I found the chapter on traumatic amnesia really interesting. It makes so much sense that psychogenic amnesia, which is caused by events whose psychological or emotional meaning produces memory loss without damaging the brain would be caused by things such as the death of a loved one, heartbreak, money problems or job loss. These are very stressful things and it seems when the mind no longer feels it can handle them it shuts down, in a way, in order to recover. With this in mind, could the fact that those with psychogenic amnesia eventually recover, whether it occurs within hours, days, or weeks could possibly be because what triggered it cannot be rehearsed causing the memory to be forgotten causing the mind to wake up out of its state of amnesia? I really enjoyed Amy’s lecture about collective memory and memorials. In the presentation we saw many different ways used to symbolize and help retell about important historical events. Most memorials contain very graphic exhibits, which made me wonder if this could trigger a memory disorder in someone who has had a first hand experience of the event a memorial is commemorating. Whether or not PTSD is a social construction or not is discussed in chapter 10. Although this chapter concludes that PTSD is not just a “social construction”, Ian Hacking pointed out the difference between interactive and natural kinds of mental disorders. I found it really interesting that MPD was classified as an interactive disorder with the reasoning that MPD can only survive if a culture allows sufferers to express themselves this way. It is amusing that those with this disorder do not necessarily have to express themselves this way and can find other ways to react to their problem based on what is and what is not culturally acceptable.
According to the DSM-IV dissociative fugue begins after a traumatic or stressful event. According to Hacking, fugue is not generally triggered by a traumatic event. In an experiment he conducted with soldiers, fugue occurred at peacetime. In the movie “Unknown White Male”, despite its veracity, Doug, who apparently has psychogenic fugue, does not remember anything about his life or identity. We learn that his mother had passed away, but it is not something that had happened right before the incident of fugue. But perhaps this traumatic incident eventually caught up to him, leading to the psychogenic fugue. Perhaps these soldiers had been in war before, and enough time had passed between the war and peacetime that it eventually caught up. The Sudhakar Madakasira and Kevin O’Brien study about a North Carolina tornado was really interesting because it pointed to evidence that those who experienced this traumatic event remembered the event clearly, but complained of everyday forgetfulness. Also, if the memories were not rehearsed on a regular basis, wouldn’t be easier for the memory to become vague or muddled? In the chapter about false memories, Kee MacFarlane says, “leading questions may sometimes be necessary in order to enable frightened young children to respond and talk about particular subjects.” (246) Leading questions could also cause the child to create a false memory of something, as they would not want to disagree with the suggestive question. As we saw in the Ingram case, suggestive or leading questions can lead to some bizarre false confessions. Is PTSD a social construction? Evidence suggests that not many cases of PTSD are reported outside the western world, but perhaps this is because it does not have a name outside the western world. Human rights activists say, “medicalizing the problem takes attention away from perpetrators of institutionalized violence.” (282) They make a point, but I think creating a structure for patients to cope within should occur along with shining the spotlight on perpetrators of institutionalized violence. PTSD may be a cultural phenomenon, but this does not mean it is socially constructed. “To understand how people respond to trauma in the past, we must understand how it was viewed from their perspective, not our own.”(283) Similarly, different cultures may deal with trauma in different ways. PTSD has given this trauma a name, perhaps this may be a social construction, but I think it is incorrect to jump to this conclusion.
One point that McNally seems to stress over and over again throughout the three chapters is that failure to recall an incident does not necessarily mean amnesia. In his words, “trying not to think of something must not be confused with being unable to remember,” (page 193) and that failure to encode is not the same as failure to recall. With the belief of traumatic amnesia also come false memories. McNally gives many examples of how some of the psychological tests on traumatic amnesia were interpreted wrong, and for the most part these are very interesting. One statement that is intriguing is in the section on alien abductions. It is suggested that when the abductees woke up to buzzing noises, flickering lights, and people standing around the bed that this could be a memory of some other kind of abuse instead. There was also a mention of the fugue state in chapter 7. The fugue state, according to Remembering Trauma, can be caused by idleness and less often stressful or traumatic events. McNally used the French soldiers, who during peacetime could not “tolerate the boredom and the regimentation of military life.” Perhaps the man in Single White Male did not have a fugue state because of the death of his mother but because he was not used to retired life compared to having a stressful job.
I found it notable that psychogenic fugue is most notable among soldiers in peacetime when they become unable to “tolerate the boredom and regimentation of military life.” (189) Looking back on Doug in Unknown White Male and the woman who wandered Central Park all summer before trying to swim to Staten Island in a fugue, it seems that these fugues, which are not precipitated by a notable trauma, may constitute a form of extreme psychological escapism from the arduous tedium of these peoples daily lives. As well, both Doug and the French soldiers McNally describes were subject to past loss or trauma; the loss of a beloved mother, and combat. It is interesting that periods of high stress followed by boredom precipitate a variety of psychological issues, including Munchhausen’s Syndrome activities and relapse in substance abusers. Perhaps this pattern is a phenomenological factor which should be explored as it appears to contribute to a variety of psychological issues. Being that we all shift from periods of high to low stress throughout our lives it would be interesting to look at what makes some people unable to cope with these transitions, rendering them susceptible to various issues. Schooler’s “forgot-it-all-along” effect is very interesting, the whole idea that some reports of traumatic amnesia may be due to forgetting recollections and disclosures of trauma. This is particularly fascinating in DN’s case, wherein she suddenly recalled not only her rape but the subsequent trial. In another case, WB suggested that perhaps she had repressed the meaning of her rape rather than the memory itself. Could it be that traumatic memories don’t become fully resonant and enduring until emotional attributes are attached to them? Ie, we don’t hold on to recollections of trauma, though they are accessible, until they are coupled with emotional memory?
I was particularly intrigued by the chapter on traumatic amnesia and whether or not people experience amnesia for their traumatic experiences. McNally outlines that there have been numerous studies on this specific concept and that have proved (and many times proved wrongly) that those who have experienced trauma have difficulty remembering the event. However McNally attacks many of these studies saying that many of them are frequently inconsistent and exclude many important factors. He explains that many people fail to remember aspects of traumatic events just because at the time of the event their attention was directed somewhere else therefore they didn’t encode the aspects of the traumatic event.
Survivors of traumatic experiences hardly ever forget trauma unless they suffer direct damage to the brain. It seems very unlikely that someone who has experienced a traumatic event would forget everything about it. It is likely however that they might forget certain details about the event, but never the whole event (unless they experienced actual brain damage). Also, many of the studies that McNally proves are extremely misleading in chapter 7 are ones that try to show that amnesia for the traumatic even occurred in the participants, but rather the amnesia that was reported proved to be ordinary forgetfulness that develops after traumatic events. Other studies following this same pattern show that the attempts of trauma survivors to repress their memories showed to be unsuccessful, as one would expect with someone who has experienced a highly traumatic event. One cannot just wipe out memories they do not want from their brain. They can do things that will lessen the pain and aftermath of the trauma, but a traumatic event will never be completely erased from one’s mind and conscience. The studies that McNally attacks and that reveal more concern with everyday forgetfulness rather than amnesia for the event seem to show that the participants remembered the event very vividly, which shows that they had no trouble remembering these kinds of events being that they are extremely difficult to forget. Also their ability to participate in these studies shows that they have not repressed the memories of the trauma. Many of these studies have little or nothing to do with an inability to remember trauma and show that trauma survivors are not incapable of remembering trauma (which is the opposite of many of the intents of these studies). Even if the memories are fragmented or hazy, with the right cues they seem to be easily retrieved.
McNally clearly states that many individuals who state that they are unable to remember aspects of a traumatic event have to do with the fact that they did not encode everything that happened, therefore representing incomplete encoding and incomplete recall. Memory is of course not perfect, therefore even in the case of a highly traumatic event, there are bound to be aspects that are difficult to recall. McNally says that even when memory is not perfect, survivors do not report complete amnesia for their trauma. Many studies mislead the accounts of trauma survivors and determine that they have amnesia for their trauma when actually it is not the case, and there is much lack of evidence supporting the idea that traumatized people are actually incapable of remembering their trauma. Maybe I am just caught up in McNally’s rant on how misleading these studies are and his views on traumatic amnesia, but I wonder why there are so many studies on traumatic amnesia that seem to all try and prove the same thing when from just reading this chapter it seems obvious that there are very few cases in which complete amnesia for a traumatic event ever occurs. It is not impossible that complete amnesia for a traumatic event could occur therefore maybe researchers are still looking for those rare cases in which this would take place.
Amy Sodaro's talk was very gut-wrenching. I found it a little odd how she described the memorials from such an emotionally distant place. Images of genocide in Rwanda and the holocaust memorials seemed so casual to her. I do understand that in her line of work she must need to protect herself emotionally in order to be exposed to such horrific images on a daily basis. The way she compared the organic Rwandan memorials to the one with the most Western influence was sort of biased. She kept harking on the fact that there were no informational guides to help a tourist understand the stories behind the dead bodies. Why would that be necessary? Why should these painful memories be marketed to tourists? Why is this a moneymaking business all over the world? Why does America memorialize tragic events that it participated in? Perhaps to keep the information under control. To frame it themselves and leave out certain incriminating details. To distract the people from the true consequences of the tragedy. To make us feel that these sad and horrific things are all in the past. When they are in reality continuing to occur all over the world. And why don't we have a memorial for slavery in America? Why is it such a money making endeavor and artistic ego battle to memorialize a tragic event? Treating the holocaust or a genocide as a commodity to be marketed is sick. How do the terms genocide and holocaust affect our perception of the events? Some say that slavery and all the horrible events surrounding it was its own holocaust. Maybe refusing to refer to it with so strong a term is part of the reason why there are no memorials for it.
6 comments:
I found the chapter on traumatic amnesia really interesting. It makes so much sense that psychogenic amnesia, which is caused by events whose psychological or emotional meaning produces memory loss without damaging the brain would be caused by things such as the death of a loved one, heartbreak, money problems or job loss. These are very stressful things and it seems when the mind no longer feels it can handle them it shuts down, in a way, in order to recover. With this in mind, could the fact that those with psychogenic amnesia eventually recover, whether it occurs within hours, days, or weeks could possibly be because what triggered it cannot be rehearsed causing the memory to be forgotten causing the mind to wake up out of its state of amnesia?
I really enjoyed Amy’s lecture about collective memory and memorials. In the presentation we saw many different ways used to symbolize and help retell about important historical events. Most memorials contain very graphic exhibits, which made me wonder if this could trigger a memory disorder in someone who has had a first hand experience of the event a memorial is commemorating.
Whether or not PTSD is a social construction or not is discussed in chapter 10. Although this chapter concludes that PTSD is not just a “social construction”, Ian Hacking pointed out the difference between interactive and natural kinds of mental disorders. I found it really interesting that MPD was classified as an interactive disorder with the reasoning that MPD can only survive if a culture allows sufferers to express themselves this way. It is amusing that those with this disorder do not necessarily have to express themselves this way and can find other ways to react to their problem based on what is and what is not culturally acceptable.
According to the DSM-IV dissociative fugue begins after a traumatic or stressful event. According to Hacking, fugue is not generally triggered by a traumatic event. In an experiment he conducted with soldiers, fugue occurred at peacetime. In the movie “Unknown White Male”, despite its veracity, Doug, who apparently has psychogenic fugue, does not remember anything about his life or identity. We learn that his mother had passed away, but it is not something that had happened right before the incident of fugue. But perhaps this traumatic incident eventually caught up to him, leading to the psychogenic fugue. Perhaps these soldiers had been in war before, and enough time had passed between the war and peacetime that it eventually caught up.
The Sudhakar Madakasira and Kevin O’Brien study about a North Carolina tornado was really interesting because it pointed to evidence that those who experienced this traumatic event remembered the event clearly, but complained of everyday forgetfulness. Also, if the memories were not rehearsed on a regular basis, wouldn’t be easier for the memory to become vague or muddled?
In the chapter about false memories, Kee MacFarlane says, “leading questions may sometimes be necessary in order to enable frightened young children to respond and talk about particular subjects.” (246) Leading questions could also cause the child to create a false memory of something, as they would not want to disagree with the suggestive question. As we saw in the Ingram case, suggestive or leading questions can lead to some bizarre false confessions.
Is PTSD a social construction? Evidence suggests that not many cases of PTSD are reported outside the western world, but perhaps this is because it does not have a name outside the western world. Human rights activists say, “medicalizing the problem takes attention away from perpetrators of institutionalized violence.” (282) They make a point, but I think creating a structure for patients to cope within should occur along with shining the spotlight on perpetrators of institutionalized violence. PTSD may be a cultural phenomenon, but this does not mean it is socially constructed. “To understand how people respond to trauma in the past, we must understand how it was viewed from their perspective, not our own.”(283) Similarly, different cultures may deal with trauma in different ways. PTSD has given this trauma a name, perhaps this may be a social construction, but I think it is incorrect to jump to this conclusion.
One point that McNally seems to stress over and over again throughout the three chapters is that failure to recall an incident does not necessarily mean amnesia. In his words, “trying not to think of something must not be confused with being unable to remember,” (page 193) and that failure to encode is not the same as failure to recall. With the belief of traumatic amnesia also come false memories. McNally gives many examples of how some of the psychological tests on traumatic amnesia were interpreted wrong, and for the most part these are very interesting. One statement that is intriguing is in the section on alien abductions. It is suggested that when the abductees woke up to buzzing noises, flickering lights, and people standing around the bed that this could be a memory of some other kind of abuse instead.
There was also a mention of the fugue state in chapter 7. The fugue state, according to Remembering Trauma, can be caused by idleness and less often stressful or traumatic events. McNally used the French soldiers, who during peacetime could not “tolerate the boredom and the regimentation of military life.” Perhaps the man in Single White Male did not have a fugue state because of the death of his mother but because he was not used to retired life compared to having a stressful job.
I found it notable that psychogenic fugue is most notable among soldiers in peacetime when they become unable to “tolerate the boredom and regimentation of military life.” (189) Looking back on Doug in Unknown White Male and the woman who wandered Central Park all summer before trying to swim to Staten Island in a fugue, it seems that these fugues, which are not precipitated by a notable trauma, may constitute a form of extreme psychological escapism from the arduous tedium of these peoples daily lives. As well, both Doug and the French soldiers McNally describes were subject to past loss or trauma; the loss of a beloved mother, and combat. It is interesting that periods of high stress followed by boredom precipitate a variety of psychological issues, including Munchhausen’s Syndrome activities and relapse in substance abusers. Perhaps this pattern is a phenomenological factor which should be explored as it appears to contribute to a variety of psychological issues. Being that we all shift from periods of high to low stress throughout our lives it would be interesting to look at what makes some people unable to cope with these transitions, rendering them susceptible to various issues.
Schooler’s “forgot-it-all-along” effect is very interesting, the whole idea that some reports of traumatic amnesia may be due to forgetting recollections and disclosures of trauma. This is particularly fascinating in DN’s case, wherein she suddenly recalled not only her rape but the subsequent trial. In another case, WB suggested that perhaps she had repressed the meaning of her rape rather than the memory itself. Could it be that traumatic memories don’t become fully resonant and enduring until emotional attributes are attached to them? Ie, we don’t hold on to recollections of trauma, though they are accessible, until they are coupled with emotional memory?
I was particularly intrigued by the chapter on traumatic amnesia and whether or not people experience amnesia for their traumatic experiences. McNally outlines that there have been numerous studies on this specific concept and that have proved (and many times proved wrongly) that those who have experienced trauma have difficulty remembering the event. However McNally attacks many of these studies saying that many of them are frequently inconsistent and exclude many important factors. He explains that many people fail to remember aspects of traumatic events just because at the time of the event their attention was directed somewhere else therefore they didn’t encode the aspects of the traumatic event.
Survivors of traumatic experiences hardly ever forget trauma unless they suffer direct damage to the brain. It seems very unlikely that someone who has experienced a traumatic event would forget everything about it. It is likely however that they might forget certain details about the event, but never the whole event (unless they experienced actual brain damage). Also, many of the studies that McNally proves are extremely misleading in chapter 7 are ones that try to show that amnesia for the traumatic even occurred in the participants, but rather the amnesia that was reported proved to be ordinary forgetfulness that develops after traumatic events. Other studies following this same pattern show that the attempts of trauma survivors to repress their memories showed to be unsuccessful, as one would expect with someone who has experienced a highly traumatic event. One cannot just wipe out memories they do not want from their brain. They can do things that will lessen the pain and aftermath of the trauma, but a traumatic event will never be completely erased from one’s mind and conscience. The studies that McNally attacks and that reveal more concern with everyday forgetfulness rather than amnesia for the event seem to show that the participants remembered the event very vividly, which shows that they had no trouble remembering these kinds of events being that they are extremely difficult to forget. Also their ability to participate in these studies shows that they have not repressed the memories of the trauma. Many of these studies have little or nothing to do with an inability to remember trauma and show that trauma survivors are not incapable of remembering trauma (which is the opposite of many of the intents of these studies). Even if the memories are fragmented or hazy, with the right cues they seem to be easily retrieved.
McNally clearly states that many individuals who state that they are unable to remember aspects of a traumatic event have to do with the fact that they did not encode everything that happened, therefore representing incomplete encoding and incomplete recall. Memory is of course not perfect, therefore even in the case of a highly traumatic event, there are bound to be aspects that are difficult to recall. McNally says that even when memory is not perfect, survivors do not report complete amnesia for their trauma. Many studies mislead the accounts of trauma survivors and determine that they have amnesia for their trauma when actually it is not the case, and there is much lack of evidence supporting the idea that traumatized people are actually incapable of remembering their trauma. Maybe I am just caught up in McNally’s rant on how misleading these studies are and his views on traumatic amnesia, but I wonder why there are so many studies on traumatic amnesia that seem to all try and prove the same thing when from just reading this chapter it seems obvious that there are very few cases in which complete amnesia for a traumatic event ever occurs. It is not impossible that complete amnesia for a traumatic event could occur therefore maybe researchers are still looking for those rare cases in which this would take place.
Amy Sodaro's talk was very gut-wrenching. I found it a little odd how she described the memorials from such an emotionally distant place. Images of genocide in Rwanda and the holocaust memorials seemed so casual to her. I do understand that in her line of work she must need to protect herself emotionally in order to be exposed to such horrific images on a daily basis. The way she compared the organic Rwandan memorials to the one with the most Western influence was sort of biased. She kept harking on the fact that there were no informational guides to help a tourist understand the stories behind the dead bodies. Why would that be necessary? Why should these painful memories be marketed to tourists? Why is this a moneymaking business all over the world? Why does America memorialize tragic events that it participated in? Perhaps to keep the information under control. To frame it themselves and leave out certain incriminating details. To distract the people from the true consequences of the tragedy. To make us feel that these sad and horrific things are all in the past. When they are in reality continuing to occur all over the world. And why don't we have a memorial for slavery in America? Why is it such a money making endeavor and artistic ego battle to memorialize a tragic event? Treating the holocaust or a genocide as a commodity to be marketed is sick. How do the terms genocide and holocaust affect our perception of the events? Some say that slavery and all the horrible events surrounding it was its own holocaust. Maybe refusing to refer to it with so strong a term is part of the reason why there are no memorials for it.
Post a Comment