After reading Brenda Mann's "Places of Refuge", I was struck by how memories from past places can be influenced by simply revisiting them in the imagination. How often do we reconstruct places in our mind in order to align them with our current view in life? In other words, can new experiences shape places from the past?
During Darrin Hagen's talk to our class yesterday, he reminisced about the places that used to be pillars of the underground community. I wonder what his conception of these places used to be? The fights, the rumours, the drugs--are these thoughts and experiences still lurking in between the rubble, or inside the walls of the newly constructed buildings? Or has nostalgia infiltrated these past experiences and warped them to cohere to the past that we want to remember?
Personally, I feel a similar feeling of creeping nostalgia when I think back to my days as a labourer in my parent's household / gulag. The chores that were once the bane of my existence are now (mal?)-formed into wonderful family gatherings. Me, outside, cutting wood, -30 degrees--now a blissful interaction with nature.
The domicile of my past has been forever warped by the experiences I have accrued away from home (or maybe my parents propaganda is finally taking grip). My question: Is it possible to reform the places from our past without nostalgia or other events seeping in to warp it? Or are we entrapped in our own subjectivity? And if so, how can we be objective as possible when revisiting our pasts?
This is a wonderful thought-provoking post.
ReplyDeleteI would say that we are trapped within our own subjectivity --- this is a problem that I'm encountering as I think about the best way to execute my map project (I talked about it in my blog and called it "nostalgia mapping"). I'm thinking about digging up old photographs and journal entries from my younger years in an attempt to be as objective as possible, but I don't know how well that works...
Anything that has happened in our past exists as nothing but a memory once the moment has passed. In my psychology course, we've talked about limitations of self-reports because they're often based on recollections and memory. The term used was "Failure of Introspection" and we went over the following:
1) People often mis-recall something, but are sure that their memory is correct
2) Some people create memories for events that didn't happen
3)A study was done in which participants were “given” memories, and when they were later told that the memories were false and fabricated, people fought vehemently with the researchers, insisting that they had vivid memories of the circumstance.
Sorry for the long comment, but I guess my point is that I don't believe we can escape the subjectivity of our memory, therefore, the places we recall are constantly growing and evolving with us.
My question is, why would we want to be objective in revisiting our own pasts? Isn't it only subjectivity that gives them any significance, any value to us? Any reason to be remembered?
ReplyDelete@Cathryn: Thanks for the detailed response! I like your idea that places evolve in tandem with the person--places can't be separated from the individual, no matter what time or place they're at.
ReplyDelete@Muse: I guess I was trying trying to be objective about reacquiring past subjectivity lol. Does that even make sense haha?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNot a problem! I guess just to address the title of the blog now, I don't think nostalgia destroys places. If the memories are fond, the places will only grow with you in a positive light =) If the place is destroyed by memories, it's likely because of ill experiences in the first place.
ReplyDelete