DIVINE MEMORY

"The soul's remarkable power of remembering things and words is proof of its divinity"  
(Yates 45)

In class yesterday Dr. Sexson explained why our memories make up our very being, and to take them away would equate with murder. According to Yates, Cicero held the "Platonic and Pythagorean position that the soul is immortal and of divine origin" (44), and that the soul is largely based upon its ability to remember. At this point in the text Yates explores the ways in which religion and memory are intertwined, an idea that I find particularly interesting.

As members of a literate society, it is difficult to think of religion without thinking of sacred texts, especially if one has been raised in congregations based upon the Lutheran doctrine of "the word alone". Many modern religious sects advocate devout individual study of the Bible. This contrasts to older religious gatherings based upon the tradition of oral sermons as a means of enlightenment. How do the different forms of study affect worshippers? As Father Ong says, "Oral communication unites people in groups. Writing and reading are solitary activities that throw the psyche back on itself" (68). While studying Yates and Ong concurrently, the reader is prompted to reflect upon the effectiveness and implications of the written vs. the spoken word. Although modern Christianity is based upon textual evidence, "God is thought of as 'speaking' to human beings, not as writing to them" (74). Are people more empowered by the strengthening of their memories through the oral tradition or by the study of literature and expanding their recollective (as separate from memory) abilities? Is one of the two traditions superior to the other, or is it a matter of them being additive and aggregative vs. subordinative and analytic?

Ong presents a balanced view,

"without writing, human consciousness cannot achieve its fuller potentials, cannot produce other beautiful and powerful creations. In this sense, orality needs to produce and is destined to produce writing" (14).

According to this logic, it is not necessary to take either form to extremes, because they complement each other. If one is to be a true scholar of the modern world, be it religious or academic, it is advantageous to become well versed in both traditions. The oral tradition promotes mental processes that are integral to our past, while the exploration of literature serves as a catalyst for the development of our future.

I was not raised in a very religious setting, so I am curious to hear if anyone in the class who was has any thoughts on the effects of the written vs. the spoken word in the case of sacred texts...

SOCIOLOGY OF RHETORIC

"Thus, as in most cases, art originates from experience" (Yates 22).

After completing Foer's entertaining narrative of his own experience with memory training, it is interesting to read the more academic oriented Art of Memory. I just finished the first chapter, in which Yates introduces the classical foundations of the art. Both authors describe the importance of the Rhetorica Ad Herennium, the oldest surviving Latin book on Rhetoric. The author considers memory to be an essential part of the effective orator's arsenal, "Now let us turn to the treasure-house of inventions, the custodian of all parts of rhetoric, memory" (Yates 5).

At the time of its publication, oratory was viewed by many as a powerful political tool that should be kept in the possession of the Greek-speaking upper classes. By publishing the text in Latin, the unknown author contributed to what could be considered a liberal-populist movement. After doing some research in Google scholar, I ran into an interesting piece by Patrick Sinclair of Northwestern University, in which he explores the ways in which the text serves as an "opportunity for self-invention for the would-be statesman"(561). He asserts that if a lower-class citizen could emulate the language of his superiors, then he would be on his way to overcoming social disadvantage and adopting the views traditionally canonical to them. According to Sinclair's analysis, the main interest of the author was in judicial oratory, where "a well-born and well-connected Roman could win the sort of distinction and form the sort of social alliances necessary for realizing his social and political ambitions"(563).

Roman orators could "best others by cleverly manipulating general, shared concepts"(568), similar to the way modern mental athletes win championships by designing new memory systems. It appears as though in classical Roman society, a strong memory was an essential tool to gaining political and social prestige. Unfortunately for Foer, this is not the case in today's society. In a world where we can easily lean on external memory crutches, one gains little recognition for winning memory championships. However, Foer is able to realize that

"memory training is not just for the sake of performing party tricks; it's about nurturing something       profoundly and essentially human" (270).

We have outrun our own programming with the advances of modern technology. Our brains are hardwired to support powerful recollection systems based off of spatial data, which is why the memory palace is such an effective tool for storing large amounts of information. The hardware is present, all one needs to do is install the software to run it. There is no longer the motivation of advancement to sustain our memory training, "But in the ancient world, devoid of printing, without paper for note-taking or on which to type lectures, the trained memory was of vital importance" (Yates 4). What if this trend advances to the point that we rely solely on external memory storage, and that spider-web breaks down?


Sincalir, Patrick. The Sententia in Rhetorica ad Herennium: A Study in the Sociology of Rhetoric. The American Journal of Philogy, Vol. 114. p. 561-580. 1993.

MEMORY LANE

"a wine that talks: That's unique. It's a memory without rivals". (Foer 102)

I am roughly halfway finished with Moonwalking with Einstein, and thus far I have found it to be very engaging. The way in which Foer blends hard fact with entertaining narrative results in an informative, yet easy to read text. The most intriguing argument that I have come across so far is his explanation of the fact that the human brain is hardwired to analyze the world around us spatially, and as a result any fact can be made more memorable by "engaging one's spatial memory in the act of remembering". 

This argument struck home, as I have always though of myself as a visual learner. I applied the technique to the memorization of the 9 muses, and was pleasantly surprised with the results. By constructing my own memory palace, I was able to associate each muse with an image that reflected her characteristics. For example, Terpsichore the dancer is located in a ballroom, and Calliope is sitting on top of a mountain peak reciting her epic poetry. The image I created was quite simple really, it is just a hallway of doors, but it is the vivid characteristics of each muse that makes each memory truly stick. Within a few minutes, I was able to recall the all of the muses by visualizing the walk through my first memory palace.