Memory Matters

'What is this obsession with our past, living in our memories, and constantly going over prior events? Why do we chose the "what ifs" and "if only" when we can have the here and now? Is it because our present is too unbearable, too painful, and our future too uncertain? Is that why we choose the relative safety of our memories? Or are we remembering so that we can begin to forget.'

That's a quote from my book The Sum of all Parts. It's a story that is considered from multiple perspectives and is told, in part, via memories - the wife looking through old diaries, her wedding album and so on. Chapter 11 is actually entitled 'We Are What We Remember', and that is, I believe, quite true. Everything we are is based on memories of our past, from stories of our family that are told to us. The importance of our past and our therefore our memories, of them being our foundation, is something that most psychiatrists and psychologists agree on.

On the whole, our memories are positive and help us to "know" who we are, to know what to do. Memory is essential as we need it to operate on the present and to think about the future. As Sternberg says:

'Memory is the means by which we draw on our past experiences in order to use this information in the present.' (Sternberg, 1999, Cognitive Psychology, 2nd Edition)

But as with my protagonist in The Sum of all Parts, memories are not always positive and helpful. Memories can torment us, cause us grief and regret. They can even lead to mental health issues. Which is really quite silly really because memory is fallible. Our memories are faulty, they are influenced by time and emotion, by age and health, by friends and family. Our memories change each time that they are recalled, they are just a version - a copy - of things gone by. As the psychologist Jerome Bruner pointed out, we are story-telling creatures, we represent our lives both to ourselves and others in the form of a narrative; so every time we recall a memory we edit it - we change the story and with it the associated emotions. That's why two people will recall the same event so differently: not only do we perceive things differently but we recall them differently and alter them as we recall them. As neuroscientist Daniela Schiller said recently 'when you disagree with your spouse about the details of an event that happened ten years ago, you both could be wrong.'

Quite a disturbing idea isn't it, because if we do reconstruct our memories - which I believe we do - how can we trust them, rely on them? If our memories are what help make us who we are but those memories are wrong, where does that leave us? And if for example, like my main character, one recalls an event of violence from childhood, how much is real and how much is changed? Do we recall the negative in more detail or is that memory also altered and adapted, is it changed so that it is easier to deal with or made more disturbing with each recall? Or are the truly horrific memories supressed? If we change them to be a more acceptable memory, then all's well I suppose. But no, it can't be ok can it? We shouldn't fool ourselves by seeing our past through rose-tinted glasses. As Bruner said:

'It is not surprising that psychoanalysts now recognise that personhood implies narrative, "neurosis" being a reflection of either an insufficient, incomplete, or inappropriate story about oneself."

And that view is reflected in The Sum of all Parts - memories are not always reliable, the past is a nice place to visit but the present is a healthier place to stay, and getting lost in our thoughts - and in our interpretation of them - can be dangerous. Aurelius said 'our lives are what our thoughts make it', and our memories - both good and bad - make a huge contribution to those thoughts: thoughts which create feelings, feelings which create behaviour, behaviour which creates thoughts and so on and on and on. Memory definitely matters

Post Views : 74