Atomic Spaces: Living on the Manhattan Project

Peter Bacon Hales

copyright 1996 the University of Illinois Press

may not be reproduced without permission or used in whole or in part without credit

In a regional depository of the National Archives is a file containing a photograph that has

lost its caption and so seems at first to float without anchor in time or place. An 8x10 glossy, it

presents with diffident specificity a desk and chair, a man, and behind the man a map of the United

States.

Like everything within it, the photograph is standard-issue. Made (we assume) by an army

photographer as a publicity shot, it describes the geography of a military bureaucracy, bland and

efficient. Only the map seems suggestive. It is pocked by push-pins, marking sites of some sort,

locations.

To immerse ourselves in the picture and its context, to seek its meanings, is to enter into

unexpected complexities. The man is Colonel K.D. Nichols, District Engineer for the Manhattan

Engineer District, the section of the Army Corps of Engineers responsible for building and

running the Manhattan Project and hence for bringing atomic holocaust to the globe. The pins on

the map behind him show the locations of various facilities of the Manhattan District: medical,

manufacturing, research, assembly, stockpiling, and the like. From this multitude of sites and

people, resources and possibilities, came the unity of will needed to win this war.

This picture might seem the quintessence of the Manhattan Project's history as we have

come to understand it since those early August days of 1945 when the planes banked away from

roaring upsurges of destruction at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when an American president warned

that the enemy had "reaped the whirlwind," and when Americans danced and sang in the streets to

celebrate the end of the war.

In its mundanity, it proposes a reassuring narrative to a nation and a world confronted

with a terrifying new form of warfare and mass destruction: it celebrates the very

matter-of-factness with which, the myth tells us, American scientists, government figures, military

planners, GIs and ordinary citizens all cooperated to bring forth this decisive new instrument of

moral vengeance and apply it, in the name of peace and freedom, to bring about the end of old

tyrannies and the control of new ones.

In this regard, the picture is a marvelous foil, for Colonel Nichols seems so uneasy in his

role as hero, the environment too bland for remarkable acts and great moments. The map behind

seems the only potent symbol, and it, too, is pressed back from histrionics. It seems, in fact,

hardly a symbol of America at all. Space, place, and person all promise a sort of history-- a

documentary history-- without need of historians.

Yet the map is there, a backdrop for the undramatic drama in which America, sprawling

and diverse, came to draw upon its peculiar resources, physical, social and human, to create this

superweapon and win the last good war. It proposes space, geography, to be an implicit and

crucial backdrop to the scientific and military achievements of the Manhattan Project. This is the

myth of the Manhattan Project, a powerful narrative, drawing the American past into a global

future. And it offers itself for analysis, for unmasking and disentangling the threads that might

comprise such a cultural history as I have written.

*

This is a story about the birth of America's atomic spaces, their creation by military fiat

and necessity, their occupation by people, buildings, and social networks, their consolidation into

a new type of cultural environment, penetrating work, leisure, environment, language, and belief,

and present even today as a significant, if surreptitious, strain of American culture.

This is the history of that atomic culture. The Manhattan Engineer District-- formal term

for the wartime Manhattan Project-- occupied three main sites and more than a hundred smaller

ones, from Alamogordo, New Mexico to Trail, in British Columbia, and included secret locations

in places like Rochester, New York, Ames, Iowa, and Berkeley, California. At the three principal

sites-- Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Los Alamos, New Mexico, and Hanford, Washington-- the District

employed as many as 125,000 people at one time, hundreds of thousands over the years between

1942 and 1946. Vast sites (one nearly as large as a state), hidden in mountains and mesas, or set

in desert lands bounded by layers of wall, fences, security patrols, guards: these became American

communities as the District built its factories and towns and set up its systems of authority and

regulation, in order to invent and manufacture the most destructive and dangerous weapons in the

history of humankind.

The Manhattan District began by carving out spaces; on these spaces it constructed a new

social and cultural environment: streets, houses, factories, all the requirements for modern social

life. These changed spaces brought people, and their behavior had to be regulated. The result

was a new sort of social landscape, one which melded the peculiar needs of the project and the

particular beliefs of its military-industrial rulers with the broader currents of American culture and

tradition outside the fences.

Most communities come about through an admixture of planning and inadvertency,

melding tradition and novelty, developing a history or histories, interconnecting with their

surroundings, drawing from them and influencing them in turn. This was only marginally the case

with the Manhattan Engineer District and its cultural geography. Somewhere between an army

base and a utopian social experiment, the MED as a whole and each of its three separate sites

joined a small handful of American planned communities of the twentieth century. At Oak Ridge,

the District's planners hired the firm of Skidmore, Owings Merrill, and did so primarily because of

SOM's involvement with utopian housing and building programs of the Depression era. SOM

responded accordingly, though the result was not an architect's or planner's utopia. At the

Hanford, Washington, site, District contractor du Pont and District planners concurred in hiring a

small local architect to create a planned community-within-a-community. There, too, the

architecture of utopia set itself within the harsh landscape of military expediency.

These impulses toward utopian planning had to meld with the military planning models.

General Groves, shadowy director of the MED, had made his career by studying, and building,

military bases, environments that were simultaneously spartan grids of self-sacrifice to the will of

the state and profoundly intrusive spaces of individual and social management and regulation.

Groves' last construction project was a different kind of extension of the modern social

landscape, the largest ever undertaken by the military: a giant multi-sided model of a

bureaucracy- as-fortress-- the Pentagon. His influence on the Pentagon had been to ruthlessly

enforce efficiencies of scale and mass-regulation to keep the project on time and budget. Its

influence on him had been to provide a paradigm for imagining military bureaucracy mapped out

as space and symbol.

Groves himself represented a larger tradition of military bureaucracy devoted to the

manipulation and transformation of American spaces to the goal of greater efficiency and the

control of nature, bedded within the Army Corps of Engineers. The Manhattan District was but

one part of this powerful legacy, and Groves was but one among the thousands of Corps officers,

engineers, veterans, contractors and companies that carried the long tradition of the Corps into

the novel world of atomic weapons invention, production and deployment.

The resulting physical landscapes manufactured by the District formed one manifestation

of a complex and evolving ideology blending corporate capitalism, government social

management, and military codes of coercion and obedience, into a new sort of alternative culture

hewn from a more heterogenous and heterodox American cultural landscape.

But the District's goal was not to produce communities but to produce weapons in and

from those communities. To do this required people, brought from outside the fences and the

particular environment of the atomic spaces. Atomic scientists, pipe fitters, concrete pourers,

housewives, musicians, writers, engineers, social workers; expatriate European Jews, Okies and

Arkies, farmers, city folk, African-Americans (then, they were Negroes, or "coloreds"), American

Indians; men, women and children: all of them came to the District. Their coming changed the

District even as the District changed them.

Here physical landscape and social landscape blur into something larger and more

amorphous-- culture. District officials saw, more or less, the ways this incursion of people,

traditions, and beliefs threatened their program; they sought, more or less directly, to eradicate

that threat where possible, and to redirect it where necessary. This they did in the spheres of law

and regulation, in the broad intercession in everyday life I have called (rather ironically) social

work. They did this also through the programs devoted to ensuring secrecy and security on the

project. And they did it through the invention, manipulation, and transformation of languages:

spoken and written, but also visual, gestural and symbolic. To the issues surrounding this process

of cultural control I have devoted the second section of this book, a section that ends with a test

case in the intersection of law, regulation, language, and belief-- the case of medicine on the

Manhattan Project.

The Manhattan Engineer District created a new form of American cultural landscape with

one herculean goal in mind: the manufacture of a new form of atomic superweapon in time to use

it on the Japanese. The goal was achieved, and the explosion of consequence from that

achievement has still not finished washing its forces over us. But I have chosen in this book to

look at a different set of consequences, less visible, less spectacular, but in their own way perhaps

as important and influential. Having begun a cultural geography of the Manhattan Project, I have

ended looking at the ways the project expanded into American life (and beyond that, global

history) and influenced the world we live in. This is an ending I have left deliberately sketchy and

suggestive. My goal when I began this book was to propose new interpretations of this most

important event in American cultural history, and I hope to leave a broad swath of open space

around my own project. And so I have ended the story at the moment when the Manhattan

Engineer District absorbed itself into other, broader streams of American and global cultural

history, leaving my own photographs of the site as a deeply personal residue, and leaving it to

others to debate the implications of that final (and continuing) transformation from past to

present.

*

It is the conceit of this book to propose the Manhattan Project as a geographical

enterprise, defined by space as reality and as metaphor. I have written a cultural history of three

places and the consequences of their occupation by a wartime project. The webs that connected

those places and gave their occupants a shared reality are not necessarily clear or easy to express.

Wherever possible, I have sought to look straight at the thing itself-- the landscape, the program,

the factory, house, room, person, act, voice, speech, word. I take these things as significant-- as

signifying the larger patterns and imperatives that drove these individuals who made and lived

within and around them. To stare long and hard at one artifact is to be led in widening spirals out

to the largest enterprises of the District, and when we do that, we see the ways in which this

Manhattan District, this atomic culture it engendered and sought to control, drew from precedents

in the past and prefigured so many of the underlying, and often unspoken, imperatives of our

present.

Already we have begun this work, looking at that photograph of a man, a desk, a map. It

is the same with memos, with regulations, orders, letters, events. My task, as I have seen it, has

been to present these so that they are engrossing and their significance clear, and to knit these

fragments into stories, the stories into narratives, the narratives into a history.

Most of the materials of the Manhattan District are hidden in plain view, rendered

insignificant by their sheer bulk, the chaotic condition of their origins and their eventual

dismemberment and storage, the inevitable encryption that results when security officials

selectively declassify government documents and, having declassified, disarray and disguise the

historical record. In each file there might be memos, letters, forms, plans: all the residues of a

powerful and complex bureaucracy. Most are written in a language hard at best to understand,

often utterly incomprehensible without knowledge of physics, of business, of military codes, of all

the surrounding contexts that make up the Manhattan District. Yet from them we can build a

story not simply engrossing but disturbingly premonitory for our own time. Here we can begin to

understand what it was that Eisenhower feared as "the military-industrial complex": a new and

immensely powerful consortium of institutions ranging across the worlds of business, government

and the military, devoted to eternal self-perpetuation and eventual colonization of the American

democracy. Here we can see the sources of a painful environmental legacy that confronts us

today, and will doggedly shadow us for decades, perhaps centuries, to come.

Today, the atomic spaces of the Manhattan Engineer District are known as legendary

swamps and deserts of toxic horror. Nothing seems safe, and no one immune. The dangers that

today threaten to eat a larger and larger share of federal dollars in order to isolate, to neutralize,

and to rectify, come as the consequence of the larger constitution of the District as an ideological

and social system, and also a system of belief. So also with the bequests of radiation injury and

toxic poisoning-- those we know and those still waiting to be revealed-- that surround the sites or

spill from their descendants.

These are the physical traces of the Manhattan Project: noxious regions, injured workers

and bystanders, stockpiles of weapons and tanks of untreatable wastes. This is what is often called

the poisonous legacy of the Manhattan Project. It is the stuff of news, and has been for some

years. The papers tell of the iniquities of government-sponsored radiation poisoning-- whether of

retarded children in state homes, hospitalized patients in prestigious medical institutions,

or"downwinders" breathing the air and drinking the milk tainted by the making and testing of

atomic weapons. Politicians, bureaucrats, reformers, journalists and reporters have found, again

and again, the fallout of the atomic era. But this physical residue is only the consequence of a

larger cultural legacy which affects far more of our global life.

The Manhattan Project is a compelling subject. It is our heritage, and its implications reach

into our present, into our everyday lives. The Manhattan Project lies at the center of our

mythology, whether we know it or not. It is one of the origin myths of the age in which we have

lived for the last half-century and more. Nature and technology, science and faith, fear and

arrogance: all these dualities, central to our uneasy sense of ourselves, come together on the

three sites of the Manhattan Engineer District, and the enterprises of war and invention for which

they were made.

Central it is, and yet also in danger of disappearing from the consciousness, and the

conscience, of our cultural and moral life. We are in danger of forgetting. But if we do, it will be

a peculiar forgetting, the sort that comes when things become so deeply imbedded in everyday

discourse, and yet are so painful, ambiguous, and complex, that they come to seem a part of the

ground upon which we stand to survey the world and measure our place within it.

And so I have written this story of the spaces and places where the myth came into being,

and the people who transformed those spaces and then occupied, however uneasily, a new sort of

America, forged in wartime but extending far beyond it.

It is an engrossing story because, within its boundaries, we recognize what matters to us

as a nation-- loose, contesting, troubled though we might be. The Manhattan Project laid itself out

on sacred lands (sacred to native peoples and to settlers both), striking from them their

sacredness. It took from us myths of great power, used and transformed them, wrote them anew

to its own ends. Its institutions weren't simply divergent from the dominant American

institutions-- democracy, free speech, contests of ideologies, the troubled murmur of the populace

demanding our rights, the contests for power, the streetcorner dances and the popular songs, the

grumbling of teachers and the anarchy of schoolchildren. Rather, it expressed in physical, social

and political terms a strain of American culture which has existed, if at a more surreptitious level,

throughout the modern era. Within its own boundaries, the Manhattan Project suppressed the

larger climate of cultural heterodoxy with its special form of order, forged and justified by the

extraordinary circumstances of the last great war.

In the years since the Project ended, we might think that its special purpose and special

nature had disappeared from around us, overwhelmed by peacetime prosperity and Cold War

fears. But this has not happened. Instead, the Manhattan District opened its fences and took

down its walls, bringing a bit of openness within its boundaries, while it exported its own systems

of belief, its artifacts and its geography into the many streams of American life.

But these are large and uneasy issues. They lie underneath the everyday circumstances

that make up the atomic culture. For this is a story of lands, sacred lands, taken and altered. It is

a story of men and women, buildings, work, pleasure, punishment, language, food, bodies: and

out of all of these, consequences.