volksdragon | Thoughts on object permanence of a sort

I'll give a little context, because otherwise this won't make any sense. Behind the cut is an email letter I wrote to my friend Kim, who's the mother of my first girlfriend in HS. The relationship between myself and Kim and her husband Mark was odd at the time I was dating their daughter for a few reasons, but we became very good friends a few years later.

They live in a truly amazing house just off of Corey Road in Brookline. It's a truly beautiful 3-floor house with a lovely tree-shaded back yard, a fish pond, a 2-level stone patio with outdoor grill, numerous huge rooms inside, and a cavernous basement. It was always a place of mystery to me, probably because of the rather imperious nature of Mark and Kim at the time I first met them and when I was dating their daughter, where he was a fairly prominent lawyer, she a fairly strict, highly-educated mother, and both of them so far above me in social status, education and etiquette and demeanor that it was hard not to view them and the house in a somewhat skewed manner. Nonetheless, they were always very nice to me, and I found behind the appearance were two genuinely wonderful, kind and funny people who welcomed myself and my family as friends of their entire family.

Now that all their children have moved out, had their own children, and bought their own houses, and now that they are becoming older and no longer need or want such a huge house, they are moving out. They invited us over to see the house before they sold it, because they knew the house was special to me as well as to their children. I and my daughter visited, and got to meet their new grandchild in the process, which was nice. Recently, Kim emailed me a link to the virtual tour of their house created by their realtor. I watched it a few times, and then I wrote her this email. Why am I posting it here? These are my thoughts, you might be interested.

Oh, and P.S.: I manufactured the Music field for this post because, well, it fits.

I just took a look at these panoramic shots of the house, and I have mixed feelings about it, so I thought I'd write you to tell you.

I think the work you had done on renovating the house was wonderfully done, and made the house much more practical and modern, and while it's nice to have these pictures of the house, in my memory the house is fixed at the point when I knew it best around 1990, before you renovated it to its current form. The house is wonderful now as it is, but it always felt like more of a mystery in its previous form, which is something I loved about it. I always felt like it was possible to get lost in your house, and I think that's a wonderful thing to feel about a house you know fairly well.

I will miss this house because of what it meant to me then, and because I have gotten so used to seeing all of you in it. As I told you yesterday about my grandmother's house, it hurt to not be able to see her again in her house before she left, as she and the house were so closely associated in my mind that they were inseparable, and seeing her anywhere else was always kind of an odd experience for me. It will probably be much the same with coming to visit you in your new location. It will be strange knowing there won't be any more cookouts in your yard, no sitting on the grass or on the porch and enjoying the beautiful roses that grow up the side of the house, but I know that seeing the two of you, regardless of the location of of where you reside, will still be a wonderful experience in itself, as it always is. Still, those times in the late 1980s and early 1990s are where my memory is indexed in regards to this house, much the way that the index of my grandparents and their house is based around 1986-1987, the years I spent the most time there as an older more independent teenager. I think there is a point to objects, places or people in life where you are enamored of that something to a high regard and still oblivious to whatever faults or downsides it might have, and that becomes the zenith point of your memory of that thing.

I feel we have a lot of things we will still talk about, and where I've been remiss in visiting you and spending time with you, I will remedy that in the coming years. I feel it will be impossible to repay the kindness you have always shown me, even when I was a less-understanding young man, but I hope our conversations can show how much I have learned from you and your family in the time we've known each other. Even if I can but approximate the level of parenting you displayed in raising your wonderful children, I have no doubt my child will turn out fine.

[FInal Closing paragraph left off because of boring stuff. :)]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

An art historian queues in...and hopes she doesn't sound condescending or pedantic. She prolly will, God knows men in particular accuse her of this on a regular basis...

Object association is one of the most common forms of memorization, and is often attached to emotional experiences. It's a very normal as well as vital process to be able to associate emotionally with an object, as most people are unable to process object memorization without it. The air of mystery you associated with that house sounds like a process you went through of self-discovery, and the house was symbolic of that. It's good to remember those things -- knowing where you come from is so vital to understanding where you're going.

It's been my experience and it is my opinion that men in particular need to have objects associated with emotional processes, because it's so rare that men feel comfortable expressing themselves in any sentimental or emotional way. Objects are one of the few "acceptable" ways for men to do that. I was always stunned at the things men remember about incidents and situations that I had simply allowed to pass, good and bad, and I realized that it in part had to do with some tangible thing that sparked their memories.

In a way, I envy it. It's a lovely form of psychometry that has a somewhat tragic aspect. Objects become conduits for men, and in many cases, it's the only thing they have permission to carry after something (or someone) is gone.

I think it's really admirable that you made that connection. I think it's really great you made a connection outside of that house, using the house as a springboard for finding the things within you that are important to understand and reconnect with. It serves everyone around you to have that sentiment, and I am happy you shared it.

I wish more people would.

Please, continue to be pedantic, this is quite interesting!

So you note that people do it in general and often hang memories/emotion off of objects, and that you believe men do it more often in particular. So is it your experience/opinion that women more typically express the emotion without tying it to an object?

In a nutshell, yes, but let me be more elaborate in my bullshitting for the day. I have two answers that I've pulled out of my ass 'specially for ya. :)

I think that typically, women are more capable as well as permitted to express emotion period, so it's a given that they are more likely to have other means to remember with -- emotional experiences and events are easier to remember when one has the ability to commiserate on them, something women do all of the time. Men are not in general encouraged to discuss their feelings, not even with each other, nor ruminate on their emotions...so they usually don't. If one is not given a sounding board with which to express their emotions, nor given an acceptable aveune to remember in other ways...what is the conduit for which emotions, a natural part of one's life, can be set free?

It has to be something thot doesn't talk back, that's what.

Men are often labelled as being constantly involved in (and are accused of) objectification. How many (straight) men have heard a woman say, "You just look at XYZ as a sex object!" or "How can you not see past my BOOBS when you're talking with me?" Some women have been so articulate as to say that they feel objectified by male friends or lovers. Some men have been open enough to admit they often encourage each other to look at women as bodies rather than people. It's a power thing (there's books on it) but it's also a part of how a man is encouraged to see the world. So much in a man's world is about objects -- boytoys, boys' toys, money-making-bread-winning-career-focus, sports, fast cars...objects are literally part of a man's psyche and I would argue his emotional world. If a man's society, if male culture dare I say, is so heavily based upon objects, and objects are in part what defines a man's psyche...why should he not regard objects as reminders of his emotional life in every aspect, not just those that burnish his psyche, but those that serve as painful lessons as well?

Perhaps it is from this phenomenon that the term "object lesson" comes from...?

Those are my thoughts.

I've read of the significant attachment men have for tracking movement, as well--as "movers" from the sperm level on up. Since objects (and bodies) move, that's where the attention and association goes. Of course, the house Wiley mentioned doesn't move as such, but it contains a great deal of activity. My first personal memories tie directly to house features, like stairs (falling down them) or porches (sitting on them with parents). Have you run into gender differences in those kind of associations, first things remembered as a child or first things learned?

This is more a cognitive psychology question than an art history question, so I don't feel as well-versed to answer it. I don't think Piaget and his proteges ever addressed the issue of gender difference in object association. There have been some recent studies in gender difference in certain cognitive abilities, with some interesting results. One that interests me and perhaps bolsters my premise is that because males seem to be universally better at spatial skills and object-oriented mental processes, it is possible that their emotional attachment to objects may have to do with natural cognitive tendencies.

Women, OTOH, are better at verbal skills and verbal recall. Their object memory seems to be based in the location of objects, which is a different sort of relationship -- objects are not the focus of a mental process, but are in fact part of a larger process concerning memory. The combination of better verbal skills and "big picture" mental processes may account for women being less interested in objects as reminders of emotional experiences too.

Fascinating stuff. Maybe I should go back to grad school. NOT!

Thoughts on object permanence of a sort

Object Association

Re: Object Association

Re: Object Association

Re: Object Association

Re: Object Association