Hannah Bowman

UWRIT 1104
November 5, 2015
The Critical
How often does a nuclear bomb explode a year? Not often. And thats the way some
people would have it. As for others, not so much. There are estimated to be 16,000
nuclear warheads able to be deployed at a push of a button. Is this a reality we are willing
to live in? Some have already lived it. Stories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors and
victims are living and dead testimonies to the amount of destruction one button can do.
Oddly enough we were fascinated by this idea of destruction. Sci-Fi novel with this topic
were out as early as 1937 years, before the first A-bomb. The real question is, how do we
live with this now? TV series such as Doomsday-Preppers would argue that we cant
be prepared enough for atomic war. But is atomic war really what it has to come to? In
this conversation, I will be addressing many topics associated with nuclear war. It is
called a conversation because I will also be asking a lot of questions. Questions I hope
you as readers will put time into thinking through. My intention is not to define the
morals for or against nuclear war but to force people to think for themselves.
It is my belief that history is something to be learned from which is why it is exactly
where my paper begins. Individuals of Japan expressing their opinions of life after the
bombing is a well of insight into how other societies can struggle from such a tragic
event. This will also hopefully call more seriousness to the gravity of nuclear war, a
subject that is too thoughtlessly reported in our daily news and media. In Shi-Lin-Lohs
research paper, the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima is an example of the
reconstruction of a society after suffering from a nuclear explosion. The people of Japan

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 6:57 PM

Comment [1]: Yosra: Following the
structure of the paper was a little
confusing in certain areas throughout. The
topic of the research is good in itself but I
recommend using better transitional
phrases and or ways to connect ideas. I
would also refrain from using short
sentences and instead combine some to
create a better understanding of the
message intended. This will help the
reader get a better insight of your paper.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:06 PM
Comment [2]: Jaycie: So far I really like
your intro, however your sentences are
fragments. I understand that you are trying
to connect your facts to sources, but some
of these sentences can be connected. An
example of combining this sentence with
the one following could be "Oddly enough
we were fascinated by this idea of
destruction, therefore sci-fi novels with this
topic were out..."

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:07 PM
Comment [3]: Yosra: Your introduction is
well structured and plays the role
intended: to draw the reader's attention.
My only concern is that im seeing a lot of
sentences coming from your sources. You
might want to incorporate more of your
own ideas that form from these sources.
This will show the reader that you are
invested in your topic and there would be
less parenthetical citations.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:08 PM
Comment [4]: Jaycie: I like how you are
asking yourself questions throughout your
assignment. It helps the reader better
understand the dynamics in your research
topic. Asking questions also shows that
you fully understand your topic and did the
research.

had to redefine its nationalism and rebuild a lot of its infrastructure. Debates over how
Japan will power its rebuilt city and whether peaceful nuclear power is acceptable was
highly debated. The idea of something that once destroyed could now rebuild was
something most Japanese searched to grasp. It was affirmed when Japan was addressed as
an exception because of the A-bomb attack. Not only do the people have to resettle and
heal physically from the bombing but also mentally and politically. The bombing created
a sort of freedom for the spread of ideas because it lacked a social and political structure.

Nuclear War is not intangible.People have endured it and lived to tell the tale. My goal is
to make this as personal as possible, to highlight the value of human life by theoretically
threatening yours. That is really what it comes down to. Making the press of a button, an
executive decision, a command, equivalent to the value of thousands of human lives. This
is what Susan Southard attempted to due when she compiles personal accounts of life
after in the riveting novel Life After Nuclear War. This report includes images of
before during and after a particular persons life associated with the bombing of
Nagasaki. The images in the novel reveal explicit physical damage and emotions
expressed. Not all peoples mentioned were in an explosion but merely from the same
location where the bomb hit. One girl remained unmarried because all her suitors would
leave once the discovered she was from an area that experienced severe radiation. Other
stories explain the long healing process and social adaptations victims had to make in
order to rejoin the working society. Example of this would buying wigs for their bald
heads because of radiation. They have went through an earthly hell that others know
nothing about aside from pictures.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:10 PM

Comment [5]: Jaycie: I really like how
connected you are to your research topic.
The fact that you are wanting to make your
paper personal really sets it apart from
other research papers. Overall good job
choosing a research topic.

Its not surprise that people have begun to see them becoming weapons. A popular TVShow featuring apocolyptic preparation is DoomsDay Preppers on National Geographic.
The content is basically about how some people are stocking up to survive an attack from
anywhere and anything.The construction of bunkers and hoarding of food are all steps in

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:16 PM

Comment [6]: Jaycie: This sentence is a
little bit confusing. I'm not really sure what
you mean by "them becoming weapons". It
would make it easier for the reader to
understand if you connect it more with the
sentence before it, or make it easier to
understand.

preparing. People have already begun to live in fear. But is that really necessary? It is
important to study how these moments in history have been handled previously. While in
the Cold war the USSR and NATO used nuclear weapons often but it was in Earths orbit
to destroy enemy informative satellites. From this we can assume that not all nuclear
weapons are bad. Some are useful on a small scale and that should be taken into
consideration in present times. It is also important to understand exactly who has what on
an international level. The United States is reported to have 7,100 with Russia beating the
US in the gun show at 7,700 warheads. Not all are in active military service. Some are
also to be dismantled due to political pacts. Many countries have decided to not own
nuclear missiles after the horrors of the Cold War. Political tensions and global
monopolies of power are exactly why pacts exist now to prevent a large scale threat.
Humans have an obsession with pushing limits according the author Marcelo Gleisure. In
his article he highlights a 5 events that had the potential to harm life on a global scale just
like in the sci-fi novels. Of those 5 of the 3 were directly related to nuclear explosions or
in some cases implosions. The Trinity test was a nuclear explosion in 1945 that lead to
the bombing of Japan. Another use of nuclear explosions was Starfish Prime an American
series of experiments to explode bombs at specific altitudes to block Soviet radio
communications. Perhaps most shocking of all is the Hadron Collider experiment in 2012
held in Geneva Switzerland. In the process of the experiment small black holes were

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:17 PM

Comment [7]: Jaycie: I think it would be
beneficial to explain which nuclear
weapons you are discussing here. Also
how they are useful whether its on a small
scale or larger scale. You could start with
after this sentence saying "For example:
Satellites can be used for _..."

discovered. Luckily they disappeared almost immediately. Destruction has always been a
human fascination. Fictional novels involving Sci-Fi armageddons have been feature all
through modern history. Now since most have lost their fascination with a more biblical
interpretation naturally a world engulfed in man-made flame is the popular plot. The
actual subject predates Hiroshima and has been a running theme in most Sci-Fi novels
since the 1940s. Now in present day TV-Show a post apocolyptic world has captured
the silver screen.
The 100 is a CW series that explores within the first few episodes a world after
nuclear war destroys the earth. Select countries survived by evacuating to space and
remain in earths orbit. This is what lit the spark for my interest in nuclear war and how i
came to write this paper. The science and lives of the characters in the series did not seem
so futuristic and inspired me to research and problem solve for educating the earth and
avoiding a possible scenario that could be even worse. Now that I have reviewed what
has happened and what is happening i now would like to propose future action in the
form of architecture.
I propose an informative simulator and museum be constructed not only to educate the
public but to hold political weight as well. The public vote on their leaders based on
policy and popularity. Everyone is most concerned about social and economic affairs
because it directly affects them but it is critical to expose them to the affairs of war and
defense. One must never overlook what they allow themselves to be capable of because
their enemies will surely not.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:18 PM

Comment [8]: Yosra: I love your
connection to your major. This
incorporates both your interests-nuclear
war and architecture in an exciting way.
One thing i would recommend is maybe
rewording the sentence so that you do not
state that you "have reviewed what has
happened and what is happening". Instead
you could say something along the lines of
"with that being said, I would like..."

The building must remain ambiguous. It must both ask questions and give answers by
allowing space for political conferences and debates to be held in different secure
areas. Not only must it open its doors to government agents but also to the general
public. The first level will be the simulator with two other levels for lectures and
meetings. The entrance will be tall the light clear and natural and the space open for the
voice to carry an echo. A staircase in the back will lead to a lecture hall and a hallway to
the right to lead to the simulator. Guests will be greeted by a female hologram that will
guide them through the museum. As the hologram progresses through the memorial
section of the entrance room to the simulator her features will alter. She will grow older
and she will grow younger. Her skin will change colors to that of every race, slowly. Her
features will change along with hair and eye color. This woman will represent every
woman in the world. She will report on the lives lost in previous nuclear explosions, give
statistics and present all her information while gesturing to visual aids that progress down
the hall.
After the hologram finishes she will offer a keyboard to those who have questions and
wish to type them into the museums database and select a pre-written question most
similar to their own. She will then repeat the question along with the answer the museum
has selected as appropriate. If there are no questions the hologram will ask a guest to
simply select no from the touch screen pad and progress into the simulator. A short
speech will be given by the hologram warning the guests that what they are about to
experience may not be appropriate for all guests and that children under the age of 15 are
restricted from this area and are invited to wait in the staff attended playground and
lounge.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:18 PM

Comment [9]: Yosra: You are very
descriptive when explaining the structure
of your building. You've incorporated
architectural aspects and specifics that
help the reader picture the building in
his/her head. This is a good tactic to have
the reader focused.

The door will then open on a timer with the holograms progression in her speech, and a
soft light and sounds of nature will meet the guests ears as they enter. All images are
merely projections and the hologram will explain this. A field of grass with a forest in the
distance and a city opposite will be projected 360 degrees to surround the guests in a
pleasant scene. The hologram will give a speech about how this is where she is from and
she must go home now and she thanks them all for coming and slowly walks toward the
city. While she disappears into the distance her image will again encompass that of all
nationalities.
Then the simulations begins. Guests watch as a missile is launched from miles away
seeing its white tail streak the sky as it comes into view as a black form headed straight
for the city their hologram just entered. Shrieks of terror begin as people emerge and
point at the sky. The bomb impacts the earth and the explosion begins. In a matter of 5
short second the guests see a wave of fire crispen the city into chalky frames and it
progress at a violent pace towards them. The entire time a faint whirring is being heard.
The wave hits the guests and the screens transition from orange to red to white in an
instant while warm air is blown around the room. The whirring sound seems to move
farther into the distance. The wind is over and the screen slowly gains color as if its
images are dazed. The room is very dim. The image of the charred city and its melting
occupants is too far to show much detail except general shapes. There is a ringing and
faint screams are heard. All around are projections of gray ash. The screen turns black. A
door opens to the left of the city and the guests exit again hearing the holograms voice far
more robotic no longer seeing her. They walk into a room with a wall covered in
questions.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:19 PM

Comment [10]: Josh: I like the overall
concept of the hologram giving the tour
guide. My one suggestion would be to
explain why she will encompass many
different nationalities. As the reader, I
have a general idea of why she represents
these various nationalities but it would be
nice if it was explained.
J.B

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:20 PM
Comment [11]: Josh: I like the idea of the
stimulation. I recommend that you explain
how you want the visitors to feel while
watching all of this. I understand that you
want them to think about nuclear power
and what it can do, but what about the
emotional aspects?

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:21 PM
Comment [12]: Yosra: I like the way you
involve the reader and guests with the
museum. The experiences and description
do a great job with portraying how a
nuclear attack would feel like. Experiences
like this will help people become more
aware of the intensity of your topic and will
touch people's hearts.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:22 PM
Comment [13]: Josh: This paragraph is
fast paced and each sentence moves from
sequence to sequence. Maybe in a
following paragraph or within this
paragraph, I would recommend for you to
explain why some of these things or
happening. Why and what is the meaning
behind having these things happen during
the guide.

This is a structure that encompasses the critical. It attaches guests to the most
imperative aspect of the building and draws the connection of human life to nuclear war.
Nothing could be more important in any relatively democratic nation than to provide an
opportunity and space to properly educate the public. That is absolutely necessary to have
a successful government and ultimately have a more informed if not more peaceful
world. This structure is to serve the world by showing what we have already done and
raise questions in regards to what we could do in the future. It will be called La
Critique.

Hannah Bowman 11/5/2015 7:23 PM

Comment [14]: Josh: I like this closing
paragraph and it really does sum up your
project. The overall goal of "La Critique" is
explained well and you make good
connections to why it is important for the
the world to be exposed to this
information. You seem to follow your
argument and there aren't any problems
with this conclusion.

Bibliography
"Fact Sheets & Briefs." Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance. June 23, 2014.
Accessed October 17, 2015.
Gleisure, Marcelo. "Five 'Scary' Experiments That Did Not Destroy The World." NPR.
August 26, 2015. Accessed October 16, 2015.
"National Geographic Search." National Geographic. Accessed October 18, 2015.
Johnston, Robert. "The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War." The Effects of a Global
Thermonuclear War. 1985. Accessed October 18, 2015.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/nuclearwar1.html.

Brians, Paul. "Nuclear Holocausts: Atomic War in Fiction." Chapter Four: The LongTerm Effects of Nuclear War. Accessed October 17, 2015.
Shi-Lin Loh, 'Beyond Peace: Pluralizing Japan's Nuclear History,' The Asia-Pacific
Journal, Vol 10, Issue 11, No 6.
Connelly, Sheryl. "'Nagasaki: Life After Nuclear War' Shows Reality of Warfare." NY
Daily News. July 25, 2015. Accessed October 18, 2015.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/herddddd-article-1.2304143.
Hannah Bowman. "Assignment One, The 100" Report, University of North Carolina at
Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, October 13, 2015.