Don, you're speaking of the main man's problem: the things flow. We conserve _signs_ of the concrete experiences: what we call "memories". But to give them an intersubjective value we need the language. Great western invention: the "photograph", another kind of sign.

So you're right. The only thing we can do is to ask to write the memories down. "Graham hit a manhole cover before to crash on the Quarter Bridge road": it's a proposition that describes a "fact". Of course the condition of the meaningness of this request is that we recognize a _value_ in the memories we ask to write down.

I recognize in the TT races a _value_ that I do not recognize in any other sport event. When I look at the MotoGP or F1 car races in tv I think: "it's IMPOSSIBLE that those things will do history". Perhaps I'm wrong and the future will confute my opinion. But there is a "but": the MotoGP and F1 car races are more and more thought and organized _already_ for the TV (for the "image"). While any TT race is absolutely out of any image control: it's based on the _concrete experience_. So I come to an apparently paradoxal conclusion: the value that I recognize in the TT races is based on the fact they are not completely subordinated to a system that produces and conserve images of the event (and what makes possible this is first of all the lenght of the course...). This is also the reason why a TT tale on the 2006 TT has a value much greater than any tale about what Rossi made in the last GP etc.

WHY are the TT races unique? I think that this question can still reserve us some surprises.