This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/H05.jpg 2019-10-14T06:02:25+00:00 NASA: Post-War Nuclear Research and Rocketry Advancement 7 image_header 2019-12-04T20:07:49+00:00             Before the Second World War scientists had theorized for decades that nuclear research was the key to push towards a new era of humanity’s knowledge and ability to control the physical world. However, the dropping of the atomic bombs in part negatively affected the perception of nuclear technology.[1] Yet once the technology was realized globally, it was duplicated, expanded, and reworked. Following the Second World War the arms race began to ensure nations had the capabilities of protecting themselves should catastrophic war break out. Research of nuclear technology in the 1950s led into the emphasis on intercontinental ballistic missiles which would be necessary for achieving satellite orbiting. Militarily nations saw this as a necessary advancement but also knew it would mean competing governments would have the same advantages over them. 
            
              During the 1950s the former ally of the United States from the Second World War, the Soviet Union, was the main target of concern as far as technological advancement went. The debate of capitalist versus communist systems was a core part of the Cold War, however, the center of Red Scare rhetoric that was marketed to the public, focused on the potential of weapons development, impending war, and the potential destruction of American values. Despite this fear-mongering, the anti-communist effort did little to dissuade the public from their mistrust of the sciences and weapons-related research. 
                       Due to the Cold War and the public perception of nuclear technology, missile research and what was reported was handled carefully. The proposal for the International Geophysical Year (IGY) was brought up in a gathering of American scientists in 1950. The IGY was to be a continuum of the International Polar Year, previously held twice, 50 years apart in 1883 and 1932. The event was a scientific Olympics, where experts from around the world would work to contribute to the collective knowledge of the earth sciences and it would be an opportunity where they could also highlight what their nations’ researchers were contributing to scientific progress. The IGY was predesignated to be set from 1957 to 1958 due to high solar activity which would occur at that time. The publicized goal of the IGY would be for nations to provide innovative research which could be shared internationally and to demonstrate advancement in the earth sciences.[2] At the time of the initial proposal space exploration had its share of scientific speculation by American researchers but it remained a far off dream until technology would be ready and was mostly relegated to the fictional realms.
              At a scientific convention in Rome in 1955, the official start date of July 1, 1957 was set for the IGY. Several weeks before the convention however, the Soviet Union had announced its intention to launch objects into space to record atmospheric data for scientific research. Shortly after the Soviet announcement, the Eisenhower administration announced the United States’ intentions to launch the first artificial satellites into orbit for the IGY. The importance of both announcements so close together when the IGY was still in talks can be summarized by both nations having ulterior motives. Journalist Mathew Brzezinski explains how the United States and the Soviet Union needed a “peaceful, civilian excuse to test the military potential of its hardware . . . [also] a research satellite blessed by the international scientific community would set the precedent for an ‘open skies’ policy where sovereign airspace did extend beyond the stratosphere.”[3] Several branches of the US military had their own missile projects underway, but due to the tensions of the Cold War, government officials were vetoing their use for space research as an international PR maneuver. The plan was to first use sounding rockets developed by civilian organizations as opposed to military technology.
              The Vanguard rockets were being developed in the United States and were supposed to be responsible for launching the first satellites but, as the IGY approached, financial and testing corners were cut to meet the deadline and launch attempts were met with failure. At least on the US front it was thought that as soon as the first satellite was in orbit, a “precedent would be set that would govern the legality of all future launches. In that regard, a purely scientific satellite, such as the Naval Research Center’s entry into the civilian IGY competition, was the perfect foil for establishing the open, international nature of outer space that would make extraterrestrial spying lawful.”[4] However, on October 4, 1957 the Soviet Union unexpectedly had a successful launch of the first manmade satellite, Sputnik. Like the Americans, the Soviets were developing powerful military missiles. Unlike the Americans, the Soviets had no qualms about using military grade missiles in this public venture. They did it for the “vast propaganda value” and because of the celebrated success in the name of human achievement, no fallout ensued.[5] In Washington, the National Academy of Sciences building was being used for an IGY conference when the news came. At the Soviet Embassy, a party was being held attended by Americans, Soviets, and representatives from other nations to celebrate the progress being made in rocket science. The Soviet scientists received a call in private and informed their American counterparts who in turn announced Sputnik’s launch to the rest of the conference members including press officials.[6]
              With the realization that Soviet technology was more advanced than previously thought, military officials and scientists panicked. The arms race had not only led to the creation of powerful weapons but necessitated scientific agencies in creating defensive security measures. As Political Scientist Ronnie D. Lipshcutz notes, the revelation of Soviet advancement had shown that “the nuclear-tipped NIKE missiles devised to shield American cities from Soviet bombers were obsolete even before they became operational—they could not protect against the new ballistic missiles that were soon to be deployed.”[7] Ultimately Sputnik had shown that America was “vulnerable to attack by a foreign power and was virtually powerless to prevent it.”[8] These realities heavily impacted futurism both thematically and as a tool to encourage consumer change.[9]
   

  ---

  [1] Paul S. Boyer, By the Bomb's Early Light: American Thought and Culture at the Dawn of the Atomic Age (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994). The reaction is nuanced in that while there was near unanimous support before, atomic culture following the Second World War saw both, the celebration of bomb technology but also inspired numerous dystopian themes in art, fiction, and discourse surrounding the future. 

  [2] Ronald E. Doel, Dieter Hoffmann, and Nikolai Kremenstov. “National States and International Science: A Comparative History of International Science Congresses in Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia, and Cold War United States,” Osiris 20 (2005): 49-76.

  [3] Matthew Brzezinski, Red Moon Rising: Sputnik and the Hidden Rivalries that Ignited the Space Age (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2007) 96.

  [4] Ibid, 134-135.

  [5] Von Hardesty and Gene Eisman. Epic Rivalry: The Inside Story of the Soviet and American Space Race (Washington, DC: National Geographic, 2007) 67.

  [6] Ibid, 76.

  [7] Ronnie D. Lipschutz, Cold War Fantasies: Film, Fiction, and Foreign Policy (Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield, 2001) 85.

  [8] Ibid.

  [9] Sobchack, “Science Fiction Film and the Technological Imagination,” 149. While there were examples of dystopic fictions before, Vivian Sobchack notes significant changes in the trends of the science fiction genre which emerge in the 1950s and continue through about 1968. Many works emerge highlighting the dangers of technology on man and consider the corporate element which had previously been missing. She cites this as being routed in Cold War political discourse calling for technological superiority and encouraging consumerism.