Memory · Narrative
 |
Description
Book Introduction
- A word from MD
-
Memories of events must be told and communicated.Can someone who has experienced a violent event truly move beyond that memory and live in the present? Can they speak of that pain? Oka Mari argues that the memories of others' experiences must be told, and we must share them.
The countless memories that still remain and have not healed must be told.
March 19, 2024. History PD Ahn Hyun-jae
Why is the memory of the incident
Should it be talked about and communicated?
The memory of the 'incident' experienced by the typist
What does it mean to share?
In the midst of a struggle over memory surrounding various 'incidents',
How can we share our memories of the current 'incident'?
The memory of an event must be told and communicated.
The essence of 'memory' and 'story',
On the nature of trauma and storytelling
The ultimate guide with dazzling insights
This book focuses on two main themes: the problems of people who live in pain in the present due to memories of violent events that occur regardless of their will.
What does it mean to share the memory of an 'event' experienced by another person?
How is that possible?
The author seeks clues to this question through narrative criticism in various genres, including novels, films, and reportage, while also raising questions about how past events are remembered in society and how the memories of those events can be shared.
The central argument that runs through this book is that we, living in the same era as them, must share and remember the memories of those who suffered psychological trauma due to the violence of past events and live as "others."
However, it is not easy to share the memories of violent incidents experienced by the ‘other’.
For this reason, the author cites historical revisionism that denies the violent events themselves, nationalism that denies the other, and the realist desire to perfectly reproduce and represent violent events.
Nonetheless, this book suggests a solution to the problem of how to understand and share the memory of 'events' in the present, amidst the struggles of memory surrounding various 'events'.
Should it be talked about and communicated?
The memory of the 'incident' experienced by the typist
What does it mean to share?
In the midst of a struggle over memory surrounding various 'incidents',
How can we share our memories of the current 'incident'?
The memory of an event must be told and communicated.
The essence of 'memory' and 'story',
On the nature of trauma and storytelling
The ultimate guide with dazzling insights
This book focuses on two main themes: the problems of people who live in pain in the present due to memories of violent events that occur regardless of their will.
What does it mean to share the memory of an 'event' experienced by another person?
How is that possible?
The author seeks clues to this question through narrative criticism in various genres, including novels, films, and reportage, while also raising questions about how past events are remembered in society and how the memories of those events can be shared.
The central argument that runs through this book is that we, living in the same era as them, must share and remember the memories of those who suffered psychological trauma due to the violence of past events and live as "others."
However, it is not easy to share the memories of violent incidents experienced by the ‘other’.
For this reason, the author cites historical revisionism that denies the violent events themselves, nationalism that denies the other, and the realist desire to perfectly reproduce and represent violent events.
Nonetheless, this book suggests a solution to the problem of how to understand and share the memory of 'events' in the present, amidst the struggles of memory surrounding various 'events'.
- You can preview some of the book's contents.
Preview
index
Preface: To Share Memories
Part 1: Representations of Memory and the Limits of Narrative
Chapter 1: The Subject of Memory
Coming memories
Surplus and violence
Chapter 2: Representation of the Event
A story called a novel
The externality of representable reality
Chapter 3: The Trap of Narrative
fictional realism
The reality of the incident
Desire for narrative
Deception of the narrative/narrative of deception
The denied hitter
Chapter 4: The Politics of Memory
The case of a wounded soldier
Speaking of memories
The wife's accomplice
Part 2 Beyond the Impossibility of Representation
Chapter 1: Transferred Memories
The way to reach the outside world
Hell with Babe Ruth
Chapter 2: The Impossibility of Possessing
Sealed Surplus
Camouflage plot
Exclusivity, traces, and others
Chapter 3: Living Through the Event
Attribution of the incident
Creating a refugee life
Basic Literature Guide
Author's Note
Translator's Note
Part 1: Representations of Memory and the Limits of Narrative
Chapter 1: The Subject of Memory
Coming memories
Surplus and violence
Chapter 2: Representation of the Event
A story called a novel
The externality of representable reality
Chapter 3: The Trap of Narrative
fictional realism
The reality of the incident
Desire for narrative
Deception of the narrative/narrative of deception
The denied hitter
Chapter 4: The Politics of Memory
The case of a wounded soldier
Speaking of memories
The wife's accomplice
Part 2 Beyond the Impossibility of Representation
Chapter 1: Transferred Memories
The way to reach the outside world
Hell with Babe Ruth
Chapter 2: The Impossibility of Possessing
Sealed Surplus
Camouflage plot
Exclusivity, traces, and others
Chapter 3: Living Through the Event
Attribution of the incident
Creating a refugee life
Basic Literature Guide
Author's Note
Translator's Note
Detailed image
.jpg)
Into the book
How is it possible to share the memory of an ‘incident’?
In order to share the memory of an 'event' with others, the 'event' must first be told.
It must be delivered.
The memory of the 'incident' must be shared with the typist.
But what does it mean to talk about the memory of an 'event' in a way that truly shares the memory of the 'event' with others?
Is such a narrative even possible?
Could it exist?
If it exists, is it a matter of the sophistication that realism displays?
But what does it mean to be real?
A lot of questions arise.
--- p.22
The fact is that 'memory' is sometimes something uncontrollable to me, something that attacks my body regardless of my will.
And the event still lives vividly in the present in my memory.
If so, then the return of memory hides the fundamental violence.
--- p.29
How can we share the memory of an 'incident' with others, when the core of its violence lies in the fact that we cannot talk about it?
--- p.34~35
Those who are denied by unconscious desires, those who are excluded from the realistically completed narrative, are the 'others'.
In that case, in the case of “Adieu,” the other person is a woman as a gender.
--- p.50
At a time when accepting the 'incident' and correcting the injustice is the task assigned to all of us, historical revisionist rhetoric that denies the 'incident' itself is spoken of openly and without hesitation, once again wielding violence against these women who have lived through the violence of the 'incident'.
We have a responsibility to denounce and condemn that violence.
--- p.58
Spielberg's desire to realistically recreate the incident as a complete narrative, which denies and forgets the violence suffered by others, is inseparably linked to his national experience and national desires.
--- p.80
However, in that it only remembers and recalls its own damages, eliminating the opportunity to recall the existence of others who suffered absurd deaths in that war and the violence of the 'event' called war as a present narrative, it repeats the nationalistic experience of post-war Japanese society itself, and shares the nationalistic desire to deny the other, as well as nationalism itself.
--- p.108
The memory of an 'event' must somehow be shared with others, that is, with people outside the 'event'.
This is because those who constitute collective memory and the discourse of history are the survivors who did not experience the ‘event’, that is, the others.
If you don't share that memory with them, the 'incident' will be considered as if it never happened.
It becomes something that never happened.
The existence of those who experienced that 'incident' is pushed beyond the memories of others, outside the 'world', and forgotten in history.
--- p.111
The discord that can never be resolved, the traces of the violence of the 'incident' left behind are recorded as scars in the present story, and there is the possibility of sharing the memory of the 'incident'.
--- p.131
People who live in an 'event' where the 'event' possesses the human, rather than the human possessing the 'event'.
It is only those who live this refugee life who possess the memory of an ‘incident’ as an ‘event’ rather than as a ‘narrative.’
The possibility of sharing the memory of an 'event' lies in what we create in 'refugees', that is, in living a refugee life.
In order to share the memory of an 'event' with others, the 'event' must first be told.
It must be delivered.
The memory of the 'incident' must be shared with the typist.
But what does it mean to talk about the memory of an 'event' in a way that truly shares the memory of the 'event' with others?
Is such a narrative even possible?
Could it exist?
If it exists, is it a matter of the sophistication that realism displays?
But what does it mean to be real?
A lot of questions arise.
--- p.22
The fact is that 'memory' is sometimes something uncontrollable to me, something that attacks my body regardless of my will.
And the event still lives vividly in the present in my memory.
If so, then the return of memory hides the fundamental violence.
--- p.29
How can we share the memory of an 'incident' with others, when the core of its violence lies in the fact that we cannot talk about it?
--- p.34~35
Those who are denied by unconscious desires, those who are excluded from the realistically completed narrative, are the 'others'.
In that case, in the case of “Adieu,” the other person is a woman as a gender.
--- p.50
At a time when accepting the 'incident' and correcting the injustice is the task assigned to all of us, historical revisionist rhetoric that denies the 'incident' itself is spoken of openly and without hesitation, once again wielding violence against these women who have lived through the violence of the 'incident'.
We have a responsibility to denounce and condemn that violence.
--- p.58
Spielberg's desire to realistically recreate the incident as a complete narrative, which denies and forgets the violence suffered by others, is inseparably linked to his national experience and national desires.
--- p.80
However, in that it only remembers and recalls its own damages, eliminating the opportunity to recall the existence of others who suffered absurd deaths in that war and the violence of the 'event' called war as a present narrative, it repeats the nationalistic experience of post-war Japanese society itself, and shares the nationalistic desire to deny the other, as well as nationalism itself.
--- p.108
The memory of an 'event' must somehow be shared with others, that is, with people outside the 'event'.
This is because those who constitute collective memory and the discourse of history are the survivors who did not experience the ‘event’, that is, the others.
If you don't share that memory with them, the 'incident' will be considered as if it never happened.
It becomes something that never happened.
The existence of those who experienced that 'incident' is pushed beyond the memories of others, outside the 'world', and forgotten in history.
--- p.111
The discord that can never be resolved, the traces of the violence of the 'incident' left behind are recorded as scars in the present story, and there is the possibility of sharing the memory of the 'incident'.
--- p.131
People who live in an 'event' where the 'event' possesses the human, rather than the human possessing the 'event'.
It is only those who live this refugee life who possess the memory of an ‘incident’ as an ‘event’ rather than as a ‘narrative.’
The possibility of sharing the memory of an 'event' lies in what we create in 'refugees', that is, in living a refugee life.
--- p.153
Publisher's Review
Memories of the incident and
The impossibility of representing violent events
The memories of those who were subjected to past violent events are still not expressed in clear language, yet the war is still ongoing.
The author says the incident “may be a wound engraved in the space-time of this world.”
Because I am still living the present vividly in my memory.
Events strike uncontrollably, regardless of one's will.
Therefore, it can be said that the regression of the incident hides its fundamental violence.
The author says that when a violent incident is ongoing, those in the midst of the violence cannot speak out and simply live through the incident.
The reason we can talk about an event is because it is verbalized in the past tense as an ‘experience.’
The act of verbalizing an event may be a way for people to tame it into the 'past'.
However, behind the verbalization of an event, “there is a surplus of events that cannot be verbalized in the past tense, events that violently regress in the present tense, events that cannot be simply said to be experiences.” Therefore, the verbalized event cannot be represented in language due to the surplus of the event.
Nevertheless, the author says that we must consider the possibility of that impossibility and share memories with others.
Speaking about unspeakable events
Milk of Memory
The author consistently questions this society and those who live there in order to share the unspeakable violent events with others.
But the politics of forgetting, which operates in various ways today, makes it far from easy to divide memory.
Nevertheless, why does the author say that the memory of the event must somehow be shared with others, that is, with people outside the event?
If we do not share our memories with the survivors who did not experience the 'incident', the incident will become something that never happened, something that never happened, and the existence of those who experienced the violent incident will be forgotten in history.
In order to create a world different from the one that exists now and live in it, we must speak of even unspeakable 'events'.
For those who cannot speak about the 'incident' because they experienced it, were inside it, and are still experiencing its violence, a third party outside the incident must testify.
By recording the traces of the violence of the incident as scars in the present story, we can glimpse the possibility of sharing the memory of the incident.
To do that, we need to share our memories.
* This book is a re-publication of 『Memory/Narrative』 (Somyung Publishing, 2004), a translation of 『Memory/Nature Story』 by Ok?ri.
The impossibility of representing violent events
The memories of those who were subjected to past violent events are still not expressed in clear language, yet the war is still ongoing.
The author says the incident “may be a wound engraved in the space-time of this world.”
Because I am still living the present vividly in my memory.
Events strike uncontrollably, regardless of one's will.
Therefore, it can be said that the regression of the incident hides its fundamental violence.
The author says that when a violent incident is ongoing, those in the midst of the violence cannot speak out and simply live through the incident.
The reason we can talk about an event is because it is verbalized in the past tense as an ‘experience.’
The act of verbalizing an event may be a way for people to tame it into the 'past'.
However, behind the verbalization of an event, “there is a surplus of events that cannot be verbalized in the past tense, events that violently regress in the present tense, events that cannot be simply said to be experiences.” Therefore, the verbalized event cannot be represented in language due to the surplus of the event.
Nevertheless, the author says that we must consider the possibility of that impossibility and share memories with others.
Speaking about unspeakable events
Milk of Memory
The author consistently questions this society and those who live there in order to share the unspeakable violent events with others.
But the politics of forgetting, which operates in various ways today, makes it far from easy to divide memory.
Nevertheless, why does the author say that the memory of the event must somehow be shared with others, that is, with people outside the event?
If we do not share our memories with the survivors who did not experience the 'incident', the incident will become something that never happened, something that never happened, and the existence of those who experienced the violent incident will be forgotten in history.
In order to create a world different from the one that exists now and live in it, we must speak of even unspeakable 'events'.
For those who cannot speak about the 'incident' because they experienced it, were inside it, and are still experiencing its violence, a third party outside the incident must testify.
By recording the traces of the violence of the incident as scars in the present story, we can glimpse the possibility of sharing the memory of the incident.
To do that, we need to share our memories.
* This book is a re-publication of 『Memory/Narrative』 (Somyung Publishing, 2004), a translation of 『Memory/Nature Story』 by Ok?ri.
GOODS SPECIFICS
- Date of issue: March 20, 2024
- Format: Hardcover book binding method guide
- Page count, weight, size: 174 pages | 153*225*20mm
- ISBN13: 9791193710210
- ISBN10: 1193710219
You may also like
카테고리
korean
korean
![ELLE 엘르 스페셜 에디션 A형 : 12월 [2025]](http://librairie.coreenne.fr/cdn/shop/files/b8e27a3de6c9538896439686c6b0e8fb.jpg?v=1766436872&width=3840)
