Relationship between Synaesthesia and Memory Retention?

I’m attempting to place all of these pieces together cohesively in my mind. So: can we say that both synaesthesia and radical memory retention are a result of a lack of synaptic regression? This is, perhaps, simplifying the process to a level that I understand it (after all, I’m still not certain what each synaptic connection really produces- is it the connection from one thought to another? What qualifies something as a “thought”? Maybe I need to brush up on LeDoux). Yet still, unpruned synapses would seem to imply a bevy of neurological connections, so that one thought led to another thought, which... etc. The “Quick Guide to Synaesthesia” describes a lack of differentiation in the sensory areas of the brain”- is this a result of synaptic regression? This mess of connecting thought patterns fits perfectly into Luria’s case of S., where one observation immediately led to a deluge of other observations, effectively drowning the poor man in a pool of information.

Perhaps this is the connection between synaesthesia and memory retention? I was struggling throughout the readings to understand why the two seemed to be interrelated. They didn’t necessarily seem tethered to one another- one can be synaesthetic without having the mnemonic abilities illustrated in the case studies. Indeed, it seems as if, in some ways, synaesthesia and memory retention serve to contradict one another in terms of potential effects. It’s noted in the “Quick Guide” that synaesthesia seems to be related in some way to creativity. It allows musicians to perceive music in a new way by connecting it to otherwise unseen attributes. It forges connections that spark insight and productivity. Memory retention, however, when it reaches the levels shown by Luria and Borges, can lead to a level of conceptual paralysis. Creativity, even understanding is not something we would connect with S., who is described as “dull” as synaesthetes are described as typically intelligent.

This is supported by the fantastic rumination on “forgetting”, and its importance in the mental process. As is brilliantly pointed out by Borges, “To think is to ignore (or forget) differences, to generalize, to abstract. (126)” That is, to think is to streamline thoughts, deeming some necessary, some unnecessary, to take the applicable traits and work them together into a cohesive line of argument. To generalize, to abstract, one must pinpoint specific qualities. Otherwise, as did S., we lose the forest for the trees.

What exactly is this phenomena that connects both synaesthesia and memory retention? It seems a strange, complicated brew. As discussed earlier, the two conditions certainly seem interrelated, in that they deal with the construction of unseen connections. With synaesthesia, these connections are productive, not so with memory retention. So what exactly is going on when the two fuse together?