The Patterns of Cold War Propaganda-Atomic Cafe

     My initial reaction to Atomic Cafe, the 1982 documentary by Jayne Loader and Kevin Rafferty that compiled clips of interviews with government officials, civil defense educational films, and military training   films, was mild amusement. As I continued watching however, I started to pick up on the messages emphasized in the propaganda, whether this was "Be calm" or "Always be prepared for the worst". I also noticed how these messages would clash with the reality of the "atomic age", specifically what would be discussed in interviews with scientists as well as the images of Japanese bomb victims. One of the first clips presented in this film was an interview with the pilot of the Enola Gay, which dropped the bomb on Hiroshima. He describes the experience much like a high school student would describe throwing a stink bomb into the boys' bathroom. He describes his reaction, and that of the other military personnel present as a mixture of awe and "Hey we should get out of here before we get caught", an example of the underestimation of the damage which had actually been done. This naivete continued with footage of the celebrations of the American people after the bombs were dropped, mixed with images of death and destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This reaction was also evidence of what Kristina Zarlengo in her article "Civilian Threat, The Suburban Citadel, and Atomic Age American Women" calls the rationale for dropping the bombs; Although Japanese civilians will be killed in the process, American soldiers won't.
    My own reaction to the footage from Hiroshima and Nagasaki: disgust. I doubt that there would not have been members of the public that viewed this in the same way, this disgust changing to fear when a certain old friend turned into our greatest enemy. The clips in Atomic Cafe seem to show this triumphant hero feeling in the U.S. turn to that of a paranoid bully; "Because we did this [bomb Japan] someone could do it to us." A reasoning which seems to have set off the dueling messages of Be prepared to be attacked/Remain calm. The "do your part" campaign, also seems to have returned from its short vacation post-WWII, along with a companion; 50's suburban American values.
     I had always assumed that these values originated from the return of the WWII soldiers to raise families as well as the desire to return to peace and normality after the chaos of war. It had not occurred to me that these were values encouraged and stemming from the possibility of nuclear attack, although this did make sense after thinking about the possible connections. While the public preoccupation with "being prepared" made for a strong foundation behind values such as suburban living, conformity, and domesticity, I knew that there were other factors such as racial tension and widespread use of cars which also played roles. Zarlengo explains that during this atomic age, the message sent to the public was that cities were targets for bombing (After all we were bombed the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki-why couldn't the same happen to us?). Essential to survival was moving to the less sparsely populated neighborhoods made of similar-looking homes. These areas however were only welcome to the white middle-class family. Those of other races and a lower socioeconomic status, were in Zarlengo's words "excluded" and considered the expected [and expendable] casualties of these attacks. Messages sent to and about suburban families portrayed them as an example of how the nation worked according to Zarlengo and as evidenced by this 1957, In the Suburbs, were doing their duty as an American citizen just by practicing these suburban values: http://www.silverscreenclassics.com/video_streaming.php?id=02421001. The Civil Defense film House in the Middle also demonstrates this enforcement of values such as cleanliness and purity, showing that in a test done on three miniature house models, the "clean" house remains relatively unharmed while the two other houses to its left and right, labeled as "neglected" and dirty, are destroyed. It is no surprise that so many educational films appeared in the 1950's discussing topics such as "good table manners" and "party etiquette". Learning these skills were viewed to be not only essential for social acceptance but for survival in the case of a nuclear attack. It is also not surprising that private businesses seized on the opportunity to present their goods and services as ways of thwarting the communist/nuclear threat: http://dengedenge.com/2009/11/cold-war-vintage-ads/ .  The messages given to the public during this decade not only consisted of these mundane topics. In the middle of Atomic Cafe, I noticed that these messages either consisted of; dehumanizing the enemy, what to expect in case of a nuclear attack, or doing one's part to deter the enemy both from inside and outside the nation (see below and in blog post following).
At several points in Atomic Cafe, clips are shown of men building fallout shelters, families and students practicing bomb and "duck-and-cover" drills, and a child riding a bike in a suit one today would think could never actually protect someone. I realized then that perhaps this not so much an example of anxiety as a demonstration of America's new obsession; being prepared for the atomic bomb. Propaganda and public information turned into pop culture. This was not a one-sided relationship. The classic gender roles which put men outside the house and women inside the domestic sphere were being further strengthened by Cold War propaganda. A clip in Atomic Cafe shows a family in a bomb shelter; What is the woman doing-making sure her children are fed. Two female students give a presentation about what kinds of foods are the best for storing in a shelter. Zarlengo states that these roles were enforced in the same way other messages to the public were; women were told that by being the model of domesticity, they were performing a duty to their country as "deterrence soldiers". Further emphasizing the importance and need for this role were the propaganda responses to what Zarlengo calls "the antiwar mother and bombshell". A clip from an army training film shows three soldiers heckling a woman who was calling for a stop to bloodshed and peace with Russia. This clip may try to portray this female as a Communist, yet based on Zarlengo's description of the "antiwar mother" could also play that role. While not shown to  the public, this clip shows the message that if someone, especially a female, does not agree with the mainstream sentiment that this war is necessary and questions the government, they are not to be trusted and furthermore harassed. A more ambivalent view is given to the "bombshell" the attractive and seductive female. The general figure was labeled by propaganda as dangerous and according to Zarlengo  the specific danger of these women were their promiscuity and sexual strength, which would thus lead to the spread of VD and moral destruction, much like how an atomic bomb would lead to physical destruction. I found this amusing both because of dual adoration and scorn held for these female figures and the propaganda was trying to keep women in the home while at the same time, elevating the bombshell female to that of a national threat.

Consumerism!

The Atomic Threat.

A lot of choking and fire

   The question I hear the most from other people who have seen Atomic Cafe is Did people really buy into the messages [lies] the government was sending to them?" The answer is yes and no. Remember that only a few decades before, Orson Welles War of the Worlds broadcast had caused a national panic, and the decade before had consisted of a war in which the U.S. was victorious. The public trusted the government to guide and help them, and in turn there was no question of the means the U.S. used to get to an end. It wasn't until the aftermath of the witch hunts that marked McCarthyism, and when the civil rights movement started to come to the attention of the mainstream that public skepticism grew towards the U.S. government. I also think that the public information fed to the people and shown in Atomic Cafe was not purely absorbed by all. While some may have wholeheartedly believed and feared these messages, others may have accepted it as a normal part of life at home, school, and work. The sentiment that the U.S. public and government is going back to this type of anxiety and propaganda-bombardment, is one I disagree with. While post-9/11 did introduce certain fear-inducing products as the color-coded terror threat scale, the tendencies which the public now has to mistrust the government and critically think about the information being given has weakened the influence of propaganda.

Death by gossip