The River War, by Winston Churchill

Source of book: I own this.

One of the interesting questions is whether Winston Churchill would have made his reputation as a man of letters, had he not chosen to serve his country as a statesman. He certainly made a significant fortune with his writings, and his later career certainly owes something to the fame and popularity brought by his books.

The River War was written in 1899, soon after the end of the conflict in the Sudan between Egypt and England, on the one side, and the forces of Abdullah Ibn-Mohammed. Churchill served in the cavalry during the conflict, and thus had personal experience of the decisive battle. However, his superiors were less than thrilled about the book, leading to a change in policy to forbid soldiers from writing about their service.

A bit of a summary of the conflict: Sudan was ruled by Egypt beginning in the early 1800s. Egypt was an ally of England, and was to a degree supported by the British military. The corrupt and oppressive Egyptian regime was resented by the Sudanese, leading to a revolt by “The Madhi”, a self proclaimed prophet of Islam, who promised independence and strict observance of Sharia Law. (This sounds vaguely familiar for some reason.) After the successful revolt and a siege of Khartoum, the Egyptians were evicted. The Madhi then died, and his successor proceeded to consolidate his power by slaughtering most of his rivals, and oppressing any other potential threats. Thus, the Egyptians were replaced by another corrupt and oppressive regime, which further had designs on “freeing” all of Egypt from the apostate form of Islam and foreign influence. Britain eventually decided that its interests were threatened by this, and supported the Egyptians in the reconquest. This occurred over the course of a few years which are the main subject of the book.

The version of the book I read is the abridged version, published in 1902. The original version was nearly twice as long. Many of Churchill’s personal experiences and nearly all of his editorializing was cut from the later version. While it would have been interesting to read these, the book remains a compelling narrative of the conflict.

First and foremost, Churchill was a simultaneously a vivid and a meticulous writer. He had a broad narrative sweep that draws the reader from one incident to another, never taking his eyes off of the destination. On the other hand, even at that young age, he had a remarkable eye for the key details of a military campaign. The ability he showed to comprehend the intricacies of the supply chain, the use of modern weapons and timeless tactics, and the psychology of a disciplined fighting force would later serve him well. Particularly excellent was his chapter on the building of the railroad that enabled the rapid transport of men, weapons, and even gunboats to the front.

In addition to the military details and narrative, Churchill was able to make the desert scenery of the Sudan come alive. The opening of the book sets the atmosphere, and throughout, it continues to add descriptions at key points.

I was also reminded again of how recently disease was a game-changing factor of basic human existence. At one point, five times as many men had died from cholera as from the wounds of war. Later, malaria renders an entire garrison (except for a handful of lucky souls) completely unfit for duty.

Churchill is also notable for his sportsman-like respect for his enemies. He has much good to say about Abdullah and his generals and other key figures on the other side. In contrast to many of his time, he views even the most “savage” of peoples to be human and have ordinary human motives. In this, he is perhaps one of the first to take the modern view of the largely rational motivations behind all except for the most depraved. Ordinary desires for freedom, power, money, glory drive all – some to their own destruction and those of thousands of others. In that sense, he is a critic of the much-abused fiction of the “Just War”. Churchill, of course, believed that it was morally acceptable to fight a war if it is of benefit to the country, without the necessity of ascribing actual evil to the other side. In fact, he believed that it would lead to casual atrocities. After all, if the other side consists of utterly vile vermin, why not torture them? The perhaps older-fashioned view of the enemy as human and even noble, even while misguided, would on the other hand lead to a more humane victory. One can only wonder at whether World War Two would have been as necessary had this view been followed in the aftermath of World War One.

Of the political opinions which survived the abridgment process are Churchill’s views on the aspirations and realities of both colonialism and religious fanaticism. Both can and often do start with noble goals, and both end in something substantially less than noble. An extended quote from the first chapter is worth the space.

What enterprise that an enlightened community may attempt is more noble and more profitable than the reclamation from barbarism of fertile regions and large populations? To give peace to warring tribes, to administer justice where all was violence, to strike the chains off the slave, to draw the richness from the soil, to plant the earliest seeds of commerce and learning, to increase in whole peoples their capacities for pleasure and diminish their chances of pain—what more beautiful ideal or more valuable reward can inspire human effort? The act is virtuous, the exercise invigorating, and the result often extremely profitable. Yet as the mind turns from the wonderful cloudland of aspiration to the ugly scaffolding of attempt and achievement, a succession of opposite ideas arises. Industrious races are displayed stinted and starved for the sake of an expensive Imperialism which they can only enjoy if they are well fed. Wild peoples, ignorant of their barbarism, callous of suffering, careless of life but tenacious of liberty, are seen to resist with fury the philanthropic invaders, and to perish in thousands before they are convinced of their mistake. The inevitable gap between conquest and dominion becomes filled with the figures of the greedy trader, the inopportune missionary, the ambitious soldier, and the lying speculator, who disquiet the minds of the conquered and excite the sordid appetites of the conquerors. And as the eye of thought rests on these sinister features, it hardly seems possible for us to believe that any fair prospect is approached by so foul a path.

The perspective of hindsight is perhaps even more bleak. After World War Two, the continent of Africa was largely freed from European domination, but the result has been brutal. In the Sudan, there has been ongoing civil war, predominantly between the Arab dominated Muslims in the north, and the Christian and Animist tribes, largely black, in the south. Sixty-five years of ongoing war, famine, and genocide. It really is depressing, and there are no easy solutions.

Perhaps then, the most lasting impression of this book is its relevance to the conflicts we face today. Is there a way to establish the rule of law in lawless and dangerous regions without become an oppressor ourselves? Is there hope for a country mired in corruption, oppression, and violence? Churchill reminds us that these issues are far from new, and are likely to continue to be an issue in the generations to come. 

A few minor related notes:

This book is remarkably brief for Churchill, at a mere 350 pages. I have previously read his 6 volume work on WWII (5000+ pages!) and The History of the English Speaking Peoples (4 volumes, 2000+ pages). Both of these are extensively available at used book stores. I found most of mine there, or in thrift stores and library sales. Both are worth reading, but are not for the faint at heart. If you do not care about wars and warfare, the WWII set will bore you to tears. However, if you are interested in that sort of thing, hearing it from the perspective of one of the main participants is priceless. Churchill was, even at that late stage, a soldier at heart, and he captures both the military and the diplomatic aspects of the war brilliantly.

The History of the English Speaking Peoples is, in my opinion, a far more interesting history of England that that found in most textbooks. While Churchill is prone to think in terms of kings and battles more than writers and ideas, his writing is so far from dull. Many a textbook writer should read this before compressing a vivid history into a dry biscuit. It’s also fun because he can’t resist giving his opinion of the military strategy of the American Civil War – a totally different view than we Americans get from our history books.

A Single Pebble by John Hersey

 Source of Book: I own this. Purchased used as a library discard

Most people know of Hersey from his unforgettable non-fiction work, Hiroshima, which still stands as an extraordinary work of journalism. It is unlikely that any one person affected our perception of atomic an nuclear weaponry more than he did. Furthermore, journalistic writing today continues to imitate his style and aspire to his impact.

Hiroshima was effective for two reasons. First, the subject itself made for a compelling story. Second, Hersey chose to write the story in clear, stripped down prose, consciously avoiding sensationalism. Instead, he let the horror of the facts themselves tell the story – perhaps one of the best cases of the writer getting out of his own way.

It would not be much of a stretch to claim that Hersey is partially responsible for the fact that the cold war never became thermonuclear. Both sides were left with a lingering fear that has never left. In addition, we all remember the name Hiroshima. Fewer remember Nagasaki, which is a shame, because it was bombed on my birthday, August 9.

(Odd digression: August 9 is not an auspicious date. In addition to numerous trifling battles over the centuries, it was also the date of the Charles Manson murders, Nixon’s resignation, and the trade of Wayne Gretzky . On the plus side, the Sistine Chapel was opened on that date, and Thomas Edison got his patent for the two-way telegraph. Not that you really wanted to know all that. You’re welcome anyway.)

In addition to Hiroshima, I became acquainted with Hersey through another non-fiction work, Life Sketches, published late in his life in 1989. This book is worth seeking out for its essays on John F. Kennedy, Sinclair Lewis, Henry Luce, and others.

I decided to try some of Hersey’s fiction. A Single Pebble is best described as a short novel. Like his non-fiction, it is written in a spare, compact manner. Hersey preferred the shorter form to the longer as a general rule, and kept his narrative directly on point. In essence, this book is a short story on a larger scale.

Hersey was born in China to missionary parents. He learned Mandarin before he learned English, but came to the United States when he was ten years old. Thus, it was natural that this book was set in China in the 1920s. The protagonist is a young engineer sent to survey the Yangtze River for a possible dam site. He travels by Junk, hauled upstream by human power alone. Called “Trackers”, these persons were paid a pittance in exchange for brutally hard work, danger, and the knowledge that they were as more expendable than the cargo on the ship.

Hersey keeps his character list short. There is the engineer who narrates the story in the first person. The old and cynical owner of the junk is married to a much younger wife, who is in love with the head tracker, nicknamed “Old Pebble” despite his youth. The engineer also comes to have feelings for the young wife, making this not a love triangle, but a love tetrahedron, perhaps. Finally, there is the cook, who would like to own the boat, and seems to dislike everyone.

One of the things Hersey does well in this book is strike a balance between the East and the West. Many modern authors have a tendency to romanticize ancient cultures and methods. Thus, they would mourn the loss of the old ways in China, and vilify the West for bringing modern technology and its benefits. Conversely, the Victorian author would consider the Chinaman to be a savage, lacking the essential humanity of the civilized European. Both extremes are avoided deftly by Hersey, as he allows his protagonist to wrestle with both points of view.

Hersey’s experience in China gives him an understanding of the culture, which in turn causes his Chinese characters to be recognizably human, despite the cultural differences. As the engineer (who is never given a name) interacts with the others, they become to the engineer and to the reader complex and sympathetic characters. His own prejudice and clumsy interpersonal skills cause sparks, and ultimately contribute in a small way to the tragedy that ensues.

On the other hand, Hersey does not sugar coat the problems with the ancient ways. We tend to forget in this era of multiculturalism that throughout most of history and most cultures, the poor were considered more expendable than animals. In this case, the work that we now do with machines was done directly by humans. By humans thought of as sub-persons. Should a tracker fall in the river and drown, well, there were thousands waiting at the next village.

In this respect, the engineer’s goal is noble. If the river is dammed, it could prevent the destructive floods that formerly killed hundreds of thousands in a bad year. Likewise, the river would be more safely navigable, and there would be no need for the trackers to be worked harder than any animal.

This tension underlies the well written narrative. Hersey chooses not to resolve the issue in the end. The narrator, like the reader, is left with food for thought, but no clear idea of the “right” decision.

In this, Hersey has certainly been justified by history. The Three Gorges dam was completed as envisioned by the engineer in 2006. It has inspired controversy both in and out of China. Its effects have been both positive and negative. Only time will tell which will prevail in the long term.

Aspiring writers would do well to read Hersey as an example of doing more with less. His works, both fiction and non-fiction, show that writing can be both clear and deep. He also, like Henry James, demonstrates that the short novel fills a niche and can achieve something that neither the long novel nor the short story are suited to do.

Everyone should read Hiroshima, preferably at various ages. A Single Pebble likewise induces thought, and can be recommended for a short, if not exactly light, read.