It was limited to the history of the B-29, the fleet, and restoration efforts. In the end, the overall exhibition was replaced and finalized with a very simple display of Enola Gay with little historical context. “We made a basic error in attempting to couple a historical treatment of the use of atomic weapons with the commemoration of the end of the war…they were not looking for analysis and, frankly we did not give enough thought to the intense feelings that it would evoke.” Due to this public announcement by Heymen, it wasn’t long until Harwit resigned stating that the dictatorship of the critics with him removing himself would allow the museum to move forward and be satisfied. In 1995, the Smithsonian secretary announced a decision to replace the exhibition with a smaller more tailorable display. Of course, there would be about five more revised proposals due to the opposing groups sparking new waves of criticism with each one making it seem that the exhibition was condemned to death.
#Enola gay smithsonian controversy how to#
It also led Harwit to seek out military historians and their opinions on the revised proposal to gain insight on how to be a “balanced” narrative. He wanted to deliver an accurate depiction of the reality of the war and the consequences of it. Through this ceaseless media and critic attacks, Harwit responded in 94’ in an editorial post that he wanted to honor veterans but also address the broader questions and concerns. The AFA was being extreme with their position on the overall proposal and purpose of the exhibit at hand and that the AFA was not too keen on hearing any of the NASM criticisms which led to the formidable campaign against the exhibition. This however still had expressed concerns that the exhibitions proposals were still not presenting an “accurate” portrayal of World War II but instead as AFA Hatch wrote to Harwit, “treated the exhibit that it treats Japan and the United States morally equivalent and gives the benefit of opinion to Japan who was the aggressor.” Of course, this led to a meeting held between NASM and AFA to discuss the concern at hand yet in the end there was no common ground, and was not settled in a compromise. These plans that were under new navigation showed about three years later in 93’ where the proposals for the exhibit began. In 1990, the review over the exhibits showed valid key points in regards to the critic's concerns and that there were changes being made to expand the overall effects of the culture and society significance. As Harwit was speaking about the exhibit deserved to be on display as an artifact of history others began to question and closely pronounce the trouble that it was not for that simple idea but to moralize nuclear warfare. This is where the controversy really heated up. “We are in a business of confronting and learning from history not to suppress it.the applicable way for a national museum who deals with space flight brings our information that allows one to decide on the issues.” I n 1989, NASM began a tour that lasted sixteen-months of panels, lectures, exhibits to network and gather for their exhibit of the Ebola Gay. Together as Harwit settled into his position over the years he and Adams began planning the exhibit with the refurbished Enola Gay also reaching out to veterans while articulating that their philosophy and the role the exhibit plays for the Smithsonian is presenting “history”, pure and simple history. “The Enola Gay will be displayed in a setting that will recall the history of strategic bombing in World War II.” As Harwit moved in his position and with his proposal and overall idea, Adams was indicating far earlier, that the seriousness of the Smithsonian mission was to tread carefully with artifacts such as the Ebola Gay because there may be some danger that would contribute to judgment of this ongoing proposal. In other words, he wanted to put on display exhibits and topics that would go under “public debates” and one of his visions was to put the Enola Gay up on display. In 1987, NASM brought on a new directory, Martin Harwit, who had a vision that the museum should move in the direction of being a “public conscience”. Between 19, The Smithsonian proposed that the anniversary was important with its mission and philosophy. This begun a vehement controversy over history and its historical narratives. How do we remember a war that we won? On the 50 th anniversary of the ending of World War II, NASM proposed an exhibition that would display the B-29 Ebola Gay, the aircraft that dropped the bomb on Hiroshima.