repetition questions

Fer states, “Repetition ensures some regulating patter of recognition.” In saying this, along with mentioning the story of Funes, Fer makes the point that repetition is essential to understanding and conceptualizing information. This suggests that one reason Martin uses repetition is so that her subject matter has the possibility of being conceptualized and understood. Why is Martin trying to conceptualize her abstract and meditative subject matter? Is it for her own (isolated) gain, or is she attempting to reach out and connect with the audience?

Fer also says that to Martin, “Repetition is understood as a means not of deadening but heightening experience.” We’re used to the idea that repetition and copies cheapen or deaden an original thought or idea. How is it that repetition can be used to enhance? What about a memory could make it more important than the original experience?
This part of the reading was definitely confusing for me. I guess a memory can become more meaningful when a person has had time to reflect and interpret the original experience. Also, after time has passed, the original experience can be placed in some sort of context with later events. The memory can be re-evaluated and re-interpreted with more information or a different point of view. For instance, someone could look back on their first meeting of a friend and say, “We have so much in common, no wonder we made such easy conversation when we were virtually strangers.” At the time, that easy conversation might have seemed like a coincidence. Only later developments of friendship and the discovery of common ground gave the original experience a more sophisticated interpretation. But in this instant, it is the extra information that adds importance to the memory, not the simple fact that the memory is a repetition. Is there something essential to the repetition itself that gives importance? Is it a number thing? For instance, if I think about X a hundred times, I’ve made X more important than if I’d only thought about X once. If that’s the case, is memory any different than anticipation? If we anticipate something over and over, the same way, and then it happens, does the event become very important because the event is a repetition of our anticipations? Or does the fact that memory occurs later in time have some special importance?