![enola gay exhibit controversy enola gay exhibit controversy](https://ncac.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/1995-Enola-Gay-exhibit-530x350.jpg)
Other museums have incorporated recent scholarship that challenged conventional narra- tives, and they have resolved controversies with "stakeholders" in different ways. But we need to do more to shape how controversies take place. If we want scholarship to reach wider audiences, we need to expect controversy.
ENOLA GAY EXHIBIT CONTROVERSY PROFESSIONAL
We can examine how historians may risk shipwreck as we seek to navigate recent scholarship beyond safe professional harbors. Precisely because the debate came from and led in so many different directions, precisely because the leading participants were unable to agree about how and where and when to engage each other, this controversy presents an extraordinary opportunity to inquire how history is, and might be, practiced in our culture and institutions. Instead of rehashing familiar themes, we turn to the controversy to explore how scholars and curators can engage the public in conversations about the past. The Journal of American History December 1995 The Journal of American History December 1995 For fuller detail, see below, "Chronology of the Enola Gay Controversy,'' 1083-84. The resolution was reprinted in OAH Newsletter, 22 (Nov. 22, 1994 (Business Ofice, Organization of American Historians, Bloomington, Ind.). Executive Board, Minutes, "Resolution on the Smithsonian Institution'sĮnola Gay Exhibit," Oct. A good collection of clippings for tracing this controversy is the volume "Enola Gay Coverage, 1995,'' available from the Air Force Association, 1501 Lee Highway, Arlington, Readers who wish to comment on this round table or to read other comments may link with H?TP:// Harwit, Martin Sherwin, Paul Schadewald, and Scott Stephan and from criticism of earlier drafts by SusanĪrmeny, Nick Cullather, Richard Kohn, and Alfred F. Tions with Michael Frisch, Arnita Jones, John Dichtl, Tom Crouch, Richard Kohn, Edward Linenthal, Martin In writing this introduction, however, I benefited enormously from conversa. I have talked about this controversy with so many people over the past year that I cannot recall all the individuals professional procedures and criteria." The American Legion broke off negotiations and called for cancellation of the exhibit in January 1995. Historians, led by the Organization of American Historians (OAH) in October, formally condemned "revisions of interpre- tations of history for reasons outside. Curators negotiated content with veterans' groups. The United States Senate unanimously proclaimed the script "revisionist and offensive to many World War I1 veterans" in September.
![enola gay exhibit controversy enola gay exhibit controversy](https://live.staticflickr.com/3095/5870062022_48e1c0827b_z.jpg)
The Air Force Association (AFA) launched a campaign against that script in March. The debate that led up to and followed Heyman's decision was much more than a controversy between veterans and scholars or another battle in "the culture wars." The story is familiar: NASM curators completed an exhibition script in January 1994. we did not give enough thought to the intense feelings. that the nation would honor and commemorate their valor and sacrifice. Veterans and their families were expecting. Michael Heyman of the Smithsonian Institution announced that the world's most popular museum, the National Air and Space Museum (NASM) in Washington, had-decided to replace an exhibition it had been planning since 1988, "The Last Act: The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War 11," with a smaller display that eschewed controversy and "interpretation." He explained: "We made a basic error in attempting to couple an historical treatment of the use of atomic weapons with the 50th anniversary commemoration of the end of the war. History after the Enola Gay Controversy: An Introduction