Review | The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes

The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes

Opening this weekend, Chris Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” has a run time of 3 hours, is very light on CGI, and is rated R for sexuality, nudity, and language.*

Released in 1986, Richard Rhodes’ The Making of the Atomic Bomb is 896 pages (or 37 hours on Audible) long, has zero CGI scenes, and, well, is not rated by the MPAA (and I’m not sure why it would be–it’s heavy on theoretical physics and history, not sex, nudity, or profanity).

It’s a no-brainer which one I recommend, even if you just want to get the rest of the story, though it might take you a little longer than a Saturday night at the movies: read The Making of the Atomic Bomb.

Again, it’s a long read. I listened to it (on more than double speed), and it took several weeks and, since I had it from the library, at least one renewal. The Making of the Atomic Bomb is comprehensive, and the book begins well before the actual effort to make the bomb with an overview of the development of the theoretical and nuclear physics that were necessary to conceptualize the splitting of the atom. It is an engaging account of the development of the atomic bomb, culminating in the use of the bomb, twice, against the Japanese during World War II. Rhodes weaves together the scientific, political, and human stories of the Manhattan Project into a narrative history of what was, and is, one of the greatest scientific accomplishments of our history, but also ranks as one of the most controversial and destructive.

Along the way, Rhodes provides fascinating insights into the lives of the scientists and engineers who worked on the project and the political and military leaders who made the decisions about its use. Perhaps one of my favorite parts was the short bios and stories about the great minds that worked on theoretical and nuclear physics, including Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Enrico Fermi, Leo Szilard, Ernest Laurence, and, of course, Robert Oppenheimer.

One of the book’s strengths is Rhodes’s clear and concise writing style. He explains complex scientific concepts in a way that is accessible to the lay reader, without sacrificing accuracy or depth. While it’s been decades since I took high school physics or read Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time and the Universe”, I found his clear and careful descriptions of highly complex concepts fascinating and easy to understand. In a book that is much about politics, war, and philosophy as it is about science, Rhodes managed to make the scientific discovery process of the early 20th century as interesting as the war that brought them together to create the bomb.

Another strength of the book is its balanced and fair-minded approach. Rhodes does not shy away from the ethical dilemmas posed by the development of the atomic bomb, but he also does not judge the people who made the decisions about its use. For example, I was inspired by Bohr, who was as engaged in working for peace as he was in the development of science and who had to escape from under the nose of the Nazis before he fled to America to join the Manhattan Project. Another is, of course, Oppenheimer, a controversial character, and though this book is not about him it surely features him and highlights his personality in a way to show why he was able to bring about the incredible collection of scientists, engineers, and minds to win the race to create a bomb. In contrast to Bohr, I was not inspired by him, but I did find him intriguing.

However, the book is not without its challenges (though perhaps these are features, not flaws). As I mentioned early, it is long and the sheer page number count can seem daunting. I delayed starting it myself for this reason, unsure if I wanted to commit the time to read it. Some might also find the technical details too much, and be bored by the rigor of Rhodes’ descriptions.

Nevertheless, I guarantee you that the read is worth the effort, and I’ll tell you why: “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” is an essential read for anyone who wants to understand not only the history of the atomic bomb but why our world was so transformed as we exited World War II. It became clear to the scientists building the bomb that successful detonation–especially against the enemy–would result in a complete transformation of the world order. No longer would nations go so quickly to war for wars would not be fought alone by combatants. Indeed, the firebombings of German and Japanese cities killed nearly as many people (100,000 died in the firebombing of Tokyo alone compared to 70,000 to 80,000 who were killed in the blast and firestorm at Hiroshima). But instead of fleets of bombers blanketing an area, a single bomb could carry out destruction on a wide scale, minimizing the loss of life for soldiers and maximizing enemy deaths, to say nothing of the radioactivity that would kill even more after the initial blast. And as the sole nation in the world to hold and use the bomb, America emerged as the sole global superpower.

If there was one place I would have welcomed more discussion, it was in the “Where are they now” category. All of the scientists involved in the project were profoundly changed by their involvement in the making of the atomic bomb, but Rhodes draws the book to an end not long after the surrender of Japan (and for good reason–it’s already long enough). But after spending so long with these brilliant minds I found myself curious about where they found themselves in the post-war world.

One last note: as incredible an accomplishment as the bomb was–and it did require an entire nation to make it at the time–there is a heavy feeling to the story. These scientists are not discovering the orbit of the planets or exploring the ocean’s depths, but are splitting the atom, unleashing a force never before seen on Earth, and deliberately plotting to kill and in large numbers all at once. Their cause was not out of a desire for power, or misguided nationalism, but largely to bring peace faster, to bring home American soldiers, and to end the war earlier, as well as to see that war does not happen again too soon. But such was not possible without a demonstration of its power–and the death of tens of thousands, if not more–first.

It is a somber tale, and it is our tale. Are these people any different from us? Would we have acted any differently if we knew what we know now? It is hard to say, but the depth and breadth of Rhodes’s history provide a glimpse into the minds and personalities that had to make those decisions, and the reader can only be better for the knowledge.

*And no, I have not seen Nolan’s Oppenheimer. Everything I’ve written about it is what I’ve read online.

• Amazon