Attacking the casualty figures used to support a conspiracy thesis, Maddox suggests that this amounts to "writing history backwards" (p. by striking out at anyone who may have considered the question of inflated invasion casualty figures.Īlthough this may be an acceptable challenge (evidence used to support falsifiable claims is what keeps many political commentators going), Maddox commits himself to responding to Alperovitz et al. In the process, he argues that the "new evidence" Alperovitz described has in fact been available for years. Maddox notes that scholars who use the revised figure of 200,000 casualties (as opposed to the 500,000 given in Truman's memoirs) to assert their criticism of the atomic decision fail to take into account that this is still a "staggeringly high" number. Maddox's point is well taken and has been central to opinions on both sides of the issue: that beyond memoranda, statistics, and political meetings, the setting and the "mood" of the times are essential to understanding the behavior of the American and Japanese leaderships. In 1995, the Enola Gay exhibit was intended to open for the 50th anniversary of the day the Atomic Bomb was dropped on Japan.In some ways, Maddox's quasi-systematic criticism of Alperovitz echoes the ways in which reviewers lashed out when the first edition of Alperovitz's book appeared. was confined to a single gallery in a first. Michael Heyman, Secretary of the Smithsonian, had a vision of creating an exhibit that would inspire people to have more profound discussions about the atom bomb. A script was written to point out the different phases that took place before the decision to drop the bomb and the aftermath of that decision.Ĭrew in 1945 features a group of smiling young men who were surely aware and. The controversy surrounding the Enola Gay exhibit stems from disagreements between the Smithsonian, historians, members of Congress, veterans, and those who were there for the event that shook the world.
The common denominator of these contacts is that veterans are opposed to the museums revisionist actions. The Smithsonian wanted to make Americans and those who saw the exhibit reevaluate their understanding of World War II. There is, however, a spread of opinion about what must be done to set things right. The outcome of the controversy had multiple repercussions. Many veterans demand that the exhibition be cancelled and that the Enola Gay be given to another museum. Judging by the state of commotion the exhibition incited, the bombings were still a contentious issue in the mid 1990s. The exhibition incited many academic, political and social commentaries to discuss revisionist perspective on historical events. Those who opposed the exhibit, however, were concerned with the credibility and the message it was trying to send. The question was whether the Smithsonian Institution's exhibition of Enola Gay was non-biased, or if, instead, it was intended as an instrument of propaganda. Within months academicians, curators, veteran groups, politicians, and ordinary citizens began defending their memories of the Enola Gay.2 For rhetoricians, the Enola Gay controversy provides several layers of texts for analysis. This dispute and various other events led to the controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit and its eventual cancellation. The exhibition was supposed to contain five controversial narrative sections. The first section was to deal with Japanese invasions and the attack on Pearl Harbor. The next would explain the decision to drop the Atomic Bomb. The third was to focus on the handling of the bomb from the secret factories to the loading onto the plane. The fourth section was intended to reveal the horrible destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after they were bombed, and the final section of the exhibition was scheduled to discuss the problems of nuclear weapons and the arms race that followed the war. This quiz is basically my version of an Am I Gay quiz. To the Smithsonian, the Enola Gay was instrumental in events that changed our world. In the first Danganronpa game, the player controls a high school student named Makoto Naegi. Kuznick, the director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, who initiated the petition along with members of the antiwar group Peace.
Both Americans and the Japanese were meant to have the opportunity to see the exhibit and to try to understand the complex.