Memory

Sorry for the late posting, class. I couldn't find time to use the computer today.

I am struggling with the idea/definition of memory systems. I understand how some of the early discussion points about ancient systems of memory define the concept of a system of memory. Even the organizational memory seems logical. I just don’t feel comfortable with the Literate Memory Systems.  How are books considered a form of memory? Sure, it’s systematic…but how is it related to memory? Perhaps I’m using the word too literally, but I just can’t buy it.

I find myself most interested in the relation between writing and memory. The authors say that writers must remember what arguments they have heard on a particular issue and they must consider the events of knowledge that might dominate their audiences’ memories.  I immediately thought of song writing and the way the role that memory plays.  Perhaps the following anecdote will serve to organize my discussion. My goal is to demonstrate the importance of cultural/memory places but also to show that their are some limitations to what we should expect from people.  In high school I played in a band, and we were attempting to play a certain style of music that wasn’t very popular. The sound wasn’t commercial, and therefore it was difficult to know what other bands were doing. We were influenced by the bands we would see perform at small venues and would listen to their low-quality, self-produced demo tapes to get ideas. None of us had a “memory place” of this genre. One day I showed up to a practice with a new riff/song intro. As I played it, my friend Jimmy said “That’s the riff from a Joshua Fit For Battle song!” I had never heard JFFB. Jimmy knew about them because he had seen them perform somewhere in Delaware and had their demo. He quickly ran and got the JFFB demo and played it for me. Sure enough, it was EXACTLY the same. The strumming pattern and tempo were identical. Because the genre we were writing music for was so new, no one had a memory place to draw from and compare against. I guess the point of this is…in order to participate (in anything really), we have to know what’s been done. This leads me to authenticity.  How closely are memory systems and authenticity linked?  And how do these relate to the practice of “thinking on one’s feet”? Because thinking on your feet requires a person to draw information, opinions, experiences, and words from their memory, is there a requirement on authenticity? How can a speaker be certain that they aren’t repeating what someone else is saying or has said? I’m assuming this because an issue of kairos/memory tapping.  Does thinking on one’s feet give the speaker more liberty to use, borrow, and adapt because it’s probably an unconscious decision? Or do speakers need to be held to the same standards as a writer?

The ancient memory systems were interesting. I can’t recall being exposed to memory systems as a kid/student, but it seems like it could be valuable. I did, however, find some of it to be a bit excessive.  I’m thinking specifically of the “Patricia Smith” example.  Is it reasonable to suggest that we consider the following terms just to memorize a name and profession: Chysippos, Pryilampes, Patrician, blacksmith, astron, nautes, and star sailor.  On the other hand, I liked the idea of associating an argument to a place, like the example of a house that the book uses. I actually think I could use that as a strategy in my classroom. It’s a way to stay organized without have cue cards or notes. It’s not just effective, but it’s also logical.