Postmemory and The Brotherhood of War

While the concept of postmemory is not directly referenced in the readings for this week, they both take note of the way identity-- national, familial, etc-- is shaped by our awareness of things we did not necessarily experience. A concept generally used to explain the deep impression of loss or tragedy felt by the children of Holocaust survivors, postmemory can equally be applied to any person who is "one rung removed from" a traumatic experience such as war, political strife, or the like (Kim, 301). Kim actually comes quite close to using a definition of postmemory without addressing the term itself, by identifying the way The Brotherhood of War illustrates tragedy that is "passed on from generation to generation" (301). I think this was an extremely relevant part of the film, and looking at the "reunion" scene where Jin-seok is faced with his brother's remains is a good way to delve further into what postmemory means for this particular family.

Pointing out the temporal inconsistencies of filmic representations of the Korean War, Kim explains how the main viewing audience of Brotherhood of War do not have the same "Cold War provenance" that their parents' and grandparents' have (302). Thus, the granddaughter is a "surrogate" of identification for contemporary audiences, and as they prepare to go to the excavation site, she demonstrates that she is fully "modern" in the temporal sense. She has all proper identification, and understands the processes of traveling and participating in the 'new' Korea. Yet, still, she is equally aware of the consequences of this exhumation, the uncertainty over Jin-tae's fate has clearly been a topic felt deeply by his family since the war. Taking the concept of postmemory one generation further, we never see Jin-seok's children, only his grandchild, and yet her awareness of his trauma and experiences are quite comprehensive. The war's "residual effects that are still ongoing and lingering" affect both the younger generation and those who lived through it (308).

The actual confrontation of Jin-seok and Jin-tae (physical remains and physically remaining) is heart-wrenching, as most of us can attest. His outpouring of grief is so authentic and so moving that it seems hardly a part of the film itself. The idea of postmemory is very interesting here, as it is generally defined by an absence, a physical manifestation of nothingness where those who were lost no longer exist. Being placed so close to his brother fills this nothingness, and it is almost too much for him to bear. One can only assume the past 50 years have been spent trying to suppress and move past this loss, only to have it brought back in full force, all at once. It seems cathartic, and I read it as the beginning of a new discourse, similarly providing closure for one generation and allowing a younger one to come into direct contact with the past. It certainly does bridge generational divides, but I see it as primarily letting the aging populace come into the present, so that the nation can move forward (towards reunification?) rather than living in the shadow of the elder generation's trauma.