Silence Broken Almost Invariably, it

Silence Broken

Almost invariably, it appears that war brings with it the widescale victimization of the innocent, while the perpetrators of this victimization commit war crimes as if there is neither retribution nor punishment for their actions. Indeed, many representations of war suggest such a dichotomy between victim and perpetrator, or the "good" and the enemy of the good. Some authors, such as Levi (1986, p. 36), suggest that, in truth, there can be no such simplification. From this perspective, war has many victims, some of whom commit war crimes while the suffering of others is compounded by such crimes. The dichotomy between victim and perpetrator is perhaps nowhere else as clearly delineated as in the account of up to 200,000 women who were coerced, before and during the Pacific War, to serve imperial Japanese troops; a service that generally involved some form of physical exploitation. In her film "Silence Broken" Dai Sil Kim-Gibson provides a highly dichotomized vision of victims' testimonies juxtaposed against brief interludes of victimizers who can say little in their defense. The question is whether this representation is indeed accurate, or if the representation creates a skewed version of what the realities of the war at the time.

To address this, one might look towards authors such as Levi (1986, p. 36), as mentioned, who states that the human tendency is to simplify history. This simplification can, at best, be referred to as "a working hypothesis," according to the author, and should not be mistaken for "reality."

The question is whether the concept of the "working hypothesis" can also be applied to Kim-Gibson's film. First, and most obviously, there occur at least two extreme dichotomies in the film: primarily, there's the juxtaposition of victim and perpetrator; secondarily, there is a juxtaposition of time, of present and past.

The film itself includes personal testimonies from former Korean "comfort women," spanning 36 minutes of the film. Many of the women give detailed accounts of the abuses they suffered, and even provide visual evidence of these abuses. The filmmaker achieves a shock effect by letting one victim reveal an injury and operation wound on her back, while another is all but incapacitated in a hospital bed, having forgotten how to speak Korean. To highlight these grim details, many of the women are filmed in close up, to indicate the dire realities of their past and current situation.

In sharp contrast to this, Japanese apologists provide somewhat stilted denials. From Japan, a soldier and a teacher provide justifications for the abuse, although they fail to adequately deny that the events were in fact as the women described. There is little to deny in the reality of the accounts, the wounds, and the general condition of the interviewees; clearly, the war had a very seriously negative effect upon them.

In the paraphrase above, Levi does not suggest that the realities presented in this way are untrue, but merely that there might be different interpretations of the truth by various role players. While there are Japanese role players in the film, the way in which these are portrayed suggests that there is little to deny in the testimony and extremity of suffering by the women. There seems to be little balance in representing the two sides of the particular situation at the time.

The further juxtaposition of time occurs in terms of the present and the past, where the present is represented by Seoul, with high rise buildings, rice fields, and wild flowered country side. This is juxtaposed by intermittent recreations of the past, where the existing testimonies of the women are reinforced by the voice of a former comfort woman to describe the events. These recreations occur in the form of short scenes, some of which the voice over describes scenes such as Japanese soldiers slitting a pregnant woman form chest to womb. These scenes are reenacted by actors, making it difficult to determine how realistically they might be presented, or whether they might be somewhat biased for effect. Indeed, the shock effect of a pregnant woman being cut open is rather higher than simply looking at soldiers murdering each other. Furthermore, there is little by way of denial by representatives of the Japanese side.

When the film as representation of reality is taken into account, it is interesting to consider the tension between the presentations of the present as opposed to the past. The present is represented as the reality that it is; with the women displaying the current state of their injuries and explaining the effect of the events upon them. Since no footage remains of the events in questions, actors must necessarily reenact the events of the past, which casts some uncertainty over verisimilitude. Also, the events being related could be the result of distorted memory or the desire to create a shock effect that resembles the shock and horror the women experienced when being abducted from their homes and their lives.

While it appears plausible, therefore, that many of these women were lured from their homes and schools by promises of work and money, other accounts might be somewhat embellished. Some of the more outlandish accounts include how the women were forced to bayonet Chinese civilians and even eat human flesh. Interestingly, the past is also represented by archival film, still black and white photographs, and footage of soldiers and the dead. This relieves some of the tension created by credibility concerns.

It is highly unlikely that any of the women openly lied, or even embellished their stories. Indeed, there is as little evidence to suggest this as there is to suggest that they are speaking the truth. However, the way in which the film is set up as representative of the suffering that occurred during the war, suggests some challenges to its verisimilitude. This challenge might be met by arguing that the first-person accounts are provided individually, without coaching and without any external influence. Furthermore it might also be argued that the impenetrable Japanese culture would do little to divulge helpful information to lend more balance to the film. The filmmaker therefore worked with the materials and testimonies at her disposal to create as accurate as possible a resemblance or hypothesis of the truth.

Benjamin (1968, p. 255) confirms this view. According to the author, the representation of the past, even in historical fashion, does not as such mean that it is an accurate or precise depiction. On the other hand, this does not mean either that the memory presented is invalid. Certainly, the memories of the women who speak during the film appear sincere enough, especially when supported by evidence such as wounds and even death.