Enola Gay Display at the Smithsonian
America is in the midst of a culture war, and one of the latestskirmishes occurred between the houses and hedgerows surrounding theSmithsonian Museum. On one side were the members of a growing numbers ofacedemians and cultural theorists who believe that American should not behonored as a country which has been a continued source of peace, andleadership in the world. History should be taught in a context, and thatcontext needs to challenge individuals to think on a larger social scale ofhow our actions may adversely affect others. The opposing forces are thosewho have fought, and sometimes given the ultimate sacrifice to earn thecountries place of responsibility as the leader of the free world, and onlyremaining superpower. These men and women look back at America's actionsand remember the issues and limitations of the day. This group has aliving memory of historical events, and is opposed to reinterpreting themin light of 21st century political cynicism, or academic enlighten. One group believes that if the military forces were downsized, andmoneys spent on nation building and international charity projects, thatthe world would become a safer, more peaceful place. The other legion
" The historical voice froze the event in time, and used it as a focalpoint for the other event which was causally related. Shebelieved that critics of the exhibition objected strenuously to the"revisionist" scholarship because she believed that the debate between"revisionists" and their "orthodox" opponents had reached a state ofpolitical and intellectual equilibrium. A Culturally Balanced Conclusion The controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian's Airand Space Museum may have gotten out of hand, and as one might expect whereemotions run high. A second draft of the plan was adjusted, including more details ofthe exhibit. (Roeder, 1993) Thus the critics who responded with outrage regarding the substitutionof pictures regarding "burnt watches and broken wall clocks" and life sizephotographs of their owners rather than the mushroom clouds that had longscreened them out of American sight were only objecting to an accurate viewof the war, not a revisionist history. Therefore, Harwit and the new curators gradually shifted their emphasis tomatch the approach of their academic colleagues. US and allied forces prepared for a difficult andcostly invasion of the Japanese islands. Writing in a statement drafted "well before my installation as Secretary"and published in the October 1994 issue of the Smithsonian magazine, Heymanput the Enola Gay controversy in terms of principles of fundamentalimportance to the Smithsonian. But when the countrygoes to war, it has made the decision to complete its mission; even throughthere will be a high cost to both sides. " (Roeder, 1993) This approach to redefining the terms by which history is defined wasalso supported at higher levels of government. The Japanese may have been on the verge of surrender, some believe thatAmerican military leaders knew that. The nation's most prestigious museum is not the place to debate thejustifications for war. The instinctive moral reaction to war without limits is often to seekan absolute prohibition of war as a means of policy, or to retaliateagainst the force which enters the conflict without self imposed limits. In a letter just a few months earlier, Tom Neuenfeld, one of thecurators put on the steering committee of the exhibit, wrote this in theproposal regarding the museum's perspective on the display.
Common topics in this essay:
Enola Gay,
Hiroshima Nagasaki,
Smithsonian Museum,
Space Museum,
American Japanese,
President Truman,
Force Association,
September Zinn,
Tom Neuenfeld,
Exhibit Hindsight,
enola gay,
atomic bomb,
hiroshima nagasaki,
atomic weapons,
air space,
air space museum,
space museum,
culture war,
air force,
gay exhibit,
enola gay exhibit,
decision drop,
air force association,
enola gay display,
world war ii,
|
Acceptance Essays
