I have closely followed the discussion on Time and have been fascinated as
always. Not only because it is a fascinating discussion but also because it
is recurring throughout this year in a variety of ways.
Mike's last posting reminded me of two issues I wanted to mention all along
but didn't have "time" to compose them in a sensible way.
Anyway - one of those two things I wanted to mention is the article by Kurt
Lewin "Defining the 'Field at a Given Time'" written in 1943 and published
in "Field Theory in Social Science" (edited by Dorwin Cartwright).
In this article, Lewin states something similar to what Mead, Naoki and
Mike were stating:
> In this context, I can paraprase the following G. H. Mead's phrase.
>
> 'When one recalls his boyhood days he cannot get into them as he then
> was, without their relationship to what he has become; and if he could,
> that is, if he could reproduce the experience as it then took place,
> he could not use it, for this would involve his not being in the present
> within which that use must take place. A string of presents conceivably
> existing as presents would not constitute a past.'(Mead, p.30)
>
> Ueno's paraphrasing Mead is as follows;
>
> 'When one recalls his macro social structure or large scale process, he
cannot get into
> them as it then was, without their relationship to what his present
practice has become;
> and if he could, that is, if he could reproduce the macro or large
scale as it then took
> place, he could not use it, for this would involve his not being in the
present practice
> within which that use must take place.
Lewin's stated that: "Any behavior or any other change in a psychological
field depends only upon the psychological field *at that time* (stress
K.L.)" This article was partially written as a response to various
critiques of field theory (one of them by Vygotsky) in which Lewin was
criticized for the lack of the historical (or developmental) dimension. He
wrote that "nothing can be more mistaken. In fact, field theorists are most
interested in developmental and historical problems..." However, the
confusion is possible because of the lack of adequate terminology to
differentiate between the object of the psychological study and its
dimension in time and the "psychological past, present and future as parts
of a psychological field at a given time". In other words, all three of
them: the past, present and future are zones of the total field (or
life-space) at each particular "present" point in time.
In this respect, Lewin's views are very similar to those of G.H. Mead and
others quoted by Naoki Ueno, Mike Cole, Jay Lemke and others. I just wanted
to mention Lewin because he had a great influence on Vygotsky and Luria at
the time (and vice versa, I think they had a great influence on him).
***
The other issue I wanted to add here is about our ability to "walk the
time" - to go back or forward in time (by remembering and or planning,
daydreaming etc). It seems to me that this is not always done in the same
way - i.e. there are different ways (processes) to transpose oneself in
"time". And the results are quite different, too. Here I think in
particular, of the Stanislavsky's method (system) for actor's preparation
of a role. While in the course of everyday life we all can have more or
less vivid memories (plans), the actors consciously USE memories as tools
for preparation of an enactment of a character (role). As a tool, the so
called "experience" is a way of "recreating" or reliving past experiences
as fully as possible with the specific goal to bring about REAL feelings
necessary for the particular situation of a character.
Here I want to briefly describe what this tool (the "experience") looks
like and what it does to "time".
First, it is clearly an activity that takes place NOW, and in that sense
"one cannot get into them as he then was, without their relationship to
what he has become;" (Mead or Ueno). To complicate the situation a bit more
- an actor "goes back into a past experience" with the purpose to create a
future (often fictional) character. And the "character" is a product of
another person's writing: therefore the "past experience" (of the actor)
has to be seen in this perspective: as a dialogue between (at least) the
playwright and the actor.
Second, a very interesting characteristic of this tool is that one cannot
fully feel just by remembering the past in general. In learning how to use
this tool, the instructions are to be as specific as possible and not to
try to "feel" but instead to try to remember as many sensory details as
possible: time (how old are you?); place (where are you?): colors, smells,
tastes, sounds, temperature; participants (who is present?) - how do they
look, how do they sound, what do they say...
In this seemingly roundabout way, without "forcing" a feeling but through
paying attention to the details of the situation, one starts to "be more
there than here", and consequently to be emotionally more and more involved
with a past event "as if" it was present. In fact, normally, no actor will
have a delusion or a hallucination that they are really in the past, no
more than anyone of us. It is more like the past becomes relevant again -
touches us again in a powerful way.
Third: this is connected to Vygotsky's writing about having control over
one's own attention and voluntary activity. Vygotsky wrote: "There is
reason to believe that voluntary activity, more than highly developed
intellect, distinguishes humans from animals which stand closest to them."
(Mind in Society, p. 37 last sentence). Emotional memory (as L. Strasberg
called it) is a skill learned in a specific social context. Just as
intellectual memory is a socially learned skill (as described by Vygotsky),
so is the tool of "past experience" used by actors. One learns not to
"remember" but to take control of one's memories and use them with
precision. What is "remembered" sometimes is not even what actually
"really" happened - but what one wished could have happened! What is
important is the making of meaning and its significance in the present and
what particular purpose (goal) it serves.
I just wanted to bring this aspect of TIME to the foreground, so we don't
forget that it is not purely and intellectual and rational dimension, but
also a very important part of the cultural development of emotions and
emotional development of a culture.
Happy Holidays to everyone
Ana
________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Ana Marjanovic-Shane
151 W. Tulpehocken St. City of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, PA 19144 OMH/MR - Research & Information
(215) 843-2909 [voice] 1101 Market St. 7th Floor
(215) 843-2288 [fax] Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 685-4767 [v]
(215) 685-5581 [fax]
________________________________________________________________________
pshane who-is-at andromeda.rutgers.edu
anchi who-is-at geocities.com
http://www.geocities.com/~anchi/
-----------------------------------------------------------
The 7th International Kurt Lewin Conference on the Web
http://www.geocities.com/~anchi/confprg1.html
SAFT Newsletter on the web
http://www.geocities.com/~anchi/SAFT/index.html
_________________________________________________________________________