Winston Churchill first became Prime Minister of Great Britain when he was 65 years old. His accession to the leadership came after a long career filled with adventure. Some of his countrymen were unhappy about his becoming their leader in 1939 but he had become the indispensable man at a time of crisis unprecedented in his nation’s history.

These facts, familiar to many Americans of a certain age, came vividly to mind this holiday season as I read the new biography of Churchill by Roy Jenkins. It is a weighty volume, both literally and in the history it records, written by a now 80-year-old veteran of British public service.  For me, reading it stirred up memories of an era momentous in itself and also important in my personal development.

Looking back to my teenage years, I remember once seeing Winston Churchill. On a visit to the United States, he came to M.I.T. in 1949 and took part that university’s  Mid-Century Convocation. Unfortunately, I have no memory of what this eloquent man said on that occasion but I do vividly recall the difficulty with which he extricated himself from a low-slung chair. His physique by then made it no easy task to stand up from that position.

As a inveterate reader, I have often found much pleasure in history and biography. This particular book is so rich in event and personalities that it held me rapt as I read. Though familiar with much of the story recounted here, I felt a new relish in reliving imaginatively sagas that used to grab my attention each day in the newspapers.

The central character, Winston Churchill, is now regarded by many as the greatest Englishman in history. His accomplishments in staving off defeat in World War II will no doubt continue to stand out for their brilliance. At the same time, he never stopped being human with the faults that entails.

Churchill was also one of the most fascinating characters in his zest for life and the eccentricities that, in a nation famous for them, made him stand out. His love for food and drink and his habit of working in bed still endear him to readers as they did to his countrymen and us Americans during those war years.

It has often been said of the man that, if he had not become Prime Minister, he would have gone down in history as a magnificent failure. His record in several other government posts before the Second World War was marked by serious mistakes. He was a risk taker who often plunged ahead in actions that proved unwise. Notable among these blunders was the invasion of the Dardanelles in 1915 when, as First Lord of the Admiralty, he was largely responsible for what turned into a costly fiasco.

But from the moment that Churchill took over the government in 1939, his courage and stubbornness started to make a difference. Those who listened to his speeches then as I did will remember their eloquence. The power of his words was sufficient to rouse a disheartened nation to resistance in the face of an expected German invasion.

He was sometimes lucky, too. The rescue of some 335 thousand British and French troops from Dunkirk could not have happened if the German army had advanced to the coast and subjected those allied forces to attack.

The sneak Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor he recognized immediately as a benefit for Britain. He felt confident that this raid, so devastating to the United States, ensured eventual victory because it brought America into the war on the British side. His repeated efforts to convince Roosevelt to support Britain had become no longer necessary.

Churchill’s story becomes poignant as the allies’ war effort becomes more and more successful. By 1944, he realized that the Soviet Union would play a dominant role in Central and Eastern Europe, with Poland and other countries becoming subject to its will. He also became painfully aware that, for all its heroic success in winning the war, Great Britain had lost irretrievably its own empire and much of its economic power in the world.

He would live to be 91 years old. In the postwar years he received widespread recognition for what he had accomplished for his own country and  the western world. However, he also tasted the bitterness of rejection when his party was defeated in the first postwar national election. I remember feeling uncomprehending, in my naiveté, that the British could prefer someone else to this great lion of heroic accomplishment.

The world of 2002 now seems far removed from the World War II era. It has become fashionable to call the heroes of that time “the Greatest Generation.” That term, in my view, tends toward reverse ageism, in unduly favoring the old over the young. But Winston Churchill and those that he and other leaders led into battle then can surely inspire both young and old with what they achieved against great odds.

Richard Griffin