E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 5, 2020

Foreword to the Symposium “Inheritance of HIROSHIMA
Memory and Emerging Reconciliation: Changing
Representations in Polyphony of/between German, Koreanand Japanese Voices”
Yasushi MARUYAMA
Hiroshima University

Atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Even
after seventy-four years have passed, no end of the controversy over its meaning is insight. The voice that justifies the drop and the voice that conveys the tragedy of the Abomb pass each other and do not encounter.
Certainly, the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons at theUN General Assembly in July 2017 was a big step toward realizing the long-standing
wish of the atomic bomb survivors to abolish nuclear weapons. However, none of thenuclear-weapon possessing states, including the United States, even attended theconference. The damage caused by nuclear weapons is a "crime against humanity",
which is clear from the terrible consequences of the atomic bombs on the people ofHiroshima and Nagasaki. Nevertheless, the abolition of nuclear weapons has notprogressed. It may be because the reality of the atomic-bombed has not been unknown
to the world. From such thoughts, many A-bomb survivors have talked about their painful
memories of the atomic bombs and tried to convey them by drawing pictures. Over 70
years passing, however, the aging of A-bomb survivors becomes more crucial, and it isobvious that there will be no survivors in the near future who can tell the actual experienceof the atomic-bombed. An urgent issue is how to pass on the memories of Hiroshima andNagasaki so that properly understanding the reality of the atomic bombed should preventfrom using any more nuclear weapons.
What can Educational Studies do for this task? One measure would be to envision

18Y. MARUYAMA

and practice peace education originating in Hiroshima. It is a type of peace education that
carefully elucidates and verifies why the atomic bomb was dropped, what was happening
under the mushroom cloud, and what kind of life the hibakusha were forced to spend;
and then that develops methods to convey them correctly. It is the peace education that
fosters an attitude of exploring together what should be done in order not to repeat thefact.
However, it is in a situation where people from different positions cannot
understand each other over this HIROSHIMA. Each other thinks the other is wrong.
Others are indifferent to or tired of hearing the discourse of HIROSHIMA. Here is atanble that must be unraveled before the peace education is given.

HIROSHIMA complexity
The thing to consider is the complexity of the issue. HIROSHIMA has beenvariously understood in various types of discourse such as science, medicine, policy,
religion, ethics, and diplomacy. Along with indifference, lack of knowledge, regret, or thesense of mission and justice, people from different positions have understood
HIROSHIMA with different representations.
For example, Hiroshima, where the atomic bomb was dropped for the first time inhuman history, was revived as an international peace city, but before the end of the war it
was a military city from which many soldiers were sent to the mainland China, and once
was the war-time capital where Imperial Headquarters was set up during the SinoJapanese War. Someone who knows the ravages of the war has criticized that the more
HIROSHIMA emphasizes the damage caused by the atomic bomb, the less visible theharm done by Japan in Asia. In addition, when HIROSHIMA is universalized as aconception praying for peace and linked with the heroism of external supporters, theparticularity of the A-bomb survivors’ own suffering—that of the experience of sufferingfrom anxiety about radioactivity and from discrimination, while feeling the sudden lossof relatives/friends, the severe pain of heat ray burns, and survivors’ burden to victims-is regarded as trivial. Voices calling HIROSHIMA a symbol of peace may block thevoices accusing A-bomb droppers of the misery. Voices requiring for the repose of
the victims’ souls may oppose the voices seeking urban development or better quality oflife. Just as the “Nuclear Peace Expo” was once held at the Hiroshima Peace MemorialMuseum, HIROSHIMA is even a political magnetic field where inconsistent words, like
“nuclear umbrella,” “nuclear weapons abolition,” “nuclear peace use,” and “opposition
Symposium: Inheritance of HIROSHIMA Memory and Emerging Reconciliation: Changing Representations inPolyphony of / between German, Korean and Japanese Voices

Foreword to the Symposium

19

against nuclear power”, are invited while passing each other.

Toward the intersection of different voices and the renewal of representations
In this complex situation, how is inheritance of memory possible to make the voices
encounter, revise fixed representations, and create reconciliation? How can Philosophyof Education respond to this challenge?
As a related study to be listed is Lisa Yoneyama, Hiroshima Traces: Time, Space,
and the Dialectics of Memory (University of California Press, 1999). Hiroaki Ozawa, oneof the translators of the book, characterizes it as follows: "The polyphonic voices evokedby the representations of ‘Hiroshima’ and ‘Atomic Bomb’ tend to be absorbed in therecollection of the damage and the narration of the history of the nation. Since the power
to promote embezzlement of memory is unevenly distributed, those who oppose it cannot
avoid having difficulty. The author vividly shows the placement of power and unravels
the place where memory works and the way the politics of historical knowledge plays”(Yoneyama, Iwanami, 2005, p. 299). Since the publication of the book, the focus on
discourse formation and the politics of memory has been understood as one of theimportant approaches to unravel the complex HIROSHIMA problem.
What is expected from Philosophy of Education considering the HIROSHIMA
problem? It is to respond to the urgent task of Hiroshima--avoiding the crisis of using
nuclear weapons, and reviewing the way of memory inheritance due to the decrease in
the number of atomic bomb survivors--and at the same time to show the path to tackle
the difficulties of this problem. That is to say, we ask how we obtain representations andhow we can change them, and demonstrate how changing representations enables those
who disagree with each other to reach mutual understanding and reconciliation.
"Philosophy of Education" mentioned here refers to activities that elucidate thefoundations and preconditions of what brings about human transformation. By reading
the intersections of various voices and unraveling the complexities of HIROSHIMA,
Philosophy of Education seeks ways to change our thoughts and attitudes throughmeeting the voices of others.

Purpose and outline of discussion
In order to meet this challenge, this panel discussion invites Lothar Wigger ofE-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 5, 2020

20

Y. MARUYAMA

Dortmund Technical University and Kim Jongsung of Hiroshima University to review
practices and challenges concerning the representations and reconciliation overHIROSHIMA. How is HIROSHIMA represented in Germany and South Korea, wherethe meaning of World War II is settled in its own way? And how can these representations
intersect and mutually transform the representations in Japan? These questions areexamined in their reviews so as to confirm that the inheritance of the memory of war canbring about reconciliation,
Dr. Wigger is a philosopher of education, who contributed "Catastrophe andPedagogy" to Passing Memories of Disaster and Calamity Down : What Can Education
Studies Do? (edited by Jun Yamana and Satoji Yano, Keiso Shobo, 2017). He may also
be known as one of the editors of Recognition and Human Formation (edited by LotharWigger, Jun Yamana and Kayo Fujii, Kitaoji Shobo, 2015). He has recently started fieldresearch on Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. He is asked to review therepresentation of HIROSHIMA in Germany through the analysis of how it was treatedin textbooks and the mass media, and to examine in the German context how passing on
the memory of war would make reconciliation possible/impossible, entitled "The Legacyof ‘Hiroshima’ in Germany: History and Current Problems".
Dr. Kim is an up-and-coming researcher who specializes in social studies pedagogy.
Focusing on the concepts of "citizen" and "nation," he is conducting developmental
research aiming to educate children who are aware of coexistence with others living
outside their country. A recent publication of him is J. Kim, (2019), “Beyond national
discourses: South Korean and Japanese students ‘make a better social studies textbook'”,in B. C. Rubin, E. B. Freedman & J. Kim (Eds.) Design research in social studies
education: There is Critical lessons from an emerging field, Routledge. He is asked thistime to examine how preservice teachers of social studies in Japan and South Korea haverenewed the representation of HIROSHIMA, and whether they could or could not reacha common understanding, entitled “Educating Citizens Who Are Open to the Discourseof Others: ‘The Last 10 Feet’ Project and the ‘Making a Better Hiroshima Textbook’Project”, so as to suggest a possible direction that the inheritance of HIROSHIMA
memory and reconciliation could take.
In response to the two reviews, Dr. Yamana will illustrate the HIROSHIMA
problem as challenges for Philosophy of Education from the perspective of cultural
memory theory, followed by a discussion.

Symposium: Inheritance of HIROSHIMA Memory and Emerging Reconciliation: Changing Representations inPolyphony of / between German, Korean and Japanese Voices