Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

14,512 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm no fan Peter Hitchens (Christopher's reactionary brother), but I endorse this article from The Daily Fail. Heed the 'bolded'. :)

Garbled message of The King’s Speech

Does it matter that the film The King’s Speech is full of what I shall politely call inaccuracies? Yes it does, because in an era where few know much history, film versions of historical events are widely believed and become accepted as the ‘everyone knows that’ version. And such things influence our actions today.

The film invents a needless scene in which King George VI swears in the hearing of two schoolboys. It pretends that his speech therapist, Lionel Logue, was irreverent and poor, when all the evidence shows that he was deferential and rich. It invents a scene in which Logue, a patriotic monarchist Australian, dismisses one of the most solemn parts of the Coronation Oath as ‘rubbish’. Why?

It completely misrepresents Winston Churchill’s role in the Abdication. The future war leader nearly wrecked his political hopes forever by siding with Edward VIII. And the final scene, in which crowds gather outside Buckingham Palace as the King proclaims the start of the Second World War, is entirely false. I have checked the newspaper cuttings. It didn’t happen. And that’s only the beginning of the list of faults.

An equally good film could have been made without any of them.

This country has yet to look the pre-war era fully in the face. The ignorant myths which are widely believed about it helped to propel Britain and the USA into the disastrous Iraq War and may yet be used to drag us into an even stupider war on Iran. This twisting of history will only help to encourage such silly illusions on both sides of the Atlantic. If you go to see it, remember that it is fiction.

Read more: Home | Mail Online
1 - 1 of 1 Posts