隨著美國正式投入第二次世界大戰，日本移民之忠誠度也遭質疑，民間仇日情緒高漲。1942 年，美國與加拿大政府以國家安全之名，分別大規模強制遷移境內的十一萬餘與兩萬餘日裔居民。這些一世與二世日裔被發配至拘禁營區集中監督管理。此事件在日裔族群的平反運動努力下，終於在八零年代末獲得國家道歉。儘管如此，在當局的歷史敘述中，拘禁營事件仍被塑造為在當時不得不然的措舉；官方的歷史敘述致力淡化這段往事，而日裔社群則以不同方式記錄與回應這個集體創傷。本論文檢視八零年代北美日裔劇作中的拘禁營書寫，透過山內若子、潮見瑞、五反田寬三位日裔作家，分析其作品中流露出的拘禁營印象，以及不同世代的作家如何轉化此歷史傷痕。1924年生的山內若子在事發當時為十七歲左右的少女，有切身經歷，而在戰爭結束數十年後，其作品仍充滿孤絕隔離意象，其劇《12-1-A》直接描寫營內的生活，歷史見證意味濃厚。1947 年次的潮見瑞，其《黃熱》寫的是冷硬派偵探辦案過程，亞裔偵探在舞台上雄姿英發、展現智謀；調查當中牽扯出70 年代加拿大民間殘留的反日情緒，「前事不忘」成了破案關鍵。1953 年生的五反田寬，其家庭劇《洗》寫一對老年面臨離婚危機的日裔夫婦，老夫老妻壓抑的情感回憶中，也點出拘禁營的過往。本文並置三個不同世代的日裔劇作，試圖呈現不同世代的日裔在八零年代如何以不同的方式回憶、想像、塑造、傳承這段過往。在美國官方尚未為此事件正式認錯道歉之前，這些劇作的出現別有一種迫切性，劇場也成了觀眾與劇場工作者集體回憶、癒療、折衝的場域

In the wake of the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor, the loyalty of Japanese Americans and Japanese Canadians was called into question and anti-Japanese sentiments in North America ran high. In March 1942, over 110,000 people of Japanese descent in the U.S. and over 20,000 in Canada were forcibly relocated to internment camps. The injustice was redressed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, with the governments offering national apologies and reparations. Nevertheless, the national narrative of the interment continues to depict it as a regrettable step that appeared necessary in its time. While the historical account of the internment tries to whitewash the event, people of Japanese descent in North America still strive to recall, record, and respond to the collective trauma by various means. This paper discusses three plays written by Japanese Americans/Canadians during the height of Redress Movement, 12-1-A by Wakako Yamauchi (b. 1924), Yellow Fever (1982) by Rick Shiomi, and The Wash (1985, 1987) by Philip Kan Gotanda. Yamauchi was seventeen when she was sent to the camp, and thus her semiautobiographical 12-1-A serves as her personal testimony. Although Shiomi and Gotanda did not personally experience the internment themselves, their plays call attention to this historical event that harshly impacted their parents and continues to influence the Japanese American/Canadian community. By juxtaposing three plays of succeeding generations, we see how the incident had been remembered, imagined, narrated, and passed on to consolidate community identity. Before the injustice was officially corrected, the emergence of these plays in the '80s was charged with political urgency since many of the victims were still alive. The paper compares the narrative strategies playwrights of succeeding generations employed in treating the memory of the internment