When a tragic incident or disaster happens, we all wish we could go back in time to prevent the unfortunate incident from unfolding. There are a number of American movies that precisely portray such fantasies. “Deja Vu,” for example, implicitly reflects the American people’s secret wish to time-travel and alter disastrous events such as 9/11. “Retroactive,” deals more explicitly with the theme of returning to the past to prevent a murder. “Back to the Future,” too, comically depicts the protagonist’s efforts to straighten out present problems by changing the past. 

Unfortunately, people’s attempts to change the past invariably fail. The reason is obvious: what has been done is done and you cannot undo it no matter how hard you try. We often lament, “If only we had done this or that, we could’ve avoided the disaster,” or “If only the tragic incident had not happened, we would be living in a better world now.” Thus we cling to the past as if we could start all over again. But we cannot bring back the precious things we lost in the whirlwind of disaster. It may be heartbreaking, but we have to forget the tragic past and move on.

We all live with indelible psychological scars. Reopening the wounds will only hurt all of us gravely. The intolerable pain will eventually ruin our happiness and paralyze our family and society. As the protagonist in “The Life of Pi” narrates, we have to let it go, no matter how tragic and devastating.

Recently, Stephen King published a novel entitled, “11/22/63.” In the book the protagonist, Jacob Epping, travels back in time to save people’s lives by altering the past. During his trip to the past, for example, Jacob fixes the ill fate of the learning-impaired janitor, Harry Dunning, who was severely injured by his violent alcoholic father in 1958. When he returns to the present, however, Jacob finds that Harry, because he was of sound health, was drafted to the U.S. Army and died in the Vietnam War in the 1960s. Thus, his attempt to change history turns out to be in vain after all, only leading to another disaster.

Nevertheless, Jacob is obsessed with the idea of preventing the assassination of John F. Kennedy that happened in 1963. He believes that if he succeeds, he can create a better world, for there will be no Vietnam War. Jacob successfully stops Oswald from assassinating John F. Kennedy and becomes a national hero. But he cannot make a better world. During his confrontation with Oswald, his girlfriend Sadie is killed by a shot fired by Oswald. And a massive earthquake hits California, costing thousands of people’s lives. Kennedy escapes the assassination attempt, only at the cost of others’ lives.

Returning to 2011, Jacob discovers himself in a bleak dystopia. He learns that due to his intervention in history, Lyndon B. Johnson did not assume the presidency and thus the Civil Rights Act of 1964 never passed. Worse, George Wallace became president in 1968, leading to nuclear war that annihilated the world. We often lament, “If Kennedy had not been assassinated, the world would have been much better.” In his time travel novel, however, Stephen King tells us otherwise; the world may not have been better if Kennedy had escaped the assassination.

In our society there are those who are obsessed with idea that Korea could have been a unified country if Rhee Syngman had not become president. They firmly believe that there would have been one Korea today if the United States had not intervened during the Korean War. They also believe that Korea could have been a better society if Japanese collaborators had been properly condemned and removed from political power after liberation, instead of being appointed as high-ranking government officials. And they condemn the recent history of South Korea, trying to nullify what happened, and fix what they perceive as the mistakes of the past.

There is some truth to their claims; you never know how history would have unfolded if the past was altered. There may have been a unified Korea today, for example, but it may be a communist country and not a capitalist one. What good is it to be a unified country, then? You are not supposed to go back to the past and reset it, no matter how much you are dissatisfied with it. Changing history will never guarantee a better society or a happy ending.

Nevertheless, we still hopelessly cling to the past and seldom move toward building a bright future of reconciliation. In “Back to the Future II” Dr. Brown told Marty, “Your future is whatever you make.” Stephen King advises us that we should close the gates (he calls it “portals”) to the past and open the gates to the future instead. We cannot dwell on the past forever; we should get back to the future! 

By Kim Seong-kon 

Kim Seong-kon is a professor of English at Seoul National University and president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. He can be reached at sukim@snu.ac.kr. ― Ed.