What is the True Story of the Hiroshima Maidens?

Ten years following the drop of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, the emotional and physical scars created by the bombing were still prominent in Hiroshima. Reverend Kiyoshi Tanimoto of Japan and Norman Cousins, an American editor who worked to bring awareness to the struggle of Japanese war victims created a program to fly women, who were physically scarred after the bombing, to America to receive surgery. In Hiroshima, their physical appearance stopped them from getting jobs or even leaving the house. They became known as the Hiroshima Maidens. This event has been researched by many different scholars, some believing it was America’s way of dealing with feelings of guilt while others believe it was simply for the purpose of having guinea pigs to test their advanced plastic surgery techniques on. Within Norman Cousin’s book, Present Tense: An American Editor’s Odyssey, he asserts that the Americans who made this trip possible did it for many reasons, but simply put, Americans did it because they had the power to do so. If one is able to make a difference then one should. Norman Cousin’s retelling of the story seems to shine a heroic light on America. On a different spectrum is scholar David Serlin’s assertion on the matter. Within his article, “Reconstructing the Hiroshima Maidens,” Sherlin makes an overall argument that the Hiroshima Maidens were used as symbols of advancement, westernization, and loss of culture.

Within Norman Cousin’s book, he tells the chronological story of the Maidens’ journey. It goes from the initial idea planning all the way to the Maidens’ reintroduction into Hiroshima after the program. Cousin’s book is unique in that it includes many quotes and personal tales from the Maidens themselves, however the narrative follows his point of view during the journey. It is instrumental to have his point of view because he very clearly states that what the media presented was not always the full truth. In one scenario, he describes how the different members of the program talked in depth about their different reasons for helping the maidens. He then adds, “All this seemed too personal for public discussion. Finally, we told the newsmen we doubted that we knew the answer ourselves” (pg 5). He regularly discusses how happy the Maidens were in New York and how pleased they were with how they were being treated. It seems to me that in other articles on Hiroshima Maidens, the overlying arguments are all about how they were used, but barely touch upon how they, themselves felt they were treated.

David Serlin makes inferences about the treatment of the women within his article. He uses a photo (above) taken of the Maidens holding gifts of steak in a market as evidence of the uncomfortable feelings they had towards what was happening. Serlin explains that steak was a luxury in Hiroshima and the photographer has them posing with steaks to broadcast the, “promise of American abundance and comfort” (pg 91). He continues his observation writing, “Two of the maidens smile obligingly. The others look resentful, contemptuous, or even humiliated because the photograph was taken” (pg 91). Serlin uses other pieces of evidence such as photos, songs, tv shows, and interviews to further his assertion that the Maidens were used as a way for America to show the good feelings shared between their two countries since the war. He does go beyond their chronological story to express how their experience helped shaped plastic surgery techniques and even how the Maidens parallel the rebuilding of Hiroshima itself. This information would not have been readily available at the time and could only have been researched years after the Maiden’s visit.

David Serlin writes his article in 2004 using different forms of evidence to support his argument. Norman Cousin writes from personal experience in 1967. Which story of the Hiroshima Maidens is thus more reliable? Were they ecstatic women thankful to America for being so heroic, or were they victims of war that were shown compassion by a guilty country who used them to broadcast the good deed America was performing?
In truth, I believe the answer lies somewhere in between the two extremes. Neither the book nor article alone gives enough evidence to truly convince me of their assertions. I cannot believe that America was accommodating to every aspect of the Maiden’s lives simply because Norman Cousins believed it so. As an American, it is not hard to imagine he would have an underlying loyalty to his country. He also put four years into making the arrangements for this project (Sherlin, pg 59). Somebody who worked for that long would most likely want to claim that the venture was a total success. On the other hand, to fully agree with David Serlin’s take on the program, he would need to incorporate more of the Maiden’s personal take on it. A photograph, as one example, can provide an incredible amount of information to scholars, but without talking to the people posing within one, it can be nearly impossible to conclude whether women are, “smiling obligingly” or just genuinely having a fun time (Sherlin, pg 91). To discover the true feelings of the Hiroshima Maidens, one would have to take primary sources as well as secondary sources and piece together the facts from the opinions.