Atomic Metaphors, Victims, and the Contestations of Nuclear Discourse
Atomic metaphors permeated daily life as the world reacted to the atomic bombings of Japan and the nuclear threat of the Cold War. These metaphors reveal a widespread sense of ownership of atomic narratives and public conceptions of victimhood that are often divorced from actual nuclear victims. Jap...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/476a48cd6bc54dfaab67ad0740ce69a5 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Atomic metaphors permeated daily life as the world reacted to the atomic bombings of Japan and the nuclear threat of the Cold War. These metaphors reveal a widespread sense of ownership of atomic narratives and public conceptions of victimhood that are often divorced from actual nuclear victims. Japan faced the reality of the nuclear again in 2011 when three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant exploded, spreading toxic radiation far and wide. Rather than turn to religion to make sense of the traumatic destruction and existential threat of this invisible force, the Japanese have processed the catastrophe through a secular discussion of victimhood. In the decade since the Fukushima accident, the discourse about victims in Japan has narrowed to emphasize the authority of the <i>tōjisha</i>—victims with direct experience of the disaster—to tell their story. The debate over narrative ownership has challenged the literary community, and post-disaster Japanese literature is an important site of imaginative exploration of this victimhood. Using the theories of Jean-Luc Nancy and Michael Rothberg, this article examines collective memory and the catastrophic equivalence of Hiroshima and Fukushima, as well as the Japanese terminology for victims, in order to provide insight into the struggles for ownership of atomic narratives. Rather than proposing solutions, the article interrogates the ongoing literary controversy over the victim/non-victim divide. |
|---|