Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki [Paperback]

Philip Nobile (Editor)

Book Description

Publication Date: 1995

Now published in its entirety, here is the Smithsonian's original Enola Gay document, with an introduction that covers the controversy and explains the issues at stake in remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki 50 years later. Two closing chapters probe the enduring moral debate over the bombings and the strongly debated matter of an official apology to Japan.

Product Details

• Paperback: 270 pages
• Publisher: Marlowe & Company; 1st edition (1995)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1569248419
• ISBN-13: 978-1569248416
• Product Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.4 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #574,663 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Balanced Assessment of Hiroshima, July 12, 2002

By A Customer

This review is from: Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Paperback)

I came to the book as a skeptic based on the contoversy over the exhibit as it had been portrayed in the media. I have studied World War II for over 20 years and have generally supported the decision to use the Atomic Bomb to end the war and save lives. I also speak from the perspective of the son of a WWII USAAF veteran who survived 65 combat missions in the Pacific Theatre, so any exhibit that hinges on the war ending mission of that conflict holds special significance for me and my family.

The way the proposed exhibit was portrayed in the media and from the criticisms presented by the AF Association and others made it appear that the Smithsonian's presentation would be biased toward those who were critical of the use of the Bomb. However, it is clear from the book that the proposed exhibit would have been a very balanced and effective one that would not have detracted from the reputations of the men and women who participated in this project and carried out the mission. I think the critics were objecting to individual portions of the entire presentation out of context and perhaps felt that any attempt to present opposing views would be seen as defaming the efforts of Paul Tibbets and the USAAF. I visit the Air and Space Museum several times per year, as well as the USAF Museum in Dayton OH, and have viewed the Enola Gay exhibit on a number of occasions. While I do like the current exhibit, I now feel somewhat 'cheated', knowing what could have been included if the original exhibit had been completed as planned. I think some of the critics would come to the same conclusion if they took the time to carefully read this entire volume.

For me, one of the important portions of the book was the discussion of projected casualties of a planned invasion of the Japanese Home Islands if the Atomic Bomb had not been used. The book makes clear that the 'million casualties' estimate was a figure that came into wide usage after the fact and was not based on the estimates made at the time by the Joint Chiefs. The actual estimates were much lower, but even the actual projected casualties in the tens of thousands are not insignificant and clearly had to weigh on the minds of planners. The use of an inflated 'million dead' figure by supporters of the bomb do not serve to illuminate the actual decision making process any more than some of the more absurdly low estimates from recent revisionist historians who support their criticism of the bombing by claiming that no more than 20,000 US casualties would have resulted from an invasion.

The 50,000 US casualties from the just completed Okinawa campaign, contested over a much smaller area and smaller number of defenders than the home islands, made clear that an invasion would be very costly in US lives. The exhibit did not make clear the toll on Japanese lives in such a land war, and that would have added another important dimension.

I came away from volume with a good deal more information on the subject than I had previously, with leads to other excellent primary and secondary sources on the subject. An exhibit modeled on the original design would have satisfied the serious student of WWII and would have pulled in the previously uninformed visitor to a topic worthy of further examination. That is the hallmark of any good museum project. And it would have done so without upsetting the sensibilities of the most ardent patriot and supporter of this war-ending mission. The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is the only institution that could have provided this sort of exhibit and now we won't have the opportunity to see it, but at least this book allows a glimpse at what might have been. The only omission was a lack of photos of what would have been included in the planned exhibit. If the volume is republished at a later date, efforts should be made to locate and include as much of this as possible.

7 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Illuminates the controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit., September 17, 1997

By A Customer

This review is from: Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Paperback)

JUDGEMENT AT THE SMITHSONIAN has three parts:
the original script of the censored Smithsonian Enola Gay
exhibit, a forward by Philip Nobile, the editor of the
volume, concerning the controversy over the exhibit and the
morality of the bombings, and an afterword by Barton
Bernstein, which summarizes the evolution, current state,
and relation to the script of historical writings on the atomic
bombings of Japan.

I was interested in this book because I wanted to know why
the opponents of the exhibit objected to it. The script treats a
number of controversial points, such as possible anti-Soviet
motivations for dropping the bomb, or the projected number
of American casulties in an invasion of Japan, by presenting
the various viewpoints expressed in the historical literature
without drawing any definite conclusions of its own. I did
not see what could be objectionable in summarizing what
others had written, nor what purpose would be served by
suppressing a text that was based on well known historical
scholarship, although the treatment of these controversies
was cited by some critics as a reason for their objections.
The fourth section of the script, Ground Zero, which
describes the effects of the bombs, seems to have been the
most objectionable section of the exhibit. Critics charged that
photographs and other evidence of these effects gave the
impression that the bombings were immoral, and that the
exhibit neglected to supply evidence showing that the
bombings were morally justified. Since the book contains
only the text, no photographs, it does not completely portray
how the exhibit would have appeared.

The first half of Bernstein's Afterword is an interesting and
informative overview of Hiroshima scholarship. The second
half compares the exhibit to the scholarly record, and
includes his recollections about the advisory board for the
exhibit, of which he was a member. Bernstein's opinion is
that script is generally accurate in its presentation of both the
events leading up to and following the atomic bombing, and
in its presentation of the main schools of thought about the
history of the bombings. Of particular note are his remarks
that this was the dominant conclusion of the advisory board
at its first meeting about the script, also held by Air Force
historians Hallion and Wolk, who later changed their
opinions after the main critics began their campaign against
the exhibit. Bernstein observes that opinion concerning the
necessity and morality of using the bombing was mixed
from the time the bombs were dropped. He also observes
that the view the critics wished presented in the exhibit
required ignoring many important sources. Bernstein says
that the critics may have been concerned that viewers of the
exhibit may have gotten the impression that the bombings
were morally wrong, though he believes that the script does
not attempt to present this point of view.

Philip Nobile's forward chronicles the events in the
controversy over the exhibit, lists the evidence that the
bombings were war crimes, and discusses the possibility
that the US apologize to Japan for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Despite the depressing subject matter, this forward is
written in a lively style. It does what the exhibit script was
accused of doing, but did not do: challenges the morality of
the decision to drop the bomb.

The publication of JUDGEMENT suggests that the success
of the critics at suppressing the exhibit was not complete.
Since JUDGEMENT contains only the text, not the
photographs and artifacts from Ground Zero, it does not
have the emotional impact that part of the exhibit would have
had, and in my view the publication of the script does not
does significantly reduce the critics success.

4.0 out of 5 stars Except for the introduction, a fine book., April 6, 2011

By 

Fred Collins "rationalist" (Buffalo, NY) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Paperback)

"Judgment at the Smithsonian" contains "the uncensored script of the Smithsonian's 50th anniversary exhibit of the Enola Gay", as well as an introduction by editor Philip Nobile, and an afterword by historian Barton Bernstein. The exhibit was cancelled after considerable controversy, mainly centered on a single sentence in the script which was quoted by several commentators. The sentence implied Japanese victimhood in that the war was fought "to defend their unique culture against Western Imperialism." However, the complete script was unavailable to the general public until the publication of this book.
After reading the script, it seems reasonable to declare that the criticism was unfair, and the media were guilty of what Nobile labels "biased reporting." But none of the critics can approach Mr. Nobile himself for one-sided journalism in his introduction.
To Mr. Nobile, anyone who does not consider the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as war crimes is either ignorant or contemptible, including those veterans who were assigned to the postulated invasion of Japan. At one point they are dismissed as "white American male intellectuals", and veterans who defend the bombing "wear their trunks too high."
For one of the more outrageous examples, Nobile labels an eminent historian and combat veteran, Paul Fussell, "the Robert Faurisson of Hiroshima denial." Faurisson is a notorious Holocaust denier, but this is not Nobile's slimiest comparison.
Any observer who does tag the bombings as an atrocity is automatically praiseworthy. A. J. Muste is not only a pacifist, he is referred to as "sainted." Linus Pauling is not just "late", meaning deceased, but also "great", because he felt that we should apologize to Japan.
Nobile ascribes no merit whatsoever to the "deniers." Martin Peretz of The New Republic asked, "who could be certain when (or that) Japan would have actually surrendered?" For that rather obvious question, he is described as "obdurate." Barney Frank said he was opposed to an apology to Japan, and "snapped" his response to Nobile's daughter, who, for some reason, was questioning him about it. Newt Gingrich criticized the exhibit, but his comments were "lowbrow."
Nobile disputes the often quoted estimate of 250,000 to one million casualties in an invasion of Japan, and the exhibit itself would have quoted much lower figures. But there is no estimate of Japanese killed in a conventional attack, or how many others would have died if the war had continued until November 1, or December 31, or well into 1946. And there is no mention at all of the fate of Allied POW's held by the Japanese.
Almost laughably, Nobile states that President Truman "deserves to be tried posthumously for war crimes." He then proceeds to do just that, demonstrating how easy it is to convict a defendant who cannot speak in his own defense, and also why a prosecutor should not be allowed to serve as the sole juror.
If Japan had offered to surrender in June or July, requiring only that a figurehead Emperor be retained as the sole condition, then the use of nuclear weapons was wholly unjustified, and, unquestionably, an atrocious war crime. Although Nobile plainly says that the Japanese would have surrendered with that sole proviso, "something that Truman admittedly knew", this is a blatant lie.
But the slandering of Paul Fussell and drawing a Hitler moustache on Harry Truman are far from the most scurrilous of Nobile's calumnies. At one point he quotes two men who both claim that they did what they did during the war because they were following orders - a sentiment that could also be expressed by Audie Murphy, Alvin York, John Bradley, MacArthur, Patton, Eisenhower, and every winner of the Medal of Honor.
The two men Nobile quotes, though, are Paul Tibbets, pilot of the Enola Gay, and Rudolf Hoess, Commandant of Auschwitz. This is the worst kind of demagoguery, equal to declaring that all vegetarians and non-smokers are morally no different from Adolph Hitler.
It is regrettable that the exhibit at the Smithsonian was cancelled, but not a tragedy. And I certainly sympathize with those World War II veterans who are sick of being told that they should have been willing to die in 1945 to avoid use of the Bomb.