PD Smith

Filthy London

02 January 2015 | cities, London, Reviewing

I’ve just been wal­low­ing in the his­to­ry of filthy Lon­don, cour­tesy of Lee Jack­son’s excel­lent new book, Dirty Old Lon­don: The Vic­to­ri­an Fight Against Filth. It’s a won­der­ful trawl through the his­to­ry of Lon­don’s sew­ers, ceme­ter­ies, and street clean­ers. Did you know that by the 1890s, Lon­don need­ed some 300,000 hors­es to keep it mov­ing and that 1,000 tons of dung were deposit­ed each day on the city’s streets? No won­der its streets were dirty!

Any­way, here’s the first para­graph of my review:

“I have seen the great­est won­der which the world can show to the aston­ished spir­it.” So said the Ger­man poet Hein­rich Heine in 1827, and the won­der he referred to was Lon­don. In the course of the 19th cen­tu­ry, London’s pop­u­la­tion soared from one mil­lion to six mil­lion. This boom­ing cen­tre of com­merce and indus­try was at “the heart of the great­est empire ever known”, but, as Lee Jack­son adds, Lon­don “was also infa­mous­ly filthy”. The Chi­nese ambas­sador turned his nose up at this most dynam­ic city, com­plain­ing it was “too dirty”. He had a point, for this was a place whose infra­struc­ture had scarce­ly changed in cen­turies. Cesspools were over­flow­ing, the ceme­ter­ies were burst­ing with stink­ing corpses, the streets were coat­ed with nox­ious black mud, rot­ting rub­bish clogged its alleys, and its cit­i­zens lived in over­crowd­ed, decrepit build­ings, breath­ing air that was heav­i­ly pol­lut­ed with soot and sul­phurous fumes. This was the filthy real­i­ty of Lon­don for most of its inhab­i­tants.

You can read the rest of my review over on the Guardian’s web­site. Or you could even buy the paper tomor­row.

By the way: Hap­py New Year!

The Plutonium Collector

29 December 2014 | Atomic Age, atomic bomb, Doomsday Men, Los Alamos, nuclear weapons, plutonium, Sanford Simons | 2 comments

Dur­ing the hol­i­days I noticed that San­ford Lawrence Simons had died of can­cer aged 92 in Lit­tle­ton, Col­orado. In 1950 he became known to the press as the “plu­to­ni­um col­lec­tor” after he was arrest­ed by the FBI for steal­ing a sam­ple of the dead­ly new radioac­tive ele­ment from Los Alam­os. Simons had been part of the Man­hat­tan Project dur­ing the war. But in 1946, he had removed a glass vial from the weapons lab­o­ra­to­ry. It con­tained a small amount of the ele­ment that had been at the heart of the Nagasa­ki atom­ic bomb.

In 1950, a few months after Leo Szi­lard had explained to the Amer­i­can peo­ple on nation­al radio how a nuclear dooms­day device could be cre­at­ed, FBI offi­cers raid­ed Simons’ home on the out­skirts of Den­ver and, after a brief search, dis­cov­ered the stolen plu­to­ni­um hid­den beneath the house. In the draw­er of a dress­er, the FBI men also found sev­er­al pieces of ura­ni­um.

That day the 28-year-old research sci­en­tist was led away in hand­cuffs. After­wards his daugh­ter remem­bers him jok­ing about the arrest. But at the time it was no laugh­ing mat­ter. I described what hap­pened and the media reac­tion to it in my book Dooms­day Men.

DM US cover

Simons, who had trained as a met­al­lur­gi­cal engi­neer, read­i­ly admit­ted tak­ing the radioac­tive mate­r­i­al, but he claimed it was just a “sou­venir” of his time at Los Alam­os, which he left in July 1946. Flanked by two impas­sive FBI men wear­ing Humphrey Bog­a­rt fedo­ras, Simons talked freely with jour­nal­ists after he’d been com­mit­ted for tri­al. Unshaven and hand­cuffed, though still clutch­ing his pipe, Simons seemed remark­ably unfazed by his predica­ment. Under the Atom­ic Ener­gy Act he faced a pos­si­ble max­i­mum sen­tence of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Just a few weeks ear­li­er, the FBI had arrest­ed Ethel and Julius Rosen­berg in New York on sus­pi­cion of atom­ic espi­onage. They were both con­vict­ed the fol­low­ing year and, despite inter­na­tion­al pleas for clemen­cy includ­ing from Ein­stein, the cou­ple were sub­se­quent­ly exe­cut­ed in the elec­tric chair.

“Why did I take it?”, said Simons sheep­ish­ly, in answer to reporters’ ques­tions. “Well, it seems pret­ty sil­ly now, but I’ve always col­lect­ed min­er­al sam­ples. I real­ized almost instant­ly that I didn’t want it, but it was like hav­ing a bull by the tail. I couldn’t let go!”

One of the press men asked how he man­aged to smug­gle the plu­to­ni­um out of the top-secret mil­i­tary research lab­o­ra­to­ry.

Simons grinned: “I just walked out with it.”

He explained that the plu­to­ni­um sam­ple had been lying around on his desk for some time. No one had asked for it back and even­tu­al­ly he sim­ply couldn’t resist it.

“There was no real check-up on what was tak­en out of the place at that time,” he added with a shrug.

You wouldn’t have guessed it from what Simons said, but in the 1940s fis­sile ele­ments such as plu­to­ni­um were more pre­cious than gold to the atom­ic bomb project. They were the result of a vast expen­di­ture of mon­ey and effort. Whole cities of work­ers laboured to pro­duce these lethal ele­ments in vast indus­tri­al com­plex­es spe­cial­ly built for the Man­hat­tan Project. Each gram was the prod­uct of thou­sands of man hours. It was not unusu­al to see sci­en­tists down on their hands and knees, sweep­ing the floor with Geiger coun­ters, hunt­ing for the small­est stray piece of met­al that might have been dropped.

Atomic Age Opens, 1945

Some­times the Geiger counter would crack­le furi­ous­ly as it passed over a tiny orange or black speck on someone’s lab coat, reveal­ing the tell-tale signs of dan­ger­ous radioac­tiv­i­ty. Even the small­est scrap of fis­sion­able mat­ter was extreme­ly valu­able and as a result lab coats were treat­ed rou­tine­ly with chem­i­cals to reclaim these ele­ments. The jour­nal­ists pressed the FBI agents who arrest­ed Simons as to how much the plu­to­ni­um in the vial was worth. Even­tu­al­ly one said he’d heard fig­ures rang­ing from $500 to $200,000.

San­ford Simons hid the stolen plu­to­ni­um under his house. He had good rea­son to. Plu­to­ni­um has been called the most dan­ger­ous ele­ment on earth. With three small chil­dren, Simons want­ed it out of reach. The glass vial and its dead­ly con­tents remained in its hid­ing place for four years. The FBI only became aware of it after they were tipped off. Simons had let slip in con­ver­sa­tion with a friend that he had some plu­to­ni­um. Per­haps his sense of guilt led Simons to make an unwise com­ment. Or maybe, just once, this mod­est sci­en­tist was tempt­ed into an idle boast. But in the year that Sen­a­tor Joe McCarthy was stok­ing fears about a Com­mu­nist fifth col­umn infil­trat­ing Amer­i­can soci­ety, to admit that you had a key ingre­di­ent for an atom­ic bomb stashed in your home was sim­ply ask­ing for trou­ble.

Wylie, Smuggled Atom Bomb, 1951 edn

Out­side the court­room, a reporter put it to Agent Rus­sell Kramer that tak­ing plu­to­ni­um as a “sou­venir” was a rather corny excuse. The FBI man nod­ded and said, with­out a trace of humour, “He’s a pret­ty corny guy.”

Dur­ing his tri­al, the defence point­ed out that Simons had nev­er been in trou­ble with the police. More impor­tant­ly, he was not a “Red” and had no “Com­mu­nist con­nec­tions.” The defence attor­ney based his case on the pop­u­lar image of the sci­en­tist. He argued, some­what uncon­vinc­ing­ly, that sci­en­tists are “all darned fools” when it came to exper­i­ments. He claimed that sci­en­tif­ic curios­i­ty alone had prompt­ed Simons to take the plu­to­ni­um and ura­ni­um in 1946. It was a case of the irre­sistible allure of for­bid­den knowl­edge, your Hon­our, and, as every­one knew, no sci­en­tist worth his slide-rule could resist that.

But Judge Lee Knous was not par­tic­u­lar­ly impressed by this defence. For tak­ing a pinch of plu­to­ni­um, the dis­graced sci­en­tist was sen­tenced to 18 months in a Fed­er­al prison.

When I was writ­ing Dooms­day Men, the sto­ry of the Plu­to­ni­um Col­lec­tor and the media’s inter­est in it struck me as a won­der­ful exam­ple of the pub­lic fas­ci­na­tion with both sci­en­tists and the new atom­ic forces which they had unleashed. For some rea­son, since writ­ing the book I’ve often thought about Simons and his dan­ger­ous desire for the new ele­ments. At the time I didn’t explore what hap­pened to him after his imprisonment. For­tu­nate­ly, it turns out that his brief spell behind bars didn’t blight his career. Accord­ing to his obit­u­ary, Simons became an inven­tor, run­ning his own bio­med­ical instru­ments com­pa­ny in Col­orado. In that same piece, jour­nal­ist Ann Imse says he was “known for his intel­li­gence, imp­ish per­son­al­i­ty, pet fer­ret and, in his lat­er years, ter­ri­fy­ing­ly wild dri­ving on moun­tain roads.”

But I bet he nev­er for­got the time when he first picked up that valu­able though dead­ly sam­ple of plu­to­ni­um and realised that he could sim­ply pock­et it and walk out of the top-secret Los Alam­os lab­o­ra­to­ry. It’s not sur­pris­ing that Simons wasn’t the only Los Alam­os sci­en­tist who longed to own a sou­venir of the Man­hat­tan Project. Otto Frisch, whose cal­cu­la­tions of crit­i­cal mass were cru­cial in the ear­ly stages of the atom­ic bomb project, shared Simons’ dan­ger­ous fas­ci­na­tion with the new atom­ic ele­ments. When the sil­very blocks of high­ly fis­sion­able ura­ni­um-235 were first deliv­ered to Los Alam­os in April 1945, Frisch felt an over­whelm­ing “urge to take one”. They were the first sam­ples ever made of ura­ni­um-235 met­al, the ele­ment that would blast the heart out of Hiroshi­ma. Strange­ly, Frisch thought the heavy met­al would make a nice paper­weight.

I’m glad things went well for Simons, after his brush with the FBI in 1950. In my book I explored how the world became obsessed with the dreams and night­mares of the atom­ic age, ter­ri­fied by mad sci­en­tists and filled with hope by saint­ly ones, such as Ein­stein. Despite his one brief moment of atom­ic mad­ness, San­ford Simons seems to have been a reas­sur­ing­ly ground­ed sort of guy. An every­day kind of sci­en­tist. And in the end I guess that’s the best kind there is.

Science Fiction Quarterly, #1 vol 2 Nov 1952, Moskowitz, atom graphic unsharp

 

If you’ve enjoyed read­ing this post, which is based on my book Dooms­day Men, then you might like to con­sid­er read­ing the whole book.

You can buy absurd­ly cheap copies of it now on Ama­zon, or if you real­ly want to sup­port me and my writ­ing you might like to con­sid­er buy­ing the e‑book. You can buy it direct from Pen­guin (ePub) or from Ama­zon in the UK (Kin­dle), or Barnes & Noble (Nook) in the US. Thanks for read­ing!

Notebook on Cities and Culture

15 April 2014 | cities, City, Detectives, Watching the Detectives

On a very wet day at the end of Jan­u­ary, Col­in Mar­shall inter­viewed me in a Win­ches­ter bar for his excel­lent series of pod­casts, Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture. We talked for about an hour about our expe­ri­ences of cities from Tokyo to Munich, about the dif­fer­ences between cities, about how they are built and how we expe­ri­ence them, about the city of non-places and the city of crime, and many oth­er sub­jects.

You can down­load the pod­cast now on Col­in’s web­site.

Reasons for writing

08 April 2014 | City

As an author, there is noth­ing bet­ter than find­ing an email like this in your inbox:

“I bought your book City a cou­ple of years ago and real­ly enjoyed it. I am a high school teacher, spe­cial­is­ing in geog­ra­phy and urban geog­ra­phy. I have been inspired by your book to re-cre­ate our rather tired urban geog­ra­phy unit, with a move away from a functional/chronological to a more nar­ra­tive teach­ing approach. I am loose­ly bas­ing the struc­ture of the first 7–8 lessons on the chap­ters of your book with a view to both cre­at­ing a deep­er under­stand­ing of the urban envi­ron­ment as well as engag­ing and inspir­ing the stu­dents with sto­ries about some amaz­ing places — much the same as you do in your book.

Real­ly, I guess I am writ­ing this to thank you for inspir­ing me to try hard­er to inspire my kids.”

Neville Gibbs
Wait­akere Col­lege, Auck­land, New Zealand

Com­ments like that make all the hard work of writ­ing and research worth­while. Thanks Neville!

Dr Strangelove, Leo Szilard & the Doomsday Men: On the 50th Anniversary

31 January 2014 | Atomic Age, atomic bomb, C-bomb, cold war, Doomsday Machine, Doomsday Men, Dr Strangelove, H-bomb, Kubrick, mad scientist, My Books, nuclear weapons, scientists, SF, Szilard, Teller, Watching the Detectives, WMD | One comment

It’s the fifti­eth anniver­sary of the release of one of my favourite films – Stan­ley Kubrick’s Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Wor­ry­ing and Love the Bomb. Described by the direc­tor as a satire about a ‘nuclear Wise Man’, it was co-writ­ten by Peter George, the British author of the 1958 nov­el on which the film is based, Red Alert, pub­lished under his pen name, Peter Bryant. In Britain the nov­el was called Two Hours to Doom.

Bryant, Red Alert, Ace

Kubrick read George’s thriller in Octo­ber 1961, the month Sovi­et sci­en­tists test­ed the largest nuclear bomb ever det­o­nat­ed. On 30 Octo­ber at 08.30 GMT, sci­en­tists in Europe detect­ed what was described as ‘the biggest man-made explo­sion on record’. Newsweek described the super­bomb as ‘Khrushchev’s mon­ster’. On an aer­i­al pho­to of Man­hat­tan Island, the mag­a­zine mapped the extent of its awe­some destruc­tive pow­er. The bomb had a yield of at least 50 mega­tons. It would blast a crater at least a mile wide and would lev­el build­ings up to ten miles from ground zero. New York with its proud sky­scrap­ers would be reduced to a radioac­tive waste­land.

Lat­er, sci­en­tists said that the Rus­sians had mod­i­fied the bomb for the test; if it was ever used in war it would explode with a force of 100 mega­tons. The Hiroshi­ma bomb was a mere 12.5 kilo­tons. The Sovi­ets nick­named their super­weapon the Tsar Bom­ba, ‘King of Bombs’. Andrei Sakharov, who designed it under direct orders from Khrushchev, called it sim­ply the Big Bomb. The det­o­na­tion of the Tsar Bom­ba made Kubrick even more deter­mined to make a movie about nuclear war. He had become obsessed with the sub­ject.

Dr strangelove poster

Kubrick and George’s film was well received when it was final­ly released in Jan­u­ary 1964 – the press screen­ing of Dr Strangelove was orig­i­nal­ly due to take place on 22 Novem­ber 1963, the day of Pres­i­dent Kennedy’s assas­si­na­tion. The New York Times panned the movie as a ‘shattering sick joke’. But Sight and Sound said it demon­strat­ed how ‘power pol­i­tics have become a Franken­stein mon­ster which one lit­tle error can send out of con­trol’. Their crit­ic praised it as ‘the most hilar­i­ous­ly fun­ny and the most night­mar­ish film of the year’. For the New States­man it was a ‘mesmeric’ film that set out ‘to cre­ate its own cat­e­go­ry or genre.’ Despite Pere­grine Worsthorne in the Sun­day Tele­graph liken­ing Kubrick’s por­tray­al of Amer­i­cans to Sovi­et pro­pa­gan­da, the film was huge­ly pop­u­lar with movie­go­ers who ‘ringed the block’ at the Colum­bia cin­e­ma in Lon­don. The cin­e­ma even had to put on spe­cial late screen­ings at 11 p.m. each night. Tick­et sales were 25 per cent high­er than for any oth­er film the Colum­bia had shown, and The Times report­ed that ‘all house records have been bro­ken’.

Of course, it is the fig­ure of the mad sci­en­tist, Dr Strangelove, that has helped make the film so mem­o­rable. Peter Sell­ers suc­ceeds won­der­ful­ly in fus­ing togeth­er the traits of the real-life, and indeed fic­tion­al, fig­ures on which he is based. Through the alche­my of film-mak­ing, Kubrick and Sell­ers cre­at­ed cin­e­mat­ic gold in the fig­ure of Dr Strangelove.

The so-called father of the H‑Bomb Edward Teller, Hitler’s rock­et pio­neer Wern­her von Braun and the hawk­ish, wheel-chair-bound math­e­mati­cian John von Neu­mann were all key play­ers in the sci­ences of destruc­tion. The ref­er­ences to Peen­emünde and the con­cen­tra­tion camps in the film’s nov­el­iza­tion make it abun­dant­ly clear that von Braun was Peter George’s main mod­el for Dr Strangelove. How­ev­er, his words are those of the man who had worked with and admired both Teller and von Neu­mann: Her­man Kahn, the physi­cist and futur­ol­o­gist who pop­u­lar­ized the idea of the dooms­day machine. He was the per­son­i­fi­ca­tion of the mil­i­tary intel­lec­tu­al – detached and cold­ly ratio­nal. Like the four rid­ers of the apoc­a­lypse, these fig­ures come togeth­er in the unfor­get­table char­ac­ter of Dr Strangelove, the ulti­mate dooms­day man.

For the his­to­ri­an and cul­tur­al com­men­ta­tor Lewis Mum­ford, respond­ing to the New York Times’ pan­ning of the film, Kubrick’s mas­ter­stroke was to make Dr Strangelove ‘the cen­tral sym­bol of this sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly orga­nized night­mare of mass exter­mi­na­tion’. For Mum­ford, the tragedy of the age they were liv­ing in was elo­quent­ly expressed by the man­ic fig­ure of this fanat­i­cal ratio­nal­ist:

‘This night­mare even­tu­al­i­ty that we have con­coct­ed for our chil­dren is noth­ing but a crazy fan­ta­sy, by nature as hor­ri­bly crip­pled and dehu­man­ized as Dr Strangelove him­self.’

He con­clud­ed by hail­ing Kubrick’s film as ‘the first break in the cata­ton­ic cold-war trance that has so long held our coun­try in its rigid grip.’

Mum­ford was absolute­ly right to iden­ti­fy Kubrick’s film as a cru­cial moment in the cul­ture of the cold war. For peo­ple all over the world, Dr Strangelove soon came to per­son­i­fy the sin­is­ter alliance of sci­ence and pow­er pol­i­tics that made it pos­si­ble to anni­hi­late mil­lions at the touch of a but­ton. Dr Strangelove’s log­ic could trans­form acts of inhu­man­i­ty into prac­ti­cal solu­tions, his rhetoric clothed bar­bar­i­ty in sweet words of rea­son, and his think tanks – such as the ‘Bland Cor­po­ra­tion’ (an allu­sion to Her­man Kahn’s RAND Cor­po­ra­tion) – used com­put­ers to trans­form lives into num­bers. For num­bers, as Kahn once said, are some­thing you can think the unthink­able about.

Williams, Day they H-Bombed Los Angeles, 1961, descreening

Dr Strangelove ends with an awe­some dis­play of mush­room clouds erupt­ing across the face of the earth, as the cobalt bombs of the Sovi­et dooms­day machine explode. News footage of H‑bomb tests is accom­pa­nied by British forces’ favourite Vera Lynn singing ‘We’ll Meet Again’. The bru­tal real­i­ty – ful­ly under­stood by the film’s audi­ence in 1964 – was that there would be no reunions after World War III.

The age of sav­iour sci­en­tists and win­ning weapons – famil­iar themes in the pop­u­lar cul­ture of the first half of the 20th cen­tu­ry – was dead. Nuclear war in the age of the Tsar Bom­ba could have only one out­come: mutu­al anni­hi­la­tion. It was exact­ly this point that the pio­neer­ing nuclear sci­en­tist Leo Szi­lard had made dur­ing a radio broad­cast in Feb­ru­ary 1950, when he first con­jured up the spec­tre of the cobalt bomb, a weapon that could destroy life on Earth. It was this idea that Peter George lat­er used in Red Alert.

In the 1960s, a new gen­er­a­tion began to reject a life reduced to num­bers and to look for answers beyond sci­ence and ratio­nal­i­ty. This gen­er­a­tion no longer felt com­fort­able with the easy post-war cer­tain­ties that their par­ents had accept­ed with­out ques­tion. For those who grew up in an age haunt­ed by the Strangelovean cobalt bomb, the old ways of look­ing at the world seemed to lead to a dead end – to dooms­day.

Atomic Age Opens, 1945

There’s anoth­er 50th anniver­sary this year, and that’s the death on 30 May 1964 of Leo Szi­lard. He was a bril­liant though often infu­ri­at­ing man, burst­ing with orig­i­nal ideas on every­thing from sci­ence to pol­i­tics and even fic­tion. He was, said one col­league, the great­est sci­en­tist nev­er to have won a Nobel prize.

In 1933, while walk­ing down Southamp­ton Row in Lon­don he had seen how a self-sus­tain­ing atom­ic chain reac­tion could lead to an explo­sive release of nuclear ener­gy. A close friend of Albert Ein­stein (they even designed a refrig­er­a­tor togeth­er), it was Szi­lard who encour­aged the great physi­cist to write to Pres­i­dent Roo­sevelt in August 1939 warn­ing of the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Nazi Ger­many might devel­op an atom­ic super­weapon. Leo Szi­lard was inspired by a utopi­an vision of how sci­ence and sci­en­tists could trans­form the world, but he was also haunt­ed by a fear of how peo­ple might mis­use this pow­er. His life epit­o­mizes the glo­ries and fol­lies of twen­ti­eth-cen­tu­ry sci­ence and his­to­ry.

Science Fiction Quarterly, #1 vol 2 Nov 1952, Moskowitz, atom graphic unsharp

I told the remark­able sto­ry of Leo Szi­lard and his nuclear hopes and fears, exam­ined through the lens of pop­u­lar cul­ture, in my book Dooms­day Men pub­lished sev­en years ago. I think it remains rel­e­vant, both as an explo­ration of our ambiva­lence towards sci­ence and sci­en­tists, and as a his­to­ry of weapons of mass destruc­tion. Today, cold-war ten­sions may have fad­ed from the pub­lic mind and the media may be pre­oc­cu­pied with glob­al warm­ing, but the weapons are still out there, and the dooms­day men are still at work devel­op­ing new ones.

Few if any authors write for the mon­ey. I do it because I love books – both read­ing them and writ­ing them. Dooms­day Men and my last book, City: A Guide­book for the Urban Age, took at least three years to research and write. The book I’m now work­ing on – a cul­tur­al his­to­ry of crime, detec­tives and cities – will also take at least that long. Nowa­days advances from pub­lish­ers are extreme­ly mod­est (I’m being polite; stronger words occur to me). You couldn’t live on them for a year, let alone three. I’m not an aca­d­e­m­ic, so I scrape a liv­ing togeth­er by review­ing and edit­ing.

There’s a lot of talk nowa­days about crowd­fund­ing new books and arts projects. That’s fine but the best way I know of sup­port­ing an author whose work you enjoy is to buy their books, and that includes their back­list too. So if you’ve enjoyed read­ing this brief post, which of course is based on what I wrote in my book Dooms­day Men, then you might like to con­sid­er read­ing the whole book.

You can buy absurd­ly cheap copies of it now on Ama­zon (I don’t know who prof­its from these; cer­tain­ly not the author) or if you real­ly want to sup­port me and my writ­ing you might like to con­sid­er buy­ing the e‑book. You can buy it direct from Pen­guin (ePub) or from Ama­zon in the UK (Kin­dle), or Barnes & Noble (Nook) in the US.

Thank you for read­ing. Now go and watch Kubrick’s amaz­ing film!

Doomsday weapon announced by Russia, PUnch, vol 247, 23 Sep 1964, p 443