DBWI Churchill didn't end up under a train

Having done a lot of reading on the lives of politicians between 1900-1943 for my final European history exam I came across the Story of Winston Churchill is a fairly sad one as it ended up with him throwing himself under a train in 1932. A hastily scribbled note indicates disappointment at Gallipoli as well as the effects of the great depression but if he hadn't thrown himself under a train(the 13:45 manchester to Plymouth train for those that are massive nerds on the subject) what would have happened, if anything ,after all could a borderline alcoholic do a decent job of running a country?
 
His political career was doomed after his twin disasters anyways. No real changes from OTL, though I can imagine him annoying PM Moseley.
 
Gee, an alcoholic hack writer killing himself? Why are people still surprised?

Actually, this is a common mistake in many history classes. History teachers like to see Churchill as a politician when in fact Churchill saw himself as a writer.

The scholarship is pretty clear: Churchill's failure to be ever become more than a hack writer was more instrumental for his depression and suicide than his political failures. With Labour's leadership and economic policies saving the UK alone from the worst of the Great Britain, Churchill's faith in the Conservative's platform were destroyed. He spent his last three years failing at writing--even being unable to find a publisher for his last three months.

Churchill again and again stated all he wanted to be was a good writer and be respected as a good writer. But he was so drunk so continuously in his last decade of life what talent he had possessed evaporated even faster than the prodigious amounts of brandy he spilled all over London and himself.

What may have been the final straw for Churchill was the event at the Ritz Bar in Paris in the spring of 1932. That night his alcoholic fueled self-immolation led to his being snubbed by Scott Fitzgerald and his party. Even more than the snubbing or Churchill's (barely) public disintegration in the near empty, the story Fitzgerald wrote about the events of that evening is what to led to Churchill's final fate.

Seated at a table in the nearly Ritz bar, Fitzgerald witnessed first hand the depths of Churchill's decline. Churchill wandered into the bar already three sheets to the wind. The rotund writer immediately ordered a double brandy, downed it, and then ordered another, downed it, too. He immediately began wretching--puking on the bar and on himself.

Two barmen started to "escort" the vomit crusted and nearly incoherent Churchill from the bar. As the three passed the table where Fitzgerald, along with Sara and Gerald Murphy and Ring Lardner were seated, Churchill began screaming. The nearly incoherent Churchill apparently was trying to berate Fitzgerald and Lardner for wasting their considerable talents by drinking. Horrified, Fitzgerald and his friends tried tried to ignore Churchill.

At this point collapsed, falling to the floor, and vomiting more--with blood now accompanying the bile and alcohol in the regurgitation. Rolling this puddle, Churchill proceeded to void his bladder and lose control of his bowels. Laying in this pool of his own vomit, piss and shit, Churchill finally had the good grace to pass out. He, of course, almost immediately spent the next six month at a Swiss sanitarium due to a "nervous condition" brought on by "overwork."

By the time Churchill was discharged, Churchill found himself unable to write and Fitzgerald's story "The Crack Up" had been published in Esquire. "The Crack Up" was one of the first great trans-Atlantic literary sensations and deservedly so. Fitzgerald created a masterful portrayal of Churchill' public self destructive evening as emblematic of a failed artist's decline due to a failed moral vision. More importantly, Fitzgerald subtly presented an allegory, holding up Churchill's failure, decline, and decay with the decline and failure, decline, and decay of conservatism as a political and moral philosophy.

Of course, all too many of the literati claimed to have the real dope about what had happened that night at the Ritz. Churchill always had been arrogant and over-bearing. This was an occasion where scores were settled. The irony was that these stories were not nearly as bad as the truth. Fitzgerald (and more importantly, editors Gingrich at Esquire and Perkins at Scribner's, fearing censorship) reigned in the more graphic and humiliating aspects of the evening.

Still, the scandal of Churchill's visit to the Ritz Bar was so great in literary circles that no respectable publisher would consider touching any of Churchill's newest work. That alcoholism (and, if rumor be true, cocaine and morphine) had ruined his talent also accounted for the publishers' refusals. Churchill soon collapsed again into a state of self-pity that made his display at the Ritz seem understated.

That Churchill, in drunken haze, three months after his discharge from the he chucked himself under a train, a train run by the newly nationalized rail system was the logical end for such a man with such artistic ambitions and such great moral uncertainty.

Truly, Churchill was wasted talent. His debauchery and sad end did, though, serve to save the careers of future Nobel Prize winners Fitzgerald and Lardner. Both credit the events of that evening for convincing them to forsake alcohol to avoid Churchill's fate and instead concentrate on their writing.
 
Last edited:
His political career was doomed after his twin disasters anyways. No real changes from OTL, though I can imagine him annoying PM Moseley.

I would have to agree; Churchill's political career was already over. I could see him being one of the louder voices in the war camp, but I doubt anything he could say would be enough to get Britain into the war before the debacle in Scandinavia. Britain and the Mosely government were far too devoted to their plan of trying to get the Nazis and Soviets to kill each other off without needing to shed any British blood in the process.
 
And we all know how well that worked out...

Well, don't forget that the Nazis and Communists hated each other right up until they decided to become allies and start carving up chunks of Europe together (and plenty of recent scholarship indicates that even during the Second Great War they still hated each other). The idea that Britain could just sit back and let nasty regime #1 fight nasty regime #2 had a lot of appeal to a British public that really didn't want another war. It wasn't really until Scandinavia that the politicians and public realized that the Nazis and Soviets were willing to put off their death match until after they finished crushing the Democracies.

Also, it's important to note that the Allies re-armament and retraining programs really kicked into high gear after the Invasion of Poland. Losing the French was bad enough, but having Italy knocked out of the war as well would have been too much; the British advisers did a lot to improve Mussolini's military after the rapprochement. Even with all the improvement the extra year bought, the Allies managing to hold onto a decent-sized chunk of Italy was a really close thing.
 
By the time Churchill was discharged, Churchill found himself unable to write and Fitzgerald's story "The Crack Up" had been published in Esquire. "The Crack Up" was one of the first great trans-Atlantic literary sensations and deservedly so.

Huh, you mean The Crack Up was about a real person? I'd never known that.

They made me read that in High School English class. Didn't really appreciate it though, until I saw Orson Welles' William Chesterfield, of the Times in a film class in college. When I found out the movie was based on that story, it gave me a new appreciation of Fitzgerald's work. Of course, my tastes were a bit more refined by then.
 
Top