Remembering in the wild: recontextualising and reconciling studies of media and memory

Abstract

Studies that locate memory entirely within the head may pay less attention to the properties, practices or cultures of the media with which people remember than studies of ‘memory in the wild’, where memory is seen to extend beyond the individual, into the distributed activities of people and material things. While memory in the head is, apparently, individual and susceptible to universal effects, memory in the wild is emergent and relational. Studies of memory in the wild, therefore, produce results that are harder to pin down but may form a stronger basis for interpreting the importance of context. It is an important, interdisciplinary challenge to reconcile evidence from studies based on these different conceptions, so that we can better understand how people remember and forget, individually and collectively, and the relationship between context, environment, and memory. I argue that wherever memory is located or studied, all remembering can be framed as in the wild, and that doing so supports ecological validity, conceptual precision, reflexivity, and realistic application of conclusions beyond the research context. A key part of my argument is that the relationship between media, technology, and memory is situated, highly complex, and not easily generalisable. Remembering in the wild supports the conceptual precision needed to understand the subtle and entangled implications of technological change in relation to memory.

Artificial intelligence and social memory: towards the cyborgian remembrance of an advancing mnemo-technic

“…Within these discussions, the instrumentalist trap of conceiving mnemonic technologies as merely mnemonic aids has occasionally been avoided by stressing that human remembering always occurs in the wild. For instance, Tim Fawns (2022) writes:…”

“…photographs and mobile phones and social media platforms) and their entanglements in our social relations with other people are too complex for us to control … if remembering happens in the head, media are more likely to be seen simply as tools or cues, external to memory processes … On the other hand, a wild view of remembering can help us see that there is no hard boundary between remembering with and without media … Properly theorized, seeing remembering as in the wild can support a more meaningful account of the complex social and material relations in which remembering is entangled. (2022,(3)(4) Focusing on remembering and/or remembrance over memory per see is useful because it foregrounds the contextual specificity of the memories produced (remembered) through human use of technology (Fawns 2022; see also Merrill 2017). Yet this approach still runs the risk of maintaining focus primarily on human remembering, reflecting those limits traditionally conceived to affect the distribution of mnemonic agency.…”

Virtual reality as a technology of memory: Immersive presence in Polish politics of memory

“…They are also co-constituted by a particular technological system and a specific virtual environment/story, which are created by entities with distinct interests and embedded within a particular political, cultural, and historical context (Evans 2019; Kazlauskaitė 2022a; Lanier 2017). VR memories are both ‘in-the-head’ and ‘in-the-wild’ (Barnier and Hoskins 2018; Fawns 2022; Hoskins 2016). Moreover, memories of VR experiences are ‘in-the-body’ too.…”

Themes for future research on memory, mind and media

“…First, it is one way to foster what Barnier and Hoskins (2018) have called the study memory 'in the wild'. This is an issue further examined by Tim Fawns (2022), who has called on scholars to avoid the temptation to 'locate memory entirely within the head' (1). The study of symbolic mediation can contribute to this effort by providing insights into what Hoskins (2016) calls 'memory ecologies', which involve 'an "expanded view" of memory that sees remembering and forgetting as the outcome of interactional trajectories of experience' (1).…”