Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
1
WRITING THE UNTHINKABLE: NARRATIVE, THE BOMB AND NUCLEAR
HOLOCAUST
By Adam Gyngell
In Russell Hoban’s Riddley Walker, Riddley enters ‘the woom of Cambry’, the epicentre of the
nuclear blast that reduced England to a neolithic state over two thousand years earlier. Walking
through the crypt of the devastated cathedral, he experiences a numinous revelation of the power
that was at once the apex of civilization’s achievement and the architect of its destruction.
Riddley struggles to articulate the sense of annihilation, of absence, he feels: ‘Some times theres
mor in the emty paper nor there is when you get the writing down on it. You try and word the
big things and they tern ther backs on you’ (Hoban 2002, 161). Riddley finds it difficult to come
to terms with the nuclear holocaust that constitutes his primitive society’s point of origin. But his
problem is also that of narrative: faced with the empty space that lies at the centre of this
apocalypse, Riddley finds that the blank page expresses the totality of the annihilation better than
any words could. Riddley’s experience illustrates the extent to which nuclear holocaust resists
representation, defies narrative structure and eludes the very words with which we write.
The detonation of the atomic bomb irreversibly altered man’s relationship with the world he
inhabited. Absolute finality had been the exclusive preserve of story-tellers, of fictions, of
narrative; the bomb now threatened to end the human narrative itself, to put an end to not only
history but the conditions by which history might exist. In 1948, Andre Breton admitted that he
had once been seduced by the ‘temptation for the end of the world.’ Apocalypse had represented the
thrill of revolution, the absurd carnage of meaningless devastation. Now, having come through
another global war and the nuclear obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Breton decided on
behalf of his generation that ‘we no longer want the end of the world’ (Conrad 1998, 39). Nuclear
apocalypse would yield nothingness. The end of the world, Breton realized, could happen: but
the event would be purely destructive. It would not be hermeneutic, it would not be revelatory; it
would just happen. Insofar as we represent it at all, we are not representing it. Like Riddley’s
paper, nuclear holocaust occupies a blank space. We can write about it only by writing ‘about’ it,
by writing around its perimeter, by circumnavigating an empty centre. Nuclear holocaust is
intrinsically alien to narrative, aggressively extinguishing the very possibility of narrative itself.
Nevertheless, we look to narrative to see what it can ‘tell’ us about nuclear holocaust, and to see
whether it can tell us about it. Steven Connor astutely notes that ‘apocalypse is as much a challenge
to our capacity to conceive, represent and narrate it, as it is to our will to avert it’ (Connor 1996,
201). Indeed, one might say that the atomic bomb and its aftermath have become suitable icons
for the post-mortem condition of post-modernism because the post-modern, as Lyotard notes, is
‘that which, in the modern, puts forward the unpresentable in presentation itself’ (Lyotard 1984,
81).
Narrating the annihilation of the world and its inhabitants, the writer occupies a liminal space
after the end as a survivor and witness of his own apocalypse. In Nevil Shute’s On the Beach, the
need to circumscribe an apocalypse that cannot be circumvented is taken as a matter of national
policy. The government authorized a history of the nuclear holocaust to be written on glass
bricks, encased in a cement cellar on Australia’s highest peak. Nuclear holocaust is a (non)event
that puts an end to history. Yet the decision to record the holocaust demonstrates an attempt to
historicize an event that will put an end to writing, an event that has not taken place and that, in
taking place, will end rather than initiate its historicity. No one will read this history; Dwight’s
belief that ‘there should be something written, all the same’ (Shute 2000, 77) is indicative of the
impulse towards resisting the absolute finality of nuclear holocaust, towards providing the
satisfaction of narrative closure that nuclear ending prohibits. Indeed, the document is
characteristic of the way writers find means of framing the apocalypse, of defusing its finality: the
recording of the holocaust strenuously resists the possibility that the catastrophe could be the
end of this narrative, or the ending of narrative itself. Rarely does the end of the narrative
coincide with the end of the world. In On the Beach, the existence of the ragged remnants of
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/opt.060903
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
2
humanity provides the psychic space needed to contemplate and articulate nuclear annihilation.
Faced with the prospect of an end without appendix, with the task of imagining an event that is
terminal, authors construct scenarios ‘after the end’. Apocalypse must be displaced
chronologically and ontologically.
In Riddley Walker and Walter Miller’s A Canticle for Leibowitz, nuclear holocaust is framed from the
longer perspective of future time: the disaster is not the end but a distant point of origin, a
cataclysmic past that is reconstructed through surviving texts and oral myths. The apocalypses
depicted in these post-apocalyptic representations are historical events. Remainders and
reminders survive: the people who inhabit these post-apocalyptic worlds try to discover, through
deciphering its traces, the nature of war, and of our own situation before its outbreak. For
Riddley’s community, all quests for forgotten knowledge resemble the excavation of wrecks from
the earth. These speculative fictions point back towards an apocalypse that is an erasure, a blank
space that characters try to interpret and understand by articulating the fragments that remain.
The worlds they portray are characterized by the absence of written texts and literacy. As a result,
nuclear holocaust becomes an enigma which survives only outside the order of conventional
discourse: in the songs and children’s rhymes of Riddley Walker; in the shopping lists and circuit
diagrams of A Canticle.
Nuclear holocaust thus exists on the margins of the text: the bomb falls in an unspecified past
before the start of the narrative (like the shadow of nuclear destruction in George Orwell’s 1984)
or beyond the last page of the book (as in Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow). Authors
invariably write about nuclear war without confronting it directly. Speculative fictions dodge the
realities of human apocalypse by transferring it to other times, other species, and other galaxies.
Nuclear annihilation itself is seldom portrayed in narrative: peering into the crater, writers
nervously edge back to the narrative safety of solid ground. The most challenging narratives are
those that attempt to render holocaust in the narrative present, rather than placing it in the
assumed narrative past. Yet, in the present, it is an event that annihilates the very possibility of
narrative representation. It can only be known in advance, in projections, in predictions, and in
premonitory narratives: it exists in the speculative tense of science-fiction, the future-conditional
of what ifs and maybes. The few works that take us through the blank of the atomic blast are
forced to question their own capacities to represent. In Gee’s The Burning Book, the blast arrives
in faltering present participles and ellipses before incinerating the very pages we read. Nuclear
holocaust takes the form of three charred, grey pages at the book’s end. Whether it be set in the
distant past or projected future, apocalypse finds a narrative frame. The end of narrative is
signalled by and within narrative itself. In contrast, works that narrate the holocaust in the
present tense find that frame shattered. In Briggs’s graphic novel When the Wind Blows, this is
explicitly realized. Normal life and its everyday routines are contained within the secure frame of
the comic strip; when the bomb explodes, the page is scorched white, its edges tinged a reddish-
pink. The frame itself is shattered and dissolved.
R. J. Lifton has observed that the hypothetical space of nuclear disaster cannot be inhabited by
the imagination. Writers find themselves skirting round the perimeter of the gaping chasm of
disaster, unable to conceive or represent it except by indirection. Nuclear holocaust offers a test
of the limits of the human imagination. The Editorial in the 31 August 1946 edition of The New
Yorker explained the editors’ decision to print Hersey’s Hiroshima in full, ‘in the conviction that
few of us have yet comprehended the all but incredible destructive powers of this weapon’
(Hersey 1981, 15). The bomb and its effects are ‘all but incredible’. The very language used to
convey the power of the explosion is stretched to its elastic limits; one could not believe it were
it not for the knowledge of its very real existence. Its consequences exert an even greater
pressure on the resources of the imagination. Confronted with the picture of mass obliteration,
radioactive contamination, and even human extinction, the mind recoils:
‘Can you visualize it, Dwight?’
‘Visualize what?’
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
3
‘All those cities, all those fields and farms, with nobody, and
nothing left alive. Just nothing there. I simply can’t take it in.’
(Shute 2000, 59)
In Shute’s novel, Moira experiences the difficulties of conceiving such total destruction, despite
living in a world that has felt its devastating effects. ‘It’s too big,’ she concedes, ‘I can’t take it
in… I suppose it’s a lack of imagination.’ Riddley articulates a similar sentiment: ‘you never wil
get to see the woal of any thing youre all ways in the middl of it living it or moving thru it’
(Hoban 2002, 186). Denied a cosmic perspective, the human imagination, trapped in the
confines of the individual consciousness, finds itself engaging with something too big to
comprehend.
If nuclear holocaust defies human imagination, then it constitutes an even greater challenge to
artistic representation. Devoid of the symbolic or allusive mediations that dominate apocalyptic
narratives, nuclear holocaust precludes the possibility of a narrative structure; by imagining the
destruction, one is projected into a dead time that falls outside the human tenses of past, present
and future. In Huxley’s Ape and Essence, the description of nuclear holocaust occupies just one
sentence. ‘There is a little click, then a long silence which is broken at last by the voice of the
Narrator’ (Huxley 1994, 31). It requires ‘the voice of the Narrator’ to give narrative shape to
silent void: the terminal moment itself is a centre of absence, bordered by the ‘click’ that
precedes it, and the voice that follows. In the novella, the holocaust is referred to by survivors
only as ‘The Thing’, an event that remains indefinite, unspecified. In A Canticle, the Abbot
informs a curious scientist: ‘I doubt if a single completely accurate account of the Flame Deluge
exists anywhere. Once it started, it was apparently too immense for any one person to see the
whole picture’ (Miller 2007, 188). Wandering through the Zone in Gravity’s Rainbow, Slothrop
encounters a scrap of newspaper which contains the novel’s only oblique reference to Hiroshima
(Pynchon 2000, 822). He makes out the letters
MB DRO
ROSHI
Staring at the distorted wire photo of the mushroom cloud printed on the soggy paper, Slothrop
sits on the curb, blankly staring at the page. The report on the bomb dropped is fragmentary, a
code that he is unable to decipher. Slothrop has no idea of the content of the whole headline,
nor can the paper give him any. It seems apposite that he finds only wet scraps: the cryptic
quality of this fragment perhaps goes further towards capturing the devastating nature of
Hiroshima than the full, unspoilt page ever could. Lifton discovered in the hibakusha or ‘psychic
numbing’ of Hiroshima survivors a metaphor for what one might feel if one tries to undergo and
absorb the experience of nuclear annihilation: ‘the human mind cannot bear very much of this
reality’ (Lifton 1967, 33). In a novel like Gravity’s Rainbow that deals with the aftermath of World
War II, the absence of Hiroshima is conspicuous. In this episode, we see how Pynchon’s
narrative seems to evade, even repress, the cataclysmic event. The memory of the Japanese
holocaust acts both as a brake and a stimulus to the apocalyptic imagination, exposing the limits
of our language and our imagination. Nuclear holocaust is ‘unthinkable’: in its destructive fire, it
consumes all potential for meaning, all systems of human thought. Riddley believes that ‘The 1
Big 1 and the Master Chaynjis aint some thing you littl in to writing’ (Hoban 2002, 84). Nuclear
holocaust points to a site past the possibility of signifying, of representing. It cannot be ‘littled
into writing’; when we try to articulate the totality of the obliteration, we are left facing a
blankness, or emptiness.
In Part One of Gravity’s Rainbow, ‘Beyond the Zero’, Slothrop explains to Tantivy his fears about
living under the rocket’s arc: ‘it could happen any time, the next second, right, just suddenly…
shit… just zero, just nothing… and…’ (Pynchon 2000, 29). At the moment of detonation, there
is nothing, ‘just zero’. It is in the ‘and…’ that follows this ‘zero’ that Riddley Walker finds its point
of origin. The thematic and geographical centre of the novel’s world is Cambry, the forbidden
zone that lies at the heart of his culture’s genesis: ‘I knowit Cambry Senter ben flattent the werst
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
4
of all the dead town senters it ben Zero Groun it ben where the wite shadderd stood up over
every thing’ (Hoban 2002, 159). Cambry is the ‘Zero Groun’: erased and effaced by the ‘wite
shadder’ of the nuclear blast, it is ‘the woom’ of his primitive society, encircled by the ring of
dead towns. Riddley’s choice of words is significant. Cambry is Ground Zero, the calculable
point of impact of a nuclear warhead; it is the point at which the world as we know it ended, and
the world as he knows it began. It is where a new year zero commenced. It is also ‘Zero ground’:
uninhabitable, with radioactive decay tangible in the air; it is a mark of absence, a scar on the
landscape, a locus of nothingness. In the novel, we are given a map that draws the Power Ring –
the ditch left by the particle accelerator that once stood around the town – as a concentric circle
around the crater, a topographical zero with an empty centre. The image is a fitting one for a
novel that deals with nuclear annihilation. Spencer Weart has noted how the image of the ringed
atom became ubiquitous in Cold War iconography and manifested itself in various forms: the
cross-sections of the bomb, the rocket mandalas of Gravity’s Rainbow, the extending continuum
of circles that form the blast radius, the green light sweeping round a radar. Riddley first heard of
this ring from the children’s song ‘Fools Circel 9ways’ (Hoban 2002, 5). It soon becomes the
circle that he must circumnavigate whilst interpreting his society’s most primal myth: ‘If we go to
Fork Stoan weare keaping the circel thatwl be axel rating the Inner G you know. Thats what you
do when you Power roun a ring’ (Hoban 2002, 90). Riddley’s journey and the narrative it
produces resemble the atoms in a particle accelerator. For Jacques Derrida, the visual,
philosophical and narrative depiction of the ‘unthinkable’ takes the form of a circle around a
point designated as zero (Derrida 1978, 281). In Gravity’s Rainbow, a range of characters are
engaged in a personal crusade to ‘try to bring events to Absolute Zero’ (Pynchon 2000, 4). It is
‘Zero’ that forms the symbol for Enzian and the Zone-Hereros in Pynchon’s novel. Architects
of their own destruction,
they calculate no cycles, no returns, they are in love with the
glamour of a whole people’s suicide […] The Empty Ones can
guarantee a day when the last Zone-Herero will die, a final zero to
a collective history fully lived. (Pynchon 2000, 378-9)
The survivors of von Trotha’s brutal extermination campaigns in the Südwest, dispossessed and
dislocated, are known as the ‘Empty Ones’: at their centre there is only absence. Rejecting the
linear, teleological view of history propagated by his colonial oppressors, Enzian believes his
people ‘will find the Center again, the Center without time, the journey without hysteresis, where
every departure is a return to the same place, the only place’ (Pynchon 2000, 379). Like Riddley,
they find themselves drawn by the gravitational pull of ‘the Eternal Center […] the Final Zero.’
In Mordecai Roshwald’s Level 7, X-117 dreams that he is in a crowded city, seconds before the
blinding light of a nuclear blast blots out the sky. When the brightness subsides, he gazes at a
scene of annihilation: ‘where I expected to see a mass of huge buildings there was nothing: what
had been there was erased from the surface of the earth’ (Roshwald 2004, 79). X-117’s dream is a
typical vision of nuclear nihilism: the awareness of absence, of erasure, of nothingness that lies at
the heart of nuclear destruction. When proposals were being made for the Hiroshima Ground
Zero Memorial, one survivor suggested a large, empty open space to represent nothingness –
because ‘that was what there was’ (Lifton and Falk 1982, 108). The blast disintegrated human
bodies, leaving white shadows on the walls and pavement; like these spectral outlines, narrative
can only register a blank, a mark of absence, when it comes to delineating the bomb and its
aftermath. Lifton notes that many Japanese survivors describe their state at that time with the
phrase muga-muchu, ‘without self, without center’ (Lifton 1967, 26). Like the Zone-Hereros, the
Japanese who lived through the blast are ‘Empty Ones’; the words they grasp to give expression
to their experience take the form of negation, of cancellation. In The Burning Book, after the blast
at Hiroshima, ‘the whole world turned white’ (Gee 1983, 66). Gee draws an explicit analogue
between the obliterating destruction of the bomb and the emptiness of the blank page. Just as
the explosion leaves only white shadows, the page becomes a locus of absence, outlined by its
margins. In The Writing of the Disaster, Maurice Blanchot explores the problems of addressing a
holocaust in language: ‘it is that which, in thought, cannot make itself present, or enter into
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
5
presence, and is still less able to be represented or constitute itself as a basis for representation’
(Blanchot 1986, 33). Nuclear holocaust manifests itself as ultimate absence, as an annihilation
that is purely destructive, and as a return to the nihil from which the world was made. Indeed, in
A Canticle, it is this recognition of absence that is supposed to be the key to the fallen
civilization’s sub-atomic wizardry. Brother Jeris asks Francis: ‘What, pray, was the electron?’
Francis replies that ‘there is one fragmentary source which alludes to it as a “Negative Twist of
Nothingness’’’. Jeris scoffs at this response: ‘How clever they must have been, those ancients –
to know how to untwist nothing’ (Miller 2007, 78). For the monks, this ancient science
unleashed such cosmic power through their ability to ‘untwist nothing’. Riddley Walker presents a
similar picture of the past. Riddley eventually gives up his rhapsodic dreams of scientific
progress, of ‘boats in the air and picters in the wind’ (Hoban 2002, 18), in favour of a nihilistic
outlook, a new belief in nothingness. ‘I wernt looking for no Hy Power no mor I dint want no
Power at all… THE ONLYES POWER IS NO POWER’ (Hoban 2002, 167). Riddley’s
revelation takes the form of an awareness of absence – suitably, it takes place at the ‘Zero
Groun’.
It is significant that both Pynchon and Hoban make symbolic investment in the figure of zero.
Zero is an empty character; at the same time, it is a character for emptiness, a symbol signifying
nothing. Zero is, in Blanchot’s terms, ‘that which […] cannot make itself present’: it can be
represented only as something that is absent or missing. Zero is an absent-presence; yet it is also
a cipher, a number, a riddle. It is unsurprising, then, that the protagonists in these novels are
engaged in processes of what Goodparley calls ‘terpitation’, of deciphering riddles, uncovering
clues, and making connections. In A Canticle, the monks analyze diagrams and doodles,
mathematical formulae and personal memos, meaningless texts that they hope will contain some
revelation: ‘this knowledge was empty of content, its subject matter long gone’ (Miller 2007, 66).
The knowledge becomes no more than ‘a symbolic structure’, devoid of meaning. In Riddley
Walker, traces of a long-past nuclear war are misread in an effort to decipher its nature.
Goodparley performs a critical interpretation of the Legend of St. Eustace manuscript, reading a
piece of art-history as if it concealed the alchemical secrets behind the ‘1 Big 1’. Riddley tries to
unriddle the coded myth of the Eusa Story: By deconstructing its words, he tries to find the
hidden, possibly absent, knowledge that lies at the centre of his society. Slothrop, in Gravity’s
Rainbow, is an inveterate sign-reader. Slothrop’s desk comprises ‘lost pieces to different jigsaw
puzzles’ (Pynchon 2000, 27). His mission on the Riviera is to read, to delve through voluminous
documents on rocketry, plastics, and propulsion, searching for clues. He applies a particularly
paranoid mode of reading, in which everything connects to everything else in one grand design.
The Zone-Hereros are ‘the Kabbalists out here […] the scholar-magicians of the Zone, with
somewhere in it a Text, to be picked to pieces, annotated, explicated.’ This ‘holy Text’, Enzian
concludes, ‘had to be the Rocket’ (Pynchon 2000, 616). The Rocket is known only as 00000: if it
is a text, then it is a cipher, an icon empty of content, representing nothing. The 00000 must
have meaning imposed on it, like the Memorabilia of the Albertan Monks, or the Eusa Story.
Blicero believes it to be an escape from the chained cycles of death and destruction: the rocket is
the white, plastic womb to which Gottfried returns. Blicero’s symbolic investment in the 00000
carries a resonance for the task of the writer who addresses the ‘Zero Groun’ of nuclear
holocaust. J. G. Ballard comments that
the catastrophe story […] represents a constructive and positive act
by the imagination rather than a negative one, an attempt to
confront the terrifying void of a patently meaningless universe by
challenging it at its own game, to remake zero by provoking it in
every conceivable way. (Ash ed. 1977, 130)
Like Blicero, the writer must strive ‘to remake zero’, ‘to confront the terrifying void’ that the
prospect of nuclear holocaust creates. Like Riddley, the writer finds that he has only words and
writings on the page with which to fill the void, and to make sense of the abyss that yawns in
front of him.
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
6
The narrator in William S. Burroughs’s The Western Lands sits crossing out scribbled marks on the
page: ‘the old writer couldn’t write anymore because he had reached the end of words, the end of
what can be done with words’ (Burroughs 1987, 258). The atomic bomb and the prospect of
universal annihilation place an interminable stress on the capacity of language to articulate the
realities of the nuclear age. Ideas that were formerly unthinkable now required a semantic
structure, a new language. In Physics and Philosophy, Heisenberg questions how we might
understand nuclear physics when we cannot speak about the atom in ordinary language. Even
physicists found themselves confronted with a mystery, a power that defied the vocabulary that
first tried to encompass it; the behaviour of sub-atomic particles could be explained only in the
densest mathematical equations. Reading a pamphlet about the H-Bomb in The Burning Book,
Angela stares in blank horror at ‘[the] exact mathematical formula of lethality k = y ⅔ / (CEP)²’:
‘in her head, the whole world had just died’ (Gee 1983, 241). Angela sees the human world
replaced by a statistical one: death and destruction are reduced to a neat collection of fractions
and figures. Her vertiginous sense of dislocation, her awareness of the helplessness of words to
express such precise annihilation, is one shared by those whose task it is to narrate nuclear
holocaust. Derrida observes how, faced by the bleak prospect of nuclear ending, we seek to
neutralize its horror, ‘to translate the unknown into a known, to metaphorize, allegorize,
domesticate the terror, to circumvent (with the help of circumlocution…) the inescapable
catastrophe’ (Derrida 1984, 201). Just as Riddley walks in narrative circles around the Power
Ring, so we find ourselves talking around nuclear holocaust. In When the Wind Blows, Mr and Mrs
Bloggs, unable to comprehend the unprecedented destructive force of nuclear war, are reduced
to rolling out clichés from the Blitz. The characters in On the Beach can do little more than
exchange similarly dead metaphors. In Gravity’s Rainbow, Pirate Prentice tries to find an adequate
term for the ‘end of burning, what’s their word… Brennschluss. We don’t have one. Or else it’s
classified’ (Pynchon 2000, 7). Characters inhabiting these apocalyptic worlds are faced with the
failure of language, the breakdown of communication. The monks of A Canticle, trying to explain
the Flame Deluge that wiped out the previous civilization, find that they ‘disagree violently in
words about what we mean in words by something that isn’t really meant in words at all’. Dom
Pauli recognizes that such an event, if it can be understood at all, has meaning only ‘in the dead
silence of the heart’ (Miller 2007, 173). To give verbal expression to that ‘dead silence’, one is
forced to reformulate the very medium of expression itself, to reconstruct the language one uses.
As X-117 tells us in Level 7, ‘to try to describe how complete such complete destruction is, is to
be reduced to playing with words – or with what was and is no more’ (Roshwald 2004, 151).
Perhaps no novel engages in this task of ‘playing with words’, with reconstructing language, more
thoroughly than Riddley Walker. The ‘barms what done it poysening the lan’ have similarly
poisoned the language. In Hoban’s post-atomic world, language, like the world around it, has
been transformed by universal decay. The language of the novel, Hoban noted in an interview,
‘carries in it the ghost of a lost technology’ (Haffenden 1982, 28). Belnot Phist’s
experimentations are translated as ‘spare the mending and tryll narrer’ (Hoban 2002, 119);
Goodparley, trying to find the secrets behind ‘1 Big 1’, knows ‘Ive got to work the E qwations
and the low cations Ive got to comb the nations of it’ (Hoban 2002, 48). In a post-apocalyptic
world, the semiotic system of written and oral language is a teasing, enigmatic collection of signs
whose references have been blasted to atoms and whose constituent parts have been mutated
into strange new forms. The mutations which underwent in this contaminated language have
released untapped semantic energy from the corrupted jargon of technology, science and
computers, fissioning and rupturing into new semantic systems. In Riddley Walker, the word itself
is fissile material. Words break in two, uncovering the secrets latent in our contemporary
language: ‘tecker knowledging’, ‘new clear’, ‘inner fearants’, ‘deacon terminations’. The
disintegration and phonetic fragmentation of language in Riddley Walker accompany society’s
quest for ‘1 Big 1’, for the nuclear power that destroyed their long-dead predecessors, for ‘the
Power of the 2ness tryin to tear the 1 a part’ (Hoban 2002, 156). Indeed, Riddley Walker is
structured by the very matrix of binary oppositions that characterizes the atomic age. The dual
impulses of the novel are those of fission and fusion. At the centre of the Eusa Story is the image
of fission. Eusa pulls the ‘Littl Man the Addom’ in two: the Addom is a symbol of all that is
broken, divided; he is the ‘2 peaces’, ‘hes jus what ever cant never be put to gether’ (Hoban 2002,
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
7
41). The Addom represents that which cannot be recovered, the loss and ruin that are so
poignant in the novel.
Whilst the very words Riddley uses are haunted by the fading images of human achievement, the
distance from the past they evoke casts it as something unreachable and irreversible. The word
that Riddley uses for ‘breathe’ is significant. Riddley writes ‘breave’ – in a post-apocalyptic world,
the very act of existence, of respiration, is suffused with a sense of loss, of grief, of
‘bereavement.’ Yet at the same time, the Addom embodies the promise of fusion, of re-
connection, the hope that ‘what evers in 2wl be come 1’ (Hoban 2002, 141). It is a promise that
finds a parallel in A Canticle, in Brother Francis’s dream that ‘someday, or some century – an
Integrator would come, and things would be fitted together again’ (Hoban 2002, 66). The worlds
of Riddley and Francis strive to put together what our world has taken apart; in doing so, they
must make sense of the pieces. Frustrated by an inability to master ‘Pre-Deluge English’, the
monks speak to each other in Latin, a suitably dead language for a dead civilization. Reading the
Legend of the St. Eustace fragment, Riddley has similar problems with understanding our
language: ‘Wel soons I begun to read it I had to say, “I don’t even know ½ these words. Whats a
Legend?’”(Hoban 2002, 124). Reading the commentary, Riddley is confronted with the same
problems of reading and interpretation that we ourselves encounter while reading his narrative.
Riddley wrestles sense out of an inchoate written language, and in doing so demands that we as
readers do the same. Composed in a phonetic English that slows the reader down to the same
level of comprehension as the story’s characters, the narrative is neatly reflexive: while we’re
trying to figure out Riddley’s time, Riddley is trying to figure out ours. Berger writes that
‘Apocalypse has an interpretative, explanatory function […] The apocalyptic event, in order to
be properly apocalyptic, must in its destructive moment clarify and illuminate the true nature of
what has been brought to an end’ (Berger 1999, 5). In Riddley Walker and A Canticle, nuclear
apocalypse, rather than acting as a moment of revelation, becomes a source of uncertainty,
darkness and ignorance. Characters seek to discover ‘the true nature of what has been brought to
an end’ – they seek illumination through processes of excavation and interpretation. Yet, what
they find they cannot understand. Like us, they find that nuclear holocaust is something that
cannot be revealed in words.
Nuclear war is ‘unthinkable’: it provides a site where language stops for reasons related to both
internal logic and social proscription. If the unthinkable cannot be thought, it is both in terms of
possibility and prohibition. Striving to reveal the secrets of apocalypse becomes an attempt to
uncover forbidden knowledge. In A Canticle, the Collegium tries ‘to pry open Nature’s private
files’ (Miller 2007, 212), to unlock the secrets of the universe. In doing so, they discover the
means by which the world might be destroyed. In 1944, while work on Oppenheimer’s
Manhattan Project proceeded, Niels Bohr arrived in Washington from Europe. He warned that
the plan to release nuclear energy through a bomb constituted ‘a far deeper interference with the
natural course of events than anything ever before attempted’ (Jungk 1958, 345). Scientists, Bohr
reckoned, were dealing with something beyond their control, beyond their comprehension. A
decade earlier, Szilard had been quick to realize the potential dangers of nuclear chain reaction,
and called on his colleagues to keep the discovery secret from the Germans. Szilard was painfully
aware of the need to restrict this knowledge. In Riddley Walker, the Eusa show narrates how the
scientists discovered nuclear power: ‘the Nos. of the sun and moon all fractiont out and fed to
the machines’ (Hoban 2002, 19). The mathematical equations that laid bare the mechanisms of
nature are fed into ‘the box’, a super-computer that performs the complex calculations required
for nuclear fission. Faced with the devastating consequences, Orfing blames Eusa: ‘I mean if you
hadnt opent up the Little Shyning Man the Addom and let out the Nos. of the Master Chaynjis
of the 1 Big 1 then if you hadnt put that knowing in the box’ (Hoban 2002, 53). The ‘puter’
becomes refigured as Pandora’s Box: splitting the atom unleashes ‘a flash of lite’, and turns
everything to ‘nite for years on end.’ In Robert Aldrich’s film Kiss Me Deadly (1955), doomsday is
a portable device, crammed into a brief-case, left in the perilous security of gym locker. Inside
the attaché, private-eye Mike Hammer glimpses a furnace of radioactivity before snapping it
shut. The woman who eventually steals the briefcase, ignoring all warnings and prohibitions,
opens the case, and is torn apart by the searing explosion of light. Like the Seven Seals that lock
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
8
the Book of Revelation, we are not permitted ‘to open and to read the book, neither to look
thereon’ (Revelation 5:4).
In Terminal Visions, Warren Wagar asserts that ‘Knowledge of the end of the world is a gnosis, a
secret pointing to salvation’ (Wagar 1982, 170). In the New Testament, the end of the world is at
once an Apocalypse – an unveiling, a violent disclosure – and a Revelation – a source of
enlightenment, of realization. For Enzian, in Gravity’s Rainbow, Apocalypse and Revelation cannot
be distinguished: the super-rocket ‘comes as the Revealer’ (Pynchon 2000, 864). Yet, unlike the
Apocalypses of the Bible, nuclear holocaust precludes the possibility of a ‘secret pointing to
salvation’. It offers no revelation, no judgment, no definition. The title of Derrida’s seminal
essay, ‘No Apocalypse, Not Now’, does not imply that the world cannot be destroyed by nuclear
war; rather, it underlines that there will be no revelation, ‘not now’. Nuclear holocaust makes the
revelation of meaning impossible; it represents ‘the historical and ahistorical horizon of an
absolute self-destructibility without apocalypse, without revelation of its own truth, without
absolute knowledge’ (Derrida 1984, 27). As in Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, the apocalypse that
will consume the world is an absurd accident. Death is accidental, random, meaningless. While
Kermode envisions apocalypse as ‘the provision of an end’, an eschatology which allows us to
formulate ‘coherent patterns’ to invest meaning in our time on earth (Kermode 1968, 17), Julia
Kristeva offers a more realistic appraisal. For her, literary apocalypse is not a ‘revelation’ but is
‘black with burnt up meaning’ (Kristeva 1980, 195) – at the point of critical mass, the light does
not illuminate, but incinerates.
From its scriptural origins, the textuality of Apocalypse is constantly underlined. The Biblical
depiction of the end of the world is found in the Book of Revelation, which, in turn, transmits
this vision through the seven-sealed book that John is shown. In Revelation, apocalypse is a
book that must be read: John is at once a reader of and witness to this fictional day of reckoning.
Derrida famously observes that nuclear apocalypse as a ‘phenomenon is fabulously textual […] a
nuclear war [which] has not taken place: one can only talk and write about it’ (Derrida 1984, 23).
Denied its all-consuming reality, nuclear holocaust can exist for Derrida only within the secure
confines of the text. It seems suitable, then, that the history of nuclear war itself seems to be so
‘fabulously textual.’ Over thirty years before the Alamogordo explosion, Wells’ The World Set Free
depicted a devastating global war fought with ‘atomic bombs’ – a Wellsian coinage. Dedicated to
Soddy and his ‘Interpretation of Radium’, the novel would later influence Szilard in his
development of the nuclear chain reaction: a discovery that paved the way for the first atomic
bomb. The bomb was thus germinated in the mind of a writer of speculative fiction. By 1980,
faced with the nightmarish prospect of human extinction as a result of global nuclear conflict,
the American Office of Technological Assessment compiled a mammoth report called The Effects
of Nuclear War. The report concludes by abandoning its hypothetical empirical assessments of a
surviving society; the ending is ironic: ‘In an effort to provide a more concrete understanding of
what a world after a nuclear war would be like, OTA commissioned a work of fiction’ (O.T.A
1980, 9). The bomb’s genesis can be found in a work of fiction. Staring at a future more
unbelievable and overwhelming than the most dystopian of novels, it seems appropriate that a
work of fiction should be commissioned to find the solution.
Nuclear holocaust, far from burning books, creates them. In Barnes’s story ‘The Survivor’, Kath
reasons that it is only the excessiveness of the human imagination that makes it possible to
devise means for its own destruction. For Kath, the very desire for narrative is deeply implicated
with the drive towards self-annihilation. To create a narrative allows a writer to create a world:
yet at the same time, it gives that writer the executive authority to terminate that world. This
power is unnerving; nevertheless, it serves as an analgesic. The urge to bring on apocalypse is
thus transported from the real world to the safe testing-ground of fiction. As Derrida notes,
nuclear war becomes ‘a speculation […] an invention to be invented in order to make a place for
it or to prevent it from taking place’ (Derrida 1984, 28). Fictional holocausts simulate an end that
cannot take place in reality, fabricating a future that cannot be allowed to become present. In The
Burning Book, Guy enacts nuclear destruction in the virtual-reality of his local video arcades,
playing Missile Command. In Level 7, the war itself is simulated: the annihilation of the world takes
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
9
the form of red dots on VDU screens. Jean Baudrillard conceives of post-modernity as a state of
‘simulation’: it is the condition ‘after the end’. Gill, the tobacco trader in Philip K. Dick’s Dr
Bloodmoney, tells Stewart: ‘It’s a survival, not a simulation’ (Dick 2000, 201). Yet the post-
apocalyptic world is precisely that, a simulation. Narratives that project into a post-apocalyptic
future are concerned with avoiding rather than promoting the apocalyptic event itself. In
hastening the end in fiction, the narratives serve, at least indirectly, to put off the day itself. Like
Scheherazade in Arabian Nights, we spin new stories to defer nuclear apocalypse. The ability to
imagine the end of the world, to simulate nuclear holocaust in narrative, becomes the ability to
survive it. As Lifton notes, ‘the vision of total annihilation makes it possible to imagine living
under and beyond that curse’ (Lifton 1976, 281). In The Burning Book, the destruction of the text
itself becomes a sacrificial substitute for the destruction of the world. When the bombs go off,
‘something cracked, and the novel was torn in pieces’ (Gee 1983, 39). The author, like
Oppenheimer, becomes a fictional ‘shatterer of worlds’ (Jungk 1958, 201).
Apocalypse is a product of the imagination. The scientific imagination has produced weapons
with the destructive capability to end the world, to leave no remainders, no aftermath. Within the
artistic imagination, the end becomes a permeable boundary, an event that can be rehearsed,
reversed and repeated – like the looped footage of blossoming mushroom clouds, accompanied
by Vera Lynn’s ‘We’ll Meet Again’, at the end of Dr Strangelove. In a world where no one is left
alive to watch his film, Kubrick permits this primal scene, the sight forbidden to humanity on the
pain of death, to repeat itself indefinitely. At the end of Gravity’s Rainbow, we are in the Orpheus
Cinema: ‘the screen is a dim page spread before us, white and silent. The film has broken, or a
projector bulb has burned out’ (Pynchon 2000, 901). As the rocket is poised above the theatre, at
its ‘last delta-t’, we realize that we are underneath it. ‘Now everybody – ’: the fate of the West
hangs in midair, while the novel culminates, not in a definitive period, but in a dash. Inside a
darkened cinema, we are watching the film of history, while outside, the real rocket falls. The
reader becomes a spectator, a survivor: like the Zone-Hereros, he is Mbakayere, the passed-over.
© Adam Gyngell, 2009
MA, Issues in Modern Culture
Department of English Language and Literature
References
Primary
Ballard, J. G. The Terminal Beach. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1966.
Barnes, Julian. A History of the World in 10½ Chapters. London: Harper Collins, 1989.
Briggs, Raymond. When the Wind Blows. London: Maestro, 1982.
Burroughs, William S. The Western Lands. London: Recall, 1987.
Dick, Philip K. Dr Bloodmoney. London: Gollancz, 2000.
Gee, Maggie. The Burning Book. London: Harper Collins, 1983.
Hersey, John. Hiroshima. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1981.
Hoban, Russell. Riddley Walker. London: Penguin, 2002.
Huxley, Aldous. Ape and Essence. London: Harper Collins, 1994.
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
10
Miller, Walter M. A Canticle for Leibowitz. New York: Iconoclast, 2007.
Pynchon, Thomas. Gravity’s Rainbow. London: Vintage, 2000.
Roshwald, Mordecai. Level 7. Madison: American Library of Science, 2004.
Shute, Neville. On the Beach. Melbourne: Thirsk, 2000.
Vonnegut, Kurt. Galapagos. London: Picador, 1985.
---, Slaughterhouse-Five: or, The Children’s Crusade: A Duty Dance with Death. London: Picador, 1970.
Wells, H. G. The World Set Free. London: Penguin, 1988.
Secondary
Ainsfield, Nancy. The Nightmare Considered: Critical Essays on Nuclear War Literature. Ohio: Ohio
University Press, 1991.
O.T.A. (American Office of Technological Assessment). The Effects of Nuclear War. London, 1980.
Amis, Martin. The Moronic Inferno. London: Harper Collins, 2006.
Ash, Brian, ed. The Visual Encyclopaedia of Science Fiction. New York: Verson, 1977.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Trans. Sheila Faria Glaser. Ann Arbor: University Press
of Michigan, 1994.
Berger, James. After the End: Representations of Post-Apocalypse. Minneapolis: Minnesota University
Press, 1999.
Blanchot, Maurice. The Writing of the Disaster. Trans. Alan Sank. Lincoln: Independent Press, 1986.
Brians, Paul. Nuclear Holocausts: Atomic War in Fiction 1895-1984. Kent: Maestro, 1987.
Browne, Corinne and Robert Munro. Time Bomb: Understanding the Threat of Nuclear Power. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1981.
Connor, Steven. The English Novel in History: 1950-1995. London: Routledge, 1996.
Conrad, Peter. Modern Times, Modern Places: Life and Art in the 20
th
Century. London: Thames and
Hudson, 1998.
De Kerckhove, Derrick, ‘On Nuclear Communication’, Diacritics 14. Summer 1984.
Derrida, Jacques. Writing and Difference. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: Chicago University Press,
1978.
---, ‘No Apocalypse, Not Now (Full Speed Ahead, Seven Missiles, Seven Missives)’, Diacritics 14
(Summer 1984).
Dewey, Joseph. In a Dark Time: The Apocalyptic Temper in American Novels of the Nuclear Age. West
Lafayette: Monroe, 1990.
Opticon1826, Issue 6, Spring 2009
11
Dowling, David. Fictions of Nuclear Disaster Basingstoke: Vertigo Press, 1987.
Ferguson, Frances, ‘The Nuclear Sublime’, Diacritics 14 (Summer 1984).
Haffenden, John, ‘John Haffenden Talks to Russell Hoban’, The Literary Review. November 1982.
Hughes, Jeff. The Manhatten Project: Big Science and the Atom Bomb. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2002.
Jaspers, Karl. The Future of Mankind, trans. E. B. Ashton. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1961.
Jungk, Robert. Brighter Than a Thousand Suns: A Personal History of the Atomic Scientists. Trans. James
Cleugh. New York: Picador, 1958.
Kermode, Frank. The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction. New York: Verso, 1968.
Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Trans. Thomas Gora
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.
Laidler, Keith. To Light Such a Candle: Chapters in the History of Science and Technology. New York:
Verso, 1998.
Lifton, Robert Jay. Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima. New York: Harper Collins, 1967.
---, The Life of the Self. New York: Harper Collins, 1976.
Lifton, Robert and Robert Falk. Indefensible Weapons: The Political and Psychological Case Against
Nuclearism. New York: Harper Collins, 1982.
Lyotard, Jean-Francois. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Trans. Geoff Bennington
Minneapolis: Cycle Press, 1984.
Nadel, Alan. Containment Culture: American Narratives, Postmodernism, and the Atomic Age. Durham:
Duke University Press, 1995.
Sandison, Alan, ed. Histories of the Future: Studies in Fact, Fantasy and Science Fiction. Basingstoke:
Parallel, 2000.
Schell, Jonathon. The Fate of the Earth. London: Penguin, 1982.
Schley, James, ed. Writers in the Nuclear Age. New England Review and Bread Loaf Quarterly 5. 1983.
Schwenger, Peter. Letter Bomb: Nuclear Holocaust and the Exploding Word. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1992.
Strehle, Susan. Fiction in a Quantum Universe. Chapel Hill: Keyser, 1992.
Wagar, Warren. Terminal Visions: The Literature of Last Things. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1982.
Weart, Spencer. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
1988.
Zuckerman, Edward. The Day After World War Three. New York: Columbia University Press,
1984.
