As was mentioned in chapter two, the Holocaust is one of the main subjects memory culture is concerned with, but in Cambodia there is a “widespread belief that mass atrocity is unique to Cambodia” (29). Therefore, the ‘Anne Frank Translation Project’ was introduced “to offer Cambodians a way to make sense of the Khmer rouge genocide within the broader framework of the world history of atrocity”, so the Cambodians stop feeling like they are the only ones who suffered (29). Furthermore, the term Anne Frank is used in Cambodia and other countries to describe people who have written testimonies of their own suffering (31). By that, the Holocaust is used as an enabling screen memory in Cambodia, entering the Holocaust and Cambodia in a productive relationship of multidirectional memory.
…show more content…
Zapata argues that “‘The Embassy of Cambodia’ juxtaposes two disturbing histories, Fatou’s and Cambodia’s genocidal past, which operate according to a multidirectional understanding of memory” (529) and further claims that “it criticises hierarchy in trauma and memory studies, which often give the Holocaust a superior position which may silence other histories” (530). This points towards the same understanding of screen memory as a tool for multidirectional memory as Rothberg’s, since the short story also negates hierarchy in memory studies. Zapata further argues
Zapata argues that “‘The Embassy of Cambodia’ juxtaposes two disturbing histories, Fatou’s and Cambodia’s genocidal past, which operate according to a multidirectional understanding of memory” (529) and further claims that “it criticises hierarchy in trauma and memory studies, which often give the Holocaust a superior position which may silence other histories” (530). This points towards the same understanding of screen memory as a tool for multidirectional memory as Rothberg’s, since the short story also negates hierarchy in memory studies. Zapata further argues