OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26993 posts, RR: 57 Posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
I have to say I like it. A historic figure with a nice design.
LONDON -- Here's a choice not likely to be too controversial: officials say wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill's portrait will be featured on a new 5-pound note.
Bank of England Governor Mervyn King made the announced Friday at Chartwell, Churchill's former home, surrounded by members of the late leader's family.
King called Churchill "a truly great British leader, orator and writer."
The bank says the note is likely to be issued in 2016. It will be based on a famous portrait photographed by Yousuf Karsh in Ottawa in 1941.
The note will also bear Churchill's wartime declaration that he has "nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6658 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3304 times:
Well I'm not British so I can't really comment on the choice of the man, but I find the picture is not the best choice, he looks like a bulldog. His head should be facing us or looking right or left but in the distance, not down like that.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
cptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3191 times:
An apropos choice, I say, bearing the likeness of one of the great free world leaders instrumental in securing (measurably for that time, anyway) an end to a world war and the installation of a freer international society.
Personally, I would like Sir Winston's portrait better WITH the trademark cigar. best regards...jack
DNDTUF From France, joined Feb 2012, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3160 times:
I'm rather against this. I don't like the idea of celebrating a political figure on banknotes - not least a man who was a lousy PM outside of wartime. Churchill is far down the list of people who should be on Bank of England notes.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3142 times:
Quoting cptkrell (Reply 11): Personally, I would like Sir Winston's portrait better WITH the trademark cigar.
I don't disagree, but that would never happen, especially in Europe. I saw a promotional video from Porsche a few weeks ago and all the alcohol and tobacco sponsor logos were blurred out, so the Martini livery changed a bit. It looked so stupid to have pit crew members walking around with big blurs on their backs.
Quoting DNDTUF (Reply 12): I don't like the idea of celebrating a political figure on banknotes - not least a man who was a lousy PM outside of wartime.
Didn't stop the US from putting FDR on the dime.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Quokkas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3088 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 10): Airstud (Reply 9):I always thought British (and all Commonwealth) currency was sposedta bear the likeness of the reigning monarch.
They do... on the other side.
In the UK maybe, but not so in all Commonwealth countries. In Australia, only the $5 note bears a likeness of the Queen. The other notes have portraits of:
$10 - AB 'Banjo' Paterson & Dame Mary Gilmore;
$20 - Mary Reibey & Reverend John Flynn (of Royal Flying Doctor fame)
$50 - David Unaipon & Edith Cowan
$100 - Dame Nellie Melba & General Sir John Monash
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10736 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3032 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 2): I don't really like overtly celebrating MPs nor war heroes.
I would prefer to see a great mind or humanitarian person. Newton or Shakespeare or someone like that.
I am also against war heroes on bank notes, but Churchill saved the Nation, and perhaps more. For some time Churchill´s Britain stood alone against what was probably the most brutal and effective war machine ever. The banknote looks good, much better than our Euro at least.
That said, yes, I agree I´d sttill rather see Shakespeare or Newton on it, or Brunel. But best, still, the Queen.
Boeing744 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1835 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2940 times:
Quoting Airstud (Reply 9): I always thought British (and all Commonwealth) currency was sposedta bear the likeness of the reigning monarch.
Also not true for Canada. The Queen is featured only on the $20 bill, and all our coins.
$5 - Sir Wilfred Laurier
$10 - Sir John A. MacDonald
$20 - Queen Elizabeth II
$50 - William Lyon MacKenzie King
$100 - Sir Robert Borden
Unlike countries like the UK, all the figures on our notes except the Queen are former Prime Ministers. Does anyone know if Canada featured anyone else on our notes historically? I have a feeling that before these individuals we only had the King/Queen of the day on our money.
Quoting DNDTUF (Reply 12): I'm rather against this. I don't like the idea of celebrating a political figure on banknotes - not least a man who was a lousy PM outside of wartime. Churchill is far down the list of people who should be on Bank of England notes.
N867DA From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1008 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2897 times:
The world seems to be smitten for retro designs and products now. Every airline seems to have planes with vintage color schemes, Pepsi made Pepsi Throwback permanent, and now even currencies are fair game! Heck, I love this old time stuff too, bring it on!
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13208 posts, RR: 77
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2855 times:
Quoting pvjin (Reply 19): I think Churchill is a good choice, surely better choice than adding more boring monarchs.
Cannot help it can you? The Monarch, our head of state, whose job is to perform that role boring or otherwise, is on all Bank Of England Notes. Basic facts, already explained here.
What about yours? Sometime Nazi collaborator Mannheim? Got the X-Factor on the TV there, one of those?
The Gallipoli Campaign comes into my mind. Hundred thousands of casualties were a consequence of his arrogant misjudgement of the power of the Ottoman forces in this foolish campaign.
And at WWII he just was there at the right time, but what were his merits? I thing nearly everybody in such a position could have done what he've done.
Churchill was not solely responsible for Gallipoli, it was poorly executed and also perhaps, yet another instance of the military tactics of WW1, on both sides, being behind the technology.
Nonetheless, he took the rap, re-joined the army as an officer and made sure he was posted on the front lines in France, he narrowly escaped death more than once while there.
Prior to that he had fought in Africa before going into politics, where he showed considerable bravery, it was, after all, one of his many famous sayings that 'there is nothing as exciting as being shot at, so long as you are not hit!'
His merits were that he united a nation in it's darkest hour, for a time his was the only voice of defiance against Hitler, he brought a sense of determination to the war lacking prior to that.
He refused to leave London at the height of the Blitz, in fact his staff were driven to distraction by his going out on to the roof to watch the air raids.
His was a real coalition, of all parties. He made mistakes, but was right on the big, fundamental issues. He had a never ending stream of ideas, some impractical but others not. He could be stubborn and imperious, still, ultimately, he listened to his military advisers. Which is something that most dictators stop doing, including Hitler.
Prior to WW2, his had also been an almost lone voice against the rise of Fascism, Nazism, he got the measure of Hitler, before he was even voted into power in Germany.
But most did not listen, until it was almost too late, one of the reasons they gave is one one you cited about Gallipoli.
: He was a soldier in the Boer War and was nearly awarded a VC, he also escaped capture and travelled over 300km through enemy territory to safety, so
: Baack in 1940, after Chamberlain´s resignation, the alternative to Churchill would have been Lord Halifax. Lord Halifax would not have stood up to th
: Churchill also took part in just about the last cavalry charge in history - by the British 21st. Lancers, at Omdurman in the Sudan in 1898. Ironically
: That was far from the last, there were many cavalry charges during WW1, including the Battle of Beersheba by the Australian Light Horse, officially t
: I was careful to write 'just about,' kiwirob. However, hopefully, between us all, we've convinced people like old european that Churchill (unlike most
: Others worth of being on their currency. Benny Hill Sir Richard Branson Sir Paul McCartney Margaret Thatcher George Alan O'Dowd
: You are joking right, even if mentioning Galland and Hartmann doesnt make that clear? Certainly none of them, anyone from the Nazi times is more or l
: IMO a hero is a hero it doesn't matter what side they are on, doing brave things is all the same even if you loose.
: A hero – if one is to use that designation at all – is someone who puts other people's wellbeing above his or her own safety under duress in an e
: This is only one definition of the word and is of relatively recent adoption. In classical terms it simply meant a being of extraordinary strength an
: The new South African banknotes have Nelson Mandela on them and one of each of the African Big Five on the other side. http://banknotes.resbank.co.za/