The most tasteless and insensitive museum exhibit ever.

[CerberusIV]

I don't see it as either tasteless or insensitive.

How many people died in the firebombing of Tokyo? In Japanese labour camps?

Weapons kill people because other people choose, or are forced, to use them. EG is just a piece of metal. Should we close all museums that display guns, military aircraft, tanks, warships, etc? I don't think so. Pretending these weapons never existed isn't helpful.

We should stop apologising, or expecting others to apologise, for wars and atrocities ordered by people long dead. But then it is harder to face current issues than argue over the past.

[Winston]

The most tasteless and insensitive museum exhibit ever?

I guess that would be V.I. Lenin's mummified corpse on permanent display in a glass coffin for ahistoric lefties to worship.

But maybe that's just me.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Winston
The most tasteless and insensitive museum exhibit ever?

I guess that would be V.I. Lenin's mummified corpse on permanent display in a glass coffin for ahistoric lefties to worship.

But maybe that's just me.

I've seen Lenin's Mausoleum and I don't think it was tasteless. I thought it was done rather well.

[Winston]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


I've seen Lenin's Mausoleum and I don't think it was tasteless. I thought it was done rather well.

Of course you didn't think it was tasteless, since you didn't give his countless victims one single thought while you were there.

That's what I meant when I said ahistoric lefties, you see.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Winston
Of course you didn't think it was tasteless, since you didn't give his countless victims one single thought while you were there.

How exactly do you know that. Are you a mindreader?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
We should stop apologising, or expecting others to apologise, for wars and atrocities ordered by people long dead. But then it is harder to face current issues than argue over the past.

How exactly do you know that. Are you a mindreader?

Your posts.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Agathon


I agree and while that may be disturbing, it's not such a big deal. This is like the Brits displaying a Lancaster and noting that it was used over Dresden without further comment, or the Japanese showing off an artillery piece that was used at Nangking.

Hiroshima is the supreme horror of the modern age, to soften it in any way is akin to denying the holocaust - whatever one thinks of the rightness of the attack.

Death is death, dude. It doesn't really matter how you die, just so long as you're dead.

[DinoDoc]

God if you people really wish to ***** about something from WW2, pick Doolittle's raid on Tokyo. It was the closest we've ever come in launching a 9/11 style assault in both form and purpose.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Agathon


I agree and while that may be disturbing, it's not such a big deal. This is like the Brits displaying a Lancaster and noting that it was used over Dresden without further comment, .

Pretty sure S for Sugar at Hendon was used on Dresden - so what?

Most of the fatalities there were accidental - we couldn't have predicted a firestorm.

Would you rather we forgot these events? It's hard to tell from your posts.

[lord of the mark]

would it be good to put the Enola Gay in historical context - yes. But a large number of americans, probably the majority, would not consider simply discussing the Japanese vicitims to be a complete context. They would want some discussion of the entire war, including Japanese atrocities, the possible costs of an invasion of Japan, etc. To present the casualties at Hiroshima without that context would be seen by them as a unbalanced presentation. This is precisely the issue that came up when parts of the Enola Gay were previously displayed.

again, the majority of americans do not see this as analogous to Auschwitz. You may disagree, but there it is.


Also the air and space museum displays a number of warplanes, including German, British, etc. It does not discuss civilian victims in those cases, and most Americans would question making an exception for the Enola Gay. As was said above this is an air and space flight museum, not a general history museum.


Of course there you have a larger issue - this museum does glorify aviation, and implicitly air power. and as everyone know, airpower since 1943 and for the foreseeable future is an area of American dominance and a key component of American power. Unfortunately no discussion of the morality of strategic bombing is possible in a veil of ignorance from that fact.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Agathon



Hiroshima is the supreme horror of the modern age,

with all due respect im not sure everyone agrees with that statement.

Hiroshima in fact killed fewer people than the firebombing of Tokyo. There was a gradual coarsening of attitude toward civilian deaths on the part of the allies, that started in august 1939. The notion of setting apart Hiroshima is largely due to 2 facts
1. The later construction of larger nuclear weapons capable of destroying all human life - something not entirely foreseeable in 1945.
2. The fact that making Hiroshima, rather than Auschwitz, or the Gulag, the supreme horror of the modern age fitted well with the ideological agendas of certain people during the cold war.

[David Floyd]

I oppose the atomic bombings (and the entire war) as much as anybody, but I fail to see how displaying a VERY FAMOUS historical artifact from the war is wrong. It may be insensitive to people who lived through the war, but then again no one forces them to look at it. Personally, I'd definitely go see the Enola Gay - I was disappointed at having missed it at the National Air and Space Museum a few years ago.

[Sava]

Originally posted by David Floyd
I oppose the atomic bombings (and the entire war) as much as anybody, but I fail to see how displaying a VERY FAMOUS historical artifact from the war is wrong. It may be insensitive to people who lived through the war, but then again no one forces them to look at it. Personally, I'd definitely go see the Enola Gay - I was disappointed at having missed it at the National Air and Space Museum a few years ago.

I'm not sure it's the display, per se... I think it's the way it is being displayed. I don't oppose displaying the Enola Slowwhand... but it shouldn't glorify the atomic annihilation of 150,000 people, and the thousands that died of radiation poisoning...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Sava
I'm not sure it's the display, per se... I think it's the way it is being displayed. I don't oppose displaying the Enola Slowwhand... but it shouldn't glorify the atomic annihilation of 150,000 people, and the thousands that died of radiation poisoning...

I don't see any evidence it does any such thing. What "glorification" is done? It seems to me that it just presents the history sans any value judgment. Not having seen the exhibit, it's easy to criticize.

I agree with DF--I don't like that we dropped the bombs, but I don't think an air and space exhibit devoted to the aircraft (not even the bomb) needs to be a place to discuss the volatile emotional issues of the bombing.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


I don't see any evidence it does any such thing. What "glorification" is done? It seems to me that it just presents the history sans any value judgment. Not having seen the exhibit, it's easy to criticize.

I agree with DF--I don't like that we dropped the bombs, but I don't think an air and space exhibit devoted to the aircraft (not even the bomb) needs to be a place to discuss the volatile emotional issues of the bombing.

well that's what I took from the article... I guess I shouldn't believe everything I read.