Peter Goodchild

The Real Dr Strangelove

Some people see Edward Teller as an evil figure, whereas others see him as a protector of democracy. In Edward Teller: The Real Dr Strangelove Peter Goodchild examines the reasons for this dichotomy. He gives information about Teller's early life, but much of the book deals with the years after the Second World War, when Teller was leading the development of the H-bomb, and when he supported the removal of Oppenheimer's security clearance. There is also information how Teller fared in the growing opposition to all things nuclear in the 1960's and 1970's as well as Teller's support for the SDI project in the 1980's.

This is a well written biography, which shows things from Teller's viewpoint, although not in the sense of trying to support his point of view, rather in the sense of trying to find out what motivated Teller to act as he did. Goodchild has also written about Oppenheimer, and here is showing things from the other side of this well known disagreement. In the epilogue he comments that he kept thinking 'if only'. At 400 pages this is a fairly long book and would most suit those who want to dig into the details of this highly significant participant of the Cold War.

Amazon.com info

Hardcover 352 pages
ISBN: 0297607340
Salesrank: 1630037
Weight:1.94 lbs

Published: 2004 Weidenfeld & Nicolson

Amazon price $51.65

Marketplace:New from $7.43:Used from $6.94

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Hardcover 352 pages
ISBN: 0297607340
Salesrank: 499386
Weight:1.94 lbs

Published: 2004 Weidenfeld & Nicolson

Marketplace:New from £19.25:Used from £8.50

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Hardcover 352 pages
ISBN: 0297607340
Salesrank: 1127714
Weight:1.94 lbs

Published: 2004 McArthur & Company / Orion Con Trad

Amazon price CDN$ 28.35

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 28.35:Used from CDN$ 7.98

Buy from Amazon.ca

Book Description
The Hungarian emigre Edward Teller spent the best part of the twentieth century at the forefront of shaping national and world defence strategies. Few have had such a profound influence on the shape of the post-war world. He was involved at every stage of the building of the atomic bomb. In the years following the Second World War he was dubbed 'the father of the H-bomb' and assailed as the mastermind of a ruinous arms race - the original Dr Strangelove, his effigy burned by students who branded him a war criminal. In the view of the Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner, he was a 'great man' of vast imagination and one of the 'most thoughtful statesmen of science'. In the view of another, Isadore Rabi, he has been 'a danger to all that's important' and 'it would have been a better world without Teller'. Throughout his life he was at the centre of controversy, pursuing causes that drew the whole world deeper into the Cold War. In the process he alienated many of his scientific colleagues while providing the intellectual lead for politicians, the military and Presidents as they shaped Western policy towards the Soviets. Yet Sakharov, the Russian dissident and father of the Soviet H-bomb, declared that Teller had been quite right in his vigorous pursuit of American military power. In his compelling biography Peter Goodchild unravels the complex web of harsh early experiences, character flaws and personal and professional frustrations that lay behind the man Ronald Reagan described as 'one of the bulwarks of American Freedom, a sterling example of what scientific knowledge, enlightened by moral sense, and a dedication to the principles of freedom and justice, can do to help all mankind.'

Book Description

The Hungarian emigre Edward Teller spent the best part of the twentieth century at the forefront of shaping national and world defence strategies. Few have had such a profound influence on the shape of the post-war world. He was involved at every stage of the building of the atomic bomb. In the years following the Second World War he was dubbed 'the father of the H-bomb' and assailed as the mastermind of a ruinous arms race - the original Dr Strangelove, his effigy burned by students who branded him a war criminal. In the view of the Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner, he was a 'great man' of vast imagination and one of the 'most thoughtful statesmen of science'. In the view of another, Isadore Rabi, he has been 'a danger to all that's important' and 'it would have been a better world without Teller'. Throughout his life he was at the centre of controversy, pursuing causes that drew the whole world deeper into the Cold War. In the process he alienated many of his scientific colleagues while providing the intellectual lead for politicians, the military and Presidents as they shaped Western policy towards the Soviets. Yet Sakharov, the Russian dissident and father of the Soviet H-bomb, declared that Teller had been quite right in his vigorous pursuit of American military power. In his compelling biography Peter Goodchild unravels the complex web of harsh early experiences, character flaws and personal and professional frustrations that lay behind the man Ronald Reagan described as 'one of the bulwarks of American Freedom, a sterling example of what scientific knowledge, enlightened by moral sense, and a dedication to the principles of freedom and justice, can do to help all mankind.'

not a serious biography *
Peter Goodchild, otherwise a documentary maker for the BBC, has written a biography of Edward Teller that I found to be disappointing. As someone very interested by the era and its scientists, I was surprised that he omits John von Neuman from his "suspects list" of possible inspirations for Dr. Strangelove. There is a strong case for this: like Dr. Strangelove, von Neuman was wheelchair-bound, consulted for the Rand Corporation, spoke German as a native speaker, was very knowledgeable about game theory (he co-invented it), and at times advocated a preemptive war against the Soviet Union. In reading this book, I did not feel that I came to know Edward Teller, who was a very interesting, if controversial, man. I learned a little about his origins, his studies, his projects, and the controversies that he was embroiled in. But only in a few events did I feel that Goodchild got to the bottom of what happened. This book reads more like a Life magazine article, or a description of a new wondersoap than like a work of history. I disliked that Goodchild makes interesting points, but then doesn't provide sources to support them. An example: Goodchild quotes an American soldier to the effect that the US military knew and tolerated that top secret information about the work at Los Alamos was being flown to the Soviet Union by the planeload, and names the air field where this is said to have happened. This is a spectacular allegation, if true. Unfortunately the sources he offers to substantiate this claim were a Soviet code clerk who worked at the Soviet embassy in Ottawa, and an American soldier who sold his story at the height of the Red Scare. Both wrote books that needed spectacular stories to sell well. Neither the Venona decrypts nor the Mitrokhin archive, both of which have provided us with a good understanding of how the Soviets exported technology from Los Alamos allude even remotely to these clandestine flights. This is not to claim with certainty that these flights never happened, but rather to say that by not credibly substantiating his claims, Goodchild makes it clear that his work is not serious. Was there no FOIA or other source to substantiate this spectacular claim? Teller was involved in Operation Chariot, a project to use H-bombs to dig a harbor that nobody wanted on Alaska's ice-bound northern coast. In the end the opposition of the indigenous population led to the operation being cancelled. This entire episode, which I think should have led to a lot of soul-searching, and led an insightful biographer to ask and answer many probing questions, is more or less described in the sterile prose otherwise used to describe a fender-bender. I was also quite disappointed by his treatment of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Goodchild makes so many subtle and sometimes unfair digs that his book seems to be more a political tract than a serious and factual biography. A further annoyance is that Goodchild doesn't include footnotes, but rather has quotes for some sources at the back of the book. This is infuriating, as some of his ideas are interesting, and it is only when you flip to the back of the book that you learn whether this is or isn't one of the ideas for which he provides corroboration. This is one of the few books I have ever read that doesn't have a single positive review of itself on its back cover. To end this review on a positive note, it is one of the few biographies of Dr. Teller, so you may have to read it for what information it offers, and perhaps to use it as a doorstop. I anxiously await a book that does justice to Edward Teller's genius, life, and times.

not a serious biography *

Peter Goodchild, otherwise a documentary maker for the BBC, has written a biography of Edward Teller that I found to be disappointing.

As someone very interested by the era and its scientists, I was surprised that he omits John von Neuman from his "suspects list" of possible inspirations for Dr. Strangelove. There is a strong case for this: like Dr. Strangelove, von Neuman was wheelchair-bound, consulted for the Rand Corporation, spoke German as a native speaker, was very knowledgeable about game theory (he co-invented it), and at times advocated a preemptive war against the Soviet Union.

In reading this book, I did not feel that I came to know Edward Teller, who was a very interesting, if controversial, man. I learned a little about his origins, his studies, his projects, and the controversies that he was embroiled in. But only in a few events did I feel that Goodchild got to the bottom of what happened. This book reads more like a Life magazine article, or a description of a new wondersoap than like a work of history.

I disliked that Goodchild makes interesting points, but then doesn't provide sources to support them. An example: Goodchild quotes an American soldier to the effect that the US military knew and tolerated that top secret information about the work at Los Alamos was being flown to the Soviet Union by the planeload, and names the air field where this is said to have happened. This is a spectacular allegation, if true. Unfortunately the sources he offers to substantiate this claim were a Soviet code clerk who worked at the Soviet embassy in Ottawa, and an American soldier who sold his story at the height of the Red Scare. Both wrote books that needed spectacular stories to sell well. Neither the Venona decrypts nor the Mitrokhin archive, both of which have provided us with a good understanding of how the Soviets exported technology from Los Alamos allude even remotely to these clandestine flights. This is not to claim with certainty that these flights never happened, but rather to say that by not credibly substantiating his claims, Goodchild makes it clear that his work is not serious. Was there no FOIA or other source to substantiate this spectacular claim?

Teller was involved in Operation Chariot, a project to use H-bombs to dig a harbor that nobody wanted on Alaska's ice-bound northern coast. In the end the opposition of the indigenous population led to the operation being cancelled. This entire episode, which I think should have led to a lot of soul-searching, and led an insightful biographer to ask and answer many probing questions, is more or less described in the sterile prose otherwise used to describe a fender-bender. I was also quite disappointed by his treatment of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Goodchild makes so many subtle and sometimes unfair digs that his book seems to be more a political tract than a serious and factual biography.

A further annoyance is that Goodchild doesn't include footnotes, but rather has quotes for some sources at the back of the book. This is infuriating, as some of his ideas are interesting, and it is only when you flip to the back of the book that you learn whether this is or isn't one of the ideas for which he provides corroboration. This is one of the few books I have ever read that doesn't have a single positive review of itself on its back cover. To end this review on a positive note, it is one of the few biographies of Dr. Teller, so you may have to read it for what information it offers, and perhaps to use it as a doorstop. I anxiously await a book that does justice to Edward Teller's genius, life, and times.

Good work of history; mediocre work of biography ***
After reading about Oppenheimer, I became interested in Teller and his role in the development of nuclear weapons and the Oppenheimer/Los Alamos saga. Though billed as a biography, this tome offers little in the way of insight into who Teller was. Instead, it is a very matter-of-fact depiction of events in his life and the development of nuclear and weapons science during the cold war. His scientific explanations are excellent and clear; his insight into his subject is sadly lacking.

Good work of history; mediocre work of biography ***

After reading about Oppenheimer, I became interested in Teller and his role in the development of nuclear weapons and the Oppenheimer/Los Alamos saga. Though billed as a biography, this tome offers little in the way of insight into who Teller was. Instead, it is a very matter-of-fact depiction of events in his life and the development of nuclear and weapons science during the cold war. His scientific explanations are excellent and clear; his insight into his subject is sadly lacking.

Teller, Meet Anti-Teller ***
In terms of pure cognitive exuberance, Teller is a hard act to follow. Reading this book on the heels of Teller's "Memoirs," I sometimes felt as if I were reading a condensed version of "Memoirs" (Goodchild quotes from it so heavily) into which someone had inserted occasional prosaic objections or asides--Rose Bethe remembers blah, blah, etc. Which is another way of saying I found the first 300 pages redundant. At that point, with the discussion of testing in Amchitka, Goodchild's version of events differs so greatly from Teller's that I was appreciative of the divergent and perhaps corrective account. The thematic heart of the book, the tragic hero's hubris, is interesting and deserved tighter focus. I found quotes like this one by George Cowan provacative: "People do betray themselves...potentially Edward was a great man in the highest sense, but he was betrayed by his obsession for power. Early on he was ambitious, which led to frustration, and then with success came the hubris and the power. And then he was lost. He made a mistake. He knows." But I never saw this adequately substantiated in what followed. Ultimately, I felt Goodchild presented the paradox of Teller but did not understand it. Am I the only one who finds the title a bit cheap, a bit of a marketing ploy?

Teller, Meet Anti-Teller ***

In terms of pure cognitive exuberance, Teller is a hard act to follow. Reading this book on the heels of Teller's "Memoirs," I sometimes felt as if I were reading a condensed version of "Memoirs" (Goodchild quotes from it so heavily) into which someone had inserted occasional prosaic objections or asides--Rose Bethe remembers blah, blah, etc.

Which is another way of saying I found the first 300 pages redundant. At that point, with the discussion of testing in Amchitka, Goodchild's version of events differs so greatly from Teller's that I was appreciative of the divergent and perhaps corrective account.

The thematic heart of the book, the tragic hero's hubris, is interesting and deserved tighter focus. I found quotes like this one by George Cowan provacative: "People do betray themselves...potentially Edward was a great man in the highest sense, but he was betrayed by his obsession for power. Early on he was ambitious, which led to frustration, and then with success came the hubris and the power. And then he was lost. He made a mistake. He knows." But I never saw this adequately substantiated in what followed. Ultimately, I felt Goodchild presented the paradox of Teller but did not understand it.

Am I the only one who finds the title a bit cheap, a bit of a marketing ploy?

The Real Deal *****
Whether or not Edward Teller was the model for Dr. Strangelove in the movie of the same name [my pick for #1 movie ever], he was still one of the most controversial and enigmatic scientists of the 20th Century. Peter Goodchild does an excellent job laying out Dr. Teller's life in the book Edward Teller, The Real Dr. Strangelove. Having read Goodchild's J. Robert Oppenheimer: Shatterer Of Worlds while still in college [and having watched the BBC show by Goodchild on PBS with my Dad - a favorite memory], I trusted that Goodchild would write a book that was neither hagiography nor hatchet job, and Edward Teller did not disappoint. Goodchild gives us Teller's life as a witty and brilliant scientist [which I have personal experience with - I had the good fortune of hearing Dr. Teller speak] and as a troubled and extremely political human being. Being a fan of Oppenheimer and a partisan against the Star Wars nuclear defense, I expected that the book would support, and perhaps intensify, my negative feelings towards Teller, but reading the book has made me more sympathetic towards Teller the human being [while still vehemently disagreeing with his treatment of Oppenheimer and his support of the scientifically ridiculous Star Wars plan]. Their may be some people that are purely heroic or villainous, but most people are like J. Robert Oppenheimer or Edward Teller, flawed human beings. I highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in science and scientists, the ethical conflicts of certain kinds of scientific research, biography, the bomb, and the history of the 20th Century. An endnote: when I was in the 1st and 2nd grades in Berkeley, California, I lived on Scenic Avenue and went to Hillside Elementary School. One of my routes to or from school took me along Hawthorne Terrace past Dr. Teller's house. I was a precocious kid and knew the "Father of the H-Bomb" lived in my neighborhood. He drove a beat-up old car, which confirms Teller's frugality as reported by Goodchild.

The Real Deal *****

Whether or not Edward Teller was the model for Dr. Strangelove in the movie of the same name [my pick for #1 movie ever], he was still one of the most controversial and enigmatic scientists of the 20th Century. Peter Goodchild does an excellent job laying out Dr. Teller's life in the book Edward Teller, The Real Dr. Strangelove. Having read Goodchild's J. Robert Oppenheimer: Shatterer Of Worlds while still in college [and having watched the BBC show by Goodchild on PBS with my Dad - a favorite memory], I trusted that Goodchild would write a book that was neither hagiography nor hatchet job, and Edward Teller did not disappoint. Goodchild gives us Teller's life as a witty and brilliant scientist [which I have personal experience with - I had the good fortune of hearing Dr. Teller speak] and as a troubled and extremely political human being. Being a fan of Oppenheimer and a partisan against the Star Wars nuclear defense, I expected that the book would support, and perhaps intensify, my negative feelings towards Teller, but reading the book has made me more sympathetic towards Teller the human being [while still vehemently disagreeing with his treatment of Oppenheimer and his support of the scientifically ridiculous Star Wars plan]. Their may be some people that are purely heroic or villainous, but most people are like J. Robert Oppenheimer or Edward Teller, flawed human beings. I highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in science and scientists, the ethical conflicts of certain kinds of scientific research, biography, the bomb, and the history of the 20th Century. An endnote: when I was in the 1st and 2nd grades in Berkeley, California, I lived on Scenic Avenue and went to Hillside Elementary School. One of my routes to or from school took me along Hawthorne Terrace past Dr. Teller's house. I was a precocious kid and knew the "Father of the H-Bomb" lived in my neighborhood. He drove a beat-up old car, which confirms Teller's frugality as reported by Goodchild.

the real Dr. Stragelove ***
I will be brief as others have written very good reviews. The authors start off well connecting with those interested in Edward Teller or the "Atomic Era coming of Age". The book does justice and provides insight until the later third, begining with the Oppenheimer security issues. From there it declines into an obsession with political correctness....conservatives are right-wing and liberals have no slur attached to them. The book ends with less and less of Teller as the object but more as a useful tool for the authors spin on history.

the real Dr. Stragelove ***

I will be brief as others have written very good reviews. The authors start off well connecting with those interested in Edward Teller or the "Atomic Era coming of Age". The book does justice and provides insight until the later third, begining with the Oppenheimer security issues. From there it declines into an obsession with political correctness....conservatives are right-wing and liberals have no slur attached to them. The book ends with less and less of Teller as the object but more as a useful tool for the authors spin on history.