Showing posts with label reconsolidation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reconsolidation. Show all posts

Sunday, March 24, 2013

Outtake: Mrs. Brown (you've got a lovely daughter)




Mrs. Brown (you’ve got a lovely daughter): an Outtake
from Stuck on Replay


Twice I remember sitting on the settee in the living room on a day of celebration, my back to the window, unwitting. A sudden visitation would change everything. In 1991, I was turning forty-two; my birthday was on a Sunday, and there I sat, indulged by my family, ready to receive presents. As I commenced unwrapping my gifts though, the children exclaimed that the sky was turning black. And indeed it was. This was the grim banner of the Oakland Hills Firestorm that would destroy so much property in the Bay Area, and too much life, however statistically insignificant the numbers may have been.

Would the fire reach our home? We were advised that it might. We spent the rest of the afternoon assembling our precious belongings and a survival kit, which we placed by the front door. The birthday celebration was at an end.

They say you can’t go back and retrieve the past. And most of the victims of the fire moved on, either literally moving to safer, less forested, less hilly (and also less beautiful) locations, or moving on by rebuilding on the same spot where their house had burned to the ground, but rebuilding there in a forward-looking way. What forward-looking meant in the aftermath of the Oakland Hills Fire was the construction of homes that were larger than their antecedents. These new homes filled up more space than the destroyed cottages and bungalows that had graced the hills. The new houses sometimes reached nearly to the edges of their lots. They were constructed of concrete and other materials that had the appearance of stone. These homes, inelegant shelters for the traumatized, were fortress-like and forbidding, their small, mean windows winking in the sun.

There was one family, though, that lost their home in the firestorm, yet succeeded in returning to it, and so to the past. How I admired their handsome house, large but not overbuilt, with its generous picture window, as I walked up to their door, ready to interview them about hosting a foreign student. The family consisted of a shy, brainy teen-age boy living with his grandmother. I didn’t inquire as to the whereabouts of the rest of the family and they didn’t tell me. What they did tell me, when I remarked on the lucky chance of their home having been spared––fire can do that, inexplicably leaping over some houses and burning down others––was that this stately home, with its wood paneled walls, bay windows, and sunny rooms, was an exact replica of the house that had burned down. The architect’s plans had been kept in a locked metal box in the basement. After the fire, the molten tin rendered the charred, frangible plans unreadable. So they took the plans in the tin box to the Chemistry Department at UC Berkeley, and had the plans re-hydrated. A modern miracle! The plans were now readable! Scientists had saved the plans, and insurance money rebuilt the house.

The second occasion of sitting unwitting on a day of celebration was Valentine’s Day 2010. Though not black with boiling, billowing smoke, the sky was heavy with molten clouds, the day cold and uninviting. I sat at one end of the settee, my husband sat at the other. Our mood was as heavy as the atmosphere. There wasn’t much to say. Our son had just been admitted to a storied but autocratic hospital in New York. His episodes of severe apathy and disorientation that had begun just days before would later be attributed to a reaction to his medication, but we didn’t yet know that. We had thought of going to New York to visit him, help out, until we learned that we would not be allowed to see him once arrived. It was not a good Valentine’s Day.

Suddenly, someone rattled the locked front gate. Looking out the window, I saw the tall figure of our daughter’s former boyfriend. When I went to the door to tell him she wasn’t there, he handed a large bag over the gate. The bag contained ten or so books she had loaned him in happier days––before the break-up. He wouldn’t come in for tea, he said. He just wanted her to have her books back. We chatted a bit, and I congratulated him on his recent graduation, which had been achieved against considerable odds.

Not long after this visit, the familiar signs of an earworm began to surface. Phrase by musical phrase it haunted me hither and yon, until I began to piece it together. This time it was a familiar song from my teens, and so clearly identifiable from early on in the game.

Ladies and Gentlemen: Herman’s Hermits! rips the Emcee. At which point five impossibly young boys, looking gawky and new-minted in their jackets and trousers, appear on the stage set of a British street on America’s Ed Sullivan Show. The earworm isn’t “Henry the Eighth,” though that’s a good song (“I’m ’er eighth old man named ’enery, ’enery the Eighth I am.”)  The earworm is “Mrs. Brown you’ve got a lovely daughter.” This bittersweet lyric was first performed in 1965:


The song is a dramatic monologue, so it’s a one-sided story. We only hear the boy’s side of things––his thoughts, his feelings. The other side of the conversation is missing. No, I don’t mean the words spoken by Mrs. Brown’s lovely daughter. The lovely daughter is off somewhere with her friends. I’m talking about Mrs. Brown. Did Mrs. B. just stand there, agape, listening? I don’t think so.

How would the conversation have gone if someone had included Mrs. Brown’s part in it?  Oh, I know, it wouldn’t have made as good a song. That song has pathos, especially as performed by the Hermits, grinning at the audience in their unaccustomed jackets; especially as sung by the sweet-looking kid with the overbite. But just for the moment, imagine Mrs. Brown. She’s not at the center of the drama––the boy and the girl are. But she’s the third character in the play, there for confirmation. Confirmation of what?  Mrs. B. is there to give us a few vital clues about who this girl is.

So imagine Mrs. Brown as I would have done, eager as I was to exorcize the earworm, had I known that the insistent quality of this particular haunting was related, somehow, some way, to the meaning that this long-forgotten song had to my present-day life.

Mrs. Brown you’ve got a lovely daughter…

Yes. Yes I do.

Girls as sharp as her are something rare…

            (Yes, she’s sharp. That used to mean ‘smart’ when I was your age: ‘smart’ and
‘cool.’ ) Oh, she’s smart. Did I tell you she won the fifth grade math prize? Oh, I did?

But it’s sad…

Sad, to be sure.


She doesn’t love me now…

(Children move on, don’t they?)
She has to follow her path.

She made it clear enough…

She would––I mean, she has a way of doing that.

It ain’t no good to pine…

(No good. No good at all.)

She wants to return the things I bought her
Tell her she can keep them just the same
Things have changed…

(They certainly have.) She crosses the street by herself now. Makes her own lunch...

...she doesn’t love me now

(Believe me, I know all about it. First it was her father, then a teacher, then a playmate, girlfriends, and just when you least expect it––before you’re ready for it, really—the boyfriends. And then the confidences end. Everything so private all of a sudden. And all you can think, all you can tell yourself is, like you say, “Things have changed.”)

She made it clear enough,

(Yes. Yes. She makes it clear enough.)

It ain’t no good to pine

(You won’t change her mind, if that’s what you’re thinking. Nothing will.)

Walking about, even in a crowd, well
You’ll pick her out

            Yes, she does stand out, doesn’t she? Especially when she wears heels.
            (Mind you it wasn’t always the case.)  Did I ever tell you about the time
            I lost her at the market? (Huge Marks and Sparks it was.) Oh, did I?

Makes a bloke feel so proud

            Yes, (You two always did make a nice-looking couple.)
            (I guess looks isn’t everything, poor lad.)

If she finds that I’ve been round to see you–

Truly. I won’t tell her. (I’ll try not to.)

Tell her that I’m well and feeling fine,

(That’s what I’ll say. And she’ll want to believe me.)
She cares for you, you know–respects you.
(Not what he wants to hear, of course.)

Don’t let on…

(Your secret is safe with me.)

Don’t say she’s broke my heart…

(That’s just between us.)
Love is like that.
(There, now…)
I know her.
(Please…)
She didn’t mean to.

I’d go down on my knees––

            (I know how you’re feeling, but trust me–)
            –It wouldn’t do any good. Not now.
(Not ever.)

 But it’s no use to pine

We know her, don’t we?
She’s honest. Says what she thinks.
And once she makes up her mind…

Mrs. Brown you’ve got a lovely daughter…
Mrs. Brown you’ve got a lovely daughter…

            (Give it time. He’ll be all right.)
            So nice of you to come round.
            (I won’t see him again.)

Here is a classic drama, with its bare bones cast of three––two actually, if you take into account the fact that Lovely Daughter remains off-stage. Yet it is she that they are talking about. And who is she? She’s not the girl next door––she’s the one that got away. Even her mother can’t say where she is, or where she’s going. (Especially her mother.)

There’s always a girl who got away. And when you see her ten or twenty years later, or a lifetime hence, the question you want to ask her is always the same, “How far have you been?” When the music has changed from rock to pop, the songs from sweet lyrics to dark satires, still, the question is the same. Did you get no further than King’s Cross, or did you get as far as the Finland Station? Did you live a life more ordinary? Or did your arrival signal some kind of revolution?  

We've got no future, we've got no past
Here today, built to last
In every city, in every nation
From Lake Geneva to the Finland station
(How far have you been?)

–– “West End Girls,” Neil Tennant

Sometimes when a young man loses his girl there’s sour grapes. Literature is full of derisory sequels presenting the exceptional woman, once lost, as merely ordinary––or worse. And this regardless of how the affair ends. Thus the protagonist (or the author) reminds himself: she didn’t get far, after all. At the high end of the literature of love and loss, Frédéric, hero of Sentimental Education, remarks, years after his affair with the beautiful Rosannette: “I met [her] in a shop the other day…She’s the widow of a certain Monsieur Oudry, and she’s become terribly fat, not to say huge. What a decline! When you recall what a slim waist she had in the old days.” Just so, Herman Wouk imagines the ambitious heroine of his middlebrow novel Marjorie Morningstar at the end of her story as a very ordinary housewife (much as Tolstoy has Natasha waving a diaper at the end of War and Peace). In popular fiction, independent women often inhabit the treacherous terrain of Looking for Mr.Goodbar, eliciting that truism: we know what happens to girls who stray too far from home.

But none of this sour grapes business for Lovelorn Boy (let us call him Herman). He knows Lovely Daughter is out of his league––she’s “sharp” and “rare”––but he isn’t bitter. And he isn’t afraid of admiring her still. Even in a crowd, she’s a standout: makes him feel so proud (as though he had something to do with it, rather like a parent). Does the boy worship her? He says he’d go down on his knees, if only…But Herman is no troubadour, no proselytizer for Mariolatry. He’s’ just the boy-next-door, heartbroken to be sure, but toughing it out like a stalwart.

Herman might have wandered off to a cliff overlooking the crashing waves of the sea. There, on a promontory, he might have bethought him to strike a pose: man against the elements, heartbreak against the drama of nature. But Herman is no Romantic, as we can see from the fact that, barring any evidence of cliffs, he takes his heartbreak straight to Mrs. Brown.

Who then is Mrs. Brown? We have made her up. The Mrs. Brown we have made up is in every sense common. No one would bother to disparage Mrs. Brown for being a housewife or a clerk, for she is, after all, only Mrs. Brown. Nevertheless she has an aura about her. She is the one boys like Herman confide in. Do they speak to her because she is kind? Perhaps. More likely the young, with their heartbreak, speak to her because this common woman has somehow managed to raise Lovely Daughter. Moreover, she “knows” her daughter, and young people generally.

She isn’t much use of course, beyond serving as a sounding board. Mrs. Brown has her own issues, and keeps superimposing them on the dialogue. Sometimes she and Herman are having two separate conversations. When Herman speaks of crushed romantic dreams, Mrs. B. mutters something about crossing the street and a child making her own lunch. At best, what Mrs. B. has to offer is comfort and a few obscure words of wisdom that sound a lot like clichés: “She has to follow her path” and “Love is like that.”

More than a sounding board, that listener, that silent interlocutor, Mrs. Brown, is a kind of mirror, reflecting back Herman’s sadness at being left behind, but also his parent-like pride, and the secret of his continuing love and admiration.

When the Mrs. Brown earworm came upon me I didn’t invent a character called Mrs. Brown, or have any thoughts about the meaning of the song. Why ruin a good song by overthinking it? I had liked listening to the song once, but the intrusiveness of the earworm was getting on my nerves. Now I hummed the song, sang it, watched videos of it on YouTube, and listened to other songs to get rid of it. As usual nothing worked. Then one day it was gone.

They say you can’t go back and retrieve the past. The family that re-hydrated their architectural plans and built a replica of the house that burned down lived in a copy of the original house. Undoubtedly they lived differently in the replica house, because of the intervening fire, than they had lived in the first house––the house that was, till the very end, innocent of disaster. They were pleased with the new house––proud of it––and rightly so. For a long time, every new visitor must have been given the tour, shown how one feature was an exact reproduction of its original counterpart, how another feature made use of newer materials: different tiles, shorter planks––because builders’ materials change, handpainted tiles change, trees are cut down sooner. Yet with every new visitor to the house, with every tour, the family would have the opportunity to reconsolidate the memory of the original home, making its loss a little less unfathomable, and less painful.

Our children, originals all, are also replicas, as are we, of parents and ancestors. We all wear the family face:

                        I am the family face
                        Flesh perishes, I live on
                        Projecting trait and race
                        Through time to times anon
                        And leaping from place to place
                        Over oblivion.

                        The years-heired feature that can
                        In curve and voice and eye
                        Despise the human span
                        Of durance – that is I;
                        The eternal thing in man
                        That heeds no call to die.

                                                - Thomas Hardy

Our loves, too, are replicas, always, of other loves, of loves nearly perfect and of loves less perfect. If you are a Romantic, you will spend your life searching for, or regretting the loss of, the one perfect love. A Platonist, you will seek your missing half. The one perfect love isn’t the same as the one that got away. The girl that got away––Lovely Daughter––belongs to the future. To love her is to let her go, without bitterness or repining. The one perfect love belongs to the ever-inaccessible past. That is why Romantics are always disappointed in the loves life has to offer; to a Romantic, love is always a replica that recalls that absent love: perfectly whole and complete.

If you are, instead of being a Romantic, a Practitioner of love, you will practice it. Practice is what Practitioners do.  Prince Charles famously remarked of the announcement of the marriage of his son William to Kate Middleton, that the couple had certainly had enough practice. Well, yes. They had. We all practice, as Mrs. Brown said, on parents, on playmates, on girlfriends and boyfriends, all the while reconsolidating our memories of the original. What is the original? Is it God? Is it our capacity to love? No matter. Every love that we meet with, every love we practice, though it be a replica of perfection, is precious. Love is our perfectly imperfect, most vital connection to the perfectly imperfect human condition.

So can I get a refill?
Can I get a refill?
Can I get a refill?
Yeah, of your time
Cause you’re intoxicating my mind
Feel like a conversational lush
Cause I don’t know how much is too much, yeah
I feel like the girl at the bar who’s been there too long
Can’t stand up!

                        –– “Refill,” Elle Varner,  Perfectly  Imperfect






Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Stuck on Replay







Listening to Music, Whether I Want to or Not




Knock, knock, knockin’ on heaven’s door


A whisper in the mind, quietly melodic and slightly ingratiating.


Knock, knock, knockin’ on heaven’s door
Knock, knock, knockin’


But wait. I’m not a believer. Stop!


Knock, knock, knockin’ on…
Knock, knock, knockin’ on….


Useless to protest. Dylan wrote it. Dolly Parton sang it. Who knows where or when? The only words I remember, or should I say the only words that remember me, are “Knock, knock, knockin’ on heaven’s door.” There was certainly knocking on my door, and the sound was getting louder.

You know the feeling. First: the melody, naïve, harmless. Then a few words join the tune, gentle reminders. Then, not so gently, a line emerges. It’s as much of a line as you will hear. You go about your business, you get on with your day. But there it is, at odd intervals: persisting, wanting in.


Knock, knock, knockin’ on heaven’s door


It isn’t a religious experience. It isn’t even music – not really. It’s an irritating little eruption, a breach in the wall of separation between chance and fate, a minor transgression of that boundary between the conscious and the unconscious mind. It’s risen from the ocean floor where your treasure chest of memories rests, perhaps with a rusty chain wrapped around it three times. But alas, not wrapped tightly enough to prevent an escaping tune, a blast from the past, an earworm.

Over a hundred years ago, Sigmund Freud wrote an unfunny book about jokes. Jokes could be elusive, Freud mused: “Often they are not at the disposal of our memory when we want them; but at other times, to make up for this, they appear involuntarily, as it were, and at points in our train of thought where we cannot see their relevance.” (Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious, 1905, p. 168)  Like earworms, jokes can be intrusive, erupting suddenly at the threshold of awareness. But while jokes insinuate themselves with puns and allusions, earworms just keep battering away at whatever barrier you may have erected to protect your sanity.

In The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, Freud described psychological mishaps as ordinary as a song getting stuck in the head. These mental glitches include the forgetting of proper names, foreign words, phrases, and impressions. In the edgy negotiation between conflicting intentions, opposing motives known and unknown, temporary amnesias play a strategic role. Repression offers the conflicted person a brief reprieve, one of the benefits of forgetting. The trouble with earworms, however, begins not with an act of forgetting, but with one of remembering.

Perhaps Freud’s thoughts most relevant to earworms concern the early treatment of hysterics. Freud said of his patients that, “hysterics suffer mainly from reminiscences.” (Abstract, On the psychical mechanism of hysterical phenomena, 1893, p. 244) Hypnosis was thought to cure the hysteric by awakening a traumatic memory that had been submerged by repression. Freud imagined the hysteric’s forgotten memory as a foreign body irritating its host: “We must therefore suppose that the forgotten memory has been acting like a foreign body in the mind, with the removal of which the irritating phenomena cease.”

The earworm, though far less malign than hysterical illness, will act like a foreign body in the mind until it is expelled or ceases spontaneously. How to expel it? This is not a trivial question, since the “control mechanisms” for suppressing earworms may one day be adapted to treat PTSD. (Williamson, Victoria J. All in the Mind, BBC Radio 4 interview, November 30, 2011) For now though, scientists’ advice is the same as conventional wisdom: listen to the entire song, listen to another song.

More than a hundred years after Freud, psychiatrist and neurologist Oliver Sacks has used engrossing case histories of his patients to explore the mind in the light of psychopathology and neuroscience. In Musicophilia, Sacks talks about the ways his patients have been haunted by music, ranging from musical seizures to musical hallucinations. Earworms, which he prefers to call brainworms, are described in a chapter called “Brainworms, Sticky Music, and Catchy Tunes.” (Sacks, 2007)

Unlike the neuropsychiatric hauntings disclosed by Sacks, brainworms belong to ordinary human experience. Sacks notes the repetitive nature of brainworms and their fragmentary onset: “often a short, well-defined phrase or theme of three or four bars.’ (p. 44) For Sacks, the experience of brainworms is an instance of normal musical imagery ‘crossing a line’ into pathology, and though he doesn’t indicate the underlying neurological process by which this line is crossed, Sacks speculates on its likelihood: “The endless repetition and the fact that the music itself may be irrelevant or trivial, not to one’s taste, or even hateful, suggest a coercive process, that the music has entered and subverted a part of the brain, forcing it to fire repetitively and autonomously (as happens with a tic or a seizure).” (p. 44) Brainworms may be among the involuntary repetitive phenomena experienced by people with Tourette’s or OCD, but the near universality of brainworms is “the clearest sign of the overwhelming, and at times helpless, sensitivity of our brains to music.” (p. 49) 

How then does it begin? According to Victoria Williamson, who conducts research in the psychology of music, there are two common triggers for earworms, or INMI: Involuntary Musical Imagery (How Do Earworms Start? Psychology of Music, 2011) The first is Music Exposure – listening to the song – rare in my case since any involuntary memory retrieval is usually of songs I heard in my teens. The second common trigger is Memory Triggers, or the sparking of memories associated with music. Williamson’s research subjects mentioned visiting a place or seeing a person associated with the music that haunted them.

Usually I’m not aware of specific memories that set a musical intervention in motion. Instead the songs emerge bit by bit, and it’s often not until they have become full-blown presences that I stop to wonder why that particular song. In the last few years I’ve been stalked by a repeating song cycle, a medley of memes. It begins with:


Ba-by, now that I’ve found you
I can’t let you go

Baby? What baby? There’s no baby in my life.


I’ll build my world around you
I need you so


You say what? I’m not building it up, I’m building it down. Cutting back. Scaling down. Divesting myself. Getting ready to travel light. No more householder.


Ba-by, even though you don’t need me,
You don’t need me.


And I hear The Foundations go on about it for a couple of weeks. Then life gets busy; phone calls and emails get exchanged. I mail a birthday present. The season turns.


If you’re feeling sad and lonely
You and I should be together


I watched a YouTube video of this song with my son in his place in New York, and during the whole video a girl sat in a chair chain-smoking to the music. Why the chain-smoking? I wondered. My son said because it was a song about addiction.


Call me, don’t be afraid you can call me


I prefer the video of Nancy Sinatra, even if she does have big hair, even if her singing is a little too talky.



Maybe it’s late, but just call me
Tell me, and I’ll be around



So I guess that’s what the smoking girl is hearing from her addiction: that I’ll always be there for you. And then Call me expires. I’m back in the house with two guest rooms. It’s not like I don’t have a life of my own. We email and chat. I buy furniture and read novels. I pull up every weed in the garden. Next up: Fleetwood Mac.


…time makes you bolder


OK, that one got started after I heard the song on Glee.


Children get older. I’m getting older too.


Who put this medley together? Do I mean medley or mashup? Mashup or mix-up?


Well I’ve been afraid of changin’
‘Cause I built my life around you


These songs are all starting to sound alike, but this one has to run its course. I contact old friends. I visit them. They visit me. And then a new song:


It was sweet and funny, a pleasure ground



This is always risky. Once my INMI starts channeling Laura Nyro I could be hearing entire albums, song after song.


Did not know about money, did not know about Timer

My darling friends, oh I belong to Timer


Time to pay the bills, the taxes, the insurance. My darling friends are travelling. They visit China and Turkey. They vacation in Tahoe and Palm Springs. We keep in touch.


He changed my face

You’re a fine, fine one Timer

You’ve got me walking through the gates of space


I get inspired by new ideas. My smile comes back. More and more, it’s hard not to smile. Time doesn’t go too fast or too slow. I make appointments and plans. The universe is vast and from my vantage point, unending. There’s always something new to explore. I laugh at the worry that the sun will burn out in, what is it, five billion years? The world is more than enough for me.

The medley seems to be over.

So we have these involuntary memories, some of them, like earworms, unwelcome and intrusive. What happens then, when I’m plagued by a few bars of music and try to exorcize it by listening to the whole song? If the song has lyrics, as is the case with most of the music in my earworm repertoire, what happens if I listen to the lyrics and think about their meaning? Can I reconsolidate my involuntary memory so that when it’s back among that treasure trove of pop songs, laid to rest at the bottom of the sea, it contains new information? Can I update involuntary musical imagery by thinking about why it intruded – or as Sacks puts it, subverted a part of my brain – at a particular moment in time?

I learned about memory reconsolidation literally yesterday – on the Internet. At the World Science Festival program on “The Unbearable Lightness of Memory,” which took place on August 18, 2011, cognitive neuroscientist Elizabeth Phelps explained how, whenever a memory is retrieved, it has to go through a storage process, and how, during the time that memory is being reconsolidated, it is vulnerable to disruption. (Phelps, http://worldsciencefestival.com/videos/the_unbearable_lightness_of_memory). Phelps’ research tells us that our memories are more malleable, and therefore more fallible, than we once thought. But the same research also tells us that memory is dynamic. The likely reason the human mind has this potential for disruption built into its system for storing memories is to enable us to update memories with new information.

As panel participant Lynn Nadel put it, “memory is always in play.” Nadel, a psychologist who has contributed to the study of memory reconsolidation and developed the cognitive map theory of hippocampal function, explained that, “Every time you reactivate a memory, there is the possibility of strengthening that memory, of disrupting it, or of updating it." Whether those possibilities are also there every time a memory reactivates you, as in the instance of earworms and other involuntary intrusions, is best left to the scientists.

Are some people more susceptible to involuntary memory incursions than others? What circumstances might influence susceptibility? In a study conducted for BBC Radio 6 Music, Victoria Williamson discovered that earworms often start playing when we are in a ruminative state or in a low-attention state, bored, or even asleep. Perhaps at such times the boundaries between the conscious and the unconscious mind are more permeable, allowing agents and messengers from the other side to slip through.

My admittedly limited experience with psychic permeability occurred during a period of chronic sleep deprivation. Of course, my memory of the occasions on which I anticipated various events may be unreliable for that very reason. Make of it what you will. At the time, I had ambivalent feelings about being psychic. Every year in Berkeley there is a psychics’ convention, and during that week cardboard signs sprout up all over the city directing the psychics to their meeting place. There’s always much hilarity about the elaborate signage required by the psychics.

My sleep-deprived mind seemed to resonate, that year, with extra time sense, however. No sooner would I think of someone I had been out of touch with than the phone would ring and there he or she would be. I had vivid thoughts of a friend two days before hearing he had died. I remarked to my husband, “It’s been a long time since we’ve heard anything from” my cousin, and the next day a cousinly letter appeared in our mailbox. Most curiously of all, since I pay little attention to celebrities, one day this random thought popped into my head: “I wonder how Jane Fonda’s marriage is doing.” The next day I heard the split-up of Fonda and Tom Hayden announced on the radio. Yes I know, I might somehow have heard that uninteresting piece of news before the thought popped into my head, but I don’t think so.

All of this psychic stuff worried me so I consulted an equally sleep-deprived friend in my mothers’ group who had mentioned having similar experiences. It turned out that Rosalind had had so many experiences of this kind that she had once considered cultivating her sixth sense. Ultimately though she decided against it, because whenever she predicted something about the future, “it was always something bad, and there’s nothing you can do about it.” She advised me to get some sleep.

Possibly psychic phenomena – these time-warped ideas that pop into the head – will turn out to be, like earworms, manifestations of what German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus identified as “involuntary memory retrieval.” (Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology, 1885) Perhaps one day such experiences will be better understood through experiments in reconsolidation.

Freud performed just such a reconsolidation experiment on an involuntary memory of his own that had greatly perplexed him when it occurred. Freud, who deeply appreciated the culture of classical antiquity, made his first long anticipated trip to Athens in late middle age. Standing for the first time on the Acropolis, his thoughts took a surprising turn: “So all this really does exist, just as we learned at school.” (Freud, A Disturbance of Memory on the Acropolis, 1936, p. 241) 

Freud’s investigation of the meaning of this disturbance of memory was recorded many years after the event. The investigation took the form of a voluntary act of memory retrieval by way of self-analysis. Freud reconsolidated (strengthened) his involuntary memory by recalling its context: the trip with his brother to Athens and, earlier, his own inexplicable feeling of depression at Trieste when the prospect of visiting Athens became immanent. Freud identified the defense mechanism underlying his perplexing reaction as derealization: the feeling that ‘what I see here is not real’, or that an experience is ‘too good to be true’. He then reasoned with himself: he had not really doubted the existence of Athens, or what he was taught about it in school, so why this sense of unreality on seeing the Acropolis? Freud recognized that what he had doubted in boyhood – owing to his family’s poverty – was that he would ever travel so far, that he would ‘go such a long way’. (p. 246) By the time he visited Athens, Freud had far surpassed the conditions of his boyhood, and of his father – an uneducated merchant.

The meaning of the disturbance of memory now became clear, and Freud was able to finish reconsolidating (updating) the memory: “A sense of guilt was attached to the satisfaction of having gone such a long way… it was something to do with a child’s criticism of his father, with the undervaluation which took the place of the overvaluation of early childhood.” (p. 247)

Freud, the father of modern psychology and psychotherapy, has undergone a half-cycle of overvaluation and undervaluation. In default of today’s scientific understanding of the brain, Freud used various working models of the mind, among them his economic model, which “developed in the wake of nineteenth century physical science based on the conservation of energy.” (Hinshelwood, R.D., A Dictionary of Kleinian Thought, 1989, p. 278) Within the last ten to fifteen years, neuroscience research has created an accurate picture of the workings of mind and memory. Still more recently, cognitive mapping of the brain and discoveries related to PKMzeta  – the memory molecule – have contributed a detailed knowledge of the biological basis of mental processes. Today, scientists can count the number of synapses involved in encoding a memory. Knowledge of memory storage and reconsolidation is based on experiments using the scientific method.

In addition to his working models of the mind, Freud used metaphors such as that of an archeological excavation to understand mental processes. Freud’s literary sensibility endowed him with a subtle understanding of a range of psychological phenomena, from the allusive quality of jokes to the indirect representation of the subject in a dream. Freud understood the manipulation of symbols in language both conscious and unconscious. Insights about figurative language contributed to Freud’s major discoveries about the workings of the unconscious: “Freud explored the unconscious and came up with certain rules of unconscious mental activity – displacement and condensation. These rules explain the way in which symbols are handled in the unconscious.” (Hinshelwood, A Dictionary of Kleinian Thought, p. 451)

Our memories, whose storage system, we now know, operates in precise ways at the molecular level, are yet accessed by us through language. Freud’s literary sensibility allowed him to see how defense mechanisms and the language of dreams worked analogously to figurative language. Despite the necessary limitations of Freud’s scientific knowledge of the brain as mental substrate, his insights concerning the language of the unconscious continue to be useful. As long as language remains the main currency for transactions between the conscious and the unconscious mind, Freud’s exploration of the unconscious will remain a source of enlightenment.



Memories,

Like the corners of my mind




Can it be that all was so simple then?

Or has time re-written every line?