The most common problem reported by those who (at least try to) read "Os Maias" by Eça de Queiroz, is that they can't get past the first 80 or more pages where the author does nothing but thoroughly describing the family house, Ramalhete. Eça is the Portuguese frontman of the artistic movement known as Realism which explains his obsession with describing the house in such a detailed manner that anyone, from reading the book alone, could build the house to match the author's mental image of it exactly.
I wonder, however, if such a long and meticulous description is needed. Take me, someone who read and even liked the book - what exactly do I remember of the Ramalhete? Not much. Almost nothing to be honest. The best I can do is attach to my memory of this house a feeling of austerity typical of monasteries or old boarding schools run by nuns. I remember it silent and abandoned. When inhabited, I remember the insides being overdecorated, almost cluttered, with many fancy objects of the Portuguese higher classes.
Now, is this true about the house? Maybe not All I care is that's what I pictured in my mind throughout the book and even now, years later. I don't remember what Eça described, what objects, window panes or flower vases. Cracking floors or wallpapers. Yet, in my mind, the image of this house is strangely vivid and realistic. If Eça had just used one paragraph to describe the house like I did here, it would have been enough. He needed only to have said "The house is huge and it looks like a boarding school run by nuns. Dark brooding shadows hover over it and kids don't dare to jump those walls". There. Whatever happens inside, my mind can create images that are perfectly sufficient to let the story unroll peacefully. Horribly incomplete images, but perfectly sufficient.
The truth is, the first adjectives are enough when you're reading. After a certain point, your brain is already a step ahead and if the description stops, you don't really need more. And when it doesn't stop (as with "Os Maias", where it seems to never stop), you are very likely to not memorize whatever comes next. Your self-made initial image, however, you might remember all your life.
It's like our eyes and their blind spot, right in the middle of your field of vision, where the optic nerve is. Your eye can see everything except for that little spot in the middle, but what one eye misses, the other one can see, and it's easy for your brain to compose a full picture of what's in front of you. But when you close one eye, you don't notice anything missing in the middle... (you can read about and test that here) Why? Because your amazing brain is filling in that gap for you, according to what's around that spot. It analyzes the surroundings and fills the blind spot with a color/pattern close enough to fool your perception (a mental photoshop clone/stamp tool). And it's sort of the same when you read... Take characters... authors frequently go through very creative efforts to make characters seem real by describing their structure, hair color or facial features. On any book you are reading at the moment, how many of those do you remember about the characters? But don't you feel like you have a very clear and accessible image of that character in your mind?
Well, this image we have isn't clear at all, it's very very incomplete, and so are the memories we have of almost everything and everyone. It's obvious if you try to draw one of your memories with detail.
I'm certain today that our brain works with the minimum effort, using just enough resources to keep you entertained and oblivious to his methods. There are many ways to make this evident, not only by inspecting our memories and how detailed they are. I hope I have the time to go through a few of them in the future.
Well, you are not supposed to memorize the whole book, so the brain takes what it "thinks" it is and WILL BE the most important elements of the text (taking the least energetic path), so you can understand what's coming next. It is an act of survival, in a way, regardless of getting real true information or not. But that's evolution for you. Evolution is not a purifier, it's just a differenciator.
ReplyDeleteSaying the brain doesn't capture what is really going on is a fair and true statement. The brain is like an algorithm of the real, like a mp3 encoder of the original wave file.
Yes, we know we cannot apprehend reality. Yes, maybe we live in a lie. But now what? What do we do about it? We just keep moving - most important - eventually forget about it. Because biology is so overwhelming and inescapable that we do generally better accepting it than trying to fight it.
Anyway,
I also read the book and I too remember very little of the description of the house. But, unlike you, I remember it as one of the most interesting parts of the book. There was something about style and the way the author looked at things that told you different/complementary things to the facts being described. Style is often dismissed as superficial and accessory. Style can be substance.
Also, all this description of the house was at the beginning of the book, so the author was explaining many things that weren't just facts, but more to do with language code for the rest of the book and to get you a feel of the time and space. So it is a very instructive part for the brain for what is to come, even if it doesn't retain most of the facts.
Maybe great writers instinctually know about the way the brain works.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that maybe what you call the brain filling a gap just so it can fool you to go on, is the brain filling it with stuff that we are not aware/ we do not value / we do not value yet, but still extremely important, as important as facts we can or not remember. Just like understanding is more than knowledge.
So, the brain is fooling us, maybe not as much as we think.
I meant "fool" in a good way. Closer to keeping things in the background and making decisions for you. For our own good, I'm aware of it. I actually think it's fooling us MORE than we think, but again, always for the best. I marvel at biology.
ReplyDeleteBe sure to read Daniel C Dennet's "Consciousness Explained" you might find it interesting.