newsflash: people have histories

The New York Times has unleashed upon us yet another in their growing collection of fake non-trends. I'm not the only one who's noticed that the Times has a penchant for declaring something to be a "new trend" when it is either a) not new at all, or b) not substantial enough to be considered a trend.

I've just finished reading an article that ran yesterday, and which I've been trying to get through since, dealing with the importance of personal narratives on personality. I had hoped that this would provide some sort of justification for the relentless self-analysis in which I engage, and, by extension, be the impetus for yet another blog about blogging, which is always fun. Unfortunately, the Times does its usual thing where it takes something that everyone knows, ties some weird lopsided study to it, and makes an overwrought announcement. In this case, the announcement is that people's lives are informed by their past experiences, and how they remember them. I can barely process this incredible shock.

The thing is, the thesis never really sits up straight in its chair. Is it that your memories are a contributing factor to your personality, or that your personality affects how you process memories? It says that perky people will put a positive spin on bad memories, and "those with mood problems" tend to focus on bad details. This is common sense- anyone will tell you this was the case without having read a study. If you have something new to add, I'd love to hear it.

This seems at first glance more like non-news than non-trend, but there is definitely an air of a larger movement (that the Times doesn't seem to know how to turn off) caused by the presence of a number of studies, implying that this is some hot new corner of psychology that nobody knows about.

The few potentially interesting and unusual aspects of the article, like the effect of experiencing memories in the third person, aren't ever fully explored. Nowhere is this clearer than the zero-hour mention of Joan Didion watching someone play her on stage. The first taste of really interesting analysis comes in the last paragraph, in the form of a quote that's supposed to tie everything up.

Another ridiculously ill-defined trend, this one being predicted, sprang up in yesterday's issue: 3-D is the next step in the evolution of cinema.One of the most important parts of my childhood, Tintin, is being adapted into three big-budget films, and they are going to be filmed in 3-D, which the Times reports is going to be the wave of the future. They even quote Jeffery Katzenberg as saying that consumers are going to own their own personal 3-D glasses -- no, not someday -- in two years.

It's almost like, around the Times offices, this is like a competition or a fun drinking game or something.

I have to say, I'm still pretty psyched about Tintin, though.