CASE STUDY-MUSEUM PROJECT
An historian was asked to participate as a consultant on a museum project
in the process of being set up on-site in Alamogordo, New Mexico to commemorate
the building and detonation of the first atomic bomb on July 15, 1945 (the
Manhattan Project). The original project outline suggested that the exhibit
should focus on the technology developed and the international community
of scientists, under the direction of J. Robert Oppenheimer, who participated
in the design and building of the bomb. One of the primary goals of the
project was public education and therefore the exhibit plan included a variety
of formats and activities to create a learning-centered environment as well
as the generate discussion. This effort to educate the public on the project
topic was one of the reasons the historian agreed to act as consultant.
By the time the historian joined the team, the exhibit plan had begun according
to the project outline which focused on scientific developments such as the
production of the first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction as well as
profiles on the scientists themselves. However, as the project team discussed
the exhibit outline and solicited the historian's input, they began to contemplate
the impact of the atomic bomb and its place in the United
States and global history. All agreed that the significance
of the Manhattan Project should be included in the exhibit, but disagreed
to the extent of the coverage. Many team members argued that the focus of
the atomic bomb's impact should be on the technology and how it was used
to end World War II against Japan. These
members wanted to emphasize how the bomb saved hundreds of thousands of American
lives by not having to deploy land troops in Japan. The
historical consultant agreed with this but argued that coverage should also
include the atomic bomb's devastating impact upon the Japanese populations. The
historian felt strongly that without an international perspective the Manhattan
Project exhibit would have been an incomplete an unbalanced view. The historian
suggested that a discussion covering the bomb's impact upon Japan as
well as the future repercussions of nuclear technology used as weapons be
included in the exhibit. Team members, however, were concerned that funding
agencies for the exhibit such as the VFW, American Legion, and the Veterans
Administrations would not be pleased with the depiction of the atomic bomb
as anything other than a "humanitarian" technological feat.
The historian's suggestion to include the Japanese perspective was presented
to the project sponsors, including the VFW, Veterans Administrations, and
other federal agencies who had provided grants for the museum exhibit, but
the addition was rejected. In fact, the majority of grant agencies made
it clear that they would withdraw their funding if the team proceeded with
the historian's revision of the exhibit plan.
After much long debate, the project team came to the consensus to not include
as part of the exhibit a segment on the impact upon Japan and
the future because they were sensitive to the original grant proposal and
the benefactors of the project. This created an ethical dilemma for the
historian who now had to determine whether to stay involved with the project
to forward public education on a very significant topic, despite its clearly
biased nature or abandon the project completely.
- What should the historian do? Stay involved with the project or disassociate
him/herself?
- What other alternatives could be proposed to fulfill the project team,
historian and funding agencies' goals?
- What are the social and ethical implications involved with making
decisions about historical interpretations/ What are the historical
profession's responsibilities?
