80 years since Hiroshima

The Devil Reached Towards The Sky

 

It’s been 80 years since Hiroshima. I remember two things about the discussion around the Oscar-winning film Oppenheimer, one of commission, and the other, omission.

You may recall the scene of the protagonist uncomfortably accepting accolades from workers after World War II, an honest reflection of his ambivalence. The other was the feeling by some critics that the results of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should have been reflected.

To the latter point, I don’t think so; it wasn’t where the American consciousness was at the war’s end. From staff writer Jane Meyer in the New Yorker: “Thirty years after this magazine published John Hersey’s ‘Hiroshima,’ [paywall] I sat in his classroom at Yale, hoping to learn how to write with even a fraction of his power. When ‘Hiroshima’ appeared, in the August 31, 1946, issue, it was the scoop of the century—the first unvarnished account by an American reporter of Hiroshima and Nagasaki of the nuclear blast that obliterated the city.

“Hersey’s prose was spare, allowing the horror to emerge word by word. A man tried to lift a woman out of a sandpit, ‘but her skin slipped off in huge, glove-like pieces.’ The detonation buried a woman and her infant alive: ‘When she had dug herself free, she had discovered that the baby was choking, its mouth full of dirt. With her little finger, she had carefully cleaned out the infant’s mouth, and for a time the child had breathed normally and seemed all right; then suddenly it had died.'”

Starting the dialogue

“Hersey’s candor had a seismic impact: the magazine sold out, and a book version of the article sold millions of copies. Stephanie Hinnershitz, a military historian, told me that Hersey’s reporting ‘didn’t just change the public debate about nuclear weapons—it created the debate.’ Until then, she explained, President Harry Truman had celebrated the attack as a strategic masterstroke, ‘without addressing the human cost.’ Officials shamelessly downplayed the effects of radiation; one called it a ‘very pleasant way to die.’ Hinnershitz said, ‘Hersey broke that censorship.’ He alerted the world to what the U.S. government had hidden.”

(There will be a public reading of John Hersey’s “Hiroshima” today at 11 a.m. at Townsend Park in Albany, NY. The event is free and open to the public, and the public is encouraged to join in the reading. Those interested in reading can sign up to participate when they arrive. Please bring folding chairs. Rain site: Social Justice Center, 33 Central Ave.)
Saving a million American lives?

When I was in sixth grade, we had a rigorous debate about whether the atomic attacks were justified. Most of us were opposed, but our teacher, Paul Peca, suggested they were appropriate.

Mr. Peca likely would have supported the position of , who wrote in Harper’s in February 1947: “The decision to use the atomic bomb was a decision that brought death to over a hundred thousand Japanese. No explanation can change that fact, and I do not wish to gloss it over. But this deliberate, premeditated destruction was our least abhorrent choice. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put an end to the Japanese war. It stopped the fire raids and the strangling blockade; it ended the ghastly specter of a clash of great land armies.”

Only recently, I learned that McGeorge Bundy, a future national-security adviser, was the ghost writer for Stimson, when they “claimed that dropping nuclear bombs on Japan had averted further war, saving more than a million American lives. Kai Bird, a co-author of ‘American Prometheus,’ the definitive biography of J. Robert Oppenheimer, [said] that this pushback was specious: ‘Bundy later admitted to me that there was no documentary evidence for this ‘million’ casualty figure. He just pulled it out of thin air.”

As I noted here, Dwight Eisenhower wrote in 1963: “Japan was already defeated, and dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary… Secondly, our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives.”

To this day, the debate continues. 

Movie

I saw the 1982 documentary The Atomic Cafe in the cinema; here’s the trailer. “A disturbing collection of 1940s and 1950s United States government-issued propaganda films designed to reassure Americans that the atomic bomb was not a threat to their safety.” It was really good, and also had a killer soundtrack (but not the last track on this YouTube chain). 

Here’s a list of seven books on Hiroshima, starting with Hersey’s book and including Barefoot Gen by Keiji Nakazawa (1982); the “comic book has little of the artfulness and refinement of the modern graphic novel. But the storytelling’s power, simplicity, and anger, based on the author’s experience, are indelible.” I bought it at the time and still own it.

This week, ABC News touted a new book that uses oral history to tell the story of the atomic bomb. Martha Raddatz spoke with author Garrett M. Graff about his new book, The Devil Reached Towards The Sky, on the nuclear bombing during WWII.

The events of eight decades ago still resonate with me since I have written about Hiroshima every five years since 2010.

Movie review: Oppenheimer

Barbenheimer

The movie Oppenheimer is worth seeing, preferably at a movie theater. Though not at the showing I attended.

J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy, who was tremendous) was a brilliant scientist who helped develop nuclear science.  He also had complicated relationships with women (Emily Blunt as wife Kitty, Florence Pugh as Kitty). And what are his ties to communism?

Very little in this story, except parts of the filming, is black and white. Was the development of the bombs that would be dropped on Japan a good military strategy or an immoral unleashing of power?

Director/co-writer Christopher Nolan has painted a non-linear painting, not just of the main character, but of important partners in the process. Major General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon) has conversations with Oppenheimer, which allow the viewer to better understand the work without slowing down the narrative.

Robert Downey Jr was stellar as the Machiavellian bureaucrat Lewis Strauss. Strauss exposed Oppenheimer’s ties to communism, not for the good of the country but for the good of himself.

It is terrific storytelling. Still, the scene of the first test of the device – using real explosives rather than CGI – is practically worth the price of admission. The only flaw I saw was that there were occasionally some 50-star flags when there were only 48 states.

Read the New York Times’ very positive assessment. The negative reviews suggest that the film, at three hours was too long – surprisingly, I beg to differ. It was also painted as too talky, sluggish, and remote, which I didn’t experience. Or the whataboutism that it didn’t show X or Y (the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima or its aftermath, e.g.), which would be a different movie.

The future of cinema

My disappointment was not with the film but the Madison Theatre in Albany the Thursday after it opened. During a scene between Oppy and President Truman, the screen went dark. The sound continued, but it took about seven minutes after two patrons went out to complain. Then it happened AGAIN about 15 minutes later for another three minutes.

That said, I worry about the future of cinema. Sure, Oppenheimer’s opening weekend gleaned $80.5 million, an excellent total for an R-rated, 180-minute film. It came in second to that OTHER Barbenheimer flick.

But several films in 2023 have been described as having box office that was “below expectations, notably the new Indiana Jones and Elemental. During COVID, even I watched movies via streaming. But I need to see the film in person, partly hoping there will be cinemas to support. The number of theaters has dropped since 2019.

Ramblin' with Roger
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial