Helen Gavaghan, “Smithsonian to study museums’ role after dropping A-bomb exhibition”, Nature (1995): 371. Martin Harwit, "The Enola Gay: A Nation's, and a Museum's, Dilemma." The Washington Post, Aug 7, 1994, c9. Michael Heyman, “Smithsonian Official Tells Why Enola Gay Exhibit Was Shot Down”, Physics Today 50, no.
Tony Capaccio and Uday Mohan, "Missing the Target," American Journalism Review 17, no. The government, as with the Smithsonian) in constructing historical narratives. The role of museums (especially when a significant amount of funding came from
Highlighted the contested nature of public history, and inspired debate about Were still considered contentious issues in 19. Itself proved that the bombing of Japan and the commemoration of World War II The desires of the Enola Gay pilot and the American Air Force. TheĬontradictory goals of the different groups involved in the exhibitionĪntagonised each other, from the scholarly pursuits within the Smithsonian, to Quality” was evident in television broadcasts about the exhibition. It was similarly argued that this “unexamined Similar to the revised history surrounding the Kennedy assassination or theĬuban missile crisis. Unwillingness, particularly in the media, to reassess these events in a manner Japan, even 50 years after the event historians argued that there was Museum, to question the degree of “political scrutiny” that the otherwise independentįacility could face, based on the precedence set by the Enola Gay.Įxhibition highlighted the tense public opinion surrounding the bombing of Smithsonian’s other museums, such as Robert Post at the American History History” would be reviewed and rectified. In Congress) that other Smithsonian exhibits believed to reflect “revisionist War was postponed, and Heyman assured critics of the museum (particularly those Following theĬancelling of the Enola Gay exhibition, an exhibit on air power in the Vietnam Tensions between the (nationally funded) museum and Congress. Something that a historian dreamed up,” tellingly reveals the underlying Johnson comment, “We want the Smithsonian to reflect real America and not The Smithsonian should depict American history. Understood as the culmination of political tensions over the manner in which However, the Enola Gay exhibition can also be In his 1996 book AnĮxhibit Denied: Lobbying the History of the Enola Gay, Harwit continued toĭivert blame away from himself, saying “the nation is the poorer for what they Transparency by museums in disclosing whose historical analysis the exhibit Particularly in a national institution there have been calls for greater Several questions about the roles and responsibilities of museum curators, Harwit’s actions and comments regarding the Enola Gay exhibit have raised Scholars have since criticised Harwit for prioritising his “particularĪpproach” over the voices of the people represented in his exhibit. However, attempts to alter the exhibit inĪccordance with the veterans’ wishes were denounced by historians in academicĬircles, who condemned the “celebratory tone” of the modified exhibit. Western Imperialism,” as labelling World War II veterans and the American Air Vengeance,” while Japan fought a “war to defend their unique culture against Own conclusions.” Harwit’s position was condemned by veterans groups, who sawĪn early draft of the exhibit that described America as fighting a “war of Piece but rather the basic information that visitors will need to draw their Smithsonian in the construction of an exhibit that would be “not an opinion The conflicting views regarding the bombing of Japan would be obstacles for the He recognised, even at this preliminary stage, that The exhibit as filling the need for a discussion about the circumstances surrounding Post column about the proposed displaying of the Enola Gay, Harwit identified