I came to the book as a skeptic based on the contoversy over the exhibit as it had been portrayed in the media. I have studied World War II for over 20 years and have generally supported the decision to use the Atomic Bomb to end the war and save lives. I also speak from the perspective of the son of a WWII USAAF veteran who survived 65 combat missions in the Pacific Theatre, so any exhibit that hinges on the war ending mission of that conflict holds special significance for me and my family.

The way the proposed exhibit was portrayed in the media and from the criticisms presented by the AF Association and others made it appear that the Smithsonian's presentation would be biased toward those who were critical of the use of the Bomb. However, it is clear from the book that the proposed exhibit would have been a very balanced and effective one that would not have detracted from the reputations of the men and women who participated in this project and carried out the mission. I think the critics were objecting to individual portions of the entire presentation out of context and perhaps felt that any attempt to present opposing views would be seen as defaming the efforts of Paul Tibbets and the USAAF. I visit the Air and Space Museum several times per year, as well as the USAF Museum in Dayton OH, and have viewed the Enola Gay exhibit on a number of occasions. While I do like the current exhibit, I now feel somewhat 'cheated', knowing what could have been included if the original exhibit had been completed as planned. I think some of the critics would come to the same conclusion if they took the time to carefully read this entire volume.

For me, one of the important portions of the book was the discussion of projected casualties of a planned invasion of the Japanese Home Islands if the Atomic Bomb had not been used. The book makes clear that the 'million casualties' estimate was a figure that came into wide usage after the fact and was not based on the estimates made at the time by the Joint Chiefs. The actual estimates were much lower, but even the actual projected casualties in the tens of thousands are not insignificant and clearly had to weigh on the minds of planners. The use of an inflated 'million dead' figure by supporters of the bomb do not serve to illuminate the actual decision making process any more than some of the more absurdly low estimates from recent revisionist historians who support their criticism of the bombing by claiming that no more than 20,000 US casualties would have resulted from an invasion.

The 50,000 US casualties from the just completed Okinawa campaign, contested over a much smaller area and smaller number of defenders than the home islands, made clear that an invasion would be very costly in US lives. The exhibit did not make clear the toll on Japanese lives in such a land war, and that would have added another important dimension.

I came away from volume with a good deal more information on the subject than I had previously, with leads to other excellent primary and secondary sources on the subject. An exhibit modeled on the original design would have satisfied the serious student of WWII and would have pulled in the previously uninformed visitor to a topic worthy of further examination. That is the hallmark of any good museum project. And it would have done so without upsetting the sensibilities of the most ardent patriot and supporter of this war-ending mission. The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is the only institution that could have provided this sort of exhibit and now we won't have the opportunity to see it, but at least this book allows a glimpse at what might have been. The only omission was a lack of photos of what would have been included in the planned exhibit. If the volume is republished at a later date, efforts should be made to locate and include as much of this as possible.

JUDGEMENT AT THE SMITHSONIAN has three parts:
the original script of the censored Smithsonian Enola Gay
exhibit, a forward by Philip Nobile, the editor of the
volume, concerning the controversy over the exhibit and the
morality of the bombings, and an afterword by Barton
Bernstein, which summarizes the evolution, current state,
and relation to the script of historical writings on the atomic
bombings of Japan.

I was interested in this book because I wanted to know why
the opponents of the exhibit objected to it. The script treats a
number of controversial points, such as possible anti-Soviet
motivations for dropping the bomb, or the projected number
of American casulties in an invasion of Japan, by presenting
the various viewpoints expressed in the historical literature
without drawing any definite conclusions of its own. I did
not see what could be objectionable in summarizing what
others had written, nor what purpose would be served by
suppressing a text that was based on well known historical
scholarship, although the treatment of these controversies
was cited by some critics as a reason for their objections.
The fourth section of the script, Ground Zero, which
describes the effects of the bombs, seems to have been the
most objectionable section of the exhibit. Critics charged that
photographs and other evidence of these effects gave the
impression that the bombings were immoral, and that the
exhibit neglected to supply evidence showing that the
bombings were morally justified. Since the book contains
only the text, no photographs, it does not completely portray
how the exhibit would have appeared.

The first half of Bernstein's Afterword is an interesting and
informative overview of Hiroshima scholarship. The second
half compares the exhibit to the scholarly record, and
includes his recollections about the advisory board for the
exhibit, of which he was a member. Bernstein's opinion is
that script is generally accurate in its presentation of both the
events leading up to and following the atomic bombing, and
in its presentation of the main schools of thought about the
history of the bombings. Of particular note are his remarks
that this was the dominant conclusion of the advisory board
at its first meeting about the script, also held by Air Force
historians Hallion and Wolk, who later changed their
opinions after the main critics began their campaign against
the exhibit. Bernstein observes that opinion concerning the
necessity and morality of using the bombing was mixed
from the time the bombs were dropped. He also observes
that the view the critics wished presented in the exhibit
required ignoring many important sources. Bernstein says
that the critics may have been concerned that viewers of the
exhibit may have gotten the impression that the bombings
were morally wrong, though he believes that the script does
not attempt to present this point of view.

Philip Nobile's forward chronicles the events in the
controversy over the exhibit, lists the evidence that the
bombings were war crimes, and discusses the possibility
that the US apologize to Japan for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Despite the depressing subject matter, this forward is
written in a lively style. It does what the exhibit script was
accused of doing, but did not do: challenges the morality of
the decision to drop the bomb.

The publication of JUDGEMENT suggests that the success
of the critics at suppressing the exhibit was not complete.
Since JUDGEMENT contains only the text, not the
photographs and artifacts from Ground Zero, it does not
have the emotional impact that part of the exhibit would have
had, and in my view the publication of the script does not
does significantly reduce the critics success.