Response paper on academic discourse and critical analysis

Grave of the Fireflies

The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are an absent presence in this film. How is this absent trauma reproduced through other absences in the film: the absent parents/relatives, the absent house, the absent buildings, the absent American soldiers hidden inside planes that are often heard but not seen, etc. Does this film suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or is it cathartic? Provide examples and textual support to argue in the negative or the affirmative.

The 1988 film Grave of the Fireflies depicts many atrocities associated with war and in this sense several that really occurred in Japan near the close of WWII. Some people question the absence of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, yet this absent trauma is reflective of the reality as real atrocities occurred that were not as final as the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings but affected people nearly as much. Especially affected were children as children have no real understanding of the reasoning behind war or aggression at all. The Film not dealing with the fateful bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not a representation of the absence of support of family or the absences of the face of American soldiers or the absent buildings, it is simply a reflection of the nature of the plot of the film, i.e. that there are moments in time that will change lives forever and this was one for Setsuko and Seita, who traverse a changed environment as innocents and end their lives as ragged civilian victims of war.

The vivid sound and animation effects are evident of memory, as this work is based on an semi-autobiographical text. The film is simply depicting the real difference between absence and presence in its depiction of the events that surround the fire bombings in Kobe. First there is everything, a loving mother, a home, the solid memory of a father gone to war, closets full of clothing, a community, a town and even extra supplies that can be buried in the garden. There are tins of candy that make Setsuko smile and then there is nothing but absence, there is no mother, no house, no community, simply nameless faceless airplanes flying overhead and threatening the lives of everyday people. The stark differences between the before, with warmth and support juxtapose what really happens when war grips the small isolated and relatively inexperienced lives of children.

Though Seita, seems a solid and stoic young man he is still charged with care that is far beyond his years and the losses are only hampered by the real need that is present within his sister. Even when Seita seeks assistance from his distant aunt there is still no relief from the care he must provide his sister and the absence of everything that they once knew. There really is for me limited hidden meaning in the present absent dichotomy as the film is reflective of imagery that brings hope back to the children over and over, but only in very small ways, as the reality of the absent environment marks the backdrop of the whole film.

The relationship between Seita and Setsuko provides additional textual evidence of the real challenges that they both face and how, realistically they cope with it. For Seita the only goal is to make Setsuko feel safe and even possibly happy, despite all that has happened. In the scene in the store where Seita spends precious resources on things like a comb and a broken old umbrella and then the two are seen walking home singing a song about big brother coming home with a new umbrella for a little sister there is a clear sense that Seita seeks to help his sister endure the absences through keeping her happy and childlike, despite his own inner fear and turmoil about having so very little and being able to rely on no one.