Inti said:I am also seeing that my memory is better with "visual" books - I don't mean books with pictures but material that conjures up strong images...almost ironically, material that seems to play on the power of imagination. Perhaps this is why folktales/myths/poetry have a much stronger effect on me.
Csayeursost said:With those visual-thought-intense books, I think the difference stems from that the part of your machine that would otherwise drift into irrelevant activity and take your focus and attention with it is instead occupied with the material, meaning that you "keep hold" of it and that it therefore remains in short-term memory instead of being displaced by irrelevant data.
I just read "The Golden Thread" (Joscelyn Godwin - has anyone read this? I'm not quite sure what to make of it) and there was a part that discusses this, which I found interesting:
Joscelyn Godwin said:The primary arts of the Renaissance were visual - painting, sculpture, and architecture. Those of the Romantic era were aural - poetry, imaginative prose, and music. The latter arts act as a more powerful stimulus to the inward path because of the different functions of the eye and the ear. The eye gives us immediate and detailed knowledge of the physical world surrounding us; it draws us out of ourselves, so much so that most people forget that they are even there. The ear also draws us, but not so much out of as into ourselves. We always have to interpret what we hear, because it comes through language rather than with the immediacy of forms and colors. When we read poetry, and even more when we hear it spoken, it causes images to arise from inside, rather than from without. We create and own them in a way that we can never do with the outside world.
The Romantic poets discovered states of the soul that noone had paid attention to before, and then educated generations of readers to feel them. The reason poetry was so effective for this process is because of its fixity with regard to language. The poem is inseparable from its actual words and all the resonances they evoke in native speakers (which is why lyric poetry especially is untranslatable). Also, because of its rhyme and meter, it sticks in the memory in a way that prose does not.
This book, interestingly, also brings up the subject of imagination. I'm a bit confused on this matter really because it seems that there are different definitions as to what it is. I can understand that the mere production of pleasant fantasies, what I would call daydreaming, is a form of mental laziness. However, sometimes it seems that there are different roles for imagination. For example, and probably many experience this, often I might play through a situation or a conversation in my mind, seeing the various potentialities of it. Is this also mental laziness or can it be useful? Isn't empathy based on imagination to an extent? (You imagine yourself as another?)
Joscelyn Godwin said:The Western esoteric tradition has always emphasized the use of the imagination as the primary way of access to higher worlds. All esoteric schools, as far as I know, train their students in visualization and active imagination (sometimes included within the broader term of "meditation"). The inner senses can be strengthened, just as the muscles of an athlete or the skill of a musician are developed through training. The time, effort, and dedication required are comparable in all three cases, as is the need for a genetic disposition.
Our concern here is both with the esoteric use of the imagination as a vehicle for entering inner worlds, and its exoteric use for educationa and indoctrination. There are various way to stimulate the imagination, including fasting, sleep deprivation, and a wide range of drugs. The goal is to overcome its usual imprecision and fuzziness, and to achieve a degree of clarity and reality rivaling that of the waking environment.
He also writes:
Joscelyn Godwin said:The practice of active imagination is the essence of Kabbalah, in which the mental manipulation of letters, numbers, and geometrical forms in two and three dimensions supposedly leads to the understanding of God's creative plan. This understanding may eventually bring the Kabbalist to the conviction of knowing God. The same techniques were practiced by Sufis.
The art of Memory, known to the ancients, was allied to these meditative practices, but was specifically architectural: its basic technique was to imagine a building in which symbolic images of the things to be remembered were placed sequentially on the walls and in the rooms
Well, I gather from this that Godwin believes imagination to be a fundamental part of various mystic teachings. I'd be interested to hear what others think on this subject.