人類在上一個世紀完成許多壯舉也同樣地留下一些對生靈包括人類自己都無法磨滅的傷害，例如種族大屠殺。亞美尼亞裔加拿大導演艾騰．伊格言的《A級控訴》(2002)作為首部有關發生於1915年至1923年的亞美尼亞種族大屠殺電影，至今仍引發爭議。爭議焦點多在電影作為再現歷史的媒介是否為達美學效果而犧牲了歷史真實。這個疑問其實是個古老問題，口述、文字及影像如何可能代表、詮釋、或翻譯所指物或事件。同時，在大屠殺受難者一代接著一代逐漸凋零的現在，更重要的是《A級控訴》如何處理否認種族大屠殺的後續效應，並自種族大屠殺後世代的位置（加拿大多元文化主義語境的亞美尼亞離散族裔，以及其他族群）反省歷史文化遺產的意義。 伊格言與伊恩．貝福在《字幕：論電影中的外異性》指出，「每一部電影都是外國電影，外異於某處某一位觀眾，且並非僅就語言而言」。我們不禁好奇，之於伊格言什麼是翻譯？為何需要翻譯？以及參與翻譯活動如何使主體與客體對象發生轉變？本論文整理主張保持外國語陌生／外異性的翻譯觀，如班雅明、里克爾、與安竹‧班哲民的語言哲學，以及他整理拉普郎虛對佛洛依德無意識的討論，亦即「無意識作為（被）翻譯」的場域，嘗試描繪伊格言的翻譯觀。進而援引賀栩的「後－記憶」以及「家人觀看／觀看家人」的觀視位置，閱讀短片《Arshile的畫像》(1995)以及《A級控訴》的重要片段。我要指出，伊格言透過拉菲與西莉亞的對話場景側面提出他的翻譯觀，並回應美學相對於歷史真實的爭議。發生於黑暗房間的事件是觀影活動的寓言，歷史事件如何向我們顯現，端看是否能夠打開所謂自保的身分認同的疆界。

Human beings in the last century have accomplished great things but we have also caused irreversible damage and harm to all forms of life. Genocide is one such example of atrocities on a scale unprecedented in previous human history. Armenian-Canadian director Atom Egoyan’s Ararat(2002), since its release, has aroused debates and accusations in terms of sacrificing historical truth for the sake of aesthetic effect. As the first internationally produced and distributed full-length film about Armenian genocide(1915-1923), the critical opinions and debates are to be expected, since the anxiety and the following question is always there: Can speeches, words, and images sufficiently represent, interpret, and translate the referred object or event? On the other hand, as the survivors and people who experienced the genocide first hand gradually faded away, Ararat seems to be more concerned with the after effect caused by the denial of Armenian genocide. Thus, this film, involving Armenian Diaspora and other ethnic groups in the context of multiculturalism in Canada, launches the quest for and examines the multiple meanings of the so-called “cultural heritage.” Egoyan and Ian Balfour in their collaborated work, Subtitles: on the Foreignness of Films, point out succinctly, “[e]very film is a foreign film, foreign to some audience somewhere—and not simply in terms of language.” This makes us wonder what it means to Egoyan by translation, why we need translation, and how the subject and object are both changed and transformed in the process of translating. To try and figure out the answers to these questions, we need to adopt an interdisciplinary strategy to connect (1) the conception of translation that strives to preserve the foreignness of/in language (e.g. Water Benjamin and Paul Ricoeur’s theory on translation), (2) Andrew Benjamin’s philosophical reflections on words and meaning in relation to translation, and (3) Jean Laplanche’s insistence on the unconscious as the “à traduire” (to translate/to be translated). Finally, by invoking Marianne Hirsh’s concepts of “post-memory” and “familial looking” as supportive argument, I will read and discuss A Portrait of Arschile and some key scenes in Arart to highlight that the possible answers to the previous questions may lie/hide in the dialogue between Raffi and Celia when Raffi visited her at the detention center. The event in and surrounding the dark room mentioned in their dialogue may be an allegory for film-viewing and remembrance.