The Interpretation of Dreams
The Material and Sources of Dreams
Chapter Five
C -- THE
SOMATIC SOURCES OF DREAMS
If we attempt to interest a cultured
layman in the problems of dreams, and if, with this end in view,
we ask him what he believes to be the source of dreams, we shall
generally find that he feels quite sure he knows at least this part
of the solution. He thinks immediately of the influence exercised
on the formation of dreams by a disturbed or impeded digestion (`Dreams
come from the stomach'), an accidental position of the body, a trifling
occurrence during sleep. He does not seem to suspect that even after
all these factors have been duly considered something still remains
to be explained.
In the introductory chapter we examined
at length the opinion of scientific writers on the role of somatic
stimuli in the formation of dreams, so that here we need only recall
the results of this inquiry. We have seen that three kinds of somatic
stimuli will be distinguished: the objective sensory stimuli which
proceed from external objects, the inner states of excitation of
the sensory organs, having only a subjective reality, and the bodily
stimuli arising within the body; and we have also noticed that the
writers on dreams are inclined to thrust into the background any
psychic sources of dreams which may operate simultaneously with
the somatic stimuli, or to exclude them altogether. In testing the
claims made on behalf of these somatic stimuli we have learned that
the significance of the objective excitation of the sensory organs
-- whether accidental stimuli operating during sleep, or such as
cannot be excluded from the dormant relation of these dream-images
and ideas to the internal bodily stimuli -- has been observed and
confirmed by experiment; that the part played by the subjective
sensory stimuli appears to be demonstrated by the recurrence of
hypnagogic sensory images in dreams; and that, although the broadly
accepted relation of these dream-images and ideas to the internal
bodily stimuli cannot be exhaustively demonstrated, it is at all
events confirmed by the well-known influence which an excited state
of the digestive, urinary and sexual organs exercises upon the content
of our dreams.
`Nerve stimulus' and `bodily stimulus'
would thus be the anatomical sources of dreams; that is, according
to many writers, the sole and exclusive sources of dreams.
But we have already considered a number
of doubtful points, which seem to question not so much the correctness
of the somatic theory as its adequacy.
However confident the representatives
of this theory may be of its factual basis -- especially in respect
of the accidental and external nerve-stimuli, which may without
difficulty be recognised in the dream-content -- nevertheless they
have all come near to admitting that the rich content of ideas found
in dreams cannot be derived from the external nerve-stimuli alone.
In this connection Miss Mary Whiton Calkins tested her own dreams,
and those of a second person, for a period of six weeks, and found
that the element of external sensory perception was demonstrable
in only 13.2 per cent and 6.7 per cent of these dreams respectively.
Only two dreams in the whole collection could be referred to organic
sensations. These statistics confirm what a cursory survey of our
own experience would already have led us to suspect.
A distinction has often been made
between `nerve-stimulus dreams' which have already been thoroughly
investigated, and other forms of dreams. Spitta, for example, divided
dreams into nerve-stimulus dreams and association-dreams. But it
was obvious that this solution remained unsatisfactory unless the
link between the somatic sources of dreams and their ideational
content could be indicated.
In addition to the first objection,
that of the insufficient frequency of the external sources of stimulus,
a second objection presents itself, namely, the inadequacy of the
explanations of dreams afforded by this category of dream-sources.
There are two things which the representatives of this theory have
failed to explain: firstly, why the true nature of the external
stimulus is not recognised in the dream, but is constantly mistaken
for something else; and secondly, why the result of the reaction
of the perceiving mind to this misconceived stimulus should be so
indeterminate and variable. We have seen that Strümpell, in
answer to these questions, asserts that the mind, since it turns
away from the outer world during sleep, is not in a position to
give the correct interpretation of the objective sensory stimulus,
but is forced to construct illusions on the basis of the indefinite
stimulation arriving from many directions. In his own words (Die
Natur und Entstehung der Träume, p. 108):
When by an external or internal
nerve-stimulus during sleep a feeling, or a complex of feelings,
or any sort of psychic process arises in the mind, and is perceived
by the mind, this process calls up from the mind perceptual images
belonging to the sphere of the waking experiences, that is to
say, earlier perceptions, either unembellished, or with the psychic
values appertaining to them. It collects about itself, as it were,
a greater or lesser number of such images, from which the impression
resulting from the nerve-stimulus receives its psychic value.
In this connection it is commonly said, as in ordinary language
we say of the waking procedure, that the mind interprets
in sleep the impressions of nervous stimuli. The result of this
interpretation is the so-called nerve-stimulus dream --
that is, a dream the components of which are conditioned by the
fact that a nerve-stimulus produces its psychical effect in the
life of the mind in accordance with the laws of reproduction.
In all essential points identical
with this doctrine is Wundt's statement that the concepts of dreams
proceed, at all events for the most part, from sensory stimuli,
and especially from the stimuli of general sensation, and are therefore
mostly fantastic illusions -- probably only to a small extent pure
memory-conceptions raised to the condition of hallucinations. To
illustrate the relation between dream-content and dream-stimuli
which follows from this theory, Strümpell makes use of an excellent
simile. It is `as though the ten fingers of a person ignorant of
music were to stray over the keyboard of an instrument.' The implication
is that the dream is not a psychic phenomenon, originating from
psychic motives, but the result of a physiological stimulus, which
expresses itself in psychic symptomatology because the apparatus
affected by the stimulus is not capable of any other mode of expression.
Upon a similar assumption is based the explanation of obsessions
which Meynert attempted in his famous simile of the dial on which
individual figures are most deeply embossed.
Popular though this theory of the
somatic dream-stimuli has become, and seductive though it may seem,
it is none the less easy to detect its weak point. Every somatic
dream-stimulus which provokes the psychic apparatus in sleep to
interpretation by the formation of illusions may evoke an incalculable
number of such attempts at interpretation. It may consequently be
represented in the dream-content by an extraordinary number of different
concepts. But the theory of Strümpell and Wundt cannot point
to any sort of motive which controls the relation between the external
stimulus and the dream-concept chosen to interpret it, and therefore
it cannot explain the `peculiar choice' which the stimuli `often
enough make in the course of their productive activity' (Lipps,
Grundtatsachen des Seelenlebens, p. 170). Other objections
may be raised against the fundamental assumption behind the theory
of illusions -- the assumption that during sleep the mind is not
in a condition to recognise the real nature of the objective sensory
stimuli. The old physiologist Burdach shows us that the mind is
quite capable even during sleep of a correct interpretation of the
sensory impressions which reach it, and of reacting in accordance
with this correct interpretation, inasmuch as he demonstrates that
certain sensory impressions which seem important to the individual
may be excepted from the general neglect of the sleeping mind (as
in the example of nurse and child), and that one is more surely
awakened by one's own name than by an indifferent auditory impression;
all of which presupposes, of course, that the mind discriminates
between sensations, even in sleep. Burdach infers from these observations
that we must not assume that the mind is incapable of interpreting
sensory stimuli in the sleeping state, but rather that it is
not sufficiently interested in them. The arguments which Burdach
employed in 1830 reappear unchanged in the works of Lipps (in the
year 1883), where they are employed for the purpose of attacking
the theory of somatic stimuli. According to these arguments the
mind seems to be like the sleeper in the anecdote, who, on being
asked; `Are you asleep?' answers `No', and on being again addressed
with the words: `Then lend me ten florins', takes refuge in the
excuse: `I am asleep.'
The inadequacy of the theory of somatic
dream-stimuli may be further demonstrated in another way. Observation
shows that external stimuli do not oblige me to dream, even though
these stimuli appear in the dream-content as soon as I begin to
dream -- supposing that I do dream. In response to a touch- or pressure-stimulus
experienced while I am asleep, a variety of reactions are at my
disposal. I may overlook it, and find on waking that my leg has
become uncovered, or that I have been lying on an arm; indeed, pathology
offers me a host of examples of powerfully exciting sensory and
motor stimuli of different kinds which remain ineffective during
sleep. I may perceive the sensation during sleep, and through my
sleep, as it were, as constantly happens in the case of pain stimuli,
but without weaving the pain into the texture of a dream. And thirdly,
I may wake up in response to the stimulus, simply in order to avoid
it. Still another, fourth, reaction is possible: namely, that the
nerve-stimulus may cause me to dream; but the other possible reactions
occur quite as frequently as the reaction of dream-formation. This,
however, would not be the case if the incentive to dreaming did
not lie outside the somatic dream-sources.
Appreciating the importance of the
above-mentioned lacunae in the explanation of dreams by somatic
stimuli, other writers -- Scherner, for example, and, following
him, the philosopher Volkelt -- endeavoured to determine more precisely
the nature of the psychic activities which cause the many-coloured
images of our dreams to proceed from the somatic stimuli, and in
so doing they approached the problem of the essential nature of
dreams as a problem of psychology, and regarded dreaming as a psychic
activity. Scherner not only gave a poetical, vivid and glowing description
of the psychic peculiarities which unfold themselves in the course
of dream-formation, but he also believed that he had hit upon the
principle of the method the mind employs in dealing with the stimuli
which are offered to it. The dream, according to Scherner, in the
free activity of the fantasy, which has been released from the shackles
imposed upon it during the day, strives to represent symbolically
the nature of the organ from which the stimulus proceeds. Thus there
exists a sort of dream-book, a guide to the interpretation of dreams,
by means of which bodily sensations, the conditions of the organs,
and states of stimulation, may be inferred from the dream-images.
`Thus the image of a cat expressed extreme ill-temper, the image
of pale, smooth pastry the nudity of the body. The human body as
a whole is pictured by the fantasy of the dream as a house, and
the individual organs of the body as parts of the house. In ``toothache-dreams''
a vaulted vestibule corresponds to the mouth, and a staircase to
the descent from the pharynx to the oesophagus; in the ``headache-dream''
a ceiling covered with disgusting toad-like spiders is chosen to
denote the upper part of the head.' `Many different symbols are
employed by our dreams for the same organ: thus the breathing lung
finds its symbol in a roaring stove, filled with flames, the heart
in empty boxes and baskets, and the bladder in round, bag-shaped
or merely hollow objects. It is of particular significance that
at the close of the dream the stimulating organ or its function
is often represented without disguise, and usually on the dreamer`s
own body. Thus the ``toothache-dream'' commonly ends by the dreamer
drawing a tooth out of his mouth.' It cannot be said that this theory
of dream-interpretation has found much favour with other writers.
It seems, above all, extravagant; and so Scherner`s readers have
hesistated to give it even the small amount of credit to which it
is, in my opinion, entitled. As will be seen, it tends to a revival
of dream-interpretation by means of symbolism, a method employed
by the ancients; only the province from which the interpretation
is to be derived is restricted to the human body. The lack of a
scientifically comprehensible technique of interpretation must seriously
limit the applicability of Scherner's theory. Arbitrariness in the
interpretation of dreams would appear to be by no means excluded,
especially since in this case also a stimulus may be expressed in
the dream-content by several representative symbols; thus even Scherner's
follower Volkelt was unable to confirm the representation of the
body as a house. Another objection is that here again the dream-activity
is regarded as a useless and aimless activity of the mind, since,
according to this theory, the mind is content with merely forming
fantasies around the stimulus with which it is dealing, without
even remotely attempting to abolish the stimulus.
Scherner's theory of the symbolisation
of bodily stimuli by the dream is seriously damaged by yet another
objection. These bodily stimuli are present at all times, and it
is generally assumed that the mind is more accessible to them during
sleep than in the waking state. It is therefore impossible to understand
why the mind does not dream continuously all night long, and why
it does not dream every night about all the organs. If one attempts
to evade this objection by positing the condition that special excitations
must proceed from the eye, the ear, the teeth, the bowels, etc.,
in order to arouse the dream-activity, one is confronted with the
difficulty of proving that this increase of stimulation is objective;
and proof is possible only in a very few cases. If the dream of
flying is a symbolisation of the upward and downward motion of the
pulmonary lobes, either this dream, as has already been remarked
by Strümpell, should be dreamt much oftener, or it should be
possible to show that respiration is more active during this dream.
Yet a third alternative is possible -- and it is the most probable
of all -- namely, that now and again special motives are operative
to direct the attention to the visceral sensations which are constantly
present. But this would take us far beyond the scope of Scherner's
theory.
The value of Scherner's and Volkelt's
disquisitions resides in their calling our attention to a number
of characteristics of the dream-content which are in need of explanation,
and which seem to promise fresh discoveries. It is quite true that
symbolisations of the bodily organs and functions do occur in dreams:
for example, that water in a dream often signifies a desire to urinate,
that the male genital organ may be represented by an upright staff,
or a pillar, etc. With dreams which exhibit a very animated field
of vision and brilliant colours, in contrast to the dimness of other
dreams, the interpretation that they are `dreams due to visual stimulation'
can hardly be dismissed, nor can we dispute the participation of
illusion-formation in dreams which contain noise and a medley of
voices. A dream like that of Scherner's, that two rows of fair handsome
boys stood facing one another on a bridge, attacking one another,
and then resuming their positions, until finally the dreamer himself
sat down on a bridge and drew a long tooth from his jaw; or a similar
dream of Volkelt's, in which two rows of drawers played a part,
and which again ended in the extraction of a tooth; dream-formations
of this kind, of which both writers relate a great number, forbid
our dismissing Scherner's theory as an idle invention without seeking
the kernel of truth which may be contained in it. We are therefore
confronted with the task of finding a different explanation of the
supposed symbolisation of the alleged dental stimulus.
Throughout our consideration of the
theory of the somatic sources of dreams, I have refrained from urging
the argument which arises from our analyses of dreams. If by a procedure
which has not been followed by other writers in their investigation
of dreams we can prove that the dream possesses intrinsic value
as psychic action, that a wish supplies the motive of its formation,
and that the experiences of the previous day furnish the most obvious
material of its content, any other theory of dreams which neglects
such an important method of investigation -- and accordingly makes
the dream appear a useless and enigmatical psychic reaction to somatic
stimuli -- may be dismissed without special criticism. For in this
case there would have to be -- and this is highly improbable --
two entirely different kinds of dreams, of which only one kind has
come under our observation, while the other kind alone has been
observed by the earlier investigators. It only remains now to find
a place in our theory of dreams for the facts on which the current
doctrine of somatic dream-stimuli is based.
We have already taken the first step
in this direction in advancing the thesis that the dream-work is
under a compulsion to elaborate into a unified whole all the dream-stimuli
which are simultaneously present (p. 83). We have seen that when
two or more experiences capable of making an impression on the mind
have been left over from the previous day, the wishes that result
from them are united into one dream; similarly, that the impressions
possessing psychic value and the indifferent experiences of the
previous day unite in the dream-material, provided that connecting
ideas between the two can be established. Thus the dream appears
to be a reaction to everything which is simultaneously present as
actual in the sleeping mind. As far as we have hitherto analysed
the dream-material, we have discovered it to be a collection of
psychic remnants and memory-traces, which we were obliged to credit
(on account of the preference shown for recent and for infantile
material) with a character of psychological actuality, though the
nature of this actuality was not at the time determinable. We shall
now have little difficulty in predicting what will happen when to
these actualities of the memory fresh material in the form of sensations
is added during sleep. These stimuli, again, are of importance to
the dream because they are actual; they are united with the other
psychic actualities to provide the material for dream-formation.
To express it in other words, the stimuli which occur during sleep
are elaborated into a wish-fulfilment, of which the other components
are the psychic remnants of daily experience with which we are already
familiar. This combination, however, is not inevitable; we have
seen that more than one kind of behaviour toward the physical stimuli
received during sleep is possible. Where this combination is effected,
a conceptual material for the dream-content has been found which
will represent both kinds of dream-sources, the somatic as well
as the psychic.
The nature of the dream is not altered
when somatic material is added to the psychic dream-sources; it
still remains a wish-fulfilment, no matter how its expression is
determined by the actual material available.
I should like to find room here for
a number of peculiarities which are able to modify the significance
of external stimuli for the dream. I imagine that a co-operation
of individual, physiological and accidental factors, which depend
on the circumstances of the moment, determines how one will behave
in individual cases of more intensive objective stimulation during
sleep; habitual or accidental profundity of sleep, in conjunction
with the intensity of the stimulus, will in one case make it possible
so to suppress the stimulus that it will not disturb the sleeper,
while in another case it will force the sleeper to wake, or will
assist the attempt to subdue the stimulus by weaving it into the
texture of the dream. In accordance with the multiplicity of these
constellations, external objective stimuli will be expressed more
rarely or more frequently in the case of one person than in that
of another. In my own case, since I am an excellent sleeper, and
obstinately refuse to allow myself to be disturbed during sleep
on any pretext whatever, this intrusion of external causes of excitation
into my dreams is very rare, whereas psychic motives apparently
cause me to dream very easily. Indeed, I have noted only a single
dream in which an objective, painful source of stimulation is demonstrable,
and it will be highly instructive to see what effect the external
stimulus had in this particular dream.
I am riding a grey horse, at first
timidly and awkwardly, as though I were merely carried along. Then
I meet a colleague, P., also on horseback, and dressed in rough
frieze; he is sitting erect in the saddle; he calls my attention
to something (probably to the fact that I have a very bad seat).
Now I begin to feel more and more at ease on the back of my highly
intelligent horse; I sit more comfortably, and I find that I am
quite at home up here. My saddle is a sort of pad, which completely
fills the space between the neck and the rump of the horse. I ride
between two vans, and just manage to clear them. After riding up
the street for some distance, I turn round and wish to dismount,
at first in front of a little open chapel which is built facing
onto the street. Then I do really dismount in front of a chapel
which stands near the first one; the hotel is in the same street;
I might let the horse go there by itself, but I prefer to lead it
thither. It seems as though I should be ashamed to arrive there
on horseback. In front of the hotel there stands a page-boy, who
shows me a note of mine which has been found, and ridicules me on
account of it. On the note is written, doubly underlined, `Eat nothing',
and then a second sentence (indistinct): something like `Do not
work'; at the same time a hazy idea that I am in a strange city,
in which I do not work.
It will not at once be apparent that
this dream originated under the influence, or rather under the compulsion,
of a pain-stimulus. The day before, however, I had suffered from
boils, which made every movement a torture, and at last a boil had
grown to the size of an apple at the root of the scrotum, and had
caused me the most intolerable pains at every step; a feverish lassitude,
lack of appetite, and the hard work which I had nevertheless done
during the day, had conspired with the pain to upset me. I was not
altogether in a condition to discharge my duties as a physician,
but in view of the nature and the location of the malady, it was
possible to imagine something else for which I was most of all unfit,
namely riding. Now it is this very activity of riding into which
I am plunged by the dream; it is the most energetic denial of the
pain which imagination could conceive. As a matter of fact, I cannot
ride; I do not dream of doing so; I never sat on a horse but once
and then without a saddle -- and I did not like it. But in this
dream I ride as though I had no boil on the perineum; or rather,
I ride, just because I want to have none. To judge from the
description, my saddle is the poultice which has enabled me to fall
asleep. Probably, being thus comforted, I did not feel anything
of my pain during the first few hours of my sleep. Then the painful
sensations made themselves felt, and tried to wake me; whereupon
the dream came and said to me, soothingly: `Go on sleeping, you
are not going to wake! You have no boil, for you are riding on horseback,
and with a boil just there no one could ride!' And the dream was
successful; the pain was stifled, and I went on sleeping.
But the dream was not satisfied with
`suggesting away' the boil by tenaciously holding fast to an idea
incompatible with the malady (thus behaving like the hallucinatory
insanity of a mother who has lost her child, or of a merchant who
has lost his fortune). In addition, the details of the sensation
denied and of the image used to suppress it serve the dream also
as a means to connect other material actually present in the mind
with the situation in the dream, and to give this material representation.
I am riding on a grey horse -- the colour of the horse exactly
corresponds with the pepper-and-salt suit in which I last
saw my colleague P. in the country. I have been warned that highly
seasoned food is the cause of boils, and in any case it is preferable
as an etiological explanation to sugar, which might be thought
of in connection with furunculosis. My friend P. likes to `ride
the high horse' with me ever since he took my place in the treatment
of a female patient, in whose case I had performed great feats (Kunststücke:
in the dream I sit the horse at first sideways, like a trick-rider,
Kunstreiter), but who really, like the horse in the story
of the Sunday equestrian, led me wherever she wished. Thus the horse
comes to be a symbolic representation of a lady patient (in the
dream it is highly intelligent). `I feel quite at home'
refers to the position which I occupied in the patient's household
until I was replaced by my colleague P. `I thought you were safe
in the saddle up there,' one of my few well-wishers among the eminent
physicians of the city recently said to me, with reference to the
same household. And it was a feat to practise psychotherapy
for eight to ten hours a day, while suffering such pain, but I know
that I cannot continue my peculiarly strenuous work for any length
of time without perfect physical health, and the dream is full of
dismal allusions to the situation which would result if my illness
continued (the note, such as neurasthenics carry and show to their
doctors). Do not work, do not eat. On further interpretation
I see that the dream-activity has succeeded in finding its way from
the wish-situation of riding to some very early childish quarrels
which must have occurred between myself and a nephew, who is a year
older than I, and is now living in England. It has also taken up
elements from my journeys in Italy; the street in the dream is built
up out of impressions of Verona and Siena. A still deeper interpretation
leads to sexual dream-thoughts, and I recall what the dream-allusions
to that beautiful country were supposed to mean in the dream of
a female patient who had never been to Italy (to Italy, German:
gen Italien = Genitalien = genitals); at the same time there
are references to the house in which I preceded my friend P. as
physician, and to the place where the boil is located.
In another dream I was similarly successful
in warding off a threatened disturbance of my sleep; this time the
threat came from a sensory stimulus. It was only chance, however,
that enabled me to discover the connection between the dream and
the accidental dream-stimulus, and in this way to understand the
dream. One midsummer morning in a Tyrolese mountain resort I woke
with the knowledge that I had dreamed: The Pope is dead.
I was not able to interpret this short, non-visual dream. I could
remember only one possible basis of the dream, namely, that shortly
before this the newspapers had reported that His Holiness was slightly
indisposed. But in the course of the morning my wife asked me: `Did
you hear the dreadful tolling of the church bells this morning?'
I had no idea that I had heard it, but now I understood my dream.
It was the reaction of my need for sleep to the noise by which the
pious Tyroleans were trying to wake me. I avenged myself on them
by the conclusion which formed the content of my dream, and continued
to sleep, without any further interest in the tolling of the bells.
Among the dreams mentioned in the
previous chapters there are several which might serve as examples
of the elaboration of so-called nerve-stimuli. The dream of drinking
in long draughts is such an example; here the somatic stimulus seems
to be the sole source of the dream, and the wish arising from the
sensation -- thirst -- the only motive for dreaming. We find much
the same thing in other simple dreams, where the somatic stimulus
is able of itself to generate a wish. The dream of the sick woman
who throws the cooling apparatus from her cheek at night is an instance
of an unusual manner of reacting to a pain-stimulus with a wish-fulfilment;
it seems as though the patient had temporarily succeeded in making
herself analgesic, and accompanied this by ascribing her pains to
a stranger.
My dream of the three Parcae is obviously
a hunger-dream, but it has contrived to shift the need for food
right back to the child's longing for its mother's breast, and to
use a harmless desire as a mask for a more serious one that cannot
venture to express itself so openly. In the dream of Count Thun
we were able to see by what paths an accidental physical need was
brought into relation with the strongest, but also the most rigorously
repressed impulses of the psychic life. And when, as in the case
reported by Garnier, the First Consul incorporates the sound of
an exploding infernal machine into a dream of battle before it causes
him to wake, the true purpose for which alone psychic activity concerns
itself with sensations during sleep is revealed with unusual clarity.
A young lawyer, who is full of his first great bankruptcy case,
and falls asleep in the afternoon, behaves just as the great Napoleon
did. He dreams of a certain G. Reich in Hussiatyn, whose
acquaintance he has made in connection with the bankruptcy case,
but Hussiatyn (German: husten, to cough) forces itself
upon his attention still further; he is obliged to wake, only to
hear his wife -- who is suffering from bronchial catarrh -- violently
coughing.
Let us compare the dream of Napoleon
I -- who, incidentally, was an excellent sleeper -- with that of
the sleepy student, who was awakened by his landlady with the reminder
that he had to go to the hospital, and who thereupon dreamt himself
into a bed in the hospital, and then slept on, the underlying reasoning
being as follows: If I am already in the hospital, I needn't get
up to go there. This is obviously a convenience-dream; the sleeper
frankly admits to himself his motive in dreaming; but he thereby
reveals one of the secrets of dreaming in general. In a certain
sense, all dreams are convenience-dreams; they serve the
purpose of continuing to sleep instead of waking. The dream is
the guardian of sleep, not its disturber. In another place we
shall have occasion to justify this conception in respect to the
psychic factors that make for waking; but we can already demonstrate
its applicability to the objective external stimuli. Either the
mind does not concern itself at all with the causes of sensations
during sleep, if it is able to carry this attitude through as against
the intensity of the stimuli, and their significance, of which it
is well aware; or it employs the dream to deny these stimuli; or,
thirdly, if it is obliged to recognise the stimuli, it seeks that
interpretation of them which will represent the actual sensation
as a component of a desired situation which is compatible with sleep.
The actual sensation is woven into the dream in order to deprive
it of its reality. Napoleon is permitted to go on sleeping;
it is only a dream-memory of the thunder of the guns at Arcole which
is trying to disturb him.
The wish to sleep, to which the
conscious ego has adjusted itself, and which (together with the
dream-censorship and the `secondary elaboration' to be mentioned
later) represents the ego's contribution to the dream, must thus
always be taken into account as a motive of dream-formation, and
every successful dream is a fulfilment of this wish. The relation of this general, constantly present, and
unvarying sleep-wish to the other wishes of which now one and now
another is fulfilled by the dream-content, will be the subject of
later consideration. In the wish to sleep we have discovered a motive
capable of supplying the deficiency in the theory of Strümpell
and Wundt, and of explaining the perversity and capriciousness of
the interpretation of the external stimulus. The correct interpretation,
of which the sleeping mind is perfectly capable, would involve active
interest, and would require the sleeper to wake; hence, of those
interpretations which are possible at all only such are admitted
as are acceptable to the dictatorial censorship of the sleep-wish.
The logic of dream situations would run, for example: `It is the
nightingale, and not the lark'. For if it is the lark, love's night
is at an end. From among the interpretations of the stimulus which
are thus admissible, that one is selected which can secure the best
connection with the wish-impulses that are lying in wait in the
mind. Thus everything is definitely determined, and nothing is left
to caprice. The misinterpretation is not an illusion, but -- if
you will -- an excuse. Here again, as in substitution by displacement
in the service of the dream-censorship, we have an act of deflection
of the normal psychic procedure.
If the external nerve-stimuli and
the inner bodily stimuli are sufficiently intense to compel psychic
attention, they represent -- that is, if they result in dreaming
at all, and not in waking -- a fixed point for dream-formation,
a nucleus in the dream-material, for which an appropriate wish-fulfilment
is sought, just as (see above) mediating ideas between two psychical
dream-stimuli are sought. To this extent it is true of a number
of dreams that the somatic element dictates the dream-content. In
this extreme case even a wish that is not actually present may be
aroused for the purpose of dream-formation. But the dream cannot
do otherwise than represent a wish in some situation as fulfilled;
it is, as it were, confronted with the task of discovering what
wish can be represented as fulfilled by the given sensation. Even
if this given material is of a painful or disagreeable character,
yet it is not unserviceable for the purposes of dream-formation.
The psychic life has at its disposal even wishes whose fulfilment
evokes displeasure, which seems a contradiction, but becomes perfectly
intelligible if we take into account the presence of two sorts of
psychic instance and the censorship that subsists between them.
In the psychic life there exist, as
we have seen, repressed wishes, which belong to the first
system, and to whose fulfilment the second system is opposed. We
do not mean this in a historic sense -- that such wishes have once
existed and have subsequently been destroyed. The doctrine of repression,
which we need in the study of psychoneuroses, asserts that such
repressed wishes still exist, but simultaneously with an inhibition
which weighs them down. Language has hit upon the truth when it
speaks of the `suppression' (sub-pression, or pushing under) of
such impulses. The psychic mechanism which enables such suppressed
wishes to force their way to realisation is retained in being and
in working order. But if it happens that such a suppressed wish
is fulfilled, the vanquished inhibition of the second system (which
is capable of consciousness) is then expressed as discomfort. And,
in order to conclude this argument: If sensations of a disagreeable
character which originate from somatic sources are present during
sleep, this constellation is utilised by the dream-activity to procure
the fulfilment -- with more or less maintenance of the censorship
-- of an otherwise suppressed wish.
This state of affairs makes possible
a certain number of anxiety-dreams, while others of these dream-formations
which are unfavourable to the wish-theory exhibit a different mechanism.
For the anxiety in dreams may of course be of a psychoneurotic character,
originating in psychosexual excitation, in which case, the anxiety
corresponds to repressed libido. Then this anxiety, like the whole
anxiety-dream, has the significance of a neurotic symptom, and we
stand at the dividing-line where the wish-fulfilling tendency of
dreams is frustrated. But in other anxiety-dreams the feeling of
anxiety comes from somatic sources (as in the case of persons suffering
from pulmonary or cardiac trouble, with occasional difficulty in
breathing), and then it is used to help such strongly suppressed
wishes to attain fulfilment in a dream, the dreaming of which from
psychic motives would have resulted in the same release of anxiety.
It is not difficult to reconcile these two apparently contradictory
cases. When two psychic formations, an affective inclination and
a conceptual content, are intimately connected, either one being
actually present will evoke the other, even in a dream; now the
anxiety of somatic origin evokes the suppressed conceptual content,
now it is the released conceptual content, accompanied by sexual
excitement, which causes the release of anxiety. In the one case
it may be said that a somatically determined affect is psychically
interpreted; in the other case all is of psychic origin, but the
content which has been suppressed is easily replaced by a somatic
interpretation which fits the anxiety. The difficulties which lie
in the way of understanding all this have little to do with dreams;
they are due to the fact that in discussing these points we are
touching upon the problems of the development of anxiety and of
repression.
The general aggregate of bodily sensation
must undoubtedly be included among the dominant dream-stimuli of
internal bodily origin. Not that it is capable of supplying the
dream-content; but it forces the dream-thoughts to make a choice
from the material destined to serve the purpose of representation
in the dream-content, inasmuch as it brings within easy reach that
part of the material which is adapted to its own character, and
holds the rest at a distance. Moreover, this general feeling, which
survives from the preceding day, is of course connected with the
psychic residues that are significant for the dream. Moreover, this
feeling itself may be either maintained or overcome in the dream,
so that it may, if it is painful, veer round into its opposite.
If the somatic sources of excitation
during sleep -- that is, the sensations of sleep -- are not of unusual
intensity, the part which they play in dream-formation is, in my
judgment, similar to that of those impressions of the day which
are still recent, but of no great significance. I mean that they
are utilised for the dream-formation if they are of such a kind
that they can be united with the conceptual content of the psychic
dream-source, but not otherwise. They are treated as a cheap ever-ready
material, which can be used whenever it is needed, and not as valuable
material which itself prescribes the manner in which it must be
utilised. I might suggest the analogy of a connoisseur giving an
artist a rare stone, a piece of onyx, for example, in order that
it may be fashioned into a work of art. Here the size of the stone,
its colour, and its markings help to decide what head or what scene
shall be represented; while if he is dealing with a uniform and
abundant material such as marble or sandstone, the artist is guided
only by the idea which takes shape in his mind. Only in this way,
it seems to me, can we explain the fact that the dream-content furnished
by physical stimuli of somatic origin which are not unusually accentuated
does not make its appearance in all dreams and every night.
Perhaps an example which takes us
back to the interpretation of dreams will best illustrate my meaning.
One day I was trying to understand the significance of the sensation
of being inhibited, of not being able to move from the spot, of
not being able to get something done, etc., which occurs so frequently
in dreams, and is so closely allied to anxiety. That night I had
the following dream: I am very incompletely dressed, and I go
from a flat on the ground-floor up a flight of stairs to an upper
story. In doing this I jump up three stairs at a time, and I am
glad to find that I can mount the stairs so quickly. Suddenly I
notice that a servant-maid is coming down the stairs -- that is,
towards me. I am ashamed, and try to hurry away, and now comes this
feeling of being inhibited; I am glued to the stairs, and cannot
move from the spot.
Analysis: The situation of the dream is taken from an everyday reality.
In a house in Vienna I have two apartments, which are connected
only by the main staircase. My consultation-rooms and my study are
on the raised ground-floor, and my living-rooms are on the first
floor. Late at night, when I have finished my work downstairs, I
go upstairs to my bedroom. On the evening before the dream I had
actually gone this short distance with my garments in disarray --
that is, I had taken off my collar, tie and cuffs; but in the dream
this had changed into a more advanced, but, as usual, indefinite
degree of undress. It is a habit of mine to run up two or three
steps at a time; moreover, there was a wish-fulfilment recognised
even in the dream, for the ease with which I run upstairs reassures
me as to the condition of my heart. Further, the manner in which
I run upstairs is an effective contrast to the sensation of being
inhibited, which occurs in the second half of the dream. It shows
me -- what needed no proof -- that dreams have no difficulty in
representing motor actions fully and completely carried out; think,
for example, of flying in dreams!
But the stairs up which I go are not
those of my own house; at first I do not recognise them; only the
person coming towards me informs me of their whereabouts. This woman
is the maid of an old lady whom I visit twice daily in order to
give her hypodermic injections; the stairs, too, are precisely similar
to those which I have to climb twice a day in this old lady's house.
How do these stairs and this woman
get into my dream? The shame of not being fully dressed is undoubtedly
of a sexual character; the servant of whom I dream is older than
I, surly, and by no means attractive. These questions remind me
of the following incident: When I pay my morning visit at this house
I am usually seized with a desire to clear my throat; the sputum
falls on the stairs. There is no spittoon on either of the two floors,
and I consider that the stairs should be kept clean not at my expense,
but rather by the provision of a spittoon. The housekeeper, another
elderly, curmudgeonly person, but, as I willingly admit, a woman
of cleanly instincts, takes a different view of the matter. She
lies in wait for me, to see whether I shall take the liberty referred
to, and if she sees that I do I can distinctly hear her growl. For
days thereafter, when we meet, she refuses to greet me with the
customary signs of respect. On the day before the dream the housekeeper's
attitude was reinforced by that of the maid. I had just finished
my usual hurried visit to the patient when the servant confronted
me in the ante-room, observing: `You might as well have wiped your
shoes today, doctor, before you came into the room. The red carpet
is all dirty again from your feet.' This is the only justification
for the appearance of the stairs and the maid in my dream.
Between my leaping upstairs and my
spitting on the stairs there is an intimate connection. Pharyngitis
and cardiac troubles are both supposed to be punishments for the
vice of smoking, on account of which vice my own housekeeper does
not credit me with excessive tidiness, so that my reputation suffers
in both the houses which my dream fuses into one.
I must postpone the further interpretation
of this dream until I can indicate the origin of the typical dream
of being incompletely clothed. In the meantime, as a provisional
deduction from the dream just related, I note that the dream-sensation
of inhibited movement is always aroused at a point where a certain
connection requires it. A peculiar condition of my motor system
during sleep cannot be responsible for this dream-content, since
a moment earlier I found myself, as though in confirmation of this
fact, skipping lightly up the stairs.
|