Groves was captivated by the physicist. When Anne Wilson, a young secretary in Groves's Washington office, asked the general, somewhat inappropriately, what he thought of Oppenheimer, he said, after a lengthy pause, "He has the bluest eyes I've ever seen. He looks right through you. I feel like he can read my mind."^[1]What dat mean

— 'The General and the Genius', James Kunetka

When I announced my intention to see the film Oppenheimer on July 23, 2023, the first response I got was "enjoy bomb yaoi."

I could not have known, at the time, just how much I would go on to enjoy the bomb yaoi.^[2]Though maybe I should have, because seeing a comparison to The Social Network is what spurred me to buy a ticket in the first place, and The Social Network is one of my personal sacred yaoi texts. I've now seen the film 14 times, which is a lot. After round five or so you'd think there would be nothing new to notice. But what I find so enriching about repeat viewings is paying close attention to everything going on that would ordinarily pass me by, since every part is operating at such a high level, both independently and as a unit. (See my previous post on the film to find out more about my favorite Glup Shittos.)

I have also spent the last year reading up on the actual history and people depicted in Oppenheimer, which has given each subsequent rewatch all kinds of new context. One of the most interesting effects has been my shifting response to the aforementioned bomb yaoi. Now, it's no secret that J. Robert Oppenheimer was something of a harlot, and his womanizing ways led to much trouble in his personal life. By that same token, it was his intense relationships with other men that would go on to define his professional life, for better or worse.^[3]"Was Dr. Oppenheimer so successful because he used his omega pheromones to mind control the alphas around him" - the greatest thread in the history of forums, locked by a moderator after 12,239 pages of heated debate,

Of course, the two lives intermingled frequently. His relationship with Jean Tatlock became a significant part of the inquiry that ultimately stripped him of his security clearance, and those he associated with professionally were also some of his closest friends. But the bomb yaoi that I consistently find the most compelling whenever I watch Oppenheimer is the relationship between Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves, the director of the Manhattan Project.

I know this sounds very "seeing shadows on the cave wall", but I have become convinced that Oppengroves (this is their ship name, get used to it) as shown in Oppenheimer is intentionally romantic - and, in fact, that depicting it in such a way is essential to the film's overall message. I refer to it as "allegorical bomb yaoi" because the trajectory of their relationship reflects the changing relationship between science and government throughout World War II, which formed part of the basis for the military-industrial complex.

It certainly helps that in real life, the Oppengroves relationship was authentically intimate and close-knit; as both saw it, this closeness was necessary for the Project's success. While much of this post will be focused on the film's depiction, I'll bring in pertinent elements of the actual history, too. The neat thing about bomb yaoi is that you usually don't have to invent much. All that stuff actually happened, and all those guys really were acting gay as hell with each other.

I Looked For Evidence

I love the first big chunk of Oppenheimer, as I love all parts of the film, but when Groves finally appears it cannot be denied that the whole thing kicks into high gear. After having spent 40 minutes in the world of neurotic physicists and quantum theory, the arrival of the brusque military man who doesn't seem to like scientists very much but is forced to work with them anyway palpably shifts the mood.^[4]Groves was just about to ship out overseas when he was told that instead he was going to have to stay in America and babysit a bunch of scientists. He was, of course, very annoyed about this.

In real life, one of Groves' biggest strengths was his keen ability to identify talent. Others protested that Oppenheimer had no experience running large-scale projects and that he had no Nobel Prize, which could undermine his authority. But Groves saw Oppenheimer's potential and, more crucially, the "overweening ambition" that perhaps Oppenheimer himself was not even fully cognizant of. It was an ambition that Groves shared, and this desire to be "great" and achieve immortality through their work was what ultimately made them more alike than different. Later in life Oppenheimer would attribute his selection to Groves' "fatal weakness for good men."^[5] What dat mean

In Oppenheimer, the chemistry between the two characters is immediate, and their relationship becomes what the middle hour of the film revolves around. I think the easiest way to illustrate the overall Oppengroves arc is to go through some of the key moments in the order they're presented to us.

• Their first meeting at Berkeley, where they have a little tête-à-tête and flirt over the idea of Oppenheimer running the Manhattan Project. Though Groves plays hard to get, you can tell he's being won over by Oppenheimer's assuredness. According to another scientist who worked with him during the war, Groves "didn't like being kowtowed to... he liked a demonstration of spirit and independence in the people he worked with."
• The Avengers recruiting montage. This is where we get our first taste of how Oppenheimer and Groves are going to work together. For the most part, Groves lets Oppenheimer take the reins while he sits there and looks displeased - except for when he briefly blows up at Edward Condon.

  

  The real Groves was known for being impatient, abrasive, and demanding, which made him unpopular with military personnel and scientists alike. (He did not care.) But multiple sources note that he was never like this with Oppenheimer; Robert S. Norris writes that "he treated Oppenheimer delicately, like a fine instrument that needed to be played just right."^[6]What dat mean Similarly, Oppenheimer was known for being rather cold, sarcastic, and condescending to people whose intellect didn't measure up to his own, but he was always patient with Groves.

• The Christmas present. During the recruitment montage, Oppenheimer asks if they can get Niels Bohr out of Copenhagen, and Groves replies that it's too difficult at the moment. He then asks, "Is he that important?"

  This serves as an opportunity to remind the audience of who Bohr is, but it also sets up a minor narrative thread that concludes later on, when Groves appears at the Los Alamos Christmas party and reveals that he did get Bohr out. I find this quite romantic - he remembered! Maybe he started working on it as soon as Oppenheimer asked him! - and it's another example of Groves knowing the importance of keeping his director happy.

• Culture clash between military and science. Groves' demanding and harsh attitude made him quite unpopular with the scientists he came in contact with, both at Los Alamos and elsewhere. This had the handy effect of "[deflecting] criticism from Oppenheimer" (American Prometheus). Basically he was face tanking the negative status effects so that Oppenheimer could do his job.

  The general was also very strict about compartmentalization and secrecy, which most scientists, including Oppenheimer, thought to be an active impediment to their work. This created much conflict and frustration. Ultimately, compromises had to be made on both sides. I like this little touch in Oppenheimer where Groves greets Oppenheimer by bluntly asking, "Progress?" Then, later, Oppenheimer returns the favor, showing how he's beginning to adopt the language and attitude of the military as it becomes more integrated into the scientific community.^[7]He even cut his famously unruly mop of hair to fit the mold of the military man, which came as a surprise to his peers.

• 𝖎 𝖜𝖎𝖑𝖑 𝖕𝖗𝖔𝖙𝖊𝖈𝖙 𝖞𝖔𝖚. As covered previously, Groves was very conscious of what Oppenheimer needed in order to flourish, and was willing to protect him from anything that might interfere. The most notable instance involved Boris Pash, the project's Chief of Security and a fervent anti-Communist who had begun investigating Oppenheimer's left-wing past. The film depicts Oppenheimer's one and only encounter with Pash, during which he puts on what is described in American Prometheus as "a bizarre and disastrous performance."

  You might expect Pash to be more of a problem from here on out, but instead, he's quickly excised from the story. The reason, as Oppenheimer discovers alongside the audience, is that in the middle of the investigation, Groves reassigned Pash to an overseas intelligence mission determining the status of the Nazi bomb project. He would never admit to it, but this was almost certainly to keep Pash away.^[8]Whenever Groves was annoyed by someone he would try to reassign them or get them drafted. Once a journalist published an article speculating on Los Alamos and Groves tried to have him drafted only to find out he was in his sixties.

• Trinity. For my last viewing of Oppenheimer at the TIFF Lightbox, I brought along a notebook and pen so I could scribble down notes in the dark. During the lead-up to the Trinity test I wrote: "bomb = consummation?" and underlined it three times.

  The nervous anticipation leading up to Trinity is obviously because of its immense significance. Oppenheimer centers it on specifically the two men who will take the brunt of the blame if it goes wrong. We see Groves and Oppenheimer together constantly as everyone prepares for the test, and then we get a scene with just the two of them discussing what they're about to do. It's a big moment for history, but it's also a big moment for them - individually and together. Their whole relationship has been leading up to this, and afterwards, it won't ever be the same again.

• Post-bomb clarity. What makes the Oppengroves relationship so compelling to me in Oppenheimer is really how it ends. As soon as the ecstatic celebrations over Trinity's success cap off the second hour of the film, we're jolted back into reality. Groves prepares to leave Los Alamos for DC, and his attitude towards Oppenheimer is oddly detached and indifferent. Oppenheimer asks if he should come along. Groves looks at him in mild confusion and asks, "What for?"

  This jarring shift, which comes after we've just spent the last 80 minutes watching Groves treat Oppenheimer like a Very Important Guy, is the key to unlocking what the film is trying to say about the US government's view of its subjects. We'll expand on that later - but suffice it to say, in real life, their relationship slowly cooled in much the same way, as you'd expect of two people who no longer have a reason to need each other.

• After the breakup. Despite being such a key figure in the "Manhattan Project" part of the film, Groves more or less disappears in the final hour. He reappears briefly to present Oppenheimer with an award on his final day at Los Alamos, and then again at the security hearing, where he testifies in Oppenheimer's defense. The real Groves was also a staunch defender of Oppenheimer's loyalty for the rest of his life, though I do wonder how much of this was because he really believed it and how much was because he felt Oppenheimer's reputation was inextricably entwined with the reputation of the Manhattan Project and, therefore, his own.

  It's striking to me that we're initially given a view of Groves from behind at the security hearing, as Oppenheimer sees him; it imparts the sense that this is the first time they've encountered each other in a while. After spending so many years face to face, they've become mysteries to each other again.

• Groves' leitmotif. This isn't just one "moment" and doesn't necessarily impact the Oppengroves arc so I've put it at the end here, but it does move me quite a bit, so it's included.

  When Groves and Oppenheimer meet for the first time, we hear the aptly named track 'Groves.' The leitmotif introduced here makes two more appearances. The first is at the end of 'Colonel Pash,' under the moment where we find out about how Groves sent Pash overseas. The second comes at the end of 'Dr. Hill,' when Oppenheimer and Groves share a warm look as Groves leaves the hearing, which is also his exit from the film. Sorry but everyone knows it's insanely romantic to have a leitmotif that plays under key moments in your relationship.

Some Necessary Historical Context

At the turn of the 20th century, the commonly understood image of "the scientist" was that of an individual tinkering away at a workbench, using only their wits and the tools at their disposal to make world-altering discoveries. This conception was born in Europe, where scientists looked down on their American counterparts, regarding them as having an abundance of resources but lacking the fastidiousness and reverence for science that they themselves possessed.

Obviously, American science's response to this was to simply spend even more money and build even more stuff. A leading figure in this movement was Ernest Lawrence^[9]In real life he is my problematic fave and probably also Christopher Nolan's. The Oppenlawrence yaoi is not as allegorical as Oppengroves but is perhaps even more crazy in some ways. That's not what this post is about but I do just have to mention that., one of Oppenheimer's closest friends at Berkeley who was also a crucial figure in the Manhattan Project. An all-American experimental physicist with the savvy of a politician, Lawrence spent his pre-war career securing funding from wealthy donors that he would use to expand his Radiation Lab and build ever larger machines in pursuit of scientific innovation. He was largely responsible for ushering in this new model which would come to be known as "Big Science."

The Manhattan Project is remembered by most as a scientific endeavor. In reality, though the physicists holed away at Los Alamos were the ones who received most of the publicity in the end, the majority of the project came down to construction and engineering involving military, government, and private contractors. Oppenheimer reigned over the science-y part, but Groves was responsible for that as well as everything else.

Nowadays, Big Science is the standard, and the defense industry is expansive. The atomic project played a significant part in the creation of what we now term the military-industrial complex (though it seems like things were headed in that direction anyway). The post-war myth-making that surrounded Oppenheimer and Los Alamos has made that fact secondary or irrelevant to many people, including even some of the scientists involved. But in the end it was not a thirst for knowledge or scientific progress that drove the Manhattan Project - it was war, and it set the stage for a new world in many more ways than just introducing nuclear weapons.

Alright, back to the yaoi

There's a part of the officially published script for Oppenheimer that never made it into the final product, but that I consider essentially canon because I like it so much. In true Nolan fashion, it's incredibly unsubtle and very blunt in its messaging, although given the general literacy level of audiences these days, that kind of thing has proven necessary in some cases.

In this exchange - which takes place whilst Oppenheimer is embroiled in the security hearing - Einstein outright compares McCarthyism in America to Nazism in Germany. When you think about it like that it kind of makes sense why this isn't in the film, which is already very sympathetic to its Communist characters but probably couldn't have gotten away with that.^[10]The brief sequence where you see what became of Communists like Frank, Lomanitz, and Chevalier is gutting, and intentionally so. Still, knowing this was in the script at all makes it much clearer where the film is coming from when it depicts Oppenheimer's security hearing and the post-war years.

If we consider the United States government akin to one of Oppenheimer's ex-lovers, it stands to reason that Groves is the avatar of said ex-lover. For years, he was Oppenheimer's only point of contact with the government. Every decision or new directive came through him. He was the one who approved all the funding, who listened to Oppenheimer's demands and suggestions, who shielded Oppenheimer from suspicion and skepticism.

The intensity of their relationship, followed by Groves' immediate coldness once Oppenheimer has served his purpose, highlights the real role of scientists in the burgeoning military-industrial complex. They were not, in fact, the innovators and decision-makers. They were cogs in the machine, beholden to their benefactors. Their "folk hero" status also made them annoying liabilities - none more than Oppenheimer, who would go on to use his influence to advocate against further developments like the H-bomb program.

During the Avengers recruiting montage, Oppenheimer speaks to one of the few OCs ("original characters") in the film, who is known in the script only as 'Concerned Scientist.' He refuses to join the project because of his left-wing associations, to which Oppenheimer replies that it'll be fine, because he has the same kind of background, but they've put him in charge. 'Concerned Scientist,' however, is not convinced.

This is a fairly obvious bit of foreshadowing but bears mentioning anyway. It's unclear whether Oppenheimer knows what's going to happen to him when he begins campaigning for global transparency and against the H-Bomb. As Lewis Strauss says, "maybe he thought fame could actually protect him." What Oppenheimer does make clear is that the security hearing was simply a pretext for the larger goal of showing the scientific community that everyone - even the father of the atomic bomb - could be punished if they stepped out of line.

And though Groves testifies in Oppenheimer's defense, his lack of presence in the final hour of the film makes for a stark contrast with the Manhattan Project years.^[11]To be fair, in real life, he was going through his own shit and could not have protected Oppenheimer the same way regardless. But you don't get that context in the film, so what's relevant is what is in the text. He - and by extension the US government - spent an exorbitant amount of time and money on Oppenheimer when he was useful to them. He nurtured Oppenheimer's great ambitions and instilled in him the belief that the project would make him immortal. He made Oppenheimer feel needed and perhaps even - sorry - loved.

So when Groves disappears, and when the country Oppenheimer has given everything to dutifully serve turns its back on him, we are supposed to feel the heartbreak and confusion. Few of us can relate directly to what Oppenheimer went through, but who among us can't understand how it feels when a relationship that once felt so good and that you thought would last forever suddenly goes sour? Under the security state everyone is expendable once they have served their purpose, and the people who helped create the bomb don't get to decide how it's used.