divisions in the army and working to damage national morale with the army such divided.

Churchill was also lucky in the composition of his cabinet in maintaining national morale. Deputy prime minister Clement Attlee was an effective organiser serving to organise the cabinet to make government efficient. Thus worked in Churchill’s favour to boost morale because it appeared Churchill had government in order, but this meant Churchill himself was not personally responsible for boosting morale.

Similarly Labour politician Ernest Bevin was responsible for maintain morale in the underlying structures of government. He fought against communist infiltration in the party and in unions. This served to keep the labour forces of the nation united and maintained national morale by keeping labour directed to the war. Historian Michael Lynch found Bevin had the enormous task of British industry to meet the demands of the war. This involved him negotiating with bosses, managers and trade unions to reach compromises that adequately rewarded workers. This served to maintain morale because as the workers felt better rewarded and paid it maintained morale.

In conclusion, on the face of government Churchill’s skill in self sufficiency, charisma and self belief served to maintain morale by providing a leadership that united and gave the nation a sense of hope and unity against foreign enemies. However it can be argued that in the underlying structures of government Churchill’s dictatorial nature threatened to tear parts of the country apart. It was also the underlying structures in Churchill’s colleagues that meant he appeared a more effective leader. Thus while Churchill appeared to maintain morale, his personable responsibility only stretched as far as his personality traits of charisma and self belief.

Compare and Contrast the effect of war on the characters’ from Journeys End by R.C. Sherriff and Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks

R.C Sherriff his play and Sebastian Faulks wrote his novel in different time periods. R.C Sherriff published his play in 1929 and the play was his experience as a soldier in the war, whereas Sebastian Faulks, who was born many years after the Great War wrote his novel based on research and the stories from his grandfather, who served in the war. Nevertheless both writers have successfully captured the effect that the war has on soldiers.

Most obviously, the effect of the war on Stanhope is that he is now become a heavy drinker. This is first discussed through hardy and Osborne when hardy brings up “how is the dear young boy? Drinking like a fish, as usual?” Stanhope also admits without alcohol and drinking he would crumble about going up to the line. He says to Osborne“. Without being doped with whisky – id go mad with fright”. He also says “I knew I’d go mad if I didn’t break the strain. I couldn’t bear being fully conscious all the time” he also seems to be making himself ill by drinking. Trotter exclaims “my goodness, uncle, doesn’t he look ill!” Trotter also says “there was Stanhope sitting on that bed drinking a whisky. He looked as white as a sheet!” Stanhope has clearly turned to alcohol to help with as an effect the war has had on him.
Correspondingly in Birdsong, Weir is also described to have turned to alcohol to help him deal with the effects of war. In our first encounter with him, he is described in this way; “But his eyes looked wild and red with whisky. The brownish stubble on his cheeks and chin was surely the result of more than one mornings missed shave.”

Stanhope is also paranoid as a result of the effect of war. He is obsessed that Raleigh is going to write home and tell his sister about how Stanhope is now. Stanhope is pathological about censoring Raleigh’s letter. When talking to Osborne about Raleigh he says “he’ll write home and tell her I reek of whisky all day” and he follows by saying Raleigh “wants to write home and tell Madge all about me. Well, he won’t, d’you see uncle? He won’t write. Censorship! I censor his letters – cross out all he says about me.”

There is a difference in the amount of sympathy the main protagonists have in both novels. In Birdsong, Stephen Wraysford is conveyed as a sympathetic man, as jack Firebrace says “They understood the difficulties of a man who had been stretched too far.” Contrastingly in Journeys end Stanhope has little sympathy for other soldiers. For example when Hibbert is complaining about his neuralgia Stanhope minimally says “get tight” which either means deal with it or get drunk. The effect of war on Stanhope has lessened his sympathy yet the effect of war on Stephen has increased his sympathy for the other soldiers.

The effect of the war physically on the characters in both novels has been conveyed excellently by both writers. When we are first introduced to Stanhope he is described to be “He is good looking, rather from attractive features than the healthy good looks of Raleigh. Although tanned by months in open air, there is a pallor under his skin and dark shadows under his eyes” Clearly the effects of war have caused some of these physical descriptions. We find that Stanhope has had trouble with sleeping. For example when Osborne pleads with Stanhope to have a sleep Stanhope replies “sleep – I can’t sleep”. An additional example is that when Osborne mentions sleep again Stanhope exclaims “Sleep! Catch me wasting my time with sleep”. Due to the fact that Stanhope doesn’t sleep much this must be why there are “dark shadows under his eyes”.
Likewise Stephen Wraysford has also been affected by the war in a physical way. When we are first introduced to Stephen in part 2 he was described by jack Firebrace; “Jack saw a man with dark hair that was going grey at the sides, he had a thick moustache that obscured his upper lip and big brown eyes that stared thoughtfully at him. He might have been from any age from twenty five to forty.” The war has evidently caused these physical appearances, as we see earlier in the novel, which is set some years before the war that Stephen is described to have “black hair” and “Stephen lifted searching eyes.” We also find that Stephen is only twenty years old. The evidence supports that Stephen’s physical appearance has been affected by the war.

The effect on war on trotter is that he experiencing a slow passing of time. He says “I’ve got an idea! I am going to draw a hundred and forty four little circles on a bit o’ paper, and every hour I’m going to black one in, that’ll make time go alright”. Trotter also doesn’t like the quiet as an effect the war has had on him. He says “too damn quiet. You bet your boots the boche is up to something. The big attack soon, I reckon. I don’t like it, uncle.” We would find this strange because we wouldn’t think the soldiers would like peace and quiet rather than the sound of shells in the trenches.

A further effect is the soldier’s acceptance of death, and their realisation that death is round every corner. For example in Journeys end the effect of war on Osborne is that he has accepted the possibility of death. When Stanhope and Osborne are talking about their plan for the big attack Stanhope says “yes. It’ll come while were here. And we shall be in the front row of the stalls” which confirms they will be heavily involved in the big attack Osborne replies “oh, well” and there is a silence, and the effect of that silence is that it shows Osborne thinks he is going to die. Stanhope has also accepted it is likely he will die as a result from the effect of war. Stanhope says to Osborne “it may not be much longer now. I’ve had my share of luck” consequently he doesn’t expect to be around much longer as he will probably die.
Equally in Birdsong there is a widespread acceptance of death, and that death can happen at any time and no one is immune to it. Jack Firebrace “thought of the stench of his clothes, the lice along the seams, the men he was frightened to be friend in case their bodies came apart the next day in front of his eyes.”

In conclusion the effect the war has had on the characters’ is very immense. R.C. Sherriff and Sebastian Faulks excellently illustrate how the war was a serious thing and not fun and games. The effects on their characters’ are practically screaming out at us, how people change because of their experiences.