The Real Environmental History of the King of Monsters

Godzilla wields one of the elemental powers of the universe - fission radiation.  Godzilla’s unique biology must be understood in context of real physics in order to explain why he is so important to our understanding of global fear and anxiety about nuclear war, and humanities problematic relationship with the natural world. 

Long Live The King!

In order to clarify, comparisons will be made directly with the atomic bomb used to destroy the Japanese city of Hiroshima in 1945.  This is useful because if compared to modern 21st century nuclear weapons it was a relatively small and delicate device.  Therefore, the following comparison model is as also as small as possible.   The explosive yield of the Hiroshima device was approximately 15 kilotons.  A kiloton is equal to 1,000 tons of TNT. 

TNT is a non-nuclear, conventional chemical explosive.  Ionizing radiation released by the device expanded away from the core of the Hiroshima device at nearly the speed of light.  15% of the energy released was radiation in different isotopes, and strengths.  Roughly 50% of the energy created by the device was blast energy directed against the surface of the earth, and bouncing between features on the ground like waves in a pond.  the remaining 35% of energy created in the explosion was thermal energy.  In a nuclear explosion the thermal energy reaches temperatures you can only find inside stars - 180,000,032 degrees Fahrenheit.  The temperature of the Chernobyl core during melt down reached 4,700 degrees Fahrenheit and was still enough to lift the roof off the building and project radiological material into the atmosphere.  It is important to remember that the sun is 92.036 million miles from Earth, and yet it can still give you a burn in 10 to 15 minutes.  Technically a sun burn is a radiation burn.

A "small" atomic explosion 9 seconds after detonation.

Godzilla uses the energy of fissile radiation as a personal weapon.  For argument’s sake let's say that Godzilla can only muster 1/2 of the energy of the Hiroshima bomb - a weak specimen of nuclear weapon.  That would mean the concussive power of his nuclear blast would still equal 500 tons of TNT (500 tons of TNT is equal to 1,000,000 pounds of TNT.)  500 tons of TNT may not sound like a great amount, but it would still produce an explosion that would be difficult to conceptualize. According to the FEMA Reference Manual to Mitigate Potential Terrorist Attacks Against Buildings an explosion of 100,000 pounds of TNT will cause total destruction of most buildings - including reinforced concrete structures - at 500 to 1,000 feet from the explosion.  The FEMA figures do not go higher than 100,000 pounds because it is inconceivable to think a scumbag terrorist could deliver 1,000,000 pounds of TNT in a truck.  Think of it like this: that terrorist's truck bomb would irreparably damage or outright obliterate a reinforced concrete building 1/5 of a mile from the epicenter of its explosion.  Obviously, bone, tissue, and anything organic fractures,

Melted nuclear fuel pooled in Chernobyl basement.

The next, and more important factor is the thermal energy released in Godzilla's nuclear blast.  Let's say that Godzilla can only muster 1/1000 of the thermal energy of the Hiroshima bomb.  That would mean that thermal energy in the blast would reach temperatures of 180,000.32 degrees Fahrenheit, or more than 1,000 times hotter than the surface of the sun.  Man-made materials cannot withstand these temperatures.  Steel melts at 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit.  Concrete melts at 1550 degrees Fahrenheit.  When the Chernobyl reactor melted down the steel casing, and control rods of the reactor melted right through the protective concrete basin beneath the unit and dribbled like toothpaste into the basement.  In Hawaii, magma coming out of Kilauea averages 2,200 degrees Fahrenheit.  If you were to jump into such a volcano from the rim, the radiant heat would burn you to death before you hit the magma at the bottom.  According to the American Burn Association, 3rd degree burns happen in 1 second at 155 degrees Fahrenheit.  above 155 degrees 4th degree burns kill.  The thermal energy of the Hiroshima bomb killed 100% of unshielded people within 13,123 feet of the explosion.

Humans have trouble relating to animals directly.  This is a function of the historical effect of a Judeo-Christian religious system, biological distinctiveness, and our psychological need to protect our assumed position in the universe.  The irony is that we still hold tight to images and characters that reference the savage complexes buried inside each of us.  We can easily accept an ape as a heroic, or noble character, where another animal would seem bizarre.  A giant radioactive lizard has found its place in this complicated human dialogue.  It's easy to get behind Godzilla when he is kicking the hell out of an alien, or some kind of alien-controlled killer robot.  If we are all honest, most of us laughed right out loud watching Godzilla defeat Ebirah.  Check out the picture.  Yes, that is a real Kaiju.  And nobody lost their jobs, or was sentenced to hard labor for creating it either! 

Ebirah begging Godzilla to end his misery.

Destroying ridiculous monsters is no problem at all.  Unfortunately, here is where it also gets a little uncomfortable - US audiences generally don't seem to have much of a problem when Godzilla is assaulting the Japanese either.  Godzilla is the result of a society that was the target of a nuclear attack.  Just imagine for a second the obvious psychological implications of a Japanese person generating Godzilla as a villain for consumption by movie audiences.  Godzilla for the Japanese clearly started as a horror story designed to confront lurking nuclear fears by a people that actually have experience which such things.  The alarming irony is how popular Godzilla became in the United States.  US audiences obviously did not get the point.  US distributors dumped brief vignettes of well known (and cheap) American actors into their dubbed export versions so Americans would actually go see the movies.  The actual term for this is "Americanization."  In the translation, the horror aspect of the earlier movies is watered down, and eventually lost.  You have to consider the early Godzilla films in historical context to see what evolved in the pop culture of giant monster movies and why it is significant to how we understand how the world processed the anxiety and fear of the Cold War.

US Marines boiling Japanese skulls in the Pacific.

The residual military racism from World War II rears its ugly head with the ravenous consumption of Godzilla movies in the US.  Wholesale destruction of people, and cities seems normal, or reasonable to an audience that just fire-bombed Japan into the stone age.  They must be guilty and deserved it - they are Japanese, and the Japanese are sneaky and uncivilized.  For most, the hilarity and glee at seeing Japanese people roasted alive and crushed under the feet of a giant lizard is not a conscious default of character.  It is however, the understandable offspring of a recent war of extermination, especially one with such lopsided results.  Japan and the United States found themselves locked in a war of extermination in the Pacific theater.  Excesses were the normal for both sides.  US Marines routinely turned Japanese bodies, and body parts into objects of dark humor and crude entertainment.  Conversely, the unreal cruelty and barbarity of the Japanese Army in the field is legendary.  There was no way for Japan to conceal from its citizens, or anyone on earth after the 9th of August 1945 that they were in an utterly unsustainable war with an enemy possessed of weapons that could literally exterminate them as a people.  Global peril only sharply increased.  Simple atomic weapons like the one dropped on Japan in 1945 were bad enough, but by 1954 the United States had devised the hydrogen bomb.  Russia followed immediately with a hydrogen bomb in 1955.  It's no mystery that Japan created Godzilla that same year

Global nuclear destruction.

The self-titled Japanese version, Godzilla was released in 1954.  Raymond Burr, playing reporter Steve Martin (no relation) was inserted into the 1956 American version (titled Godzilla: King of the Monsters) of the first film.  His monologues are clearly not describing a giant lizard to his radio listeners.  He is saying nuclear weapons, without using the words and thus giving life to an expression of the tension and fear growing in the early Cold War.  The opening line of the American version reads like a warning:  

"This is Tokyo. Once a city of six million people. What has happened here was caused by a force which up until a few days ago was entirely beyond the scope of Man's imagination. Tokyo, a smoldering memorial to the unknown, an unknown which at this very moment still prevails and could at any time lash out with its terrible destruction anywhere else in the world." [...] "For the living the horror of last night was over. The only thought left was the paralyzing fear that it could happen today or tomorrow." (emphasis mine.)

The oxygen destroyer.

Every single person hearing that bit of dialogue in 1956 would instantly recognize the implications - instant death delivered anywhere on the planet.  Unsettling to the extreme.  Godzilla is ultimately defeated in 1954 through the use of a weapon even more terrible than the ones that gave rise to the monster.  The "oxygen-destroyer" is designed to assault mother nature herself.  Its destruction is so extreme, and so final that its creator, Dr. Serizawa, must be destroyed along with the prototype.  This suggests that there is no limit to the suicidal self-destructive inventiveness of mankind.  These weapons will end up destroying us all.

An apparently very, very well-fed Burr was Americanized again for the film Godzilla 1985 (The Return of Godzilla in the U.S.)  By the time this film was released, Godzilla had 29 years of global mayhem to his credit.  The Cold War itself is a character in Godzilla 1985, and the utter futility of nuclear weapons is demonstrated in explicit detail.  Fear and anxiety about the health and continuity of the natural world was well on its way to surpassing mutually assured destruction by 1985.  No one knew it at the time, but the mighty Soviet Union itself would be dead within 7 years.  Certainly, runaway militarization and nuclear proliferation were part of the 80s discussion about the danger mankind posed to the natural world, but the focus of the dialog was already undergoing a clear change thanks to the likes of Rachel Carson, David Brower, Benton MacKaye, Love Canal, Greenpeace, the EPA (via Richard Nixon,) and all manner of related legislation.  Speaking in 1985, Steve Martin (no relation) explicitly compared Godzilla with environmental concerns while downplaying the earlier fixation with nuclear fire, and death:

“Godzilla's like a hurricane or a tidal wave. We must approach him as we would a force of nature. We must understand him. Deal with him. Perhaps, even, try to communicate with him.” Martin goes on: “Nature has a way of sometimes reminding Man of just how small he is.  She occasionally throws up the terrible offsprings of our pride and carelessness to remind us of how puny we really are in the face of a tornado, and earthquake, or a Godzilla.  The reckless ambitions of man are often dwarfed by their dangerous consequences.” (emphasis mine.)

The following year at Prypiat in Ukraine the Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor Plant visibly punctuated Martin’s argument.  There is a reason that Godzilla is a giant unstoppable monster spewing radiation.  How else do you safely conceptualize the fears and very real horrors of nuclear war.  How else do you safely conceptualize the fears and very real horrors mankind has inflicted on the natural world?  The old lizard does an excellent job capturing the sheer scale of the whole mess.  Godzilla is the perfect product of our collective experience of the dawning of the atomic era - for better or for worse.  V1.N5

Coming soon: King Kong Nazi Stooge?

Amazons And The Fight For History And Memory

Initially, I was working on research for a post about how Wonder Woman plays into the historical narrative of the First World War.  When I saw the film, I was instantly reminded of the works of historian Jay Winter and the things that he suggested about how we produce memory and history.  Winter argued that there exists a multi-tiered system to remembering the First World War that changes with the historical distance from the subject.  Essentially modern treatments of the First World War are “public history,” the products of film and museum, “outside the academy.”  The historical realities of events are no longer predictors of the memory of the event.  The danger here is that historical reality may become the servant of memory, either how we choose to remember an event, or how we want to remember an event. 

The most savage example of the contemporary fight between history and memory, at least in terms of the United States, is the Vietnam War.  Take Ken Burns’ recent 17 ¼ hour documentary titled The Vietnam War.  By hour 16 the viewer feels like they are relentlessly picking a vast and horrible emotional scab.  I met Ken Burns once.  One of my fellow graduate students challenged him on his academic qualification to produce history outside of the academy, and if it would be better to leave history to academic historians.  Without missing a beat, he responded that his work will reach millions of people where an academic historian will only reach a dense specialty – maybe, ten or twenty people.  Burns is not completely wrong and I have remained transfixed by the idea of history as a public possession and how we create memory as a product of history from that moment on.

Wonder Woman was created as the character that we all know and love in 1941, right at the precipice of American entry into the Second World War.  She was the first female super hero to have her own comic book and straight from the beginning she meant serious business.  One of her earliest fights was with a monstrous incarnation of Mussolini, Hitler, and Tojo.  Many of the ideas present in Wonder Woman’s early “Fight for Womanhood” appear directly in the movie.  When Trevor’s secretary tells Diana that her job requires her to “go where he tells me to go, and do what he tells me to do.”  Diana, responds “Where I’m from that is called slavery.”  This entire idea is lifted straight from a single panel in the “Fight for Womanhood” storyline published in the 1943.  Historically speaking, Wonder Woman is the intellectual offspring of 1900s suffrage, and Rosie the Riveter.

It is therefore ironic that Wonder Woman would first appear in the First World War, fighting Imperial German troops.  As I watched the savage beating those Germans were taking it dawned on me that this artistic choice was telling us more about the present than secretary slavery in the 1940s.  Think about where Diana confronts the Germans – she is standing in No Man’s Land.  No Man’s land was the thin strip of land between the trenches of the Allies, and the Central Powers.  The very name of the place is a play on words because the action of crossing fields of machine gun fire, and overhead artillery meant no man could physically exist there without being killed.  

Typically, I would decry the throw away German soldier/boogey man as the worst kind of intellectual low hanging fruit.  This is clearly a time saving device for film makers.  We don't have to spend effort demonstrating that they are the bad guys - why? - because they are Germans - oh, obviously.  It's exasperating.  Would Indian Jones, or Hellboy not be as heroic and entertaining if they were killing someone that isn't German?  Who knows.  In this instance I think we should forgive the film maker taking the easy way out.  World War II was a conflict of motion where armies swarmed over conquered areas two, three, or more times.  No Man's Land was part of the lexicon by the 1940s, but, it certainly didn't exist in any literal sense in the hideously stagnant and immobile way it did during World War I.  Having a woman break through No Man's Land is clever and worthy.  

What does this have to do with history, and memory?  Plenty, just not about World War I.  This entire episode with Diana in the trenches tells us more about contemporary ideas about women and their interaction with society.  Released in 2017, Wonder Woman followed closely the forceful arrival of the Me Too Movement.  The actual phrase dates to 2006 (the woman that coined the phrase is black - so naturally, nobody cared - until Italian model, and Miss Italy finalist began using it in 2015, but, that's a different argument.)  Through 2015, 2016, the Me Too Movement rightly picked up speed, volume, and attention as more and more women revealed the idiotic and criminal things that men in places of social, political, and financial power had done to them.  By 2017 there is simply no better place for Diana to assert her martial and moral superiority than fighting the massive industrialized inhuman war machine of imperial Germany.  Not only are the men surrounding her rightly and reasonably afraid, but, only move forward after Diana squashes the Germans like so many bugs.  Perception, history and memory bleed together in this special space creating a statement informed by the particulars of the present using the foil of the hyper masculine industrialized past.

 

No surprise some nations reacted so violently to the 2017 Wonder Woman film.  Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon, and Qatar all banned the film.  Jordan attempted to ban it, but just gave up.  Don't forget that Ms. Gadot is Israeli, and was also a member of the storied Israeli Defense Force.  For the Jew-hating scum in these backwards corners of the world it is no doubt a Woman (and Israeli!) stomping hell out of Germans was simply too much for their misogynistic brains to handle.  The folks over at Lebanon's "Campaign to Boycott Supporters of Israel" must have had some kind of stroke because in a clear episode of masochism and intellectual self-harm they failed to have Ms. Gadot's film Fast & Furious banned also.  Oops!  You can draw your own conclusion about why there would be a difference in perception between sexy Gadot in the car movie, and Amazon Gadot in the Woman movie.  I'll wait.  VI.N4

More Research Surfaced...

Special Supplement to "Velociraptor's 1980's Roots" (White Rabbit Object Volume 1: Number2.)

I found an interview with Jurassic Park’s author Michael Crichton where it records that Crichton had written an original screen play about a genetically engineered dinosaur in 1981.  He held the screenplay back from publication because: “At the time there was a great dinosaur mania in this country” […] “I didn’t particularly want that association, so I decided to wait.”  The problem was that the dinosaur fervor never stopped.  This was Crichton experiencing the 1980s Dinosaur Renaissance as an outsider.  Crichton told the interviewer that in 1989, because of the imminent birth of his daughter he returned to the genetically engineered dinosaur idea and after several rewrites delivered the final manuscript to Knopf in May of 1990.

Everything revealed in this interview with Michael Crichton dovetails perfectly with the claims I have already made about the intellectual time line of dinosaurs in White Rabbit Object Volume 1: Number 2.  Crichton was working on Jurassic Park in 1989, and 1990 shortly after the publication of some of the foundational texts of the Dinosaur Renaissance in 1986, and 1988.  The dinosaurs of Jurassic Park are products of this revolution in dinosaur evolution.     

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Ruffles Some Feathers (Part 2)

Complaints about Jurassic Park’s scientific accuracy proceed from a couple of false assumptions.  The first, and by far the most important issue for this discussion is scientific accuracy was never the avowed goal of Ingen, Masrani, Lockwood’s flunky or anyone else involved with the physical creation of these animals.  The other assumption deals with the dollar value attached to these animals.  John Hammond tells us they: “spared no expense,” but, this is clearly not the case. 

All the way back in the dark ages of the early 1990s when the novel Jurassic Park was released the text pointed out that the characters had a clear understanding of the “nature” of their creations even if they did not have control over them.  The chapter titled Version 4.4 records a lengthy philosophical discussion between Dr. Henry Wu, and John Hammond.  Dr. Wu argues that people do not want real dinosaurs, they “want to see their expectation.”  He goes on to point out that “[Jurassic] Park is entertainment” and “entertainment has nothing to do with reality.”  When Hammond protests that changing the dinosaur would make them less real, Wu responds “They’re not real now […] there isn’t any reality here.”  The take away point here is that even before the creation of the Jurassic films the franchise was predicated on the knowledge that the dinosaurs did not reflect reality.  

Like the steady drum beat of the Roman legions this concept is reinforced ad nauseum in each Jurassic film, right down to Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.  The degenerate CEO of InGen insinuates the artificial construct of the dinosaurs in The Lost World saying: “an extinct animal brought back to lie has no rights.  It exists because we made it.  We patented it.  We own it.”  In the following film in 2001, an exasperated Dr. Alan Grant explained: “What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park [was] create genetically engineered theme park monster, nothing more, and nothing less.  When Dr. Wu is confronted by Simon Masrani in 2015’s Jurassic World he defends himself saying: “Bigger, scarier, cooler, [are] the word[s] that you used in your memo. You cannot have an animal with exaggerated predator features without the corresponding behavioral traits. […] You are acting like we're engaged in some kind of mad science, but we are doing what we have done from the beginning. Nothing in Jurassic World is natural. We have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals and, if their genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different, but you didn't ask for reality. You asked for more teeth.”  The take away point here is that explicitly, since the beginning, the dinosaurs were never meant to be real in the paleontological science sense of the term.

So, what does this tell us about the great feather schism?  Sticking feathers in your butt does not make you a chicken.  Yet, some folks will still need explaining.  If you view the Jurassic Park dinosaurs in the historical context of cloning it is very easy to understand why the animals we know to have feathers do not appear with feathers in the films.  Quite a few very smart people have worked on the science of cloning.  Beginning in the 1920s and 1930s German scientists experimenting with genetics set the bedrock for what would evolve into modern cloning research.  Frogs were cloned in 1952, carp in 1963, and a mouse in 1986.  By far the most famous clone, Dolly the sheep, was created in 1997.  

The scientists that created Dolly have stated that it took 277 attempts to achieve success.  What the geneticists have steadfastly refused to release is the total dollar value of the effort to clone Dolly.  The best guess from other British scientists put the total at or near £500,000.  Converting currency that comes to $659,630.50 to clone one sheep.  If you do a little bit of math you can see the financial forces at work in cloning.  If an average sheep weighs 180 pounds and costs $659,630 and some change how much would a full-size dinosaur run?  An adult Tyrannosaurus weighed 9 tons, or 180,000 pounds, 100x larger than Dolly the sheep.  Per pound, that makes a Tyrannosaurus $65,963,050 before shipping. 

The great feather schism is really centered on the Velociraptor though.  If you read Velociraptor’s 1980’s Roots then you know that the film Velociraptor is actually built to the dimensions of Deinonychus, about 200 pounds each.  Therefore, each of the film Velociraptors cost somewhere around $733,000 each.  Clones of sheep, cows, cats, dogs have all been created since 1997, but, the limiting factor has been, and will continue to be the cost of production.  It is true the price per unit of everything drops in relation to the scale of production.  But, unless you are talking about producing millions, or even tens of thousands of Velociraptors reduced unit cost is not going to help you.

We know that irrefutable fossil evidence found in 1996 proves that non-avian dinosaurs like Velociraptor had feathers.  The problem for our beloved Jurassic Park franchise is that the initial Velociraptors were created prior to this.  None of the original three Velociraptors survived the Isla Nublar Incident in 1993.  The Velociraptors in The Lost World, and Jurassic Park III were created concurrently with the nine animals that were transported to Isla Nublar before the failure of the first park.  There is a commonality of genetic material among the Isla Sorna, and Nublar Velociraptors.  Therefore, even though we discover non-avian feathered dinosaurs before the second and third film, the animals in those films are already alive, or direct genetic descendants of animals that were already alive.  It is very unlikely that anyone on the board at InGen, or Masrani would say “go out there and shoot those $733,000 Velociraptors so we can make some new ones with feathers.”  A constant shown in the films is the concern that InGen has about preserving their financial investment – the bottom line.  Lest we forget, that is why Drs. Alan Grant, Ellie Sattler, and Ian Malcolm travel to Jurassic Park in the first place. 

Waste Not, Want Not.

The above facts and timeline even explain the lack of feathers on the four Velociraptors living in Jurassic World ca. 2015.  Remember that the obnoxious little boy traps a Velociraptor in the walk-in freezer during the 1993 Incident.  After the fall of the first park, Dr. Wu is still employed by InGen.  Dr. Wu is also, not an idiot.  He is not going to reinvent the wheel of dinosaur DNA when he has a full grown adult Velociraptor on ice in the Visitor Center Kitchen.  Waste not, want not.  In both Jurassic World, and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we see scenes of Dr. Wu, and other nefarious InGen goblins grabbing DNA samples as they flee like Hood leaving Atlanta. 

Therefore, the Velociraptors, and by extension all the other dinosaurs in Jurassic Park from 1993 to 2018 have clear and logical explanations for their lack of feathers.  When Dr. Wu creates something “new,” or is hired by the AMNH, or Smithsonian then we can revisit the dinosaurs sans feathers argument.  Naked dinosaurs are just fine if the franchise is working from the 1993 DNA, and the descendants of the original animals.  Who knows what will happen now that the dinosaurs are with us on the mainland.  Part 2 V1.N3 

Next episode: Wonder Woman, and History.