Can AI Produce Counter-memory in the Postmemory Generation?
KIM Yeonmin [Professor, Chonnam National University]
Marianne Hirsch conceptualizes the term “postmemory” to theorize the experience of the generation after who did not directly witness a traumatic event but inherit its memories through cultural mediation, such as photographs and stories. This process involves “imaginative investment, projection, and creation”, allowing the past to be aesthetically reinterpreted. Through postmemory, discourse in the field of memory studies, previously centered on trauma, past-orientation, and individual/familial/national narratives, is shifting toward healing, future-oriented perspectives, and multi-directional responsibility and solidarity. The postmemory generation, in particular in the age of AI, relies heavily on cultural media such as images, videos, and narratives generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, in the course of understanding the distant past. Recently, AI-generated content has solidified the so-called post-truth era, where the boundaries between truth and falsehood are blurred, engendering the so-called memory war. This presentation investigates the possibility of counter-memory in postmemory generation in the age of AI.
.
.
.
While there is a concern that the codes of cultural memory consumed by the public may become standardized through algorithms designed by specific digital platforms, one must also be cautious of overestimating their influence from a deterministic perspective (Bar-Gil 1284). This is because AI and digital archiving also facilitate the preservation of survivor testimonies and the development of pedagogical resources, such as digital museums and virtual funerals, which foster global engagement in postmemory generation. Although algorithms risk homogenizing collective thought, they also possess the power to change a collective memory system, which usually takes a long time, at a very rapid pace (Rigney 19). Considering that algorithms are a primary means of making information go “viral” online, they offer the potential to quickly share new themes of memory and social issues with global citizens. When historically suppressed voices, especially those previously excluded from digital archiving priorities, are digitized, rediscovered, and reconstructed with AI tools, new images and narratives can go viral and foster counter-memories to hegemonic memory regime. AI tools can thus offer a transformative potential to foster multidirectional solidarity. The intersection of AI and postmemory work is not merely a site of skepticism, but a dynamic arena to “awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed” (Benjamin 257).
Can AI Produce Counter-memory in the Postmemory Generation?
KIM Yeonmin [Professor, Chonnam National University]
Marianne Hirsch conceptualizes the term “postmemory” to theorize the experience of the generation after who did not directly witness a traumatic event but inherit its memories through cultural mediation, such as photographs and stories. This process involves “imaginative investment, projection, and creation”, allowing the past to be aesthetically reinterpreted. Through postmemory, discourse in the field of memory studies, previously centered on trauma, past-orientation, and individual/familial/national narratives, is shifting toward healing, future-oriented perspectives, and multi-directional responsibility and solidarity. The postmemory generation, in particular in the age of AI, relies heavily on cultural media such as images, videos, and narratives generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, in the course of understanding the distant past. Recently, AI-generated content has solidified the so-called post-truth era, where the boundaries between truth and falsehood are blurred, engendering the so-called memory war. This presentation investigates the possibility of counter-memory in postmemory generation in the age of AI.
.
.
.
While there is a concern that the codes of cultural memory consumed by the public may become standardized through algorithms designed by specific digital platforms, one must also be cautious of overestimating their influence from a deterministic perspective (Bar-Gil 1284). This is because AI and digital archiving also facilitate the preservation of survivor testimonies and the development of pedagogical resources, such as digital museums and virtual funerals, which foster global engagement in postmemory generation. Although algorithms risk homogenizing collective thought, they also possess the power to change a collective memory system, which usually takes a long time, at a very rapid pace (Rigney 19). Considering that algorithms are a primary means of making information go “viral” online, they offer the potential to quickly share new themes of memory and social issues with global citizens. When historically suppressed voices, especially those previously excluded from digital archiving priorities, are digitized, rediscovered, and reconstructed with AI tools, new images and narratives can go viral and foster counter-memories to hegemonic memory regime. AI tools can thus offer a transformative potential to foster multidirectional solidarity. The intersection of AI and postmemory work is not merely a site of skepticism, but a dynamic arena to “awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed” (Benjamin 257).