R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program 487

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021

pioneers and pathbreakers LEONARDO, Vol. 50,No. 5,pp.486–492, 2017 486 ABSTRACT Fair in 1956 in Kabul, Afghanistan. At the time of the 1959 the of time the At Afghanistan. Kabul, in 1956 in Fair Exhibition in Moscow in 1959 and at the International Trade National American the at Fuller with worked also ’67, had JackMasey, worked atUSIA forwho Expo Fuller hired and ’67. Fuller worked for the USIA before the Expo commission. U.S.USIA the missionedby the design to Pavilion forExpo but ahumanitarian nation. nationwar-faring a UnitedStates—not the of side humane a show to World,” wanted His USIA and the “Man theme, War Cold Vietnam the and War. Expo’s the Inkeepingwith April 1967 and closed 29 October 1967. It was the time of the 28 fair’s The on funding. opened gates of lack to due clined de Union Soviet the after site the as chosen was Montreal ’67. Expo Montreal Exhibition International and Universal for the U.S. Pavilion at ’67 knownExpo [1], asotherwise the Information Agency (USIA) to develop an exterior structure and the company Geometrics were hired by the United States RichardBuckminsterFuller,1964,of Sadao Shojifall the In P U.S. and theAtomsforPeaceProgram the Expo’67Pavilion e v i t c e p s r R. BuckminsterFuller, e p l a c i r o t s i h designing hisgeodesicdome,includingExpo’67pavilion. when could beappliedforpeacetimeapplications,particularly productsofdestruction—ofwaranditsweaponry— potential forfearful explains howFuller, likepoliticiansofthetime,believedthat base andthusbeappliedtodevelopbetterarchitecture.Thisarticle thought atomictechnologycouldhelpextendhumankind’s knowledge Americans butcouldbeappliedforthebenefitofallhumanity. Fuller Fuller believedthattechnologybasedontheatomdidnotjustfavor architecture wasanoutgrowthofthepeacefulatom.And,likeJohnson, peace” enthusiasts,Fullerthoughtthattherevolutionthenoccurringin similar ideas.LikeU.S.PresidentLyndon Johnsonandother“atomsfor lead, architect-designer-philosopherRichardBuckminsterFullerespoused the rhetoricofpeacefuluseatom.Followinggovernment’s Since theendofWorld War hasembraced II, theU.S.government with thisissue. See forsupplementalfilesassociated Email: Rebecca There are a few reasons why Fuller may have been com- been have may Fuller why reasons few a are There

.

a Dalvesco vilion vilion R A C C E B E

(design-architectural at Ex p o ’67 o D

historian), a lv

Mesa, C S E

AZ,

U.S.A. o

- MD. Photo:Rebecca Dalvesco.) Source: TheUnitedStates NationalArchivesatCollegePark, Park, the exteriorofpavilion.(Courtesy, TheEstate ofR.BuckminsterFuller. Fig. 1. air at all locations and other statistics. All of these data would the in airplanes resources, natural movements, population growth, population data: various provide and mechanized The 1). (Fig. space exhibition the of Dymaxion World Map his enlargement600-foot-longof a for was pavilion the for During Fuller’s initial withinterview the USIA, his first idea Design: Early area over any other. nation’s the UnitedandStates the this in in superiority ogy architecturaltechnolof- importance the stressed it because U.S. Pavilion fitthe USIA’s the for designed agenda Fuller fordome an geodesic War.The “American Cold identity” the during Union Soviet the in as well as States United the in domes geodesic promotehis to used he thatatom peaceful desic domes for of pavilions. both these nation’seach ofmerits createdFullergeo- consumer goods. the famous Nixon and Khrushchev kitchen debate about the Moscow Exhibition, the Cold War had reached its peak with Another reason may have been Fuller’s rhetoric of the the of rhetoric Fuller’s been have may reason Another

Fuller’s firstproposaltotheUSIAshowinghisDymaxionMap and World Game World doi:10.1162/LEON_a_01157 , which was to be placed on the ground World MapWorld ©2017 ISAST would be be would was hired for the interior exhibit design, there were many problems with Fuller’s tetrahedronal truss exhibition structure. The tetrahedronal truss was only a roof

structure, so there were worries about pioneers and pathbreakers drainage and shelter from Montreal’s win- ter climate. These technical issues would require the tetrahedronal truss to be en- closed with walls. Such an enclosure would create a heavier mass than Fuller’s first proposal and ruin his concept of a light- weight tensegrity structure. Fuller also did not have any agenda for how people would use the generated form. He was more in-

Fig. 2. Fuller’s tetrahedronal truss for the U.S. Pavilion that was part of his Total Exhibit Package. terested in form for form’s sake and the (Courtesy, The Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller. Source: the United States National Archives at College system for the system’s sake [4]. Park, College Park, MD. Photo: Rebecca Dalvesco.) Final Design: Skybreak Bubble Peter Chermayeff proposed to Fuller the concept of a large geodesic dome for the exhibition structure. He met with Fuller, along with Jack Masey and Ivan Cher- mayeff, a few weeks later in Washington, D.C., to discuss this idea further. Peter brought a book of Fuller’s work to the meeting containing a photograph of Ful­ ler’s theoretical 1951 Cotton Mill project. He pointed out the project—a transparent, three-quarter spherical structure that had a number of floors—to Fuller and con- vinced him to use it as the impetus for the U.S. Pavilion [5]. Geodesic domes are large, clear-span structures that involve geodesic tensegrity, which was Fuller’s name for his discontin- uous-compression, continuous-tension Fig. 3. Fuller’s final design, a ¾ geodesic dome for Expo ’67, shows a monorail passing structures [6]. Fuller patented his concept through the pavilion. (© Cambridge Seven Associates. Photo: Peter Chermayeff.) of the geodesic dome in 1954. The U.S. Pa- vilion was Fuller’s largest geodesic dome, measuring 250 feet in diameter and 187 feet in height and composed of steel struts and help to emphasize “the unity and interaction of people” [2]. acrylic lenses (Fig. 3). This was the first time Fuller would According to Fuller, this exhibit would have been called How be able to realize a geodesic dome of such a large volume. It Do I Make the World Work? which later became known as would become known as the Skybreak Bubble. World Game. In Fuller’s game, a computer would answer The U.S. Pavilion was developed using a model of a spheri- questions pertaining to the world and its resources. At the cal icosahedron, which is an icosahedron exploded onto the conclusion of the Expo, prizes would be given to authors of surface of a sphere. The engineers hired for the project— essays discussing pertinent issues as developed on the World Heger, Simpson and Gumpertz—aided Fuller, Sadao and Map. The exhibit would have open sides, screened by trees, Geometrics to develop a double-layer space frame out of and include exhibits that would surround areas of the map’s Fuller’s basic design of the icosahedron. By using the com- perimeter. Balconies were to be placed on all sides of the puter program MAST, the engineers were able to subdivide map that would allow visitors to see the map and therefore the icosahedron and help develop the final design for the the world in its entirety [3]. Later, Fuller, with Shoji Sadao, U.S. Pavilion [7]. would further develop his Total Exhibit Package, which in- Because an icosahedron has 20 equal sides and 12 equal cluded the Dymaxion Map and his World Game, underneath poles, the largest polyhedron has equal triangular sides and a tetrahedronal truss structure supported by four columns 12 vertices. Therefore, a sphere could be erected that would (Fig. 2). contain 20 equal triangles. For the U.S. Pavilion, the struts According to Peter Chermayeff of Cambridge Seven, who needed to be quite large and subdivided in order to cre-

Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program 487

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021 as the United States redirected atoms used during war into the atoms used for peacetime applications [13]. By 1954, the United States had enough uranium to allow it to promote the international use of nuclear technology

pioneers and pathbreakers for peaceful purposes without detracting from its military supplies. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was soon created in order to manage atomic energy internationally. A fever of nuclear utopianism subsequently spread during the 1950s and 1960s [14]. In 1955, Harold E. Stassen, Eisenhower’s Special Assistant on Disarmament, claimed that nuclear en- ergy would create a new kind of world in the future: [A world] in which there is no disease . . . where hunger is unknown . . . where food never rots and crops never spoil . . . where “dirt” is an old-fashioned word, and routine household tasks are just a matter of pushing a few buttons . . . a world where no one stokes a furnace or curses the smog, where the air is everywhere as fresh as on a mountain top and the breeze from a factory as sweet as from a rose. Imagine, the world of the future . . . the world that nuclear energy can create for us [15]. However, the control of the peaceful application of the atom also implied the control of the military use of atomic Fig. 4. The double-layer space frame of the U.S. Pavilion designed by technology. ­engineers Simpson, Gumpertz and Heger. (Photo © Rebecca Dalvesco) Like Eisenhower, U.S. President Lyndon Johnson was also an advocate of nuclear power and the Atoms for Peace pro- gram. Like most nuclear advocates, Johnson believed that ate a spherical appearance with an outer layer composed the splitting of the atom would create utopia for humanity. of triangles and an inner layer composed of hexagons [8] Johnson continued propagating phrases of a technological (Fig. 4). utopia—a nuclear utopia—and expressed this ideology in the following: Fuller and the Atoms for Peace Program But the most exciting horizons are in the life of man himself In 1945, at the end of World War II, U.S. President Harry Tru- —and what we can do to improve it. We can eliminate pov- man stressed using the atom for “peaceful and humanitarian erty. We can cure man’s ills, extend man’s life, and raise ends” [9]. Truman commented: man’s hopes. This is the call we must answer [16]. Never before in history has society been confronted with To Johnson and other nuclear prophets, nuclear research a power so full of potential danger and at the same time so and development would end society’s ills. Atomic research full of promise for the peace of the world. I say that we can would provide the answer to remaining young and disease use the knowledge we have won, not for the devastation of free. His predictions regarding the atomic future, like those war, but for the future of man [10]. of others in this area, might have disappointed him in terms of their accuracy. The following year, the U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1946 Fuller’s rhetoric has often been deemed unnecessarily took control of atomic energy from the military and placed it complex [17]. As an early proponent of the use of technol- in the hands of civilian management. It was believed that the ogy for the betterment of humanity, Fuller fell into alignment technology used to create nuclear weapons should be used with Johnson’s speeches and Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace for peacetime purposes [11]. Public policies were established program and their nuclear utopian rhetoric. He often wrote to encourage such civilian applications in the areas of nuclear as if he were different from the politicians and their rhetoric, power, radioactive isotopes in medical diagnostic procedures but his ideas are very similar. Fuller, like Truman, Eisenhower and agricultural endeavors [12]. and Johnson, believed that the potential of fearful products In 1949, the Soviets exploded their first atomic bomb. The of destruction—of war and its weaponry—could be applied United States would soon advocate the sharing of nuclear to peacetime applications, and in particular, his geodesic information on an international basis. The United States re- domes. He acknowledged that most of U.S. resources, as well mained superior in weapons capability to any other country as those of other nations, had gone into wartime production. in the world, and the sharing of information was central to Fuller stated: the Atoms for Peace agenda as espoused by U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower. The Soviet delegation added its support Up to now killingry [sic] systems, or weaponry systems, of the peaceful uses of nuclear information and technology alone have been advantaged by the totally integrated, high-

488 Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021 est physical and scientific capabilities of man and his eco- The American eagle is an excellent symbol of industrial nomically organized world energy, materials and money man’s future. We are won’t [sic] to depict the eagle alertly resources [18]. poised with intense potential mobility and therefore with well-demonstrated security, even upon the most precipi- According to Fuller, the politicians controlled the

tous [sic] advantage [23]. pioneers and pathbreakers weaponry. Fuller instead believed that “livingry,” instead of weaponry, should be the focus of architect-engineers. This mobility is equated to prefabricated architecture, par- ticularly geodesic domes. The national symbol of America, In a manner similar to the past evolution in weaponry sys- the bald eagle, is a metaphor for his prefabricated archi- tems the new, architect-designed, world-around, livingry tecture, as well as for the country. The United States, using [sic] systems will be realized in progressive, economic-­ Fuller’s geodesic dome, is capable of landing anywhere on industrial-­plan increments predicated upon pyramidal Earth, thus being symbolic of American hegemony over the reinvestments of the forward years’ regeneratively ampli- world. It is important to note that the USIA remarked that his fying and progressive techno-economic advantages [19]. geodesic domes were in over 50 countries worldwide when The architect-engineer, or Fuller himself, would be re- the USIA hired him to design the Montreal Pavilion. sponsible for taking wartime technology and applying it to In 1963, Fuller equated his geodesic domes as symbols of livingry systems. In the statement above, Fuller uses the same the nuclear age and purported that his domes should be used rhetoric as the politicians. His domes were important not by the United States and the Soviet Union. He claimed that only for their advanced technology but for creating this type the etymology of the dome can be equated with God, home of architecture for less than the cost of conventional housing. and dome—domus, domicile and dome. Dome, he added, is Fuller touted his geodesic domes’ superiority for providing also the root word for dominate and dominion. He went on an economic advantage to the nation using them in the Cold to discuss how the etymology of dome may also be related War. America’s “checkmating and counter-checkmating” to the word bomb: would rely on each nation’s technological ability, and “the The D was interchanged with the T in designation of the winning technique must devolve upon superior deployment dome as mortuary shrine and with a W as the gestation of higher standards of living facility—livingry” [20]. Thus, or pre-nativity shrine. Thus man went from W-OM-B to Fuller’s domes are equated with the military and technologi- T-OM-B via the H-OM-E. Even the B-OM-B is derivative cal strength of a nation. Fuller describes how his domes can of dome as the super-accelerated explosive nativity con- help prevent further nuclear attacks: tainer. The Bikini bomb was dome-like in shape [24]. The biggest guns of this Cold War exchange eventually Fuller gave his domes layers of meanings. He emphasized must be a barrage of production of scientific dwelling that his geodesic domes would survive atomic blasts and machines, as constituting the comprehensive package of proclaimed that the only structure left remaining at ground higher livingry [sic] standards. Thus there would be world zero in Hiroshima in 1945 was a dome framing of a structure economic preoccupation with competitive fostering of the and that the Japanese made a “historical monument” of this new phase of world-wide industry—livingry [sic]. The up- structure [25]. shot of this new preoccupation is progressive reduction of Fuller affirmed that his geodesic domes had the same probability of further shooting wars [sic] [21]. principles as a nuclear bomb; there is an “advantage” to the His domes—scientific dwelling machines—would help hemispherical volume with the “natural fountain-wise flow solve the Cold War crisis, and the minds of the politicians of of heated air (for air heated at the center tends to expand both countries should be focused on using his prefabricated and rise as the heavier air is pulled down by gravity)” [26]. domes to help prevent any major wars from occurring. The The hot air—as it moves upward, expands and cools— “flows capitalistic production and distribution of his domes would outward and downward to floor level, then re-centers for help the two nations look toward consumerism, and this reheating and recirculation” [27]. His geodesic domes are an would help end any future threat of nuclear war. example of using the principles of this heating and cooling According to Fuller, prefabricated architecture is architec- in a shape metaphorical of the Bikini Bomb. Fuller claimed ture that gives a nation an advantage over another. Fuller that geodesic domes could “withstand nearby atomic bomb believed that in war, supremacy goes to the party with the shock impacts” [28]. Therefore, his domes could also be used biggest defense advantage. This defense advantage lies in as fallout shelters in case of nuclear war. mobility; thus the military should not build permanent Soviet engineers purportedly informed Fuller that by the structures. The military should “not dig in” [22]. Architec- 1960s the Soviet Union would have cities composed of geode- ture and politics were intricately intertwined to Fuller and sic domes in the Arctic [29]. By stating this, Fuller was plac- he promoted his domes as wartime dwellings. ing the United States in competition with the Soviet Union. Fuller was espousing a Modernist rhetoric on not only He used the Cold War as a means to market his geodesic the international style of architecture but also the American domes to both nations. According to Fuller, geodesic domes hegemony of architecture. This can be exemplified in the fol- were symbolic and iconic of the nuclear bomb, and whoever lowing statement where Fuller uses the symbol of the United obtained his geodesic domes were thereby claiming their States, the bald eagle: nuclear superiority.

Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program 489

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021 He also used his geodesic dome as a means to lead to disarma- the peaceful atom and, therefore, the commercial aspects of ment. Any country that employed his domes would have the the atom, because whoever controls the peaceful atom con- advantage in controlling the peacetime atom. Fuller explains: trols the consumer market. His domes would help to achieve this control. [The Soviets are] converting their high aeronautical too-

pioneers and pathbreakers According to Fuller, his domes are a direct product of up’s (tool-ups) [sic] advance industrial capability and large weaponry and thus are superior to any previous domes in production capacity directly to livingry [sic], to be first in- architectural history. As Fuller notes, it is what the geodesic stalled in remote places such as their vast Arctic frontiers. domes represent. It is in this manner that he applies technol- I think the Russians will be delivering livingry [sic] equip- ogy—metaphorically—as a nuclear bomb. ment and environment-controlled structures of a city of In 1964, Fuller informed the USIA that at the time of Expo ten thousand in a one-day air drop within the next five ’67, the world’s regard for the United States would be at its years [30]. lowest in decades [32]. Fuller believed that the United States He continued: had to convince the rest of the world that it was not just a fighting machine but that it also had humanistic qualities. Because of this historical reorientation of highest prior- After U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, John- ity capability from weaponry to livingry [sic], I am sure son inherited the objective of containing Communism in that Khrushchev is going to agree to much disarmament. I Vietnam [33]. After 1964, the United States’ role in Vietnam think you can safely say that this major shift of weaponry began to grow steadily. Johnson ordered Operation Rolling to livingry [sic] production is at the back of all his present Thunder: continuous airstrikes over North Vietnam. Eighty- strategy. Khrushchev is glad to have his adversaries think three percent of the American public supported Johnson’s of his desire for disarmament as constituting only propa- decisions pertaining to the war. However, some did not. A ganda, for this will give him just so much of an advance number of protests sprang up across the United States, at start in capturing consumers for his conversion of weap- universities, in the United Nations and even at the White onry to livingry [sic] [31]. House [34]. In this statement, Fuller is suggesting that the Soviet Union The USIA did not want to symbolize America’s identity is ahead of the United States in terms of the applications of with military strength but instead wished to promote a hu-

Fig. 5. President Johnson viewing the model of Fuller’s U.S. Pavilion. Around the model are Leonard Marks (2nd from left), Johnson, Fuller (2nd from right). Also present: Amb. Edgar Ritchie (Canada), Robert Winter (Canada) and Milton Friedman. (Photo: Yoichi Okamoto. Courtesy of the Lyndon B. Johnson Archives.)

490 Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021 manistic portrait of America. Nicholas Ruggieri, an assistant Even the USIA emphasized Fuller’s apolitical stance. In the to the Commissioner General for the U.S. Pavilion, stated USIA’s report on the architects of the pavilion, they affirmed that the objective for the U.S. Pavilion and its exhibits was that Fuller would achieve this coordination of “resources and “to portray a nation—a warm and human portrait of a people technology on a world scale for the benefit of all mankind,

whose intrinsic good humor and love of life goes often unno- and would constantly anticipate future needs while they pioneers and pathbreakers ticed in the cold brilliance of its technological prowess” [35]. found ever-better ways of providing more and more from The USIA wanted a structure that would serve to mask its less and less” [38]. The USIA claimed that Fuller would ac- military strength. Fuller’s rhetoric of going from weaponry to complish all of this “independently of politics and ideology” livingry, similar to that of the Atoms of Peace program enthu- [39]. The USIA continued, “Fuller thinks there is still time to siasts, fit this notion of the United States as a peaceful nation. accomplish this, despite the political and economic upheav- Fuller met Johnson at the end of 1966, when he and others als of the times” [40]. Because Expo ’67 took place during the gathered in the Cabinet Room at the White House to view time of the Cold War and the Vietnam War, it was important a model of the U.S. Pavilion for Expo ’67 (Fig. 5). At this for the USIA to emphasize that Fuller’s ideas could be applied meeting, the Canadian official presented Johnson with an to help define America’s identity as not a war-faring nation honorary passport to the exposition. but as a humanitarian nation. Fuller’s U.S. Pavilion would be a symbol of nuclear supe- Conclusion riority and technical architectural engineering superiority. There could be many explanations of why Fuller was hired to In 1963, Fuller claimed that his domes resembled the atomic design the U.S. Pavilion. While Fuller (and others) claimed bomb in shape and in principle. He wanted to propagate the he was apolitical, his ideas fit into those propagated during use of his domes worldwide by marketing them with the the 1960s by Johnson and other nuclear enthusiasts who rhetoric of the Atoms for Peace program—as an ace card believed in the Atoms for Peace program. Popular culture for the Soviet Union as well as the United States during the during the 1960s also incorporated the wonderful promises Cold War. He proclaimed and marketed the domes’ benefits of the nuclear age [36]. for both wartime and peacetime. Thus, both Fuller and the Like Johnson and other nuclear enthusiasts, Fuller be- U.S. government could conclude that his domes were icons of lieved that technology could solve “such problems as war, power. They could be icons for power; whomever controlled overpopulation, hunger, and disease” [37]. Fuller advocated the peaceful atom, controlled the military atom. that a comprehensive designer would help to carry out this Fuller’s U.S. Pavilion may be viewed as mirroring the mission of using weapons technology for peacetime applica- American political culture as well as concealing it. It re- tions. This would lead to his notion of a design revolution—a flected the rhetoric of the Atoms for Peace program, claim- worldwide technological revolution. The United States, as ing the United States’ superiority in nuclear research and well as other nations, could achieve this through the use of development, while it tried to conceal its involvement in the his geodesic domes. Vietnam War.

References and Notes Lincoln Lab, could perform structural analysis of large three-­ dimensional structures. For the U.S. Pavilion, engineers used the 1 John Henderson, The United States Information Agency (New York: MAST program to help convert membrane forces that are axial forces Praeger, 1969). Formed in 1953, under Dwight D. Eisenhower’s ad- (tension and compression) as well as sheer forces into strut forces. ministration, the United States Information Agency (USIA) had its beginnings in a postwar program called the Office of International 8 Heger [7]. Information and Cultural Affairs (OIC 1946), which was started by the government for peacetime propaganda. During 1947, its name 9 On 6 August 1945, the U.S. government made the decision to launch changed to the Office of International Information and Education an attack on Hiroshima with the atomic bomb. Another bomb hit Exchange (OIE) with the United States Information Service (USIS) the city of Nagasaki. In July 1946, two bombs would be deployed as its overseas organization. The USIA was given authority for any over the Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands. Chester Holifield, “The U.S. participation in international fairs and exhibitions abroad. Birth of the Peaceful Atom,” in Joseph Pilat and Charles Ebinger, eds., Atoms for Peace: An Analysis After Thirty Years (Boulder and 2 John J. Slocum and Jack Masey, “Interviews with the Architects: (12) London: Westview Press, 1985) p. 54. R. Buckminster Fuller, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Il- linois, and Forest Hills, New York.” In the United States National 10 Holifield [9] pp. 54–58. Archives at College Park, College Park, MD, 1964, pp. 1–2. 11 Steven L. Del Sesto, “Wasn’t the Future of Nuclear Engineering 3 Slocum and Masey [2] p. 2. Wonderful?” in Joseph J. Corn, ed., Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology, and the American Future (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986) 4 Peter Chermayeff, personal communication, 5 May 2000. pp. 58–76. 5 Chermayeff [4]. 12 Holifield et al. [9]. 6 Richard Buckminster Fuller, Ideas and Integrities: A Spontaneous 13 Holifield et al. [9]. Autobiographical Disclosure (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1963) p. 170. 14 Nuclear utopianism can be traced back as early as 1909. However, during the 1950s and 1960s, it became even more apparent ac- 7 Frank Heger, personal communication, 3 May 2000. The MAST cording to American writers and government officials. Corn [11] (Membrane Analysis of Structures) program, developed by MIT’s pp. 58–76.

Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program 491

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021 15 Corn [11] p. 58. papers also had antiwar ads among their pages. See Tom Wells, The War Within: America’s Battle Over Vietnam (Berkeley: University 16 Lyndon B. Johnson, remarks at the meeting of “Scientists and Engi- of California Press, 1994) p. 20. neers for Johnson-Humphrey,” 6 October 1964. In Public Papers of the Presidents: Lyndon B. Johnson, July 1 to December 31, 1964 (Vol. 35 Nicholas Ruggieri, “What is the U.S. Pavilion at Expo?” 17 June 1966, 2) (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1964) p. 1217. in the United States National Archives at College Park, College Park, pioneers and pathbreakers MD, p. 1. 17 Rebecca Dalvesco, Fuller Speak (Ottawa: Legas Press, 2002). 36 Films propagating the wonders of the nuclear age include Voyage to 18 Fuller [6] p. 277. the Bottom of the Sea (1961), King Kong vs. Godzilla (U.S. version) 19 Fuller [6] p. 277. and A Bomb Was Stolen (Romanian version, 1961). All of these films extoll the wonders of the nuclear age. See Mick Broderick, Nuclear 20 Fuller [6] p. 192. Movies: A Critical Analysis and Filmography of International Feature Length Films Dealing with Experimentation, Aliens, Terrorism, Holo- 21 Fuller [6] p. 196. caust and Other Disaster Scenarios, 1914–1990 (London: McFarland & Company, Inc., 1991). 22 Fuller [6] p. 208. 37 USIA, “The Architects of the United States Pavilion,” c. 1964–1967, 23 Fuller [6] p. 93. Arizona State Univ., Architecture and Environmental Design Library 24 Fuller [6] p. 93. Archives, Tempe, AZ, p. 1. 25 Fuller [6] p. 154. 38 USIA [37] p. 1. 26 Fuller [6] p. 221. 39 USIA [37] p. 1. 27 Fuller [6] p. 221. 40 USIA, “R. Buckminster Fuller: Architect of the U.S. Pavilion at Mon- treal’s EXPO ’67, c. 1964–1967,” in Arizona State Univ., Architecture 28 Fuller [6] p. 223. and Environmental Design Library Archives, Tempe, AZ, p. 1. 29 Fuller [6] p. 165. 30 Fuller [6] p. 295. Manuscript received 4 September 2014. 31 Fuller [6] p. 295. 32 Richard Buckminster Fuller, “Letter to Dr. Jerome B. Wiesner, c/o Rebecca Dalvesco obtained her PhD from Arizona State President’s Advisory Committee on Science,” 14 February 1965, in University in architectural history, theory and criticism. Her the United States National Archives at College Park, College Park, MS is in industrial design theory, criticism and methodology. MD, p. 1. Dalvesco was art history chair and design historian at The Uni- 33 At the beginning of Kennedy’s presidency, less than one thousand versity of Wisconsin-Stout. She later became assistant professor U.S. advisors were in Vietnam. At the time of his death in November at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Department of 1963, there were approximately 16,000 advisors in Vietnam. In 1965, Johnson sent the first American troops—more than half a million— Architecture, Interior Architecture and Designed Objects. She to Vietnam. See Michael Kort, The Columbia Guide to the Cold War was also a faculty affiliate of the school’s Art History Depart- (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1998) p. 53. ment and helped develop the curriculum for the then-fledgling 34 During this time, the White House received more than 1,000 tele- Architecture, Interior Architecture and Designed Objects Mas- grams denouncing the U.S. bombings in Vietnam. Major news­- ter’s Programs.

492 Dalvesco, R. Buckminster Fuller, the Expo ’67 Pavilion and the Atoms for Peace Program

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/LEON_a_01157 by guest on 01 October 2021