Post on 22-Jan-2023
Jacome, Marc
Remembering the Space Race: Nationalism and Heroic White America
I. Introduction
On September 12th, 1962, forty thousand people gathered at
Rice Stadium in Huston Texas to listen to President John F.
Kennedy’s televised message to the nation. In light of the Soviet
Union’s success in sending the first human into space, Kennedy
declared that in order to win this “race for space” and reach the
Moon, America “must be bold.” Although the journey would be the
“most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man
has ever embarked,” America has accepted this risk and “choose[s]
to go to the moon.” In Kennedy’s eyes, America must “conquer”
space just as the famous explorers of world history conquered the
new world. (Kennedy 1962). As a charismatic individual, Kennedy’s
grandiose metaphors and imageries were not uncommon. But, by
framing the United States as a powerful, heroic, risk-taking
conqueror, Kennedy’s discourse affirmed a vision of United States
nationalism founded on both masculinity and whiteness. This
rhetoric not only reflected how America understood the
Jacome 2
spaceflight at the time, but also composed a specific nationalist
narrative which would come to shape America’s historical
understanding of the ‘Space Race.’
This paper seeks to trace the genealogy of this nationalist
narrative through media representations from the Space Race’s
early inception to the present day. Born from the paranoia of the
Soviet Union and communism, this narrative of American
spaceflight arose as a tool to inspire nationalism and unite the
American public. But neither Space Age nationalism nor its
historical representations can be separated from the ideological
underpinnings of whiteness and masculinity which have permeated
American society. Kennedy’s ideologically loaded speech can be
seen as one of the many ways in which these not-so latent biases
emerged. Since the space age, alternative representations of the
Space Race have emerged in an attempt to dethrone this narrative.
This paper will explore how both the Apollo 11 conspiracy theory,
as well as the late-1960’s environmental movement represented a
counter-culture in American society that sought to challenge the
ideological assumptions of the dominant narrative. The emergence
of these powerful counter-narratives however, did not spell the
Jacome 3
end of the nationalist representation. In fact, in spite of these
counter-narratives, the nationalist, exclusionary undertones of
the dominant narrative remain to this day.
Media representations provide a unique medium by which
historical analysis can understand the dynamic representations of
the Space Race. First of all, media imagery, whether it is
television, cinema or news, acts as a mirror that reflects
popular sentiments and societal assumptions (Keltner 2007).
Thus, an examination of these sources can provide insight into
how society understood this era. Additionally, because space lies
outside the boundaries of individual empirical observations, the
public’s view of space only existed (/exists) through
authoritative accounts. In an age in which media filters these
accounts, media had the additional role of shaping the public’s
very understanding of space (Rosenberg 2008). Thus, in a cyclical
fashion, media had a dual role of both reflecting popular
representations and reinforcing them as well.
II. Before Nationalism: Space and the Red Scare
It is important to understand that the nationalism which
arose as a result of the Space Race was not a historical anomaly;
Jacome 4
rather, it was the product of the deep seated anxiety and
paranoia that characterized the dawn of the Cold War. After World
War II, tensions between the former allies, the Soviet Union and
United States, rose a point at which the two sides saw themselves
and their ideologies in direct competition with one another. This
mutual process of demonization solidified an ostensibly
irreconcilable enmity between the two sides. In the immediate
aftermath of World War II, the Soviet Union ended the United
States’ monopoly on the atomic bomb by developing and testing its
own. For the first time in United States history, America at
large feared the legitimate possibility that they faced an
existential threat from the Soviet Union’s nuclear capacity. From
thereon out, the anxiety of the situation motivated both sides to
horizontally and vertically proliferate their nuclear arsenals in
order to secure victory in this arms race. Nevertheless, the fear
of Soviet power was not the only source of anxiety. The Soviet
Union’s rapid acquisition of the atomic bomb itself raised
serious questions about how the Soviet Union developed such
technology within a short time span. Many feared that Soviet
spies in the United States had breached the federal government
Jacome 5
and given the Soviet Union the requisite nuclear intelligence.
When, in March of 1950, two American citizens, Julius and Ethel
Rosenberg, were convicted for nuclear espionage, public paranoia
reached new heights. In the time period known as the Second Red
Scare, the American people would direct this fear towards an
overall anxiety of communism (Mora 2013). The fact that communism
had been spreading all over China, Europe and Korea only placed
the public in a permanent state of insecurity about whether
communism could bring about the end of the United States itself.
This Red Scare paranoia which permeated American society was
channeled into America’s understanding of space long before the
Space Race even began. The 1950 film Destination Moon exemplifies
how space exploration became synthesized with the fear of a
foreign military threat. The plot revolves around the United
States’ mission to become the first nation to land a human on the
moon. The mission, under the guidance of the United States army,
is framed as crucial to America’s military security. While it was
not the first movie about journeying to the Moon, it was the
first one to frame the venture in such an ominous tone. Subtle
features throughout demonstrate why this film is historically
Jacome 6
understood as a product of the Red Scare paranoia. The fact that
the mission is military in nature reflects the securitization
against ‘other’ military threats. Although the movie never
explicitly references the Soviet Union as the nation that poses
the threat, for any movie-goer of the 1950’s, it was all but too
clear which country represented this security threat (Lanius
2008). While elements of the movie such as the ultimate success
of the American space program have some nationalist elements, it
is clear that Destination Moon focuses on exploiting the sense of
fear and paranoia which was an intrinsic part of the era of the
Red Scare. Other space-related science fiction movies such as
Invaders from Mars (1953) or Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
illustrate that the movies of this time period were aiming for
pseudo-horror by focusing on issues such as alien-espionage as an
implicit reference to communist espionage (Rosenberg 2007).
Destination Moon was unique in it being one of the first widely
popularized space-related science fiction movies. In addition to
reflecting the paranoia of the era, the film also participated in
the active social construction of space as an object to conquer.
By understanding space as simply a ‘destination,’ the brought
Jacome 7
back the ideological underpinnings of the frontier mentality of
Manifest Destiny to the area of space. It is from these
foundations that nationalism would arise as a dominant ideology
of the Space Age.
III. The Dawn of the Space Race
On October 4th, 1957, the unthinkable became reality when
Russia sent Sputnik into orbit and claimed the title of the first
spacefaring nation. As millions of Americans looked to the stars
to see the Soviet satellite, the fear of Soviet domination came
to the forefront of America’s collective consciousness. Thus,
what would later be known as the Space Race began. Given the
heightened tensions of the Cold War, Russia’s thrust into space
was seen as a challenge to America – the only rational response
became a competition the likes of the arms race which coincided
with it. The United States began to pour billions in its space
program in an attempt to ‘beat out’ the Russians in space. Like
Kennedy, many writers and politicians began to frame space as a
crucial ‘frontier’ to conquer if the United States were to
survive the Cold War. The media served as an indispensable tool
in the formation of this nationalist image: for example, TV
Jacome 8
journalists like NBC’s Walter Cronkite became ‘Space
Journalists.’ By framing space development in terms of a ‘Space
Race,’ Cronkite, along with other journalists, played an
instrumental role in propagating a securitized, nationalist
vision of space exploration. In spite (or perhaps because) of
its gross inaccuracies and exaggerations concerning space policy,
Cronkite’s show became a hit and generated nationalist fervor
throughout the nation (Oberg 2006).The importance of his show
could be demonstrated by his extreme popularity and his
recognition as “most trusted man in America.”
The rhetoric of a competitive ‘space race’ along with a
heightened state of insecurity laid the foundations for the birth
of a reinvigorated spirit of nationalism determined to counter
Russia. Like other waves of American nationalism, those who
constructed this narrative attempted to create universal values
and images that all Americans would promote. In a period of
massive racial and gender disparity, one must question how
universal this nationalism was. Space Age nationalism came to be
known through two distinct, yet related, images which held
problematic associations: the astronaut and the frontier. The
Jacome 9
gendered and racial undertones of both images created an
exclusionary form of national identity and nationalism that
proved inaccessible to those who were not white males.
At the height of the Space Race, the public came to regard
astronauts as national celebrities. The Apollo astronauts were
not only valued for their occupation, but, in the media, they
represented what it meant to be a true American. The masculine
values of Kennedy’s moon speech such as heroism, risk-taking and
boldness, took on the human form of the astronaut. Life magazine
wrote numerous articles dedicated to the ‘all-American astronaut’
who, without fail, was white, protestant and male. The wives of
these astronauts were praised for their domesticity and
highlighted as exemplar models for all women (Rosenberg 2008). By
tying men to the image of the heroic astronaut and women to the
role of being domestic care takers, the media not only washed
over the importance of women in the Space Race, but affirmed the
gender stereotype that only men could be the rugged pioneers who
would lead the United States through the dangers of space
(Keltner 2007). Still, the discriminatory undertones prevalent in
media coverage were not limited to gender. The race of the
Jacome 10
‘American’ astronaut also asserted a similar binary between the
stereotypical successful, heroic, moral white American and the
lazy, unintelligent, immoral black male. For the majority of the
American public, the characteristics of the ideal astronaut
naturally seemed ‘white.’
By the 1960’s the second image, the frontier, became the
dominant representation of the space. Although this image was
nothing more than a metaphor for the void of space, the choice to
frame this void as another frontier reflected Americans’
ideological understanding of space itself. Born from the Kennedy
Administration’s motto ‘The New Frontier,’ space was seen as an
extension of the Wild West in which the United States could
venture off into the unknown and conquer distant lands. Not only
did this representation complement the image of an astronaut as a
heroic pioneer, the idea of space as a frontier also reaffirmed
the colonialist history founded on the idea of white supremacy
and manifest destiny (Rosenberg 2007).
IV. The End of the Space Race and the Birth of the Counter-
Narratives
Jacome 11
Finally, on July 20, 1969, the United States demonstrated
its technological dominance in space by successfully completing
Apollo 11, the United States’ mission to the moon. As ninety-six
percent of the nation watched in amazement, history was made as
man set his foot on the moon. America had conquered the moon and
Old Glory was left there to prove it. The excitement surrounding
the mission was unmatched. Along with nationalism, the Space Race
and Apollo 11 came to also signal American triumphalism. In the
immediate aftermath of Apollo 11, America felt it had proven its
superiority and the media was quick to reflect this sentiment.
Cronkite came to hail it as a “U.S. achievement,” which proved
that there is “nothing that we [America] can’t do eventually.”
For the next month, one would have been hard pressed to turn on
the television and not find the images of the American Flag or
the Moon on the news (Keltner 2007).
But despite the fact that Apollo 11 represented the peak of
nationalist fervor, it was also the last great space mission and
from thereon after, Space Age nationalism would lose its
strongest engine. As the psychological power of this nationalism
waned, a wave of counter-narratives that would seek to challenge
Jacome 12
this dominant narrative. Although the nationalist representation
of the Space Race never dissipated, several historical events
immediately following 1969 created serious doubts in the American
institution, paving the way for these alternative narratives of
the Space Age.
The 1970’s drastically altered the political landscape and
sentiments of the national population. The later years of the
Vietnam War as well as the Watergate Scandal dealt serious blows
to both the credibility of the national government and the
willingness of citizens to support their national government. At
the height of the Space Race in 1964, 76% of Americans polled
“expressed confidence in the ability of their national government
to do what is right.” After Vietnam and Watergate, the confidence
polled was less than 25% (Lanius 2007). Due the cynicism in
government and the decline of nationalism, two influential anti-
nationalist interpretations of the Space Race emerged. The first
focused on the Apollo 11 mission and claimed that it was a
government ploy to distract the nation from its woes and the
second focused on pictures taken during the Space Era and
Jacome 13
attempted to frame the Space Race as part of a universal human
recognition of the beauty of the environment and Earth.
V. The Moon Conspiracy Theory
From the assassination of John F. Kennedy to the terrorist
attacks of September 11th, it is clear that the rise of
conspiracy theories has been a common, albeit interesting, aspect
of American history. The Moon conspiracy theory, as its name
suggests, centers on the idea that NASA fabricated the Apollo 11
moon landings. As early as a few months after Apollo 11, a
number of individuals from isolated parts of the country began
circulating the idea that, as a 1970 issue of the Atlanta Constitution
put it, Neil Armstrong “took his giant step for mankind somewhere
in Arizona.” The first legitimate attempt to make a sustained
case against the truthfulness of Apollo 11 would not come till
1974 when a journalist named Bill Kaysing released his pamphlet,
We Never Went to the Moon. In this pamphlet, Kaysing attacked the
very idea that the United States was technologically competent
enough to complete such a mission. Furthermore, he cited certain
problems with photographs taken during the mission such as the
lack of stars in the background along with the waving appearance
Jacome 14
of the flag despite space’s airless environment. Kaysing argued
that, to the United States, the Space Race was too big to lose
and thus, manufacturing the evidence was the only feasible
alternative. While only five years prior to its release Kaysing’s
argument would have been treated as treason, events such as the
Vietnam War or the Watergate Scandal had created widespread
distrust in the government. Kaysing’s pamphlet was both a
reflection of this distrust, as well as a historically
significant piece which encouraged other writers to follow in his
footsteps. As more journalists gave their own take on the
conspiracy, the theory gained even more popularity among both the
media and the public. In 1978, movie director Peter Hyams
capitalized on these sentiments by releasing the movie Capricorn
One, in which the government fakes a Mars landing. Although the
film is about a Mars mission, the similarities between the
fictionalized universe and the time of Apollo 11 are apparent.
The movie depicts NASA, under immense political pressure to show
its viability, simply counterfeiting a video in which they land
on Mars and threatening anyone who goes to the press. As the
American public watches the mission on their small box television
Jacome 15
sets, the public becomes convinced that America had made the
‘greatest achievement known to man’ and landed on Mars. However,
demonstrating the simplicity of a space-based government
conspiracy, the film spread doubt in the minds of the American
public.
While there were numerous different articles, movies and
journals written about the moon conspiracy, each source preserves
an anti-nationalist sentiment constructed in opposition to the
dominant nationalist narrative. As conspiracy theory expert Chip
Berlot explains, in all conspiracy theories there exist mutually
reinforcing elements of dualism and demonization. After first
constructing the world in terms of good and evil (dualism), the
conspiracy theorists then assign an individual or group as the
personification of evil (demonization). In the eyes of the
conspirator, there is always a belief that this ‘evil’ force has
been involved in a well-organized plot to carry out some sinister
goal (Lanius 2009). In the case of the Moon conspiracy, it is the
federal government itself who assigned to the sinister position.
By adopting this cynical view of the federal government, the Moon
Jacome 16
conspiracy theory espoused a view diametrically opposed to the
heroic, noble vision of the United States.
In addition to directly challenging nationalism, the Moon
conspiracy offered an alternative, more appealing narrative of
the Space Race for those who could not connect to the
exclusionary form of space era nationalism. Given the whiteness
of space age nationalism, there was an overall disconnectedness
between the federal government’s space efforts and minority
communities. At the same time that the federal government and
NASA spoke about the unity of Americans under the space program,
race riots in Chicago, Detroit and other cities reminded African
Americans that this unity was a façade. Gil Scott-Heron’s 1970
spoken word poem titled Whiteys on the Moon demonstrated how, to
African Americans, Apollo 11 (as well as the overall space
effort) was not an example of national achievement, only
‘Whiteys’ achievement. Given this disconnectedness, when the
anti-nationalist Moon conspiracy theory gained popularity, some
African Americans would channel this discontent toward a denial
of Apollo 11. Polls at the time reveal that, whereas in most
cities the amount of individuals who doubted the moon landing
Jacome 17
averaged at five percent, fifty four percent of African Americans
in those same cities held suspicions that America had not truly
gone to the moon (Bowdley 2003). This statistic does not prove
African American denial of Apollo 11 was a universal phenomenon.
However, it does suggest that since African Americans were not as
easily caught up in nationalistic fervor, it would have been
easier for many to channel their discontent with the government
into a denial of the mission.
VI. The Environmental Movement
On April 22nd, 1970, the world celebrated its first Earth
Day. From that day forward, the world would continue to annually
recognize this day as a time to recognize the importance of
environmental protection and our identity as Earthlings. The
emergence of Earth Day marked the beginning of an environmental
consciousness which lay the foundations for a new countercultural
movement. This movement would seek to abandon national identity
in favor of a global identity which would recognize human
solidarity. However, many individuals fail to recognize that this
global movement was only made possible by a move to reframe the
Jacome 18
1960’s wave of space exploration away from its characterization
as a Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union.
The attempt to characterize the Space Race as a global human
endeavor traces its roots back to as early as 1966 with the book
Human Values on the Spaceship Earth. Kenneth Boulding, the author of
the book, attempted to portray Earth as a spaceship traversing
through the mystical void of space. The book argued that, we, as
global citizens, must take care of our human spaceship in order
to survive for the foreseeable future. The appeal to the
solidarity of humanity would be an important characteristic of
this, call for environmental action, as well as of future ones.
To frame it as such would be an explicit rejection to the United
States’ call for nationalist fervor against the Soviet Union.
However, the environmental movement would not gain significant
ground until the publication of NASA’s photos of Earth in Stewart
Brand’s Whole Earth Catalog in 1968. Brand himself lobbied for NASA
to release the photos that satellites and astronauts had taken
during the 60’s. He believed that the image of the Earth would
become a powerful icon of the environmental movement that would
invoke the spirit of shared consciousness and aesthetic
Jacome 19
appreciation for the mystic universe. For Brand and the youth of
the generation, it was time to begin a countercultural movement
that would reorient humanity’s relationship towards each other
and the universe. Like Brand expected, these images of ‘Mother
Earth’ were largely successful in inspiring the population to
become more environmentally aware (Kirk 2011). Again, it is
important to note that the growth of this anti-nationalist
movement could not be separated from the growing discontent with
the United States. As the Anti-Vietnam War countercultural
movement grew in strength, its participants became attracted to
the Environmental movement’s peaceful, utopian discourse. Soon,
the two movements became closely interrelated and the
Environmental movement began to borrow political strategies from
the former. Environmentalists held rallies in which they would
they would play off of anti-war slogans. Instead of ‘Give Peace a
Chance’, environmental rallies shouted to ‘Give Earth a Chance’
(Rome 2003). By building off of the dissatisfaction born from
the Vietnam War, the Earth movement gained significant
popularity. The establishment of the first Earth Day was a
testament to the growth of the anti-nationalist movement.
Jacome 20
Yet in presenting an alternative narrative to human space
flight, the environmental movement not only challenged
nationalism, but also reframed America’s understanding of space
away from its problematic representation as a frontier to
conquer. Environmentalists attempted to challenge the ‘outward’
focus of the Space Age by arguing for the importance of taking
care of ‘Spaceship Earth.’ In both the nationalist and the
environmentalist outlook, the universe was nothing more than a
mystical and incomprehensible void. While nationalists focused on
colonizing that void, environmentalists simply stressed the
aesthetic beauty of the void itself. To them, the paramount
concern of society was not conquering the space around us, but
preserving its beauty, starting with the preservation of
‘Spaceship Earth.’ With this focus on ‘taking care’ of Earth, the
environmental movement also challenged the masculinity behind
Space Age nationalism by promoting feminine values. By promoting
the image of ‘Mother Earth,’ environmentalists celebrated the
fact that Earth had taken care of humanity and stressed the
importance of adopting a reciprocal maternal relationship (Rome
2003). Although the association between the female sex and
Jacome 21
maternal behavior had its own problematic gendered assumptions,
the endorsement characteristics seen as ‘feminine’ nevertheless
challenged society’s exclusive admiration for masculinity.
VII. The Retreat from Space and Contemporary Nostalgia
As the years went by, the Space Race faded from the
forefront popular culture to become a mere historical memory.
After the early 70’s, American’s concern with space also
declined. Incidents such as the Apollo 13 failure, the Space
Shuttle Challenger disaster and the Colombia disaster only
psychologically pushed Americans even further away from space. In
times of austerity, NASA’s budget had routinely been cut to the
point of being utterly insignificant (Lanius 2009). For decades
thereafter, space programs would receive little attention beyond
infrequent news coverage.
However, the retreat from space did not signify the end of
America’s memories of the Space Race. Despite the disinterest in
venturing into space, contemporary representations of the Space
Race demonstrate a recreation of the nationalistic narrative
through a sense of nostalgia. The 1996 film Apollo 11 is
reminiscent of the same sense of triumphalism which existed after
Jacome 22
the Apollo 11 mission itself. The film tells the classic story of
the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union:
In the face of the scary Soviet threat, the United States pulls
together, through struggle and persistence, and lands a man on
the moon. Many later films would replicate this same romantic
vision of the Apollo era Space Race missions which would act as
testaments to American victory. The nostalgia for the spirit of
the Space Race triumph has been such a constant feature of the
last decades that it seems to have been a subconscious part of
America’s psyche (Dick 2007).
This nostalgia not only reaffirms the nationalism of the
era, but also the exclusionary ideologies which were born with
it. Nostalgia for the nationalism and unity of the Space Race
litter many magazines and articles that speak to the issue
(Keltner 2007). However, this rhetoric demonstrates ignorance to
the violent racial divisions of the society which prove that this
era was anything but unified. The frontier ideology also remains
ever-present. In popular media, the Moon can rarely be spoken to
without also referencing Apollo 11 – i.e. the conquering of the
Moon (Keltner 2007). Documentaries such as The History Channel’s
Jacome 23
Triumph and Tragedy recreate the conception of space as a frontier
by characterizing America a “nation of explorers…like Columbus.”
In the documentary, the masculinity of the astronauts is also
emphasized by speaking to their “heroism” and the danger they
overcame. This contemporary nostalgia for the Space Race thus
cannot be separated from the exclusion which permeated the era.
VIII. Conclusion
Although the history of these representations of the Space
Race is short, recognizing the historical contingency of these
representations can provide us a useful understanding of how to
deconstruct the problematic representations of today. Despite the
existence and temporal popularity of multiple counter-narratives
of the Space Race, neither one was able to usurp the dominant
ideology. Yet the mere existence of these counter-narratives
should remind us that the dominant narrative need not exist. As
we can see, the nationalistic narrative has greatly influenced
our understanding of the Space Race and space itself. Thus, by
recognizing how this exclusionary ideology has recreated itself,
one can problematize the discourse and representations we use
today in order to more properly understand these issues.
Jacome 24
Works Cited
Bowdley, David. "Hollywood Goes to the Moon: The Greatest Hoax ofThem All?" IOP Science Journal 38.5 (2003): 406-12. Print.
Kirk, Andrew G. Counterculture Green: The Whole Earth Catalog and American Environmentalism. Lawrence, Kan.: University of Kansas, 2007. Print.
Rosenberg, Emily S. 2008 “Remembrance and Cultural Representationof the Space Age” <http://history.nasa.gov/Remembering_Space_Age_B.pdf> April 1, 2013
Lanius Roger. 2009. “Denying the Apollo Moon Landings: Conspiracyand Questioning in Modern American History” <http://www.smithsonianconference.org/apollo/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Denying-the-Apollo-Moon-Landings.pdf April 7, 2013> April 4th, 2013
Rome, Adam. “Give Earth a Chance: The Environmental Movement and the Sixties." Journal of American History (2003): 1-30. <Http://www.journalofamericanhistory.org/issues/902/902_rome.pdf.> April 18th, 2013
Keltner, Kathy. From Myth to Metaphor to Memory. Ohio University, 2007.Print
Dick, Steven J. Societal Impact of Spaceflight. History Division, 2007. Print.
Oberg, James. "Cronkite on Space: Inspiration, Not Information." The Space Review:. 6 Mar. 2006. <http://www.thespacereview.com/article/570/1> April 5th 2013.
Jacome 25
Media Sources
Apollo 11. Dir. Norberto Barba. Lulu Zezza. 1996. Film
Capricorn One. Dir. Peter Hyams. ITC Entertainment. 1978. Film
Boulding, Kenneth. Human Values on the Spaceship Earth. 1966.
Brand, Stewart. Whole Earth Catalog.1968.
CBS Evening News, CBS, Walter Cronkite, Los Angeles.
Destination Moon. Dir. Irving Pichel. George Pal Productions. 1950.Film
Gil Scott-Heron. Whiteys on the Moon. 1970
Kaysing, Bill. We Never Went to the Moon. 1974.
Kennedy, John F. 1962 “John F. Kennedy Moon Speech - Rice Stadium” <http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/ricetalk.htm> April 8, 2013
"Many Doubt Man‘s Landing on Moon." Atlanta Constitution 15 June 1970:n. pag. Print.
Triumph & Tragedy. The History Channel, New York City. 1999