1961/1981 Human Spaceflight: ABSTRACTS
The conference has ended
Day 1:
Michael F. Robinson
(Keynote)
Title: Lessons from the Last Frontier
NASA has always stood at the
fulcrum of the past and future. It is the inheritor of
Alexander C.T. Geppert
Title: When
was the Space Age?
Most space historians would agree
that they aim to locate the so-called ‘space age’ in time. Yet they have
generated surprisingly little explicit discussion about what characterized this
ominous period; whether the notion should be regarded as a historical or,
rather, a purely analytical concept; and when this nebulous ‘space age’
actually took place, if at all. Did the ‘space age’ define an entire epoch, was
it one period among many, a specific and bounded time span – or simply an
alluring, if short-lived and overloaded label that the international space
movement created in the 1940s with a view to promoting and publicizing its
costly cause? In order to simultaneously de-metaphorize
this ‘space’, ‘orbital’ or ‘planetary’ age and to suggest several answers as to
its duration, in particular its end, this paper approaches the linked problems
of both definition and periodization from two
oppositional perspectives. On the one hand, it historicizes the notion of a
‘space age’ by tracing, comparing and juxtaposing salient definitional attempts
and their respectively assigned characteristics through historical
publications, pamphlets, and the popular press. A full representation of these
arguments must draw also from the writings of European
science fiction writers such as Arthur C. Clarke, historians of science and
psychoanalysts such as Alexandre Koyré
and C. G. Jung, philosophers including Pierre Teilhard
de Chardin, Ernst Jünger,
Hannah Arendt and Hans Blumenberg, and contemporary
cultural critics and art theorists such as Peter Weibel.
On the other, the paper isolates and extracts the most pertinent definitional
elements from these divergent writings, reassembling them into a new take on periodization. Specifically conceptualized and designed to
allow for the space age’s controlled, theory-led and empirically saturated historicization, this move attempts to leave aside all
political agendas, however intentional or oblique. Extending and applying
Reinhart Koselleck’s idea of Begriffsgeschichte (conceptual
history) well into the twentieth century, this variegated approach results in a
dynamic combination of historical semantics and practical historiography with
an emphasis on Western Europe during the decades prior to the establishment of
the European Space Agency in 1975.
James Spiller
Title:
The Rise (1961)
and Fall and Rise Again (1981) of America’s “Space
Frontier”
This presentation
closely examines the reasons why the trope of the “space frontier” became
commonplace in the early years of the space age, waned dramatically in the
early 1970s, and waxed once again in the beginning of the following
decade.
The space frontier
had developed as a popular cultural motif decades earlier, but it became a
conventional, serious-minded way of framing spaceflight by 1961 because many
national leaders and aerospace professionals purposefully used the motif to
promote an expensive and fast-growing U.S. space program. They did so not as a cynical ploy, but
because the frontier motif provided culturally meaningful shorthand that
ennobled their celestial aims and resonated with a popular nationalist frontier
mythology. The motif naturalized the
U.S. space program by casting it as a pioneering effort aligned with the
nation’s past and as proof of the basic Cold War principle that American
liberalism continued to unleash people’s innate talents, as no other nation
could, for the “benefit of Mankind.”
This presentation
does not assume that the space frontier trope was monolithic and
unchanging. Instead, the salience of
that motif in the years around 1961 depended not only on favorable geopolitics
and domestic context, but also on the internal complexity of frontier
mythology, which had two distinct and mutually reinforcing strands. One vein, prominently articulated by
historian Frederick Jackson Turner, held that geographic frontiers spawned
Americans’ exceptional liberalism and their nation’s progressive economic and
political development. The other,
famously evoked by Theodore Roosevelt, held that Americans’ strenuous efforts
of frontier conquest (specifically those of particular “races” of white men)
morally and psychically rejuvenated the nation, maintaining its competitive
fitness and preventing Americans from slipping into overcivilized
sloth and indulgence. This presentation
will explain why, in the context of the 1960s, these two mutually reinforcing
strands worked together to make the space frontier an effective rhetorical
framing devise to market and make meaningful the U.S. space program.
This presentation
will then propose how international relations and domestic affairs undercut the
space frontier motif in the early 1970s, prompting national figures to abandon
the Rooseveltian strand as anachronistically
gendered, racist, and martially nationalistic and the Turnerian
vein as ill-suited to the economic limitations of that decade. It concludes by elaborating how the space
frontier motif enjoyed a second (albeit temporary) life by 1981, as Turner’s
frontier-focused account of freedom and economic progress and an attenuated version
of Roosevelt’s frontier-based national revivalism captured the zeitgeist and
suited the political and cultural agenda of an increasingly conservative and
nationalist America.
Steve Dick
Title: Exploration and Discovery in Science and Human Spaceflight
Claims to the contrary
notwithstanding, exploration, discovery and science are not synonymous. Magellan was an explorer, but not a scientist
or natural philosopher. Many scientists
undertake routine science that can hardly be called exploration. Exploration and science may or may not lead
to discovery, which is a complex process that by any definition must mean
finding something new, or, as Proust preferred, “seeing with new eyes.” These distinctions are important not just for
academic reasons but because they represent the very vocabulary of both NASA
and of those who determine space policy, as was made clear most recently when
the new human spaceflight policy announced in 2004 was labeled “A Renewed
Spirit of Discovery” and its strategic objectives “The New Age of
Exploration.” In human spaceflight,
exploration, discovery and science can be synergistic, as they were in the
Apollo program. By contrast, and despite
notable successes, the judgment of history will likely be that the Space
Shuttle itself, inarguably a magnificent winged machine and an engineering
accomplishment unlikely to be seen again in the space arena for generations,
was not a robust agent of exploration, discovery or science. The Shuttle, with its triple mission of
transportation, construction and repair, did demonstrate that human and robotic
spaceflight are potentially complementary approaches to the larger goal that is
in both the American tradition and in the tradition of our species: exploration
of the unknown. Exploration of the
universe beyond Earth orbit, which remains the new frontier even after 50 years
of the Space Age and despite the historical baggage of the term “frontier,”
will be accomplished sooner or later by humans and robots working
together. To achieve a balanced program
of both robotic and human spaceflight emphasizing exploration, discovery and
science, with the limited resources at hand, in the midst of turbulent events
on Earth, is the challenge now before NASA.
Margaret A. Weitekamp
Title: Setting the Scene for Human
Spaceflights: Men Into
Space and The Man and the Challenge
As both the United States and the
Soviet Union prepared for the first human spaceflights in 1961, two significant
programs appeared on American television.
On NBC, The Man and the Challenge
(1959-60) used the inspiration of John Paul Stapp’s
well-publicized rocket sled experiments to create a series featuring a
fictional doctor/researcher whose scientific experiments probed the limits of
man’s endurance. On CBS, Man Into Space
(1959-60) depicted the realistic adventures of Colonel Ed McCauley, head of the
American space program. Aimed at adults,
and with the cooperation of the US Air Force, “technical advisor” Wernher von Braun, and space artist Chesley
Bonestell, this short-lived television series offered
a fact-based depiction of space flight in the near future of the budding space
age.
These
two television programs represented a significant break from the abundant
fantastical space adventures of the early- and mid-1950s, such as the
well-known Captain Video and His Video
Rangers (1949-55), Tom Corbett, Space
Cadet (1950-1955), Space Patrol
(1950-55), Buck Rogers (1950-51), and
Flash Gordon (1954-55), or the
shorter runs of Rod Brown of the Rocket
Rangers (1953-54), Rocky Jones, Space
Ranger (1954), or Commando Cody, Sky
Marshal of the Universe (1955). They
also represented a very different cultural moment than the space-themed shows
that would follow them on American television in the late 1960s. Programs such as The Jetsons (1962-1963), My Favorite Martian (1963-66), Lost in Space (1965-68), and I Dream of Jeannie (1965-70), cast
changing family and gender dynamics in space-themed settings. Notably, Star
Trek (1966-69) took spaceflight most seriously, although still using its
space setting mostly to defamiliarize contemporary
social and cultural issues.
Examining
this transitional moment in American space-themed television provides both
context and background for understanding how the first human spaceflights were
received. Both programs emphasized
assertions of masculinity at a time when the rigid post-war gender roles could
be seen to be breaking down. Likewise,
both shows glorified the ingenuity of men’s technological prowess as they
pushed back boundaries. By depicting
realistic adventures based on actual scientific principles and practices, they
also prepared the television audience for the kinds of public performances of
technological achievement that human spaceflight provided. This paper will use an analysis of these two
television programs to unpack the cultural contexts that helped shape the
reception in the United States of Yuri Gagarin’s flight and, even more so, Alan
Shepard’s mission as the first American in space,
both in 1961.
Andrew Jenks
Yuri Gagarin was both a popular hero and official
Soviet icon. Genuine love for him as well as the prodigious resources of the
state fueled the cosmonaut's worldwide celebrity. His public image was a
curious hybrid of socialist realist hero and Russian playboy. Even as the
regime urged young Soviets to be like Gagarin, the first cosmonaut was also
rumored -- for good reason -- to enjoy fast cars, alcohol, and the company of
women. He traveled the world over. He was head of both the Cuban-Soviet
friendship society and the Soviet water-skiing association. For the older
generation, Gagarin was the ideal patriotic son. For those too young to fight
against the Nazis in World War II, Gagarin proved that heroism was nonetheless
possible. And everyone was charmed by Gagarin's charisma, sense of humor, and
love of life. He was, in short, an ideal image of Soviet Russian maleness -- a
kind of Soviet Russian brand. And that brand has endured, surviving the
collapse of the Soviet system that produced it.
John M. Logsdon
Title: Pursuit of an Illusion? JFK and U.S.-Soviet Cooperation in Missions to the Moon
May 25 of this year
will mark the fiftieth anniversary of the 1961 speech to a joint session of
Congress in which President John F. Kennedy, just four months in office,
proposed sending Americans to the Moon “before this decade is out.” This was
the start of Project Apollo, which between 1969 and 1972 took twelve astronauts
to the lunar surface. The talk will highlight the little-known reality that
racing the Soviet Union to the Moon was JFK’s second choice. He would have
preferred to make outer space an arena for U.S.-Soviet cooperation, and at the
end of his life proposed turning the lunar landing effort into a joint
undertaking. The talk will trace the role of U.S.-Soviet cooperation in JFK’s
thinking about space and speculate with respect to what might have happened
should Nikita Khrushchev have accepted JFK’s September 1963 offer of a joint
mission to the Moon (and Kennedy not been assassinated).
Megan Prelinger
Title: 1961 – 1981: A Comparative Study
of Human and Robotic Spaceflight as Represented in Industrial Advertising
This paper asserts that our
national human and robotic spaceflight programs experienced a reversal of
aspirations between 1961 and 1981, and that this reversal is clearly
articulated in the changing visual and textual elements of the advertising that
promoted both projects. The paper is based on evidence found in industrial and
trade advertising from 1961 and 1981. Industrial advertisements constitute a
distinct body of evidence that, when analyzed, tell a multi-part history of our
U.S. national space program.
In 1961 human spaceflight was
poised to aim far higher than satellite programs, promising to deliver people
to the Moon and then to Mars and beyond. Its every stance was outwardly and
upwardly directed, away from Earth and beyond Earth-orbit. Robotic spaceflight,
in contrast, was centered at the time on the emerging promise of orbital
telecommunications satellites. The 1981 commencement of the Space
Transportation System (the Space Shuttle program) fixed the reversal of those
trends. The reversal had begun in the 1970s when the robotic programs captured
the broadest public attention with the Pioneer, Viking, and Voyager probes and
their dramatic interplanetary trajectories. At the same time, human spaceflight
struggled for definition as a cultural objective, leading to the scaled-down
Shuttle program with a dramatically reduced “exploration” horizon of low-Earth
orbit. This exchange of horizons between robotic and human spaceflight programs
is expressed through the cultural frames cast around these two broad projects
in their surrounding trade industry advertising.
Guillaume de Syon
Title: Astronauts and Cosmonauts in
Frenchmen: Understanding Space Travel Through The
Popular Weekly Paris-Match
This
paper examines the vision of human space travel that a mainstream publication, Paris-Match,
offered the Francophone public between 1961 and 1981. This widely read
publication cast an essentially foreign event into one that was right at home
in France. In so doing, to borrow from Marshall McLuhan, it neither alienated
nor polarized public opinion, but made it part of an early “global village.” Paris
Match became a standard weekly magazine in the 1950s, but occupied a unique
niche in French culture that does not appear to have parallels in American
media history. Simply put, as an odd cross between Time, People,
and the Saturday Evening Post, the publication came to be viewed as a
respectable form of entertainment in both working and middle class households.
The combination of glamour entertainment and news generally stressed human
dimensions in all stories and pictures, and space travel was part of the mix.
The culmination of such coverage came during the Apollo moon missions when Paris
Match went so far as to commission artistic representations of some
astronauts to honor their achievement and emphasize the magnitude of the event
to readers. This emphasis on the human element carried on with the Apollo Soyouz test program and the first space shuttle flight.
French readers thus came to envision space travel
with an uncritical and in fact welcoming eye that also helped pave the way for
France’s own fielding of “spationauts” aboard Soviet
and American spacecraft.
Trevor Rockwell
Title: They May Remake Our Image of Mankind:
Representations of Cosmonauts and Astronauts in Soviet and American Space Propaganda
1961-1981
This paper compares representations of space
explorers in Soviet and American propaganda magazines between 1961 and 1981.
The two publications—the American America Illustrated, and its Soviet
counterpart Soviet Life—were large format, glossy, monthlies produced
and distributed after 1956 as part of a cultural exchange agreement between the
two superpowers. They played a significant role in each nation’s propaganda
strategy. Space exploration was one of the most prominent themes in each magazine,
and manned spaceflight was the most frequent subject of space‐themed articles. The periodicals thus provide an
excellent source for investigating how representations of cosmonauts and
astronauts functioned as Cold War propaganda. They offer fascinating insight
into how each nation viewed the significance of manned spaceflight, and how
they sought to use it to suggest global leadership.
This
paper will highlight the main themes associated with manned spaceflight in
Soviet and American propaganda. In many ways, Soviet and American
representations of manned spaceflight were similar. Both assumed manned
spaceflight was necessary, and used depictions of space explorers to associate
their respective space programs with notions of peace and progress. Both
portrayed their space explorers as heroes, but also stressed their ordinariness
as humans. Their heroism and humanity suggested that the collective society
they personified was likewise both heroic and humane.
Representations
of astronauts and cosmonauts straddled the heroic and the human to reinforce
the predominant narratives of peace and progress in the broader space
propaganda. As heroes, both Soviet and American propaganda stressed the space
explorers’ courage and determination in the face of adversity and danger, their
ability to perform demanding tasks in a difficult environment, and the
scientific nature of their training and missions. But the publications also
routinely portrayed astronauts and cosmonauts as ordinary humans, linking them
to the “millions” of ordinary earthlings following their exploits worldwide. Both
magazines emphasized their ordinariness, modesty, cheerfulness, humor,
manliness, work ethic, and spiritual values. Overall, they were depicted as a
powerful unifying force, uniting humanity to follow their space achievements,
and illustrating the ideals of the society that they represented. In spite of
these similarities, there were key differences between the Soviet and American
treatments of manned spaceflight in their propaganda. Such differences grew out
of their divergent definitions of peace and progress, and the different
communications techniques they employed in the production of propaganda.
Day 2:
George C. Herring (Keynote)
Title: The Cold War, 1961-1981
This keynote address will discuss the
Cold War during this 20-year period as context for other topics covered at the
conference. It will analyze briefly the origins and nature of the Cold War and its
emergence as the central fact of international politics and economics in the
1960s and 1970s. During these two decades, Soviet-American conflict came full
circle, from the events leading to the Cuban Missile Crisis, the most perilous
time in the Cold War, through the era of detente and Vietnam, and then back to
the resurgence of Cold War tensions after 1979. Dr. George Herring will seek to
explain how, despite the Vietnam War, detente evolved out of the missile
crisis, why its duration was quite short, and why by 1981 the two superpowers
were on the verge of another period of extreme tension, what would become in
fact the final "campaign" of the Cold War.
Matthew H. Hersch
Title: The Creature That Wouldn’t Die: Spaceplane 1961/1981
Today,
man, with his intelligence and reason, has suddenly come to the
crossroads. Some believe that the guided
missile and electronically controlled space vehicles are the ultimate answers
to spaceflight. The recent orbital and
suborbital achievements have been spectacular and extremely important. However, man will never be satisfied in the
undignified position of sitting in a nosecone, acting as a biomedical specimen.
―Jimmy
Stewart (voiceover), in Richard Donner’s X-15 (1961)
Today, few would regard 1961’s X-15 as an “important” film, but the
mere fact of its existence reminds historians that the year of the movie’s
release was more than one of milestones and records: it was the year Americans
were finally convinced that their first forays into space would be in
semi-automated capsules like the Project Mercury spacecraft instead of souped-up airplanes like those depicted in the film. Americans reached this decision only after
vigorous debate and independent demonstrations of the capsule’s capabilities on
both sides of the Iron Curtain. The spaceplane, though, was a creature that wouldn’t die. Twenty years after Alan Shepard’s
first spaceflight, when Americans once again sought to hurl themselves beyond
Earth’s atmosphere, the spaceplane re-emerged as a
state-of-the-art solution to a decades-old problem―one with a profound
impact upon the astronaut labor force.
The 1981 flights of the Space Shuttle Orbiter Columbia—including one
with a veteran X-15 pilot in the left seat—demonstrated not only the stubborn
resilience of one particular design concept, but the continued efforts of spaceplane proponents to place the history of spaceflight
within the larger techno-cultural narrative of aviation innovation. As the supposed next step in fixed-wing
flight after the jet, the spaceplane was to be the
heir to an American aeronautical tradition dating back to the Wright brothers,
and a rebuttal to rocket-builders who craved an alternative to the tyranny of
the wing.
This paper draws upon archival
materials of the George M. Low Papers of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
the Johnson Space Center History Collection at the University of Houston-Clear
Lake, the NASA Historical Reference Collection in
A short film clip on DVD and a
PowerPoint presentation accompany this paper.
Amy Kaminski
Title: Explorers We? Prospects for Public Participation in Human Space Flight during the Space Shuttle Development Era
Scholars in the field of science and technology studies are interested in examining the nature, extent, and processes of democratic decision-making and public participation in scientific and technological issues facing society. They have typically explored the roles of “laypersons” or “non-experts” in policy development, research agenda-setting, and participation in research within the environmental and health sciences – areas that understandably have strong bearing on individuals’ daily lives. But what can be said of the extent and forms of the general public’s participatory role in the history of space exploration, and in NASA’s human space flight program in particular?
This paper takes up that question
as it relates to NASA’s development of plans in the 1970s and early 1980s for
use of the Space Shuttle. While NASA had worked diligently to inform the
American and global publics of its achievements up through the Apollo era,
members of the general public remained passive participants in the
adventure. With the start of the Space Shuttle program’s development,
however, NASA along with corporate contractors, major news media outlets, and
space advocates began to offer discourses and take actions suggesting that the
space agency was preparing to use the nascent space transportation system to
engage the public in new ways and to open space flight opportunities to various
sectors and segments of society including, perhaps, the ordinary person.
In this paper I closely examine the particular discourses and actions NASA
embraced to promote the Shuttle’s instrumentality in the routinization
and even the democratization of space flight, including the creation of a
program intended to fly citizens with non-technical backgrounds on the Shuttle,
and the leaders and technical, social, and political considerations that drove
them. Through probing the decision processes NASA used and the choices
the agency ultimately made regarding how and why to select particular
citizen-in-space participants, I assess the degree to which NASA’s discourse
and actions amounted to an opening of its human space flight program vis-à-vis
the Space Shuttle to non-traditional participants, addressing who benefited,
how, and why. In doing so, I identify where these discourses and actions
positioned the loci of authority, expertise, the ideal type of an astronaut,
democratic decision-making, and public participation in space exploration
during this timeframe in human space flight history.
Valerie Neal
Title: Bringing Spaceflight Down to
Earth: The IMAX Films Experience
Bringing spaceflight down to
Earth to the public through the popular media of commercial film and television
had always posed a dilemma for NASA: how to ensure the accuracy and tone of a
studio production. NASA entered the Shuttle era still reluctant to engage with
A dramatic new motion picture
technology—IMAX—that emerged during the Shuttle development period of the
1970s, opened the way for NASA to become involved in commercial film production
that would vividly bring the experience of spaceflight down to Earth. The
high-resolution, large-frame IMAX film format and giant-screen projection
system would essentially put people in space, seeing what the astronauts saw
and sharing in their experience, to introduce a wide audience to the excitement
and benefits of
From Hail
This paper examines the NASA,
IMAX, Smithsonian, Lockheed partnership to bring the spaceflight experience to
the giant screen. Examining how these four entities shared roles and
responsibilities and how they carried out the projects from planning to
premieres opens to exploration such crucial issues as content control, message
shaping, public and private sector motives and benefits, and public access to
the experience of spaceflight. It also situates the IMAX space films within one
of the key themes of the Shuttle era—making human spaceflight routine and
practical. NASA’s IMAX experience also
tracks with the agency’s evolving comfort with externally-produced depictions
of spaceflight. By 2000 NASA had embraced cooperation on programs that reached
the public through commercial theaters without surrendering the agency’s
ability to frame its own vision of human spaceflight. The pairing of IMAX
technology and Shuttle flights, and the resultant space films, effectively
brought spaceflight down to Earth and also gave NASA a comfortable entrée into
the motion picture industry.
Roger Handberg
Title:
Finding Your Way
to Orbit: History, Politics and Institutions’ Role in Initiating Human
Spaceflight
Human
spaceflight remains the most publicly visible facet of the space enterprise.
Sending individuals to orbit has long been considered the marker of a world
class national space program. Evidence to support this can be seen in the
funding dedicated such activities compared to the funding usually available for
other space activities outside the realm of military space activities. The
question I explore and present is: “What have we learned about national space
agencies versus transnational consortia such as the European Space Agency
versus private sector investment in human spaceflight capabilities?” What is
interesting about this question is that until the early 1990s it was largely a
question of ESA as a singular example compared to an N of 2, the US and the
Soviet Union with others more distant. What makes the question particularly
interesting now is that new national players are entering the arena while ESA
begins the delicate task of reassessing what they now deem possible or
necessary. Motivations to pursue human spaceflight usually are multiple and
evolve over time so the analysis here will begin with the initiation of human
spaceflight activities. These are presented in their starkest form and will be
refined for the presentation and final paper. The two original space pioneers,
the Soviet Union and the United States, found themselves in a global
competition that had both security and prestige components. The result was
space programs that began in the early 1960s when the space race heated up with
no fiscal constraints at least rhetorically; reality was much murkier that this
but the Apollo myth in the United States assumes little fiscal constraints
existed. What is occurring now is that cost increasingly matter even though
prestige and national mythology continue as political supports for continuation
of a program if initiated or one is contemplated. Human spaceflight is rapidly
becoming the new totem of international politics with a diversity of states
suggesting they are next pursuing human spaceflight. Their success or failure
is obviously unclear at this time although there appears to be some ignoring of
past experience, a reflection of nationalism in that the new participants can
do it better than the original ones. How the new aspirants pursue the goal of
human spaceflight and older participants cope with the challenge posed by the
new is the story of the next generation of human spaceflight.
Dean Cheng
Title:
China and Human Spaceflight
On
October 15, 2003, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) launched Lieutenant
Colonel Yang Liwei into space aboard Shenzhou V, and joined the former Soviet Union and the
United States as the third state to place an astronaut into orbit. Yang’s
successful mission marked the culmination of a decades-long interest in manned
spaceflight, dating back to the first decade of the PRC. It also reflects
ongoing support for China’s manned space program from the highest levels of the
Chinese government.
This
presentation will review China’s manned space efforts, including Project 571
and Project 921 and the Shenzhou development program.
It will also examine Chinese statements regarding where their manned space
program is heading.
Ashok Maharaj
Title: India's Ambitions in Human Space
Flight: History, Challenges and Opportunities
Few today contest the
significance of India’s rapid economic expansion, or question the growing
importance of India in world affairs. As an emerging global power its nuclear and space ambitions has grown by leaps and
bounds. During the past two years, India’s space budget has doubled to $4.7
billion, and India now looks towards an ambitious space program, including
human space flight, in the coming decades.
This paper will give an overview of India's forays into space since
1963, "portraits" of Indians who have traveled to space, and the
rationale for including human space flight as one of its major goals for the
next twenty years.
