台灣紀錄片近幾年蓬勃的發展，與庶民生活、地方記憶、社會議題等相結合，形成特殊的文化景觀。本文以蕭菊貞《銀簪子》 （2000）與湯湘竹《山有多高》 （2002）為探討對象，這兩部片子的主角都是一九四九之後來台的老兵，也都是導演的父親；對於複雜的命運課題以及親情感受，他們當如何紀錄與詮釋？蕭菊貞《銀簪子》以找尋祖母的銀簪子為發想，回溯其父的生命史，從而衍生及其父與友朋的老兵遷徙紀事；以相片（文獻特質） 、軍歌（時代感） 、字幕的即景敘事，交織組合的庶民離散史，與老兵在紅布幕之間的單一特寫與獨白，榮民之家的規訓情境交揉，產生了巨大的視覺衝擊。湯湘竹《山有多高》聚焦在個人的童年記憶，可說是導演的原鄉情懷的想像，說出了屬於他的「湘」 「竹」故事，而非宏觀的 1949 離散史。透過鏡頭的藝術表現，真實而詩意地召喚自然地理空間，將地景與家園意識結合，創造屬於湯湘竹式的鄉愁。導演以個人視角還原離散者的肉身，影像的力量讓我們進入了「他」 （們）的故事，進而對於時間與記憶予以深刻的思索。兩位導演依違於個人記憶與家國敘事之間，既傳達了個人思索過程，亦表述了離散者共同的心靈型態。

The thriving of documentary in Taiwan recent years, combining with life of common people, local memory and social issues has formed a special cultural landscape. This paper investigates The Silver Hairpins by Hsiao Chu-chen (2000) and How High is the Mountain by Tan Shiang-chu (2002). These two films share some similarities: The main characters are both veterans retreated after 1949. They are both the directors’ father. While encountering the blunders in life and the familial affection, how do they “record”? And how do they interpret and represent?
The Silver Hairpins begins from finding her grandmother’s hairpins, tracing back the her father’s life history and shifts (derives) to her father and friends’ migration. With the interlace of photos (text/literature feature), military theme (sense of time) and the diegetic subtitle, composes the Diaspora of common people. Also, the close up and monologue on the red curtain scene, the discipline in the veterans’ home brings a huge visual impact. Tang’s How High is the Mountain focuses on childhood memory, as a kind of nostalgic imagination of the director. The film depicts the story belongs to his (own land) hsiang (Hu-nan) and chu (“Hsin-chu”) instead of the macro-history of the Diaspora in 1949.
Via the artistic performance of the shots, replicating the natural geographic space truly and poetically, Tang combines the landscape and home consciousness and creates the nostalgia of Tang. The director returns the shapes of those Diaspora from his personal point of view. The power of images induces us into their stories and brings a deeper thoughts on time and memory. The two directors swing between personal memory and nationalistic narrative. They not only convey their personal thinking process but presents the shared mental status of the Diaspora.