As much as the bombings impacted the lives of the Japanese, it has also had a profound effect on Americans, who have lived with the stigma of being the aggressors, rightfully or wrongfully so.
The memory of the atomic bombings came into question in 1995 over a proposed 50th anniversary exhibit at the Smithsonian Institute. Disagreement between the vision of museum curators and that of interested veterans groups sparked a controversial, semi-public debate over the scope of the exhibit and how it should be presented.
The project was originally conceived of as a critical examination of the bombs, however early drafts for the exhibit were met with strong opposition, in particular from the American Legion, the Retired Officers Association and the Air Force Association, who felt that they were condemning the decision to use the bomb and by extension, their role in it. What ensued was a struggle between the veteran groups, with the support of powerful political and military groups and the media, and the curators, who hoped to preserve a critical perspective without negatively reflecting the veterans.
The script was thus modified many times until it was shortened to skip over any controversial issues and finally, when an agreement couldn’t be reached, the project was scrapped, going on display with just technical information. That it came to this was especially unfortunate because of the sheer magnitude of the event, one that both ended World War II and was the focal point of world politics over the next 40 years.
Edward Linenthal, a member of the Exhibition Advisory Board, reflects on this “missed opportunity”
The Enola Gay is now permanently on display at the National Air and Space Museum, but avoids controversy by glossing over the suffering that the bombs caused.
As demonstrated by the plight of the Smithsonian exhibit, the official American view of the bombs is that they were unfortunate but necessary occurrences in order to end the war with minimum casualties. They are more concerned with preserving the memory of the brave men who they believe rendered the free world a great service on those two fateful days in August 1945 rather than critically analyzing what happened in order to better deal with the issue of nuclear weapons today.
The refusal by prominent American interest groups and media to engage in unbiased, critical analysis has propagated a rather rosy outlook of their role in the bombings. The media chose not to engage in critical analysis of the situation, instead deflecting the question by pointing their fingers at Japanese atrocities in the Pacific prior to and during the war, implying that the bombings were justified.
Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe, August 16, 1995
Individuals on the planning side of things, including curators and Advisory Board members were unhappy with what they felt was unfair judgment on the part of the press.
Also supporting this notion were many prominent American scholars, including Noam Chomsky and Alan Brinkley, who collaborated to send a letter to the secretary of the Smithsonian, calling the exhibit a “transparent attempt at historical cleansing.”
Chomsky, Brinkley and others oppose censorship
Today, the denial of any sentiment of regret, beginning with President Harry Truman, the man who ordered the bombs to be dropped, is the issue that angers the Japanese the most. For some, Truman is the main culprit, however the majority view all Americans with similar hostility.
A Japanese man criticizes President Truman
A young writer describes his grandmother’s feelings towards Americans
While American officials certainly don’t want to alienate their veterans, who did serve selflessly, their decision to completely avoid this messy situation greatly hinders the population’s ability to learn from their actions, which is one of the main functions of historical study. It also has the effect of casting themselves as villains from the viewpoint of the Japanese, making reconciliation of this issue even less likely.
Leave a comment