Sunday,
May 6, 2001 (London) I GOT a handwritten letter a few days
ago from Andrew Roberts, to whom I
had tut-tutted about his reference in last
week's Sunday Telegraph to my forthcoming
work on Churchill (i.e.,
Churchill's
War,
vol. ii.) as a hatchet job. I wrote him
that he will find I am far tougher on
Eden, Mountbatten, et al.,
than I am on Winston. "Of course you
are entitled to opinions, but I do hope
you will read it before reviewing it,
if and when that time comes . .
." In his reply he states he has in fact
read the volume from cover to cover,
and "I thought it
was a shame that you did not allow him
a single redeeming feature. I accept
that you are just as tough on Eden,
Mountbatten, and especially that weird,
near-lunatic rambling of
Mackenzie-King's!" (The Canadian prime minister is one of
the few statesman whose integrity and
incorruptibility I praise in the volume).
As we shall see from his review, he says,
"I did not like the book at
all." For a few nanoseconds this deeply
upsets me (the book has taken nearly
thirty years to produce); but the same
mail brings a letter from Professor
John Erickson, of Edinburgh
University, the world's leading authority
on the Soviets in the war, and he writes
that he finds Churchill's War, vol. ii "a vivid
portrait accompanied by much striking
and original analysis. It is certainly
no mere repeat of the usual
hagiography." (Is that an unconscious allusion to
Roberts's works?) "Once again." says
Erickson, I have shown myself "a master of
documentation." That is way up there with
what Judge Gray said [in
his Judgment] about my knowledge
of World War II being "unparallelled." A phone call from The Evening Standard
reveals that they are publishing Andrew
Roberts's article early next week (which
badly jumps the gun, as the book is not
now out until June).
I HAVE a long talk with [a London
barrister friend] to 11:35 AM. and he
tells me all he knows of Roberts, and his
family's failed aspirations to aristocracy
(he was an exact contemporary of the
journalist's at Cambridge University);
Roberts's father made his fortune from
Kentucky Fried Chicken
and Unigate Dairies concessions (mine
-- right --
perhaps unfortunately was
uninterested in money, and spent his life
fighting as a gunnery officer of the Royal
Navy for Britain and our empire); so the
Roberts family are very wealthy in
consequence -- what is called nouveau
riche by the polite. Andrew Roberts failed the entrance
examination to Eton, much to his own
dismay, and was expelled from his public
school for a prank when he painted the
Founder's statue white (I respond that
this rather elevates him in my view: I
myself hung a twelve-foot square Communist
hammer-and-sickle banner over the main
entrance to my public school at dead of
night in 1955, for which deed I was merely
given six-of-the-best as punishment when
found out). My barrister friend knew him well at
Cambridge, and while at university young
Roberts's own views on the Jews and Nazis,
rather like those of the late Alan
Clark, were well to the right of
Adolf Hitler's; but in public he
has sublimated these views well, seeking
to perpetuate the "ghastly wartime myth"
of Churchill's greatness and to establish
his own impeccable credentials by such
cunning acts as trampling on David
Irving's face in print -- as my barrister
friend puts it; in other words his
ambition now is so all-consuming that he
is prepared to prostitute his own previous
beliefs in order to succeed in the
snakepit of the print media. Sounds like really nice fellow. I
remember how two years ago he claimed, in
a letter published by his newspaper The
Sunday Telegraph, that I was lying when I
said in print that at the outset of his
career he had sought and received full
assistance from me in the documentation of
his first book, a biography of Lord
Halifax (The Holy Fox). A quick check of
my private diaries confirmed my own
recollection, that he had borrowed the
Halifax diaries from me and other papers
for many months, and had to be pressed
several times to return them. Oh well; I wish him well, but he will
have to amend his ways if he wants to
succeed in the long run. The Lord watches
over His own, but so does the
Devil. [previous
diary] Related items on this website -
Roberts
claims Britain was "ready to betray
Poland in 1939"
-
David Irving writes
to The Sunday Telegraph, Jan 16,
2000: "Being the fellow who supplied to
Andrew Roberts the Lord
Halifax diaries which he used to
write his own definitive biography, I
found his sneering article on my
current libel action meagre
recompense indeed."
|