Unravelling the Historical Perspectives through the Lens of New Historicism in Oppenheimer PDF Free Download
1 / 10/10
100%
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews
Journal homepage: www.ijrpr.com ISSN 2582-7421
Unravelling the Historical Perspectives through the Lens of New
Historicism in Oppenheimer
1Nashra Khan, 2Mr. Uday Khanna
1 BA English, Amity University of Languages, Amity University Lucknow Campus, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Assistant Professor, Amity School of Languages, Amity University Lucknow Campus, Uttar Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT
This research paper discusses about Dr. Julius Robert Oppenheimer and elaborates on the information which had him entitled as the “Father of Atomic bomb” and
the associated concerning factors and versatile aspects and presents the information in this research paper providing example through New Historicism to the readers
in effect .
METHODOLOGY
The methodology adopted for this research paper is to understand the complexities and challenges that were in association with Oppenheimer’s leading
role in the invention of the atomic bomb and the consequential impact of the diplomatic agenda hidden behind the invention on Oppenheimer’s life
through the lens of New Historicism . The information in this research paper has been thoroughly segregated in different sections and the analyzation
through New Historicism has been carried out at the end of the research paper on the basis of the information under each heading .
INTRODUCTION OF THE FILM : OPPENHEIMER
The film depicts the life of Julius Robert Oppenheimer, the physicist who developed the atomic bomb. The story takes place in the mid-20th century,
during a period of high global tension as nations competed for atomic power for both military and scientific purposes. The film explores complex power
dynamics, socioeconomic tensions, and moral quandaries caused by humanity's pursuit of possibly harmful innovation.
The story revolves around J. Robert Oppenheimer, a physicist of a reputed stature who was caught between political, economic, and militaristic interests.
Cillian Murphy's portrayal of J. Robert Oppenheimer is so nuanced that he becomes more than just a scientist—rather, a multifaceted symbol of this
historical period. The author's trip from Cambridge, where Patrick Blackett was his teacher, to Los Alamos, New Mexico, is a prime example of the
unwavering quest for knowledge—often at the expense of moral and personal compromises.
Oppenheimer highlights the monetization of scientific activities for wartime purposes, as well as the fundamental inconsistencies of a capitalist culture
that honors inventors but frequently traps them in ethical dilemmas. The film explores how new information influences warfare and political control.
Nolan's Oppenheimer raises important questions regarding the relationship between scientific activity, personal ambition, and socio-political reasons.
Oppenheimer is more of a thorough examination of the turbulent moral and political climate that surrounded J. Robert Oppenheimer than it is an exposé
on the development of the atomic bomb. Oppenheimer is a cinematic masterpiece that explores the obstacles of a protagonist's scientific objectives in the
setting of political upheavals and the threat of global destruction.
1. ANSWER TO THE 'WHO WAS' OF JULIUS ROBERT OPPENHEIMER QUESTION.
On April 22, 1904, Julius Robert Oppenheimer was born in New York City. He was raised in a Manhattan apartment adorned with works by Gauguin,
Cézanne, and van Gogh.Oppenheimer graduated from the Ethical Culture School of New York in 1921, ranking first in his class.
At Harvard, Oppenheimer studied science and mathematics, philosophy, Eastern religion, and English and French literature. Through solo study, he
obtained graduate rank in physics within his first year of undergraduate studies.
Oppenheimer was enthralled by experimental physics after completing a thermodynamics course offered by Percy Bridgman, who was a Higgins
University Professor of Physics at Harvard .
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1297
In 1925 he graduated summa cum laude and went to the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge University to work as a research assistant to J. J. Thomson.
He enrolled in quantum physics at the University of Göttingen in Germany when he became unimpressed with the usual laboratory work.
Oppenheimer studied with famous figures such as Max Born and Niels Bohr.In 1927, Oppenheimer earned his doctorate and collaborated with Born to
study the structure of molecules, resulting in the Born-Oppenheimer approximation..
Later, he studied in esteemed institutions of higher learning in physics, including Harvard, the California Institute of Technology, Leyden, and Zürich.
He was offered teaching positions at the University of California, Berkeley and Caltech in 1929. Having accepted both offers, he divided his time between
Berkeley and Pasadena, drawing a group of young, gifted physicists.
He wed Katherine (Kitty) Puening Harrison in 1940; she was a divorced biologist whose second husband perished in the Spanish Civil War. During the
Spanish Civil War, Peter and Katherine, the couple's two children, were born. The two kids of the marriage were named Katherine and Peter.
To everyone who knew him, J. Robert Oppenheimer appears to have been a mystery. By all accounts, Oppenheimer was a complex man; over the years,
observers have described him in a variety of ways, using terms such as paradoxical, complex, ambitious, charismatic, mystical, and flawed. Pundits
mostly seem to agree on one thing: Oppenheimer was a bright man. He was honored as the creator of the atomic bomb but was also attacked during the
1950s red scare for opposing the ensuing arms race.
2. UNMATCHED INTELLECT : A PAWN IN THE GAME OF ACQUIRING DOMINION ‘OVER’ ‘ALL’
In the abstract, science is sometimes hailed as a pursuit of truth free of politics and on its own path, but in practice, science, politics, culture, and society
can all have a significant impact on one another. Charles Thorpe, a professor of sociology at the University of California San Diego, says, "Part of
Oppenheimer's power as a scientist was his ability to communicate that science and its importance, putting it in the context of an 'ethical narrative' that
made the cultural significance of the science of the day clear."
Two bombs were dropped on Japan in August following a successful test in Alamogordo, New Mexico, 200 miles south of Los Alamos. This brought an
end to World War II and elevated Oppenheimer to the status of America's most well-known and significant scientific hero. As the bomb's devastating
power became apparent, Oppenheimer voiced concerns about his work in public. President Truman referred to him as a "son-of-a-bitch" and a "cry-baby
scientist" when he warned him, "I feel I have blood on my hands."
The moral justification Oppenheimer provided for working on the atomic bomb is the main focus of this story. His primary driving force is a genuine
desire to end the atrocities of World War II and prevent the potential destruction caused by a Nazi atomic bomb.
However, post Germany's surrender, the project's acceleration, detached from its initial justification, placed Oppenheimer in a profound moral quandary
(Brody, 2023). Despite being pure at its core, his research turned into a commodity and was used as a weapon by the US government to assert its
supremacy in the post-World War II global order.
The commercialization of atomic knowledge, in which novel scientific insights are turned into a salable commodity for gaining power in international
relations, comes to light as Oppenheimer is seen as a brilliant scientist whose unmatched abilities were used to create one of the most lethal weapons
ever. He was a beacon of scientific enlightenment. The destruction of Hiroshima, as depicted in the movie, represents the most terrifying extremes.
Oppenheimer's lament, "Now I am become Death, destroyer of worlds," is portrayed in the film in a moving way, revealing the inner struggle of a man
struggling with the moral implications of his achievements.
In all of his intellectual magnificence, Oppenheimer is presented as a sufferer as well as an inventor, his enormous achievements eclipsed/obscured by
the very apparatus that supported his efforts. Oppenheimer's first desire was genuine: to create a weapon powerful enough to put an end to the tragedy of
World War II. Although fraught with moral quandaries, this ambition was ultimately motivated by a wish for peace (Atomic Heritage Foundation).
However, as the novel unfolds, it becomes evident that the military-industrial complex will exploit his vision and skills.
Oppenheimer's transformation from a scientist to the "father of the atomic bomb" emphasizes the moral conundrum at the heart of the narrative.
Oppenheimer might have thought he was in charge of the Manhattan Project, but Groves and Lewis Strauss demonstrate how real power can affect
decisions. "Strauss' orchestrated campaign against Oppenheimer is not merely a personal vendetta but also an assertion of the state's dominion over
individual intellect" (Fat The Man and the Little Boy, 1989). Oppenheimer investigates the global effects of moral compromises made in the name of
dominance and power.
The bombing of Hiroshima is a horrifying example of this. The quest to end a war resulted in unprecedented destruction, setting a new bar for nations
seeking control (Atomic Heritage Foundation). The removal of Kyoto from the list of targets, maybe due to a false story of Stimson's honeymoon,
highlights the unpredictable nature of decisions that affected many lives (The New York Times interview with Nolan). The film's narrative highlights the
complex and often arbitrary nature of ethical decision-making at high levels of leadership.
3. INVENTION TURNED DESTRUCTION?
The first successful atomic bomb explosion was witnessed by scientists and engineers at the Trinity test site in Alamogordo, New Mexico, on July 16,
1945.
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1298
At the Trinity site in New Mexico, the first atomic bomb explosion caused a mushroom cloud that ascended about four times higher than predicted (40,000
feet high). Physicists were also uncertain about what would happen if the bomb detonated; they experienced some anxiety as they attempted to determine
whether or not the explosion would cause the atmosphere to catch fire.
The people who lived downwind from the Trinity test suffered some of the so-called "collateral damage," as investigative journalist Lesley Blume reveals.
Approximately 500,000 people lived within 150 miles of the explosion, with some of them as close as 12 miles away. They didn't warn anyone or evacuate
them.
According to psychiatrist and author Robert Lifton, the greatest tragedy of Oppie's life was not the "American Inquisition" when his loyalty was
wrongfully challenged in the 1950s, but the realization of his extraordinary talents as a physicist and human being in the creation of a weapon capable of
wiping out humanity.and more than initially thought, it was damaging.
4. THE HAND AS A METAPHOR : DR. C. CASSIDY’S AESTHETICALLY CRITICISIVE INTERPRETATION
The only color image of the Trinity test that is still in existence.
Image courtesy of Los Alamos National Laboratory Archives; taken by Jack Aeby.
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1299
Cassidy effectively reminded readers that Oppenheimer was the source of the explosion by connecting the hand to "the atomic blast" using the possessive
pronoun "its." Additionally, he has briefly substituted a metaphor for human, or "cultural," involvement (the hand) for a natural one (the mushroom
cloud). Cassidy is able to foresee the profound effects that Oppenheimer's work will have on the physical landscapes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the
deserts of Nevada and the Pacific islands where subsequent tests will be held, as well as the psychic and cultural landscape of Cold War America, thanks
to the hand, which is frequently used as a symbol of human interventionary power and our ability to shape the world around us.
Similar to Lady Macbeth, Oppenheimer uses his hand as a major metaphor to convey his regret to Harry Truman when he complains about having blood
on it. The hand also symbolizes an inherently imperfect ego for Oppenheimer, the strong shaper and guilty scientist. The fundamental values of absolute
truth and transparency that guide scientific study are called into doubt by this incomplete self. Cassidy bases his allegations on test photos that show an
unfinished self, casting doubt on the photos' purported scientific objectivity.
The image of the incomplete scientist in the desert, wringing his hands, evokes a dystopian scenario where technological advancement results in complete
destruction. Catastrophe follows from "opening up the atom" and "revealing its secrets," two popular scientific cliches with dire implications.
These persistent questions about the nature of science point to a shift in public opinion toward skeptic perspectives on scientists, which coincided with
the AEC's 1953–1954 investigation of Oppenheimer, which Roslynn Haynes said "was to culminate in a witch hunt for atom spies" (256). The logic, if
not the aesthetic, of absence and synecdoche that permeates these images is fundamental to this slow cultural shift of the scientist from hero to villain,
which accelerated dramatically with Oppenheimer's humiliation at the hands of the AEC.
Cassidy's conflicted feelings are explained by this interpretive oscillation between the hand, which symbolizes Oppenheimer's manipulation of the desert,
and the desert itself, which is screaming to life and reaching for the sky. - "In the previous interpretation of this textual moment, Oppenheimer uses his
dedication to science to discover almost unimaginable new energies, asserts his power in controlling and making these energies visible, wins the war, and
leaves an indelible fingerprint (or, rather, handprint) on history as an American hero" (L. M. Banco, 2012.). However, the second interpretation of this
moment holds that the scientist's fear—which spread as the proliferation of nuclear weapons started in earnest—represents the desert coming to life and
his inability to see beyond science to his social responsibilities, his loss of control over his creation, and his potential exclusion from the privileged
position that comes with scientific discovery because of the unpredictable nature of the discovery itself.
Scientific technology sliding out of control as a result of the reckless pursuit of natural secrets that scientists shouldn't have is an unmistakable motif since
Shelley's Frankenstein, not to mention in innumerable sci-fi novels and films. This illustrates an even earlier fear of certain forms of knowledge. Using
this striking depiction of the desert, Cassidy accuses Oppenheimer of engaging in the age-old, long-prohibited practice of unleashing powers that are
beyond one's control.
Like Sherwin and Bird, Cassidy questions the hagiographic or merely heroic portrayals of Oppenheimer that are common in biographies and popular
culture. Cassidy agrees with Bird and Sherwin that Oppenheimer was primarily to blame for the militarization and corporatization of research conducted
after the 1950s. Cassidy, in contrast to Bird and Sherwin, sees Oppenheimer's downfall as the result of his obsessive, Faustian dedication to developing
this new technology between 1942 and 1945, which transcended boundaries of science and epistemology and disastrously bolstered American
exceptionalism.
5. ORIGIN OF THE STORY : ORIGINAL BROTHERS BEHIND THE BIOGRAPHY OF OPPENHEIMER
The biography "American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer," written by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin, is widely
recognized. The book, published in 2005 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the first atomic bomb test, was the result of 25 years of extensive
research. The book was widely praised and won the Pulitzer Prize for Biography or Autobiography in 2006. Bird and Sherwin's portrayal of Oppenheimer
highlights his sensitivity, aesthetic abilities, and influence in shaping the physical and scientific contexts. However, they also show his brusqueness,
hubris, and vicious streak. Oppenheimer is portrayed as a complicated figure of the American sublime, able to mold and define his homeland.
A comprehensive picture of his character took Bird and Sherwin 599 pages (721 pages including notes, bibliography, credits, and index). In an interview
with Bird for the Bulletin titled "Oppenheimer: 'A very mysterious and delphic character'," the author explores Oppenheimer's role as a leader in the
scientific pursuit of building the bomb, his rise to popularity, and his decline from favor.
Oppenheimer's scientific picture frequently rests on the idea that the scientist's elevated position, allowing him or her to scan a broad expanse of terrain
with a piercing stare, can be metaphorically used to represent the logical process of knowledge acquisition. Inspired by the artist's Romantic figure, the
second form of portrait emphasizes the subject's emotional responses to the environment and places Oppenheimer in the desert as a defining, shaping
force through the use of gnostic analogies. There's no denying that Bird and Sherwin's assessment of Oppenheimer's inner life heavily relies on his
surroundings.
They depict a "primal scene" in which an eighteen-year-old Oppenheimer first sees the deserts of the Southwest and is "love-struck" by the terrain, as
well as "insanely jealous" of a friend's future journey to the area. Bird and Sherwin also reference a well-known letter in which Oppenheimer writes, "My
two great loves are physics and New Mexico." Bird and Sherwin conclude from Oppenheimer's 1943 visit to Santa Fe that he "had fallen in love with the
stark beauty of the place." According to the authors of "American Prometheus," Oppenheimer's relationship with the terrain is deeply emotional, driven
by intuition rather than logic—sublime insanity and overwhelming passion over cool reason. The rhetorical result of Bird and Sherwin's focus on their
emotional bond with the New Mexican environment is the creation of an emotional scientist—someone whose feelings supersede his reason. This
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1300
illustrates "American Prometheus"'s dedication to portraying Oppenheimer as an aesthete, a Romantic with an ethereal and evocative relationship to the
landscape as opposed to one that is objective or decisive.
Bird and Sherwin's descriptive techniques for depicting the landscape in and around Los Alamos help to define Oppenheimer as an artist and craftsman.
Adjectives like "pristine," "spartan," "stark," or "desolate" that qualify nouns like "wilderness" often empty the landscape, transforming it into a large
blank canvas. This language voiding of the terrain adds to Oppenheimer's presentation as a master shaper, a shrewd scientist who transformed a "desolate,"
"empty" mesa into a sophisticated weapons laboratory and the principal means of winning WWII. Wiping the terrain clean before Oppenheimer's arrival
stresses American values of innocence and purity, which serve as the foundation for fables about the diligent, efficient creator earning power and fortune
from virtually nothing and then re-establishing his heroic reputation following a catastrophic collapse.
The poetic and even extravagant detail in many of Bird and Sherwin's descriptions, while at odds with the seemingly austere and stripped-down
countryside, are consistent with the Romantic ideals of authorship on which they base their construction of Oppenheimer.
The military chief of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves, was escorted by Bird and Sherwin to the mesa in 1942 to choose the location, and
they write: "To the west, the snow-capped Jemez Mountains rose to 11,000 feet." Oppenheimer's beloved Sangre de Cristo mountain range, which reaches
13,000 feet, could be seen forty miles east across the Rio Grande Valley from the expansive veranda of the Fuller Lodge." In this warm and picturesque
location, "dramatic thunderstorms came in over the mountains for an hour or two in the late afternoon, cooling the terrain.". Nestled among the spring-
green cottonwood trees that encircle Los Alamos are flocks of bluebirds, juncos, and towhees. A crucial component of the desert, often viewed as
paradoxical, is highlighted by such a rich and gorgeous backdrop: the desert is "about" both severe absence and exquisite presence. The mythology of
frontiersmanship tempers the idea that deserts are wastelands with the idea that they are zones of democratic possibilities, where seekers can find
everything they want. This mythology gets at least some of its texture from the American West's deserts. In addition to provoking the scientist's emotions,
the captivating and vast visual panoramas and lofty heights serve as a conduit for supernatural inspiration and wisdom that, in accordance with the
Promethean myth mentioned in Bird and Sherwin's title, descends from above.
Oppenheimer is characterized by Bird and Sherwin as being infatuated, highlighting his unbridled energy and aesthetic sensibility, which contribute to
his image as a Romantic genius consumed by a desire for eternal wisdom. With emotional resonances that predate scientific pursuits, the mesa is a
"strange new mystical landscape," a "magical dominion" whose majesty has been associated with American exceptionalism since the Puritans' time. A
recurring theme in Oppenheimer's story is annihilation, which is further informed by Bird and Sherwin's romanticized portrayal of the Manhattan Project.
They emphasize the emotive parts of Oppenheimer's myth, but their history, like the myth of Prometheus, is as much about his death as it is about his
deeds.
Bird and Sherwin talk about Oppenheimer, who says, "I am responsible for ruining a beautiful place," in reference to his involvement in the creation of
the atomic bomb at Los Alamos. This is one of the first times that the story emphasizes destruction. This connects his identification as a potentially
dangerous scientist with his artistic interpretation of the landscape. Interestingly, some of the mystical connotations connected to the concept of the
Romantic genius are hinted at in the narrative form that Bird and Sherwin choose to introduce this quotation.
They include this quote early in the story, despite the fact that Oppenheimer said it in 1955, ten years after the war ended. Bird and Sherwin present
Oppenheimer as an example of a sui generis Romantic character who operates outside of time and place by shifting the citation and removing its historical
specificity.
The natural beauty and apparent barrenness of the desert, the Romantic genius who is both artist and destroyer—these are the elements from which the
image of Oppenheimer in "American Prometheus" is crafted, ultimately positioning him as an American Prometheus grappling with the dual nature of
creation and destruction. This portrayal of Oppenheimer, the American Prometheus, reinforces and transcends his scientific accomplishments and tragic
flaws, weaving his personal emotional depth and aesthetic sensibilities into the larger narrative of American exceptionalism and the turbulent history of
the twentieth century. The deep and multifaceted nature of Oppenheimer's persona, as played by Bird and Sherwin, prompts thought on the profound and
sometimes contradictory intersections of science, emotion, landscape, and national identity.
6. FROM SCRIPT TO FILM, THE TRANSITION'S KEEN, WHAT'S WRITTEN IN INK, ON FILM IS SEEN : THE
MAN BEHIND THE DIRECTION
The man behind , to the world is quite well known
For the creator of cinematographic masterpieces he is, the script is very much of his own
As clearly as his reputation precedes him , texts have the man’s name respectfully enclosed in colon
Known by the name - Christopher Nolan
As a byproduct of the capitalist filmmaking apparatus, Nolan interprets the intricate relationship between political power, economics, and moral
compromises that accompanied the development of the atomic bomb.The renowned director of Oppenheimer, Christopher Nolan, was interviewed in-
depth by John Mecklin, the chief editor of the Bulletin, about his experience adapting the polymath's biography from print to film. Nolan calls
Oppenheimer "the ultimate Rorschach test." I think the Oppenheimer tale captures both the wonderful and the horrific aspects of America's singular
modern influence in the globe." ( Christopher Nolan ).
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1301
Through a brilliant blending of IMAX 65 mm and 65 mm large-format film, Nolan's painstaking attention to historical detail results in a cinematic
universe that is both real and immersive. The IMAX black-and-white cinematography used in some scenes is not just a creative choice; it also highlights
the sharp contrasts and morally dubious areas that characterized the atomic age. These creative decisions highlight the director's dedication to taking the
audience to a time of both breathtaking technical advancement and eerie moral quandaries. Nolan, renowned for his meticulousness, is largely true to
historical veracity. However, he concedes cinematic license in places, shaping a more enthralling story (Smith, 2015). Furthermore, Nolan's portrayal of
Oppenheimer's encounters with influential historical personalities such as Werner Heisenberg and Albert Einstein provides a rich background for delving
into the moral quandaries that intellectuals of the time encountered. The philosophical and moral undertones of their talks echo with the same issues that,
even today, modern scientific pioneers face: Where do you draw the line between the quest of knowledge and its potential misuse? And how much of the
political appropriation of scientists' discoveries is their fault?
The way that Nolan masterfully blends creative reinterpretation with historically accurate material to create a gripping narrative that evokes strong feelings
while imparting knowledge is evident in Oppenheimer. Though there are unmistakable departures from the historical narrative, these highlights also serve
to underscore the vast moral, political, and scientific complexity of the time, providing viewers with a very nuanced cinematic experience. "Oppenheimer's
sophisticated structure alternates between three narrative lines. The main story follows Oppenheimer from the academy to the laboratory, through the
bomb's testing, his conscience-stricken reaction to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and his postwar campaign for worldwide nuclear weapons control. Then
there are scenes from the 1954 security clearance hearing, followed by scenes from the 1959 Senate confirmation hearing, which are now in black and
white. Jennifer Lame's rapid-fire editing and Ludwig Göransson's furious score somehow hold it all together, as the all-star cast's familiar faces guide the
audience through a populated dramatis personae."
Nolan's most problematic decision is to not depict the bombings and the pain they caused. However, as Susan Sontag frequently noted, representations
of others' anguish, particularly through cinematic spectacle, create their own ethical and political issues. (Susan Sontag ) In any case, it's difficult to see
how it might work within the narrative restrictions of an Oppenheimer biopic. Some Japanese films, such as Hideo Sekigawa's Hiroshima and Shōhei
Imamura's Black Rain, offer a unique perspective from the victims.
7. LOS ALEMOS : A SOCIETY ON THE PRECIPICE OF ATOMIC BREAKTHROUGHS
In the course of a typical, covert paperwork approval process, the United States created a research center in the New Mexico highlands on April 1, 1943.
It was known as Project Y in the papers, and the University of California oversaw its administration. Project Y refers to the design and production of
atomic weapons carried out by the Manhattan Project. Los Alamos, also known as Project Y, was commanded by theoretical physicist Robert
Oppenheimer, who was nominated by Manhattan Project head General Leslie Groves. Oppenheimer and General Groves conducted a tour of the area in
mid-November 1942 before making their decision. A secret community arose on the site of the Los Alamos Ranch School, using about 46,000 acres,
including roads and power line rights of way, purchased for $415,000. Construction was finished in November 1943 for a total cost of $7 million. Los
Alamos was home to approximately 6,000 people at the time. Project Y worked on calculating the amount of material required and the building of the
explosives . Clinton Engineering Works managed the production of uranium isotopes, greatly expanding an existing Army operation. Aside from chemical
engineers laboring to enrich uranium, Oak Ridge housed most of the Manhattan Project's administrative activities. With an additional 15,000 workers
residing nearby, this location is home to 75,000 people in total as it continues to grow.
The very society he worked in, one on the verge of atomic discoveries and, consequently, atomic weapons, is a microcosm of the more significant
ideological conflicts waged in the 20th century. .
Instead of starting in the highly classified Los Alamos laboratories during the construction of the atomic bomb, the story takes viewers to 1954 and has
them witness Oppenheimer struggle with loyalty issues in a cramped Washington, D.C. chamber.
8. THEORETICAL PHYSICIST vis-à-vis THEORETICAL PHYSICIST
One striking departure occurs when Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein discuss the implications of the atomic bomb and how it might ignite the atmosphere
in the movie. The director fabricated the interactions, despite the fact that the worries shown were real. For example, physicist Edward Teller's concerns
in the movie concerning a possible atmospheric ignition actually had to do with Arthur Compton, not Einstein. Because Einstein is a well-known physicist,
Nolan decided to include him in order to ensure a wider audience resonance. Although the two physicists did indeed work together, this 1947 exchange
serves more as a moving illustration of their common viewpoints than a chronicle of their past exchanges. The exchange that is portrayed emphasizes the
fleeting nature of celebrity, as Einstein forewarns Oppenheimer and says, “It’s your turn to deal with the consequences of your achievement. And one
day, when they have punished you enough, they’ll … give you a medal. And tell you that all is forgiven.” (Albert Einstein).
As the scenario concludes, Oppenheimer reminisces on the terror that surrounded the atomic test, imagining the world-altering chain reaction it may
cause. Oppenheimer acknowledges Einstein's approving nod with a dejected expression, "I believe we did." Einstein's historical distaste for political
manipulations, as seen by his 1951 correspondence criticizing the McCarthy era, resonates strongly in this cinematic debate. Oppenheimer's appeals to
President Eisenhower underlined the critical necessity for a de-escalation of the nuclear arms race and open public discussion about nuclear weapons. In
parallel, Einstein, an ardent pacifist, lobbied strongly for nuclear disarmament.
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1302
9. THE MANHATTAN PROJECT AND ROADMAP TO FEEEDING ITS PROGRESS
World War II disrupted the work and lives of the majority of American physicists.In November 1942, fearing that Germany would acquire nuclear
weapons, the US government appointed Oppenheimer to lead an intensive, crash-course development initiative. The government chose Los Alamos, a
covert assembly site on an isolated mesa twenty miles west of Santa Fe, New Mexico, based on Oppenheimer's direct knowledge of the Southwest from
childhood excursions there.
Assigned to the Manhattan Project, Oppenheimer worked on the creation of the atomic weapon in 1942. The project involved facilities at the University
of Chicago, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Los Alamos, New Mexico, among other top-secret locations across the nation. In order to work on the creation
of an atomic bomb, Oppenheimer oversaw the establishment of the Los Alamos laboratory, which brought together the brightest minds in physics.
Because of his role in this endeavor, he is referred regarded as the "father" of the atomic bomb.
To undertake the theoretical and experimental work, a worldwide group of science titans, including Edward Teller, Hans Bethe, Enrico Fermi, and of
course Oppenheimer himself, arrived at the location. According to most reports, Oppenheimer, who was six feet tall, tried his hardest to lose weight and
reach 110 pounds in time to complete the task before the Nazis arrived.
Oppenheimer was chosen to lead the Manhattan Project team, which included top physicists, engineers, and army personnel, due to his intelligence,
leadership skills, subject expertise, personal knowledge of German scientists involved in Nazi bomb development, and hard work. He could absorb all
theories and was interested by quantum physics while in Europe. When the Manhattan Project was launched, Oppenheimer was picked to command a
team of thousands of individuals, including the brightest scientists, engineers, and army soldiers in the field.
The United States' General Leslie Groves created the Combined Development Trust in order to dominate the world market for uranium ore. The trust's
objectives were to guarantee uranium supply for the Manhattan Project while also keeping other nations—especially the Soviet Union—from obtaining
it. The primary supply of uranium for the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan was the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The US also sought to acquire
uranium from other nations for use in its nuclear weapons.
10. TRINITY: TRANSFORMATION OF BELIEF UNTO ENTITLEMENT
Oppenheimer began studying Sanskrit with Arthur W. Ryder at Berkeley and discovered it to be wonderful (Smith and Weiner 165). He began attending
Ryder's Thursday evening readings of the Gita, and the principles of the Gita prepared him for his future endeavors, which impacted the destiny of all
humanity. Chapter 3 of the Bhagavad Gita's teachings on Karma Yoga, widely known as the path of selfless service, provided Oppenheimer with a
rationale for creating the atomic weapon.
Verse 1: Arjuna spoke up and said, "If you believe that knowledge is more important than action, then, O Kesava, do You want me to take part in this
horrible action (war)? Verse 4: (Lord replied) Man does not accomplish actionlessness by not committing activities, nor does he attain perfection by
simple resignation.. Verse 7: But whoever, controlling the senses by the mind, O Arjuna, engages himself in Karma Yoga with organs of action, without
attachment, he excels. (Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 3)
According to the book's authors, everyone felt nervous the night before the Trinity exam. Oppenheimer encouraged the squad by singing another shloka
from the Gita, which declares that God defends those who do well.
The Sanskrit shloka Oppenheimer apparently chanted during the Trinity test:
"- ' -- ' ' " (Bhagavad Gita, Chapter
11, Verse 32).
The translation and interpretation of the verse, 'Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds', which has sparked dispute and disagreement among
many about the verse's true meaning, did not appear to be his concern. For him, as for many others, the Kaal represents death. He saw Kaal in terms of
the destructive effects of nuclear weapons on humanity. Admittedly, the over-projection of one verse has resulted in an entirely different interpretation
of what the Gita or Indian wisdom tradition entails. It is part of our concept of the universe: the beginning, middle, and end. It is a time cycle that includes
all stages. Oppenheimer discovered the Gita's usefulness in resolving his issues. At the moment, the question was whether to carry out his responsibility,
which was to work on nuclear physics and the nuclear weapon development programme.
He realized he was simply a tool in the big scheme of destiny, and he was satisfied that he had performed his duties flawlessly. That is why he could
accept his situation after losing his security clearance without complaint since he understood his limited part in the larger cosmic design.
In an NBC 1965 documentary, ‘The Decision to Drop the Bomb’, (Banco 143) he recounts his memory of moments after the blast: We knew the world
would never be the same... I recall a passage from the Hindu literature, the Bhagavad Gita: 'Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.'
The book states that Oppenheimer may have called the test site (Trinity) after the Indian Trimurti—Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesh. In the film, though,
this fact is not pictured or told. The authors of the book write: Oppenheimer named the test site 'Trinity', but he wasn't sure why he picked that name years
later. He barely remembered having in mind a poem by John Donne that opens and says ”‘Batter my heart, three person’d God . . .”. (Holy Sonnets, 1610-
1611). But this implies that he might have borrowed from the Bhagavad-Gita once more; Hinduism is based on the trinity of Shiva, the destroyer, Vishnu,
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1303
the preserver, and Brahma, the creator. The authors state that Oppenheimer formerly thought the Gita was helpful in easing mental anguish. In a lengthy
letter to his brother, Frank Oppenheimer, he emphasized the importance of the Gita in personal management. He used the Gita as a philosophy of life to
govern his inner self and make decisions on critical issues such as nuclear weapons development, similar to Arjun seeking answers from Krishna. Later,
during a disagreement with President Roosevelt, he used the Gita to emphasize the need of faith.
11. THE COLD WAR FALLOUT AND LEGACY AND THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION FACE OFF
The Manhattan Project, which was in charge of overseeing all atomic research and development in the US, was replaced by the Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC) after the war. The General Advisory Committee Chairman, J. Robert Oppenheimer, was firmly against the development of the
hydrogen bomb, also referred to as the "Super Bomb," because of its incredible destructive potential—it is thought to be a thousand times more potent
than an atomic weapon.
After the war, Oppenheimer's prior Marxist beliefs were turned against him, despite his valiant efforts on the Manhattan Project. His opposition to the
hydrogen bomb (dubbed the 'Super' by its chief proponent Edward Teller), which had a potential force equivalent to 100 million tons of TNT compared
to the atomic bomb's 15,000 tons, caused him to fall from favor. Oppenheimer wrote for the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) after the Soviet Union
conducted its first nuclear test in 1949, cautioning against the creation of a "weapon of annihilation.". This position grew particularly contentious during
the Cold War, a period of strong geopolitical rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union.
In the 1950s, while Oppenheimer served as Director of the Institute, Washington, D.C. was swept by anti-Communist hysteria led by figures like
Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy and other fervent anti-Communists relentlessly sought to expose Communist infiltration in every facet
of American society, including scientific and intellectual circles. Oppenheimer found himself at the center of a highly publicized security inquiry, which
triggered a media frenzy and deeply divided the intellectual and scientific communities.
In 1954, he faced an Atomic Energy Commission security hearing on what many consider to be exaggerated charges of Communist affiliation and
accusations of espionage for the Soviet Union. Despite his defense, Oppenheimer's security clearance was revoked in 1953, abruptly ending his influential
role at the AEC and isolating him from scientific and technical circles that once welcomed him. The fallout from the hearing left Oppenheimer in a state
of quasi-exile, his reputation tarnished and his contributions to science overshadowed by political controversy.
However, recognition of Oppenheimer's scientific contributions eventually came full circle in 1963, when the Kennedy and Johnson administrations
honored him with the Enrico Fermi Award. This prestigious accolade acknowledged his pioneering work and enduring impact on the field of nuclear
physics. Oppenheimer passed away in 1967, leaving behind a complex legacy as a brilliant scientist whose career was marred by political intrigue and
ideological turmoil.
12. NEW HISTORICISM AND ITS USAGE IN A RESEARCH PAPER
The New Historicism is a literary philosophy that arose in the 1980s and has its roots in Renaissance studies. It asserts that all human ideas and actions
are contextual, shaped by the cultural and power dynamics of the period. This approach, influenced by intellectuals such as Michel Foucault and Jacques
Derrida, rejects universal truths in history, arguing that historical narratives are formed by power dynamics both during events and at the time of writing.
The New Historicism stands in stark contrast to past historicist traditions, particularly Karl Popper's deterministic approach, which saw historical forces
as irresistible and tied to authoritarian ideologies. Instead, the New Historicism is based on cultural relativism, which implies that values are unique to
each civilization and evolve throughout time.
This idea gained traction through seminal works like Frederic Jameson's "The Political Unconscious" and Frank Lentricchia's "After the New Criticism."
It has received support from scholars like as Stephen Greenblatt, who developed the phrase "New Historicism," and has ties to institutions such as Duke
University and periodicals such as the South Atlantic Quarterly. The New Historicism also intersects with other subjects, such as gender and ethnic
studies, and is frequently aligned with the broader cultural Left, which attempts to use academic platforms for political action.
Despite its popularity, the New Historicism is criticized for its deterministic and politically motivated approach. Critics claim that it can lead to solipsism,
which denies the existence of objective historical reality. However, proponents believe it provides a useful framework for comprehending the intricate
interplay between literature, history, and power.
The New Historicism seeks to historicize literature by tracing its origins and defining its basic concepts, so questioning traditional divisions between
history and literature, text and environment. Its emergence has provoked major controversy within literary criticism and historiography, reflecting larger
cultural and philosophical shifts in understanding history and narrative.
Any topic or idea discussed in a research paper states about the incidents or examples of events which may have had prevailed or may still be ongoing
which provides an era of time periods to talk about and subsequently the varied factors which influenced those examples to be caused at the time . Since
history , from the point of view of New Historicism is not just factual information based on concrete evidence or proof but rather like a story delivered in
the form of various versions as per the narration , it is , therefore , a valid explanation for the use of the concept in a research paper for drawing the
meaning of the information not just through the writer’s observance but also through the cultural , economic and political context of the time .
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1304
13. FINAL OVERALL ANALYSIS THROUGH THE LENS OF NEW HISTORICISM
Applying New Historicism to a research paper on J. Robert Oppenheimer entails diving into the intricate interplay between his life, the sociopolitical
backdrop of his time, and the cultural objects that reflect him. This method emphasizes how historical settings shape and are shaped by individuals and
their stories.
Contextual Background :
J. Robert Oppenheimer, sometimes known as the "father of the atomic bomb," lived during a period of significant scientific growth and worldwide
upheaval. Born in 1904, his career included eras of significant political and social change, such as the Great Depression, World War II, and the start of
the Cold War. These times created a backdrop for his writing and future depictions of his life.
Oppenheimer's earliest interactions :
Understanding Oppenheimer's academic and intellectual context is required for an analysis of his early encounters using New Historicism. His meetings
with Albert Einstein at Caltech in the early 1930s serve as a classic example. This period saw a surge in interest in theoretical physics, with Europe and
America at the forefront of significant research. The intellectual companionship and competitiveness among scientists, particularly disputes over quantum
mechanics and relativity, contextualize Oppenheimer's career as a physicist.
The Manhattan Project :
The Manhattan Project (1942-1946) was a watershed point in Oppenheimer's life and world history. New Historicism encourages us to view this research
not only as a scientific endeavor, but also as a response to World War II's geopolitical forces. The worry that Nazi Germany would be the first to build
an atomic bomb fueled the rush to develop one. Oppenheimer's leadership at Los Alamos and ability to coordinate the work of various scientists exemplify
the era's collaborative yet competitive scientific culture.
Ethical and moral dilemmas :
Oppenheimer's subsequent thoughts on the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki illustrate the ethical and moral quandaries that troubled him.
New Historicism investigates these thoughts in light of current discussions about war ethics, scientific accountability, and growing Cold War tensions.
His famous phrase from the Bhagavad Gita, "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds," highlights his psychological dilemma as well as the
larger existential concerns that humanity faces after 1945.
Cultural Representations :
Films and biographies on Oppenheimer, such as the film "Oppenheimer," provide enough fodder for New Historicist study. These cultural objects are
creations of their time, reflecting current beliefs toward science, heroism, and guilt. For example, the film's depiction of Oppenheimer's brilliance and
moral struggle can be interpreted as a commentary on modern scientific responsibility and the lingering effects of nuclear war. Examining how different
ages depict Oppenheimer reveals altering cultural attitudes and concerns.
Power dynamics and ideological struggles :
Oppenheimer's postwar life, which included confrontations with the Atomic Energy Commission and the eventual loss of his security clearance,
exemplifies Cold War power dynamics and ideological clashes. New Historicism examines these occurrences to demonstrate how political paranoia and
fear of communism influenced scientific communities and individuals' lives. His fall from grace underscores the larger conflict between scientific freedom
and national security.
Examples :
Interaction with Einstein: This emphasizes the collaborative and competitive nature of early twentieth-century physics, demonstrating how intellectual
exchanges influenced scientific advancement.
The Manhattan Project, as viewed through New Historicism, demonstrates how scientific undertakings are influenced by and contribute to historical
events such as WWII.
Ethical Dilemmas: Oppenheimer's postwar observations and cultural reactions to the atomic bombings highlight the ongoing debate over scientific
accountability.
Cultural Depictions: Films like "Oppenheimer" provide a window into modern perceptions toward historical events and personalities, reflecting and
changing popular consciousness.
Cold War Dynamics: Oppenheimer's experiences highlight the conflict between scientific investigation and political ambitions.
International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 8, pp 1296-1305 August 2024 1305
14. CONCLUSION
"The Oppenheimer case sent a warning to all scientists not to stand up in the political arena as public intellectuals," (Kai Bird, co-author of the biography
"American Prometheus," in the New York Times). This was the true tragedy of Oppenheimer. What happened to him also harmed our society's ability to
debate scientific theory openly, which is at the heart of our modern world.
Today, the scientific community "is wired to do everything that we can to remain detached from the entire endeavor of politics, policy, and parliament,"
says Daniel Correa, of the Federation of American Scientists.
"The relationship between science and politics is a two-way street," says (Toshihiro Higuchi, a professor of history at Georgetown University).
REFERENCES
➢ Snyder, Alison. Kramer, Miriam. “Oppenheimer revealed the human and political sides of science.” Axios . https://www.axios.com/2 023/07/21
oppenheimer-politics-nuclear-bombs. 21 July 2023
➢ “J. Robert Oppenheimer : Life , Work and Legacy.” Institute for Advanced Study . https://www.ias.edu/oppenheimer-legacy. Accessed July
6, 2024
➢ Greenberg , Jon. “MovieFact: ‘Oppenheimer’ sticks close to historic record, with some liberties.” Politifact . https://www.politifact.com/
article/2023/aug/25/movie-oppenheimer-fact-check-historical-real/ . 25 August 2023
➢ Blitz India Media . “Oppenheimer and the Indian knowledge tradition .” Blitz India Media . https://blitzindiamedia.com/oppenheimer-and-
the-indian-knowledge-tradition/. 26 October 2023
➢ Nayan , Rajiv . "Oppenheimer and the Indian Knowledge Tradition . " IDSA. https://idsa.in/issuebrief/oppenheimer-indian-knowledge-
tradition-rnayan-120923 . 12 September 2023
➢ National WWII Museum. "Making Public What Was Once Secret: Los Alamos and the Manhattan Project." National WWII Museum .
www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/making-public-what-was-once-secret-los-alamos-and-manhattan-project. 11 May 2022
➢ Viswanathan , Uma Maheswari. "Voice of the East in Eliot and Oppenheimer." ResearchGate, December 2023
➢ Maggs, Joseph. "A Damning Portrait." Socialist Lawyer, no. 93, 2023, pp. 42-43. Pluto Journals. JSTOR,
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48745256. Accessed 26 May 2024.
➢ Banco, Lindsey Michael. "The Biographies of J. Robert Oppenheimer: Desert Saint or Destroyer of Worlds." Biography, vol. 35, no. 3,
Summer 2012, pp. 492-515. University of Hawai'i Press on behalf of Center for Biographical Research. JSTOR,
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23541147. Accessed 26 May 2024.
➢ Drollette Jr., Dan. "Oppenheimer: The Man Behind the Movie." Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 79, no. 4, 2023, pp. 201-202. Taylor &
Francis Online, https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2023.2224160. Accessed 27 June 2023.
➢ Hoover, Dwight W. "The New Historicism." The History Teacher, vol. 25, no. 3, May 1992, pp. 355-365. PDF file.
