Remake of Hiroshima by John Hersey by Kylee Loyson

Was the atomic bomb really different than all of the bombing raids that had come before in the war?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Yes, the atomic bomb was quite different from the average bombs they experienced before. The atomic bomb was much stronger, could do more damage, and could affect a larger distance of area. The people of Hiroshima knew that something would happen to their town, so they prepared for everything on the assumption that a bomb would hit them. Mr Tanimoto had carried anything portable from his church to a different house that was 2 miles away from the center of the town. They knew what to expect with the bombing raids that had happened before, however, they did not know how to prepare for the atomic bombs.

How does one deal with the stress of imminent danger (as in the beginning of the novel with preparing for devastation...p 2)? What effects does this have in the short term? In the long term?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

The short term effects included people simply not knowing what was going on and how to react. This was a type of bomb that they were not aware of before, and they didn't quite understand the dangers. As explained, many people had a blank expression and were silent because they simply did not know what else they should do. One man saw his wife and he barely even reacted to her presence even though he didn’t know if she was safe or not. He didn't even know how to comprehend this situation let alone worry about his loved ones.

Long term stresses are the fact of how damaged their town was after the bomb. Cleaning up a town after a huge disaster like this, does not happen overnight. It was difficult for the average person to get by after the bombing. Mrs. Nakamura for example was barely getting by years after the war while actively working many jobs. It was difficult for many atomic bomb survivors to get a job because employers thought they would be weak and unreliable

Dr. Fiji didn't seem overall that affected by the bomb at first. Although it of coursed ruined many aspects of his life, he himself never suffered from any sicknesses in a short term route. However, later on he started to change habits such as going out all alone and coming back late at night. Habits that he never had before. However the stresses of everything made him start to lose it.

What is a priest's duties? Are they steadfast in their vocation in this story? Can we fault them?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

A priest's duties to spread the word of God. Considering the circumstances the Japanese people were in during this time, I think the priests stayed very steadfast in their vocations. Although they might have had less time to preach about God, they all did work that resembled their beliefs. For example, Dr. Kleinsorge gave his penicillin to parishioners who were as sick as him. He could have tried helping himself, however, he decided to put others before himself in making sure that get better. They helped as many people as they could on the day of the bombing and many weeks, months, and years later.

What mental toll did the survivors face? Think of the effects of physical illness and the length of it.

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Mentally, the survivors faced many hardships including the mental toll that it took on them. Mentally and physically it was very hard for the Japanese people to keep having encouragement and determination to keep going. The ratio of doctors to injured individuals was already setting many up for failure. Even if people receive minimal help from doctors, recovery time is tortuous and takes a long time. When people see no improvement it is easy to be discouraged with the result of your mental health being affected because of it. For example, one of the doctors was so tired and sick of everything that had happened in Hiroshima that he tried blocking it out. It became too much to have lived through it and to treat people through it. He lost touch with a lot of knowledge on how to treat Hibikusha people that he eventually suffered from Hibikusha treatments, and as a result he didn't know how to treat or care for himself.

Do you think the Japanese regretted the war? Did they regret their allegiance to the emperor?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Although the atomic war was horrific, I do not think that the Japanese regretted the war. The atomic bomb was an eye opening experience for them. Sasaki-son admitted that people should have focused less on the actual bomb and more on why the bomb came. What did Japan do to make this horrible event be triggered. Many people started to realize that perhaps that put too much trust and faith into the emperor, and not enough in themselves and what they believe. I think the Japanese people were able to learn a lot from the war, even if that means a horrible process in the moment. They were happy to have made an improvement in realization.

Page 90: "The crux of the matter is whether total war in its present form is justifiable, even when it serves a just purpose. Does it not have material and spiritual evil as its consequences which far exceed whatever good might result?"

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Total war is an idea that is hard to comprehend whether it should be morally accepted. A German Jesuit priest wrote a report sharing that some Japanese citizens viewed the atomic bomb has a horrible action that should not be allowed. They even compared it in the book to poisonous gas. However he also found that some viewed it as a total war and realized that some things had to be done in order to end a war.

Page 121: "These thoughts led her to an opinion that was unconventional for a hibakusha: that too much attention was paid to the power of the A-bomb, and not enough to the evil of war."

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Sasaki-son believed that yes although the bomb was horrible and wrecked many lives, why are people not looking more at the fact to why this happened to them. Everyone was so focused on the horrific outlook of what their town looked like as a result. However, what happened in their government that made this happen. Has their beloved leader let them down? Are the Japanese people as a whole having too much hope in their government to the point that they are starting to lack a sense of critical thinking?

Was the bomb a war crime that America should have been accountable for?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

I think that the atomic bomb made a horrible impact and devastation on the Japanese people. The outcome of the bomb showed America the horrible thing they did. I think technically America should have been held more accountable. Americans completely ruined the lives of the Japanese people, and their consequences for their actions were little to nothing. However, although America wasn’t technically held accountable, they still understood what they had done, and knew it was important to help Japan in being rebuilt. Therefore, yes it should have been a war crime due to how severe it really impacted the Japanese people. The hibakusha's were treated differently and viewed differently. Although Mr. Tanimoto was lucky, the average age a hibakusha would live was 62. This bomb affected the hibakusha in every possible aspect in life. Even including their lifespan. The bomb did more than scare the Japanese people, it ruined them. I think America should have been held more accountable.

Describe the Japanese people after having read the book. Contrast those descriptive words with how we usually imagine the Japanese in the WWII time period.

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

After reading this book my initial thought on the Japanese people is that they are simply regular human beings. It’s very easy to judge or look down on people that we have many indifference's with, however they are still people. I have sorrow for these people as clearly during the time the atomic bomb was dropped, we were not thinking of these humans as humans who will also drastically suffer from such a horrible bomb. We only had one view of them from WWII and that was not highly thought of. In the book it described to us how Mrs. Nakamura really suffered during this time period. She did anything she possibly could to earn enough money to afford food so she did not starve to death. Understanding the challenge that she faced every single day made me have a great deal of sympathy for the Japanese people.

Compare and contrast the A-bomb with Pearl Harbor and 9/11.

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

All three events were horrible circumstances that ruined many aspects of life as well as caused many fatalities. They are all similar because the way that all events happened was simply horrible. The circumstances changed many ways that people view and consider life. The atomic bomb and pearl harbor were similar because they were both in the time period. Americans designed the atomic bomb because of how horrible they felt the conditions at pearl harbor were. In all three situations people were forced to come together in times of uncertainty. In the book Mr. Tanimoto paddled for hours picking people up and bringing them upstream in an attempt to save them. This act of helping shows that people felt that the only thing they could try and do was help people. Similarly, in 911, people ran right into fire in hope to save as many people that they could. It makes more of a sense of unity when in times of doubt.

What did knowing the fate of the survivors in "Aftermath" do for you in terms of impact?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Having a little bit of background knowledge helped me step into their shoes in hopes of understanding their point of view better. We all already knew that the atomic bomb greatly affected the Japanese people, however, we have not heard much of their side of the story. It was interesting because each character had the bomb affect them in different ways. However, it was inspiring because we already knew they survived through it. Due to the fact that I already knew the aftermath, I feel as though I was able to appreciate everyone that attempted to safe people. For example, Father Kleinsorge was ready to help people immediately after the bombing. He implied that it was incredible in a way that everyone came together to help while not being concerned that they may have different backgrounds. It was very impactful to see people putting their differences aside in times of need.

Could the world agree on things that are "off limits" during a war? Should we? Make a list - where do you stop? What qualifies as an "atrocity"?

kyleeloyson — 2024-08-26 18:39:27 UTC

Although I think it would be a great idea to make a list of ideas or actions that should not be used during a war, I do think it would be extremely difficult to agree. However, that does not mean we shouldn’t take that as a challenge and start making a change. I think a general rule is, that if something is used towards our enemies, it should not break the simple line of humanity. We must remember that no matter who our enemies are, they are still human beings. Something like the atomic bomb went way past that line because the conditions were simply inhumanely. However, I do not think all counties will ever agree on what is considered inhumane and what is fair game. I think that if there is an event that negatively affects an individual's whole life, then it most definitely qualifies as an atrocity. For example, Mr. Tanimoto was actively involved in his city before the bomb. However, due to his radiation sickness that he got as a result, he slowly became weak and loses energy. He dedicated his whole life trying to rebuild his country and help his people, when eventually he physically cannot.