Question from a newbie: Taking memories out of your head?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 164130

bboyminn wrote:
> 
> <snip> While some have suggested 'Shadow' memories, I think
'secondary' memories is closer to the truth.
> <snip>
> [A]fter a certain age, you are no longer remembering the actual
event, you are remembering the last time you remembered the event. You
remember the last time you fondly remembered, and with each
rememberance, we embellish slightly; <snip>
> These are what I call Secondary Memories.
> 
> So, let's say Snape removes an event from his memory. Once he does
that, how does he even know to look at it? How does he even know the
event occurred? How does he know that he should put it back, if he
can't remember that he ever had it? <snip> Of course, the answer is he
has many secondary memories related to the event that he can  draw on.
To remember to view it, he can recall putting it in the Penseive, why
he put it their, the general nature of the thought placed therein,
etc.... <snip>

Carol responds:
While I agree that memories that are constantly relived, not
necessarily fondly (and unless Snape put it in the back of his mind
using Occlumency, that memory of teenage humiliation would be one of
them) are distorted by our emotions and biases regarding the people
and events involved, and often by what we wish had happened (though
that wouldn't apply in this case), I don't think JKR has anything so
complicated in mind. I think that once a person removes the *objective
record* of the memory and places it in a Pensieve, what remains is the
subjective remembrance, a shadow memory that may be almost as detailed
or much vaguer than the objective memory, but which cannot be placed
in a Pensieve because it isn't a real, objective record of what happened. 

For example, I remember that when I was in first grade, a boy named
George (not Weasley <g>) grabbed my glasses and put them on. When I
grabbed them back, a teacher named Mrs. Brooksby ordered me to "Give
George back his glasses" and sent me (for the one and only time in my
life) to the principal's office! I don't constantly relive that
memory, thank goodness, nor do I remember the concrete details of the
objective memory that are no doubt somewhere in my subconscious mind,
but if I were a witch and a Legilimens and could remove the real
memory, its echo or shadow, my subjective shadow memory--an
inaccurate, vague recollection distorted by any emotions I might still
feel regarding the incident--would still be in my head, inaccessible
to a Legilimens like Snape or Voldemort (or a Legilimens spell like
the ones snape used on Harry) because of its insubstantiality and lack
of detail. (I don't remember what George or Mrs. Brooksby looked like,
for example. I remember that the incident occurred near the back steps
of the school, but not what the grounds looked like or who else was
present.)

So Snape would remember that James and Sirius had attacked and
humiliated him, even using one of his own spells against him, and he
would, of course, remember that he had put that memory and two others
into the Pensieve, but the objective details of the memory, such as
exact words and facial expressions, would be protected from accidental
exposure to Harry, or, through him, to Voldemort by being removed from
snape's head and placed in the Pensieve.

Carol, whose memories, even the most vivid ones, are all of the
inaccurate subjective variety--and don't match my sister's subjective
memories of the same incidents