What do you think?
Rate this book
Hiroshima in America
In a study of the impact of the use of the atomic bomb, two historians argue that information and debate about President Harry Truman's decision, in August 1945, to drop the bomb on Japan have been suppressed in order to prevent criticism of America.
425 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1995
7 people are currently reading
635 people want to read
About the author
Robert Jay Lifton
52 books226 followersRobert Jay Lifton was an American psychiatrist and author, chiefly known for his studies of the psychological causes and effects of wars and political violence, and for his theory of thought reform. He was an early proponent of the techniques of psychohistory.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
April 15, 2021
5.0
This is the most comprehensive book I've ever read on the topic Hiroshima and its aftermath in America. It's separated into 4 parts:
1. The Official Narrative (and the tension between those who wanted to tell the truth and those who wanted to keep it hidden)
2. Making and Defending the Decision (to drop the bombs, largely focused on President Truman)
3. Memory and Witness (how American presidents, military members, scientists, activists, media, historians, etc. have tried to make sense of what happened)
4. Hiroshima's Legacy - Moral, Psychological, Political
This book asks the reader to reflect on the American military legacy, post WW2, specifically on how our leaders came to the decision to drop atomic weaponry and how the collective avoidance of the Hiroshima topic has manifested in the American psyche ever since. It suggests that the continued inability of American leadership to acknowledge its moral transgressions has brought us into an age where the threat of nuclear armageddon will persist long after need be. The arguments are clear and compelling, the tone is partially historian, partially narrative, and partially activist, and the details are meticulous. I'm glad to have read this; I found it to be thorough, well-researched, and an eye-opening read. I wish I had read this sooner.
This is the most comprehensive book I've ever read on the topic Hiroshima and its aftermath in America. It's separated into 4 parts:
1. The Official Narrative (and the tension between those who wanted to tell the truth and those who wanted to keep it hidden)
2. Making and Defending the Decision (to drop the bombs, largely focused on President Truman)
3. Memory and Witness (how American presidents, military members, scientists, activists, media, historians, etc. have tried to make sense of what happened)
4. Hiroshima's Legacy - Moral, Psychological, Political
This book asks the reader to reflect on the American military legacy, post WW2, specifically on how our leaders came to the decision to drop atomic weaponry and how the collective avoidance of the Hiroshima topic has manifested in the American psyche ever since. It suggests that the continued inability of American leadership to acknowledge its moral transgressions has brought us into an age where the threat of nuclear armageddon will persist long after need be. The arguments are clear and compelling, the tone is partially historian, partially narrative, and partially activist, and the details are meticulous. I'm glad to have read this; I found it to be thorough, well-researched, and an eye-opening read. I wish I had read this sooner.
November 14, 2014
This is the book I've been searching for my entire life.
I've repeatedly heard about how the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary evils. They ended a war and, so, ultimately saved a million lives. Sometimes this story is told so closely in conjunction with Pearl Harbor that it feels like nothing else happened in the Pacific theater of WWII. And it even feels like, You bombed us, We bombed you back even bigger. All of this has always just ripped me up inside. There's more here! A bigger story! A bigger argument! Are we really not talking about the morals and ethics of this? Are we really always going to justify it? Are we never going to dig deeper (the bombs killed *this many* people, they ranged in age from *this to this*, people were affected for *this many* years afterward)? Whether or not you believe the bombs were justified, don't you want to know more? Or do you want to go with the same quick reasoning that's been trotted out for now over 50 years--Well, it ended the war. The science behind the atomic bomb is fascinating--don't you want to know the damage it inflicted? Nope, not usually, just that it ended the war. What does that say about us??? To me it has always said: We know this is wrong but we're going to plug our ears and sing to drown out the voices of good conscience.
Not that people today are entirely to blame, I suppose. The messages about the atomic bombs were carefully orchestrated by our government and many people went with it. And people still do. When the Smithsonian attempted to put together an exhibit that told more of a balanced story, there was so much criticism, so many problems, that it was eventually shut down and never came to fruition. (If you study history, Part III of the book about memory and witness is fascinating.) What a shame (and can we try to get that up and running again?).
There was so much I learned from this book--Truman's chief of staff is quoted as saying that this wasn't a bomb or explosive, it was a poison, comparing conventional poison to the effects of radiation. I had never thought about the bombs quite like that. I never knew they were exploded so high above the cities to inflict the maximum amount of deaths in the most horrible way, less about how quick the deaths could be, and more about deaths by radiation. I never realized how close Japan was to surrendering, but the bombs were possibly used anyway because of a power play with the Soviets--how disturbing and evil is that? I had always heard 500,000 to a million people's lives were saved by the bombs being dropped/the war ending--this book gave different numbers and told how they became so inflated (they estimate 20,000 to 63,000, with no official pre-Hiroshima casualty estimate exceeding 63,000).
This book certainly wasn't the most well-written. It was often dry, and sometimes the theories of the effects of the bombs (on culture, politics, etc.), I thought were a bit reaching. It really took me over 6 months to read this, but it was definitely worth the time and effort.
I've repeatedly heard about how the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary evils. They ended a war and, so, ultimately saved a million lives. Sometimes this story is told so closely in conjunction with Pearl Harbor that it feels like nothing else happened in the Pacific theater of WWII. And it even feels like, You bombed us, We bombed you back even bigger. All of this has always just ripped me up inside. There's more here! A bigger story! A bigger argument! Are we really not talking about the morals and ethics of this? Are we really always going to justify it? Are we never going to dig deeper (the bombs killed *this many* people, they ranged in age from *this to this*, people were affected for *this many* years afterward)? Whether or not you believe the bombs were justified, don't you want to know more? Or do you want to go with the same quick reasoning that's been trotted out for now over 50 years--Well, it ended the war. The science behind the atomic bomb is fascinating--don't you want to know the damage it inflicted? Nope, not usually, just that it ended the war. What does that say about us??? To me it has always said: We know this is wrong but we're going to plug our ears and sing to drown out the voices of good conscience.
Not that people today are entirely to blame, I suppose. The messages about the atomic bombs were carefully orchestrated by our government and many people went with it. And people still do. When the Smithsonian attempted to put together an exhibit that told more of a balanced story, there was so much criticism, so many problems, that it was eventually shut down and never came to fruition. (If you study history, Part III of the book about memory and witness is fascinating.) What a shame (and can we try to get that up and running again?).
There was so much I learned from this book--Truman's chief of staff is quoted as saying that this wasn't a bomb or explosive, it was a poison, comparing conventional poison to the effects of radiation. I had never thought about the bombs quite like that. I never knew they were exploded so high above the cities to inflict the maximum amount of deaths in the most horrible way, less about how quick the deaths could be, and more about deaths by radiation. I never realized how close Japan was to surrendering, but the bombs were possibly used anyway because of a power play with the Soviets--how disturbing and evil is that? I had always heard 500,000 to a million people's lives were saved by the bombs being dropped/the war ending--this book gave different numbers and told how they became so inflated (they estimate 20,000 to 63,000, with no official pre-Hiroshima casualty estimate exceeding 63,000).
This book certainly wasn't the most well-written. It was often dry, and sometimes the theories of the effects of the bombs (on culture, politics, etc.), I thought were a bit reaching. It really took me over 6 months to read this, but it was definitely worth the time and effort.
November 19, 2019
I came to Hiroshima in America after reading Susan Neiman's Evil in Modern Thought in which she judged the 2 most manifest examples of 20th century evil to be the Holocaust and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. She hinted the cataclysmic destruction of Hiroshima was unnecessary but which nevertheless was carried out because the momentum of the times dictated it. I thought I had a good idea why the first 2 atomic bombs were used in 1945. My dive into the book was to learn more of evil as a perceptible human trait.
The narrative we're all familiar with is that America dropped the bombs to convince Japan to surrender before the planned invasion of Japan proper in October. The savage Japanese defense of Okinawa earlier in 1945, the last stand mentality of their military, and the American high casualties there convinced Army and Navy commanders that the human cost of invading Japan proper would be staggering. Lifton mentions more than once that perhaps 500,000 casualties were thought possible. Around 100,000 was the more realistic figure with perhaps a million for the Japanese. Whatever the figure, we wanted to avoid the 2 planned seaborne landings, Kyushu in October and near Tokyo in March. There are many variations of this narrative. I personally have always thought we used the bombs to end the war quickly before the Soviet Union, who'd shifted large forces from the war against a defeated Germany to the east and had already overrun Manchuria, could become too much of a presence, though we'd asked them to help against Japan. In fact, not too long ago a periodical piece was passed along to me claiming the event which convinced Japan to surrender wasn't the bombs but the Soviet declaration of war. I once read that the bombs were used because the American government and military would have been excoriated by public opinion once it became known we'd had the bombs but not used them and had instead resorted to a conventional invasion. Justifying the casualties would've been impossible.
The story Lifton tells about how the decision was made involves the tension between the military rush to implement a plan long decided on and the second thoughts of some Manhattan Project scientists who were more wary of what was being unleashed, especially after the initial test in New Mexico, in July. The final decision, of course, was made by Harry Truman where, famously, the buck stopped. Four central chapters of the book are about Truman and his decision and the effect its aftermath had on him. It turns out the Japanese were trying to surrender that summer of 1945. A sticking point not well understood at the time was whether or not they'd be allowed to keep the Emperor. It was known that Japan would surrender before out planned invasion in October. The decision was made to use the 2 existing atomic bombs anyway. Turns out the Soviets were a factor. The post-European war Soviets were already proving to be truculent, difficult partners in Europe, as expected. Truman later made the statement that the bombs, in addition to encouraging Japan to a speedier surrender, were intended to intimidate the Soviets in the postwar world.
(A sidebar: it's known the Soviets were planning to invade the northern Japanese islands and probably would have done so and already initiated substantial military operations north of Tokyo before we invaded the main island in March, 1946. No doubt Japan would've been defeated. However, the 2d half of the 20th century was marked by confrontations across divisions between the communist and democratic worlds. In addition to East and West Germany, North and South Korea, and North and South Vietnam, think how different and how scary the latter half of the century would've been had we also had to contend with a north and south Japan. Not trying to justify anything, just sayin'.)
Part III concerns American reactions to the bomb. Stories are recounted about the airmen who dropped them and the scientists who built them. The reactions of servicemen who saw the bombs as the end of the war and their reprieve from having to invade the Japanese mainland was understandably favorable. Scientists and activists thought differently. There's a chapter discussing media coverage then and now, the view of historians and that of the general public, you and me.
I began to think the book had gone off track in Part IV. It discusses the moral, psychological, and political ramifications of Hiroshima and the nuclear age born in 1945. Lifton in my opinion overwrites the psychology developed following use of the bombs. He begins to use phrases like "nuclear deity". I thought the idea of psychic numbing, introduced here and caused by living in the nuclear age, was overstated. I don't think it's true that the modern individual self is threatened with being overwhelmed by a large death event. He writes of a scenario in which that threatened individual self imagines nuclear apocalypse as the second coming of Christ. He didn't make me believe we have a "troubled relationship with death" brought on by Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I was disappointed by his move into viewing nuclear weapons in the light of Christian theology. And, interesting as the book is, I was in the end disappointed that the possibility of an evil committed was never addressed.
But, to be fair, the book was published in 1995 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Hiroshima. It has some years on it. Maybe we can say it hasn't aged well. Maybe that psychology I think overheated has receded in the intervening 25 years. Or maybe I've forgotten or maybe wasn't even paying attention in '95.
The narrative we're all familiar with is that America dropped the bombs to convince Japan to surrender before the planned invasion of Japan proper in October. The savage Japanese defense of Okinawa earlier in 1945, the last stand mentality of their military, and the American high casualties there convinced Army and Navy commanders that the human cost of invading Japan proper would be staggering. Lifton mentions more than once that perhaps 500,000 casualties were thought possible. Around 100,000 was the more realistic figure with perhaps a million for the Japanese. Whatever the figure, we wanted to avoid the 2 planned seaborne landings, Kyushu in October and near Tokyo in March. There are many variations of this narrative. I personally have always thought we used the bombs to end the war quickly before the Soviet Union, who'd shifted large forces from the war against a defeated Germany to the east and had already overrun Manchuria, could become too much of a presence, though we'd asked them to help against Japan. In fact, not too long ago a periodical piece was passed along to me claiming the event which convinced Japan to surrender wasn't the bombs but the Soviet declaration of war. I once read that the bombs were used because the American government and military would have been excoriated by public opinion once it became known we'd had the bombs but not used them and had instead resorted to a conventional invasion. Justifying the casualties would've been impossible.
The story Lifton tells about how the decision was made involves the tension between the military rush to implement a plan long decided on and the second thoughts of some Manhattan Project scientists who were more wary of what was being unleashed, especially after the initial test in New Mexico, in July. The final decision, of course, was made by Harry Truman where, famously, the buck stopped. Four central chapters of the book are about Truman and his decision and the effect its aftermath had on him. It turns out the Japanese were trying to surrender that summer of 1945. A sticking point not well understood at the time was whether or not they'd be allowed to keep the Emperor. It was known that Japan would surrender before out planned invasion in October. The decision was made to use the 2 existing atomic bombs anyway. Turns out the Soviets were a factor. The post-European war Soviets were already proving to be truculent, difficult partners in Europe, as expected. Truman later made the statement that the bombs, in addition to encouraging Japan to a speedier surrender, were intended to intimidate the Soviets in the postwar world.
(A sidebar: it's known the Soviets were planning to invade the northern Japanese islands and probably would have done so and already initiated substantial military operations north of Tokyo before we invaded the main island in March, 1946. No doubt Japan would've been defeated. However, the 2d half of the 20th century was marked by confrontations across divisions between the communist and democratic worlds. In addition to East and West Germany, North and South Korea, and North and South Vietnam, think how different and how scary the latter half of the century would've been had we also had to contend with a north and south Japan. Not trying to justify anything, just sayin'.)
Part III concerns American reactions to the bomb. Stories are recounted about the airmen who dropped them and the scientists who built them. The reactions of servicemen who saw the bombs as the end of the war and their reprieve from having to invade the Japanese mainland was understandably favorable. Scientists and activists thought differently. There's a chapter discussing media coverage then and now, the view of historians and that of the general public, you and me.
I began to think the book had gone off track in Part IV. It discusses the moral, psychological, and political ramifications of Hiroshima and the nuclear age born in 1945. Lifton in my opinion overwrites the psychology developed following use of the bombs. He begins to use phrases like "nuclear deity". I thought the idea of psychic numbing, introduced here and caused by living in the nuclear age, was overstated. I don't think it's true that the modern individual self is threatened with being overwhelmed by a large death event. He writes of a scenario in which that threatened individual self imagines nuclear apocalypse as the second coming of Christ. He didn't make me believe we have a "troubled relationship with death" brought on by Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I was disappointed by his move into viewing nuclear weapons in the light of Christian theology. And, interesting as the book is, I was in the end disappointed that the possibility of an evil committed was never addressed.
But, to be fair, the book was published in 1995 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Hiroshima. It has some years on it. Maybe we can say it hasn't aged well. Maybe that psychology I think overheated has receded in the intervening 25 years. Or maybe I've forgotten or maybe wasn't even paying attention in '95.
August 7, 2008
This informative book examines how the government molded public opinion just prior to and after dropping the atomic bombs on Japanese cities. The authors discuss the possible myth that millions of lives would be saved by utilizing the bomb, as well as how reporters and doctors were only able to report on "accessible" areas of the explosion. The authors also look at the effect the bomb has had on the generation of Americans that followed its use. I found this really interesting.
September 30, 2008
I love Robert Jay Lifton. This was a very fascinating account of the bombing of Hiroshima, the events leading up to it and its ramifications. A wonderful combination of history and sociology.
October 10, 2021
Very compelling argument against the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I highly recommend this book.
February 6, 2022
Extremely interesting look at how the bombing of Hiroshima was understood and processed after the event. This tremendously destructive and unknown force was unleashed on an unwitting populace, with stories coming out soon after about secret cities and a tremendous industrial effort to produce the weapon. It sort of catalyzed the self-image of the US as uniquely super-heroic in both a moral and power sense; since they realized only the purest of motives could justify such destruction, they retroactively justified their actions as higher virtue and not base self-interest.
It feels like an event that was the formative germ for the back-half of the century, and often downplayed or lumped-in with the other huge changes happening at the time. The book does a great job of explaining how potent and psychologically charged the event was, even and perhaps especially 50 years later when it came time for the Smithsonian to try and create a commemorative exhibit.
The somewhat less-successful parts of the book is when it gets more abstract and speculative, usually with regards to the specific psychology of some individuals involved like Truman. But still, a really worthwhile and uniquely interesting book to read. Surprised it's pretty obscure only 25 years later.
It feels like an event that was the formative germ for the back-half of the century, and often downplayed or lumped-in with the other huge changes happening at the time. The book does a great job of explaining how potent and psychologically charged the event was, even and perhaps especially 50 years later when it came time for the Smithsonian to try and create a commemorative exhibit.
The somewhat less-successful parts of the book is when it gets more abstract and speculative, usually with regards to the specific psychology of some individuals involved like Truman. But still, a really worthwhile and uniquely interesting book to read. Surprised it's pretty obscure only 25 years later.
January 6, 2018
I wonder if I should sit on this a while and craft a more temperate review; however, this book was written to fuel emotions, and so I will write from that heated place. (I can always edit this later, but I also know no one will probably read this, and since I’m lonely and loveless and headed for an early grave, why not be honest over benign?)
With the sword of Damocles hanging over all of us, and madmen & morons in charge of tremendous power, this book is sadly still vitally important, and the strong use of psychology is a huge boon here. Hiroshima in America is a testament to true scholarship and the challenging of erroneous history. It is simultaneously horrifying, maddening, and empowering to absorb.
Hiroshima in America is horrifying to see how such horrendous acts, and literal crimes against humanity, came to fruition with so many possibilities for foresight, contemplation, and detour, only to set the world awash in the “civil religion” of nuclearism, one in which humanity may never escape without the unimaginable happening.
Hiroshima in America is maddening to learn about the grand hypocrisies of the United States of America, a nation founded on the grand hypocrisies of slavery and genocide, promulgated by government and military bodies across parties and administrations, and relatively unchallenged by the spoon-fed sheeple to assuage their collective guilt of such abhorrent atrocities. One issue that is mentioned several times but not unpacked completely is how racism towards the Japanese influenced the sociopathic application of atomic weapons upon civilians of “otherness”. While Nazi fantasies of eugenics have been appropriately vilified, US-Caucasian treatment of Asians during the same time-period is still often swept under the rug. The harsh light of humanity is often our wanton inhumanity towards alien otherness (i.e., xenophobia). The Japanese military did monstrous things, but children should never be slaughtered for the sins of their fathers. The United States should be the paragon of all nations, but we’re just as blood-soaked and sin-stained as all the rest, as this work highlights poignantly. Being the only nation on Earth to have—so far—dropped nuclear weapons on others, and seeing what that 2-part act did to mold human history thereafter, can only be the greatest lesson to learn from. However, when the esteemed leader of the United States attempts to goad another leader, like a child, with text-based tweets of:
“North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the ‘Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.’ Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!” (03 JAN 2018)
. . . then, quite frankly, we might all be f-ked (thank you, voters, and the Electoral College system). (I guess I need an amendment here, since apparently POTUS cannot even craft his own goads: https://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...)
Still, Hiroshima in America is empowering to bear witness to good journalism, armed with hope that the empathic, enlightened, and humanistic slivers of societies can rise up and eclipse the ignorance, intolerance, and warmongering of the rest, though in this era one must wonder. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (https://thebulletin.org/) has us at 2.5 minutes to midnight on their metaphoric clock. This is NOT a joke. The road to any war is a series of CHOICES made by those who hold the POWER. We, the people, must rein-in their delusional madness, or we face ever-more Iraqs, Vietnams, and Hiroshimas.
As an Iraq War veteran, and the son of a Vietnam vet, I am painfully aware of the lies our politicians and generals feed us to get what they want, as well as the tragic carnage and misery inflicted upon whole other regions of the world. The Greatest Generation was also lied to regarding Hiroshima, as well as those of us taught in school systems to swallow the falsehoods our teachers parroted without question. WE MUST LEARN FROM THE PAST, or else humankind is bound to make the same f-ing mistakes.
I would wish this book to be required reading for all high-school history classes, the future politicians and their voting constituents, as a means of holding our leaders accountable for their choices. It’s not too late to turn the tide. Education, empathy, and humanism can rule well.
Empathy is a powerful driver. Try stepping into the shoes of others, and wonder darkly what the experience must have been like before, during, and after an atomic bomb drops (and be thankful it’s not your city, today), with this extra reading: “Hiroshima” by John Hersey, 1946: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/19...
“It is too easy being monsters . . . as we try to be human.” -Victor Frankenstein, Penny Dreadful (Season 3, episode 9, “The Blessed Dark”).
With the sword of Damocles hanging over all of us, and madmen & morons in charge of tremendous power, this book is sadly still vitally important, and the strong use of psychology is a huge boon here. Hiroshima in America is a testament to true scholarship and the challenging of erroneous history. It is simultaneously horrifying, maddening, and empowering to absorb.
Hiroshima in America is horrifying to see how such horrendous acts, and literal crimes against humanity, came to fruition with so many possibilities for foresight, contemplation, and detour, only to set the world awash in the “civil religion” of nuclearism, one in which humanity may never escape without the unimaginable happening.
Hiroshima in America is maddening to learn about the grand hypocrisies of the United States of America, a nation founded on the grand hypocrisies of slavery and genocide, promulgated by government and military bodies across parties and administrations, and relatively unchallenged by the spoon-fed sheeple to assuage their collective guilt of such abhorrent atrocities. One issue that is mentioned several times but not unpacked completely is how racism towards the Japanese influenced the sociopathic application of atomic weapons upon civilians of “otherness”. While Nazi fantasies of eugenics have been appropriately vilified, US-Caucasian treatment of Asians during the same time-period is still often swept under the rug. The harsh light of humanity is often our wanton inhumanity towards alien otherness (i.e., xenophobia). The Japanese military did monstrous things, but children should never be slaughtered for the sins of their fathers. The United States should be the paragon of all nations, but we’re just as blood-soaked and sin-stained as all the rest, as this work highlights poignantly. Being the only nation on Earth to have—so far—dropped nuclear weapons on others, and seeing what that 2-part act did to mold human history thereafter, can only be the greatest lesson to learn from. However, when the esteemed leader of the United States attempts to goad another leader, like a child, with text-based tweets of:
“North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the ‘Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.’ Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!” (03 JAN 2018)
. . . then, quite frankly, we might all be f-ked (thank you, voters, and the Electoral College system). (I guess I need an amendment here, since apparently POTUS cannot even craft his own goads: https://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...)
Still, Hiroshima in America is empowering to bear witness to good journalism, armed with hope that the empathic, enlightened, and humanistic slivers of societies can rise up and eclipse the ignorance, intolerance, and warmongering of the rest, though in this era one must wonder. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (https://thebulletin.org/) has us at 2.5 minutes to midnight on their metaphoric clock. This is NOT a joke. The road to any war is a series of CHOICES made by those who hold the POWER. We, the people, must rein-in their delusional madness, or we face ever-more Iraqs, Vietnams, and Hiroshimas.
As an Iraq War veteran, and the son of a Vietnam vet, I am painfully aware of the lies our politicians and generals feed us to get what they want, as well as the tragic carnage and misery inflicted upon whole other regions of the world. The Greatest Generation was also lied to regarding Hiroshima, as well as those of us taught in school systems to swallow the falsehoods our teachers parroted without question. WE MUST LEARN FROM THE PAST, or else humankind is bound to make the same f-ing mistakes.
I would wish this book to be required reading for all high-school history classes, the future politicians and their voting constituents, as a means of holding our leaders accountable for their choices. It’s not too late to turn the tide. Education, empathy, and humanism can rule well.
Empathy is a powerful driver. Try stepping into the shoes of others, and wonder darkly what the experience must have been like before, during, and after an atomic bomb drops (and be thankful it’s not your city, today), with this extra reading: “Hiroshima” by John Hersey, 1946: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/19...
“It is too easy being monsters . . . as we try to be human.” -Victor Frankenstein, Penny Dreadful (Season 3, episode 9, “The Blessed Dark”).
February 15, 2019
More or less well-structured, thoroughly researched, truly compelling, highly interesting, somewhat terrifying, and properly dedicated to all survivors. The world certainly has never been the same since an atom bomb exploded over Hiroshima, and the dawn of the Nuclear Era definitely requires examination and reflection, both of which are well provided by this detailed, investigative book. You may disagree with it, but regardless, you should read this book. After reading it I don't think one can even begin to have an opinion without investigation and reflection.
I love a good history book, and overall I would consider this to be great example. It starts by exploring the events and moves immediately to establish what the official narrative is, and how it overcame resistance while numbing Americans to the truth of what had happened, and how it became ingrained in culture as well. Many if not all of the major figures involved in the design and decisions are invoked in the course of the telling. Towards its end this book moves into 'the present day' of 1995, exploring the ill-fated Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian. The appendix contains analyses of cultural work relating to the Nuclear Era, which was particularly interesting to me.
There's some psychological examination as well, which makes sense: one of the authors is a professor of psychology and psychiatry—you may not like, understand, or agree with it, but I think it's quite necessary and makes for interesting reading. The psychological, post-traumatic numbing has certainly occurred, and furthermore, very few people understand the events enough to say or think anything constructive about it.
Early on, I got the impression that the bombing of Nagasaki was an effect of the war machine running on autopilot, which is terrifying, as it is extremely debatable if the second bombing was necessary at all. Shortly after Nagasaki, president Truman made explicit presidential consent necessary for the use of nuclear weapons. Still, even in this book, the event sits in the shadow of Hiroshima and isn't mentioned very often—considering the title it is probably a good thing the writers did not muddy the waters too much.
There is certainly a lot in this book. Some of it is hard to digest, and even unthinkable. It's a demanding read and at times it's not comfortable, but the prose always remains serviceable, the insights tend to flow, and while there is editorializing, the facts are presented as such and kept apart from emotional appeals. I see it primarily as a historical work, and a good one at that.
Find this book and read it. It's always going to be relevant, and it's extremely worthwhile and rewarding. Then do your thinking and form an opinion. After all, we live in (most of us were born in) the shadow of this event.
I love a good history book, and overall I would consider this to be great example. It starts by exploring the events and moves immediately to establish what the official narrative is, and how it overcame resistance while numbing Americans to the truth of what had happened, and how it became ingrained in culture as well. Many if not all of the major figures involved in the design and decisions are invoked in the course of the telling. Towards its end this book moves into 'the present day' of 1995, exploring the ill-fated Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian. The appendix contains analyses of cultural work relating to the Nuclear Era, which was particularly interesting to me.
There's some psychological examination as well, which makes sense: one of the authors is a professor of psychology and psychiatry—you may not like, understand, or agree with it, but I think it's quite necessary and makes for interesting reading. The psychological, post-traumatic numbing has certainly occurred, and furthermore, very few people understand the events enough to say or think anything constructive about it.
Early on, I got the impression that the bombing of Nagasaki was an effect of the war machine running on autopilot, which is terrifying, as it is extremely debatable if the second bombing was necessary at all. Shortly after Nagasaki, president Truman made explicit presidential consent necessary for the use of nuclear weapons. Still, even in this book, the event sits in the shadow of Hiroshima and isn't mentioned very often—considering the title it is probably a good thing the writers did not muddy the waters too much.
There is certainly a lot in this book. Some of it is hard to digest, and even unthinkable. It's a demanding read and at times it's not comfortable, but the prose always remains serviceable, the insights tend to flow, and while there is editorializing, the facts are presented as such and kept apart from emotional appeals. I see it primarily as a historical work, and a good one at that.
Find this book and read it. It's always going to be relevant, and it's extremely worthwhile and rewarding. Then do your thinking and form an opinion. After all, we live in (most of us were born in) the shadow of this event.
June 1, 2022
I learned so much from this book. So many myths I had learned as a teenager about the atomic bomb and the end of WWII.
Especially enlightening was the section on the controversy at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum when they tried to present a nuanced and factually complete version of the bombing and were censored by conservatives and veterans and called a "politically correct" revision of history until the exhibit was basically scrapped and Americans didn't have to confront the truth of the bomb and our reason for using it.
Being born just after the controversy, I had never even heard of it until I read this book and there were a lot of parallels between conservative treatment of history then and now.
Especially enlightening was the section on the controversy at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum when they tried to present a nuanced and factually complete version of the bombing and were censored by conservatives and veterans and called a "politically correct" revision of history until the exhibit was basically scrapped and Americans didn't have to confront the truth of the bomb and our reason for using it.
Being born just after the controversy, I had never even heard of it until I read this book and there were a lot of parallels between conservative treatment of history then and now.
October 6, 2025
I rate this book 3 stars. It had some interesting insights of how the U.S. remembers Hiroshima, but the writing was slow and pretty boring. I learned more about the atomic bombing but it wasn't very thrilling to me.
February 24, 2016
"A Gallup poll, probably in 1945, revealed that 70% of Americans wanted Hirohito punished, by exile, imprisonment, or execution. (He wasn't, of course; the US government wanted to use him to help keep the Japanese population in line.).
The book says that many Americans wanted more atomic bombs to be used, and that another bomb was scheduled to be ready in about a week. "...among the targets for the next attack were cities four to ten times larger than Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Unfortunately, the book does not name the cities. However, the book does say that Truman was impatient with the Japanese taking so long to surrender, and he was considering dropping an atomic bomb on Tokyo.
"The Pentagon's censorship office had deleted two-thirds of a Philadelphia Bulletin article which revealed that radioactivity from the July 16 test had spread to small towns surrounding the Trinity site."
The scientists thought the radiation would diminish quickly within three miles from the test site, but they found it formed a band thirty miles wide and a hundred miles long.
General Leslie Groves got a message from the Los Alamos group saying they were aware of Japanese reports about victims suffering from the effects of the atomic bomb, and he said the reports were a hoax, just propaganda.
The book also goes into the intense censorship of reports from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, censorship applying even to American reporters. The military did not want the American public to know the full extent of the horrors that the bombs caused.
An Air-force public relations person did not want General Curtis LeMay to release figures on the number of people killed by the bombs, since it would make the Americans look like "barbarians."
Further, although American prisoners-of-war were in Hiroshima and some were killed, their families were told that the men had died in Japan, but they weren't told they had died in Hiroshima.
After the US occupied Japan, the Japanese newspapers came under strict censorship, and they were not allowed to even say that they were being censored.
The book notes that ethical expressions about Hiroshima came mainly from church leaders and publications. The Federal Council of Churches on March 5, 1946, criticized the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Fulton J. Sheen, who later became Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, said that the attack on Hiroshima was "contrary to moral law."
Nagasaki
The second bomb was dropped so soon after the one on Hiroshima because Leslie Groves said it would take two bombs to make an impression on the Japanese, and so two bombs were used. In Nagasaki, of 100,000 dead, about 250 were actually Japanese military personnel.
The book says that many Americans wanted more atomic bombs to be used, and that another bomb was scheduled to be ready in about a week. "...among the targets for the next attack were cities four to ten times larger than Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Unfortunately, the book does not name the cities. However, the book does say that Truman was impatient with the Japanese taking so long to surrender, and he was considering dropping an atomic bomb on Tokyo.
"The Pentagon's censorship office had deleted two-thirds of a Philadelphia Bulletin article which revealed that radioactivity from the July 16 test had spread to small towns surrounding the Trinity site."
The scientists thought the radiation would diminish quickly within three miles from the test site, but they found it formed a band thirty miles wide and a hundred miles long.
General Leslie Groves got a message from the Los Alamos group saying they were aware of Japanese reports about victims suffering from the effects of the atomic bomb, and he said the reports were a hoax, just propaganda.
The book also goes into the intense censorship of reports from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, censorship applying even to American reporters. The military did not want the American public to know the full extent of the horrors that the bombs caused.
An Air-force public relations person did not want General Curtis LeMay to release figures on the number of people killed by the bombs, since it would make the Americans look like "barbarians."
Further, although American prisoners-of-war were in Hiroshima and some were killed, their families were told that the men had died in Japan, but they weren't told they had died in Hiroshima.
After the US occupied Japan, the Japanese newspapers came under strict censorship, and they were not allowed to even say that they were being censored.
The book notes that ethical expressions about Hiroshima came mainly from church leaders and publications. The Federal Council of Churches on March 5, 1946, criticized the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Fulton J. Sheen, who later became Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, said that the attack on Hiroshima was "contrary to moral law."
Nagasaki
The second bomb was dropped so soon after the one on Hiroshima because Leslie Groves said it would take two bombs to make an impression on the Japanese, and so two bombs were used. In Nagasaki, of 100,000 dead, about 250 were actually Japanese military personnel.
October 1, 2014
Hiroshima in America is a book with the purpose to inform. Through reading this novel you see the feelings that came from America during the time when the bomb dropped. Mitchell and Lifton give you a lot of information about what happened in America, and how government officials tried to hide it from the public. Their purpose was to inform you that a lot went on in America too, that Japan was not the only country with worries.
The theme of the book was insensitivity. The authors talked about their feelings on how the bomb might have been too drastic. The theme revolved around worries with government officials not being sensitive toward the disaster this bomb would bring. Another theme could be trust. Mitchell and Lifton also discussed how the government released only checked papers and did not share as much information as they had. They tried to hide the bomb from the rest of the country.
This book was an exposition. They analyzed the situation, and explained everything that happened in great detail. The authors showed the true colors of our government during this time, and deeply considered actions that were made. They brought clarity to the decision to drop the bomb, and analyzed this decision with other facts.
I liked this book. It gave many interesting facts, and it showed me a side of this story I had never heard before. Hiroshima in America was a novel full of opinions and new ideas. It brought out a side of our country I have not had the opportunity to see.I would not have changed anything about this book. Overall, I thought Hiroshima in America was a book of great detail and wonderful facts.
The theme of the book was insensitivity. The authors talked about their feelings on how the bomb might have been too drastic. The theme revolved around worries with government officials not being sensitive toward the disaster this bomb would bring. Another theme could be trust. Mitchell and Lifton also discussed how the government released only checked papers and did not share as much information as they had. They tried to hide the bomb from the rest of the country.
This book was an exposition. They analyzed the situation, and explained everything that happened in great detail. The authors showed the true colors of our government during this time, and deeply considered actions that were made. They brought clarity to the decision to drop the bomb, and analyzed this decision with other facts.
I liked this book. It gave many interesting facts, and it showed me a side of this story I had never heard before. Hiroshima in America was a novel full of opinions and new ideas. It brought out a side of our country I have not had the opportunity to see.I would not have changed anything about this book. Overall, I thought Hiroshima in America was a book of great detail and wonderful facts.
August 22, 2010
I am glad that I discovered this 1995 book 15 years late. If I had read it in 1995, I might have become discouraged about other World War II-era atomic history books, and never read them. The author is certainly very much in the camp with those who think we should not have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan in 1945. But, all in all, I'm glad that I finally stumbled upon this book. It was an uneven read, mostly I think because of the constant editorializing. But no library about atomic energy or nuclear weapons, or World War II for that matter, should be without it.
August 25, 2012
This book helped me and a colleague to shape our Atomic Bomb Museum Project back in 1997. How should we remember history? was the essential question. Our students loved the idea that Hiroshima can be remembered in different ways.
July 9, 2011
Well researched, but repeatitive and vague in many places. Some good points get covered up in unnecessary detail. Over all, the book is stuck trying to find its identity somewhere between narrative, analysis and activism.
Want to read
July 18, 2008Looks interesting. I have lots of Japanese friends and I pray that no one else every has to suffer this kind of war.
October 14, 2015
Very educational and eye opening. It fails only when it is over reaching in its assumptions of what was going through the minds of the major players.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews