Conclusion
Cold war visions of the future differentiate heavily from the interwar era visions firstly due to the research and advancements in technology during the Second World War. Communications technologies, improved methods of transportation, and weapon research all made heavy strides during the war. Ultimately communications and transportation technologies trickled down to the everyday consumer as additional resources of forms of comfort and leisure activities. Advanced communications also allowed for strides in advertising which resulted in more products pushed on the consumer. Nuclear research and the use of atomic power resulted in a pop culture phenomenon in celebration of the bomb. This, combined with science fiction writers’ doomsday warnings, inspired a heavier push to advertise science as an avenue of progress and a necessity to defeat external threats, such as the Soviet Union, no matter the consequences. The scientific goal of reaching and traveling through space created a unique tool for futurist inclined advertising to emphasize. This heavily promoted interest in space affected many aspects of daily life, from the news, to daily entertainment, as well as in architectural and product design.
The push from NASA, a government agency, to revitalize the public’s trust and interest in science was an unprecedented phenomenon. This government effort marks a significant shift from past decades when individual endeavors were the primary factor in new technology and science, and when those individuals had to spend time convincing people that their technology had significance.
The feeling of being misled and lied to perpetuated strongly into the first decade of the 2000s and can largely be attributed to the bombardment of images from all angles. Marketed promises of clean energy, a leisurely future due to automation (without the consequences of job displacement), space travel, and futurist envisioned transportation technologies fell short on delivery. Ultimately, this push affected the historical memory of the era and explains why Americans appear to be so much more disappointed with the promised future that did not come. First, consider the differentiation of historical memory from the space race to other eras. As an example consider the rivalries in technologies such as Tesla’s or Edison’s currents and Betamax or VHS. Individuals invested in a particular technology or enthusiasts who made their own predictions may wax poetical about the lost technologies. Others laugh when encountering nostalgia about outdated gadgets. However, it’s common enough in language centered on the space race and Cold War, to hear that people were promised flying cars and jet packs during this era. “What happened to that vision?” – remains the common question repeated about the time. The answer rests in the fact that those visions were promoted with a different intensity in terms of projection and consequence to the public. Moreover, there was open deception in the marketing and futurist vision.
What’s interesting about the viewpoint of a mere decade ago in looking at the space race versus the early twenty-first century is the sense of disappointment and that the why we didn’t go anywhere with space exploration question no longer holds true. As of 2019, the first manned missions to the Moon in decades have been announced, as well as plans on travel and settlement on Mars. One significant difference involves the youth who believed in those future visions of the early space era decades, who grew up and took action to further pursue the reality of that vision. Private capital ventures, such as SpaceX and Virgin Galactic, have allowed a form of competition to take place which not only provides an economic benefit but increases the fervor of conquering something new that hasn’t been felt since the space race. The fiftieth anniversary of the Moon landing has just passed, and like fifty years ago, Americans have been bombarded with space news and merchandise, from clothes, to space themed snacks, and films. Not to mention special announcements and attention from NASA themselves. NASA’s current director James Frederick Bridenstine, the first one in NASA’s history to not have been alive during the Apollo missions, recently said, “we need to make sure that we don’t let another 50 years go by.”[1] On reminiscing about his space age influences and the possibility of going back to the Moon, Mark S Geyer, NASA’s Johnson Space Center director declared that “it will ramp up the attention and the interest of kids… If we can show them that they have a place in this future.”[2]
