Pensieves and the Question of Objectivity
The question of whether memories in a Pensieve are subjective or objective has been bothering me for quite a while, but this morning I had an epiphany, and this theory (along with the Muggle-technology analogy) popped into my head. I hope no one objects to me blathering on about it in public.
I'd love to hear comments - especially if there's some canonical fact that I've missed. Many of the conclusions I've come to have been come out of ongoing LJ discussions of the topic, so here's a 'thank you' to everyone who's participated in those discussions. (OotP spoilers ahoy.)
The difference between wizarding photographs and Muggle photographs is not in their concept or purpose - both are intended to record a particular moment in time for the sake of remembrance or nostalgia - but rather in their depth and intricacy. Similarly, I think the difference between wizarding memories and Muggle memories is one of scope; a Muggle memory would be static, containing only the details a person sees with their own eyes and hears with their own ears, while a wizarding memory would contain everything that is within a certain visual/auditory range of the wizard, whether or not the wizard actually (consciously or subconsciously) sees or hears it. While this greater scope provides more detail than a Muggle memory, it's not unlimited. The viewer is still tied to the immediate vicinity of the person whose memory it is.
Examples of both the restrictions and the additional depth of wizard memories can be found during Harry's trip into Snape's memories (OotP, Chapter 28). Harry can't stray too far from young Snape, but he can see and hear things - James's doodling of 'LE' and Lupin's commentary on the exam's werewolf question, for instance - that Snape could not have seen or heard at the time.
I see the silver strands that are drawn out and placed in a Pensieve as being like DVDs: they're the physical recordings of the memories. The memory itself is clear and objective*, with no single point-of-view, though (like a movie) it has a central "focal" point. In the case of a movie, the focal point is the camera, around which all action occurs; the focal point of a memory is the person who experienced it. The memories are recorded onto the silver strands, their format the mental equivalent of widescreen, Technicolor, and with Dolby Surround sound.
The subjectivity comes in when the movie on the DVD is viewed by someone, even the person whose experience it originally was. When a person "remembers" something, they're putting that objective mental DVD into a player in their head and playing back the memory. Similarly, when a memory (DVD) is placed into the Pensieve and viewed, it's "played" on the viewer's A/V equipment, i.e., filtered through their experiences and personality.
The fact that the memory is now viewed through the subjective filter of an individual's perception doesn't change the fact that the original recording is still objective. If I hook up my DVD player to a 13" black and white television with a single speaker on the front, then The Matrix Reloaded may appear to be in black and white with monaural sound, but that doesn't change what's recorded on the DVD. I can still take it to my friend's house and play it through her home theatre system for full effect.
(For a simpler but very similar analogy, think about the fact that no two people get exactly the same thing out of a film; each person views the film through the filter of their own emotions and experiences. One man's clever, witty dialogue may be another's trite crap.)
In the end, I think that the answer to the subjective/objective question is 'both'. The memories themselves are objective, but any attempt to view them taints that objectivity with the viewer's subjective opinions. Sometimes this taint is extremely faint (e.g., when a stranger watches a memory that means nothing to them) and other times it's enough to distort the memory completely (e.g., when an emotionally charged memory is being viewed by its owner), but it's always there.
* The only canonical statement I've found that would seem, on the surface, to argue against the objectivity of unfiltered memories is Dumbledore's statement to Harry in Chapter 30 of GoF: "That was Bertha as I remember her at school." Dissecting the statement, though, I think "as I remember her" can be interpreted to mean "during her time at Hogwarts", rather than "as a subjective image from my memory".
I'd love to hear comments - especially if there's some canonical fact that I've missed. Many of the conclusions I've come to have been come out of ongoing LJ discussions of the topic, so here's a 'thank you' to everyone who's participated in those discussions. (OotP spoilers ahoy.)
The difference between wizarding photographs and Muggle photographs is not in their concept or purpose - both are intended to record a particular moment in time for the sake of remembrance or nostalgia - but rather in their depth and intricacy. Similarly, I think the difference between wizarding memories and Muggle memories is one of scope; a Muggle memory would be static, containing only the details a person sees with their own eyes and hears with their own ears, while a wizarding memory would contain everything that is within a certain visual/auditory range of the wizard, whether or not the wizard actually (consciously or subconsciously) sees or hears it. While this greater scope provides more detail than a Muggle memory, it's not unlimited. The viewer is still tied to the immediate vicinity of the person whose memory it is.
Examples of both the restrictions and the additional depth of wizard memories can be found during Harry's trip into Snape's memories (OotP, Chapter 28). Harry can't stray too far from young Snape, but he can see and hear things - James's doodling of 'LE' and Lupin's commentary on the exam's werewolf question, for instance - that Snape could not have seen or heard at the time.
I see the silver strands that are drawn out and placed in a Pensieve as being like DVDs: they're the physical recordings of the memories. The memory itself is clear and objective*, with no single point-of-view, though (like a movie) it has a central "focal" point. In the case of a movie, the focal point is the camera, around which all action occurs; the focal point of a memory is the person who experienced it. The memories are recorded onto the silver strands, their format the mental equivalent of widescreen, Technicolor, and with Dolby Surround sound.
The subjectivity comes in when the movie on the DVD is viewed by someone, even the person whose experience it originally was. When a person "remembers" something, they're putting that objective mental DVD into a player in their head and playing back the memory. Similarly, when a memory (DVD) is placed into the Pensieve and viewed, it's "played" on the viewer's A/V equipment, i.e., filtered through their experiences and personality.
The fact that the memory is now viewed through the subjective filter of an individual's perception doesn't change the fact that the original recording is still objective. If I hook up my DVD player to a 13" black and white television with a single speaker on the front, then The Matrix Reloaded may appear to be in black and white with monaural sound, but that doesn't change what's recorded on the DVD. I can still take it to my friend's house and play it through her home theatre system for full effect.
(For a simpler but very similar analogy, think about the fact that no two people get exactly the same thing out of a film; each person views the film through the filter of their own emotions and experiences. One man's clever, witty dialogue may be another's trite crap.)
In the end, I think that the answer to the subjective/objective question is 'both'. The memories themselves are objective, but any attempt to view them taints that objectivity with the viewer's subjective opinions. Sometimes this taint is extremely faint (e.g., when a stranger watches a memory that means nothing to them) and other times it's enough to distort the memory completely (e.g., when an emotionally charged memory is being viewed by its owner), but it's always there.
* The only canonical statement I've found that would seem, on the surface, to argue against the objectivity of unfiltered memories is Dumbledore's statement to Harry in Chapter 30 of GoF: "That was Bertha as I remember her at school." Dissecting the statement, though, I think "as I remember her" can be interpreted to mean "during her time at Hogwarts", rather than "as a subjective image from my memory".