Inside Box 1663, by Eleanor Jette

On a recent trip into New Mexico’s Jemez Mountains, we visited Los Alamos, an almost nonexistent spot on the map until the Army commandeered the valley in 1943 for work on the Atomic Bomb. In Inside Box 1663, published in 1977 by the Los Alamos Historical Society, the story of life in the compound is  vividly recalled by Eleanor Jette, wife of a scientist and mother of a nine-year-old boy. The place was ill-suited for a rapidly-expanding workforce. Begun on the site of a boys’ school, the original dormitories and Bathtub Row, housing for school personnel, quickly overflowed into surrounding fields. Living space, allotted by status in the bomb-building effort and family size, was seldom adequate. 

Water, in limited supply to begin with, was soon a dire situation – springs that fed the source creek were clogged and during the dry months, dwindled. Constant exhortations to conserve water were unequal to the severe disconnect between population and supply. Eleanor Jette, on arrival appalled by housing conditions, was not a complainer but a doer, and soon employed her wit and native intelligence to the problems, battling frequently with Army officers whose hands were tied by budget constraints. She and a few women friends quickly formed a group that helped newcomers adapt, hounded the decision-makers, and found ways to blow off steam. 

This human’s-eye-view of the cloistered world of Trinity, the Los Alamos section of the Manhattan Project, is a useful addition to the biographies of famous men (Robert Oppenheimer, Leslie Groves, etc.) whose experiences have gained wider recognition. Without the pressure of women like Eleanor, it’s possible Los Alamos itself may have burned to the ground, its occupants poisoned by polluted water and alternately frozen in hard winters and roasted in hot summers (while the Army directive to stoke furnaces till May 15th regardless of conditions, rendered dormitories uninhabitable). 

She has fun with the secrecy – they were not allowed to tell anyone where they were going nor why. Her New Mexico drivers license identifies her as Number 44, her residential address Special List B, Santa Fe. “I had joined the secret society whose membership was closely guarded. Thus, I later became Number 9 for income tax purposes, and when the laundry service was resuscitated, I was Number 464. We were numbered for everything except our ration books, and the numbers were never the same. Our official address was Box 1663, Santa Fe.” 

As Robert Oppenheimer is in the headlines again in a new film, it’s worth considering the lives of those who toiled to make existence tolerable alongside the bomb-builders.

The Painter, a novel by Peter Heller

Peter Heller’s 2014 novel, The Painter, is written in economic, dynamic style, with lots of white space on the page: modern fiction’s answer to the short attention-spans of readers accustomed to fidgety electronics. Ultimately, though, a novel is a story, and whether you appreciate it has everything to do with whether it delivers on its promise. 

Jim Stegner is a painter, rebellious son of a logger and a drunk, with his own struggles with alcohol and a hot temper. Jim’s agent and gallerist in Santa Fe, doing what he can to keep Jim painting, sends him to Paonia, Colorado, to a cabin outside town after release from several years in prison for shooting but not killing a man in a bar. The narrative is first-person – we have to take Jim’s word for his actions and accept his rationale – and in large degree he seems, or tries to be, as honest as possible. The book is situated in parts of Colorado I know well; it was a pleasure to have them so beautifully evoked. Heller is a fine writer. 

Jim – I’ll call him Jim because everybody else does – loves to fly-fish. The shooting that landed him in prison was fallout from the murder of his seventeen-year-old daughter Alce and his subsequent divorce from her mother. Jim taught Alce to fly-fish, and that activity brings her back in ways that could heal his wounds. But arriving at a creek outside Paonia, he encounters an outfitter beating a horse with a club. Jim in a rage attacks the man, the sheriff is summoned, the injured horse is taken to recuperate. And Jim has made an enemy. 

The story spins into a maelstrom of violence that overwhelms its homage to art. Since we see it all through Jim’s perspective, his choices feel consistent with who he is – but the sheriff’s warning early on, to live and let live, falls on deaf ears. Jim can’t, nor can those aligned against him. Meanwhile, as stories circulate and his notoriety grows, his paintings become darker, with violence lurking in the frame; the art connoisseurs of Santa Fe can’t buy them fast enough. 

Jim’s creativity does get him out of jams – by behaving unpredictably, he survives encounters where he could easily end up dead. And his riffs on the creative process are fine: “Usually. It comes fast, it comes without thought, it comes like a horse running you over at night. But. Even if people understand this, they don’t understand that sometimes it is not like that at all. Because the process has always been: craft, years and years; then faith; then letting go.” But I confess to being disappointed that this tale about art turns noir. I didn’t need the focus on stalking, killers, and vengeance. And despite Jim’s self-image as a man with ordinary human struggles, his participation belies it. 

Likely aware of how escalating violence can hijack a narrative, Heller regards it from a philosophic perspective, letting Jim steep in what he’s done – self-defense or not, prosecuted or not, he feels the stain on his soul, as he should. Heller humanizes the villains too, enough that the reader is not pleased to think of Jim as some Dirty Harry ridding the world of scum. In a society increasingly drawn to vigilantism and guns, this book fits right in – except the art, which doesn’t. 

Late in the novel Jim reflects on a pair of paintings at the Tate Modern Museum in London, both striking him as powerfully sexy portrayals of women. The first, a detailed study of a pale nude on a divan, leaves him wondering if she’s alive or dead. The second, a Picasso rendering of his young lover: “She was not perfect, like the other, not in a classical sense, her limbs were short, she was pudgy, she might even waddle a little as she walked. But. She was devastatingly sexy. That was it, maybe. The painting was so simple. Simple joy, simple sensual heat, simple love in her presence. I felt what Picasso must have felt.” 

He concludes this riff with his own ethos, however tattered by events: “[T]his dark yearning is what happens when we idealize anything: the form of a woman, a landscape, a spiritual impulse. We move it closer to the realm of the dead, if not outright kill it. The living joyful exuberant woman becomes statue marble and dead, or pornographic and equally dead… That is when I decided that whatever I did as an artist, I would try to go toward the living and not away from it.” But does he?