a special activity of the mind, which can freely display itself only in
the sleeping state, was the one undertaken by Scherner[58] in 1861.
Scherner’s book, written in a heavy and bombastic style, inspired by an
almost intoxicated enthusiasm for the subject, which must repel us
unless it can carry us away with it, places so many difficulties in the
way of an analysis that we gladly resort to the clearer and shorter
description in which the philosopher Volkelt[72] presents Scherner’s
theories: “From the mystic conglomerations and from all the gorgeous and
magnificent billows there indeed flashes and irradiates an ominous light
of sense, but the path of the philosopher does not thereby become
clearer.” Such is the criticism of Scherner’s description from one of
his own adherents.
Scherner does not belong to those authors who allow the mind to take
along its undiminished capacities into the dream life. He indeed
explains how in the dream the centrality and the spontaneous energy of
the ego are enervated, how cognition, feeling, will, and imagination
become changed through this decentralisation, and how no true mental
character, but only the nature of a mechanism, belongs to the remnants
of these psychic forces. But instead, the activity of the mind
designated as phantasy, freed from all rational domination and hence
completely uncontrolled, rises in the dream to absolute supremacy. To be
sure, it takes the last building stones from the memory of the waking
state, but it builds with them constructions as different from the
structures of the waking state as day and night. It shows itself in the
dream not only reproductive, but productive. Its peculiarities give to
the dream life its strange character. It shows a preference for the
unlimited, exaggerated, and prodigious, but because freed from the
impeding thought categories, it gains a greater flexibility and agility
and new pleasure; it is extremely sensitive to the delicate emotional
stimuli of the mind and to the agitating affects, and it rapidly recasts
the inner life into the outer plastic clearness. The dream phantasy
lacks the language of ideas; what it wishes to say, it must clearly
depict; and as the idea now acts strongly, it depicts it with the
richness, force, and immensity of the mode in question. Its language,
however simple it may be, thus becomes circumstantial, cumbersome, and
heavy. Clearness of language is rendered especially difficult by the
fact that it shows a dislike for expressing an object by its own
picture, but prefers a strange picture, if the latter can only express
that moment of the object which it wishes to describe. This is the
symbolising activity of the phantasy.... It is, moreover, of great
significance that the dream phantasy copies objects not in detail, but
only in outline and even this in the broadest manner. Its paintings,
therefore, appear ingeniously light and graceful. The dream phantasy,
however, does not stop at the mere representation of the object, but is
impelled from within to mingle with the object more or less of the dream
ego, and in this way to produce an action. The visual dream, _e.g._,
depicts gold coins in the street; the dreamer picks them up, rejoices,
and carries them away.
According to Scherner, the material upon which the dream phantasy exerts
its artistic activity is preponderately that of the organic sensory
stimuli which are so obscure during the day (comp. p. 29); hence the
phantastic theory of Scherner, and the perhaps over-sober theories of
Wundt and other physiologists, though otherwise diametrically opposed,
agree perfectly in their assumption of the dream sources and dream
excitants. But whereas, according to the physiological theory, the
psychic reaction to the inner physical stimuli becomes exhausted with
the awakening of any ideas suitable to these stimuli, these ideas then
by way of association calling to their aid other ideas, and with this
stage the chain of psychic processes seeming to terminate according to
Scherner, the physical stimuli only supply the psychic force with a
material which it may render subservient to its phantastic intentions.
For Scherner the formation of the dream only commences where in the
conception of others it comes to an end.
The treatment of the physical stimuli by the dream phantasy surely
cannot be considered purposeful. The phantasy plays a tantalising game
with them, and represents the organic source which gives origin to the
stimuli in the correspondent dream, in any plastic symbolism. Indeed
Scherner holds the opinion, not shared by Volkelt and others, that the
dream phantasy has a certain favourite representation for the entire
organism; this representation would be the _house_. Fortunately,
however, it does not seem to limit itself in its presentation to this
material; it may also conversely employ a whole series of houses to
designate a single organ, _e.g._, very long rows of houses for the
intestinal excitation. On other occasions particular parts of the house
actually represent particular parts of the body, as _e.g._, in the
headache-dream, the ceiling of the room (which the dream sees covered
with disgusting reptile-like spiders) represents the head.
Quite irrespective of the house symbolism, any other suitable object may
be employed for the representation of these parts of the body which
excite the dream. “Thus the breathing lungs find their symbol in the
flaming stove with its gaseous roaring, the heart in hollow boxes and
baskets, the bladder in round, bag-shaped, or simply hollowed objects.
The male dream of sexual excitement makes the dreamer find in the street
the upper portion of a clarinette, next to it the same part of a tobacco
pipe, and next to that a piece of fur. The clarinette and tobacco pipe
represent the approximate shape of the male sexual organ, while the fur
represents the pubic hair. In the female sexual dream the tightness of
the closely approximated thighs may be symbolised by a narrow courtyard
surrounded by houses, and the vagina by a very narrow, slippery and soft
footpath, leading through the courtyard, upon which the dreamer is
obliged to walk, in order perhaps to carry a letter to a gentleman”
(Volkelt, p. 39). It is particularly noteworthy that at the end of such
a physically exciting dream, the phantasy, as it were, unmasks by
representing the exciting organ or its function unconcealed. Thus the
“tooth-exciting dream” usually ends with the dreamer taking a tooth out
of his mouth.
The dream phantasy may, however, not only direct its attention to the
shape of the exciting organ, but it may also make the substance
contained therein the object of the symbolisation. Thus the dream of
intestinal excitement, _e.g._, may lead us through muddy streets, the
bladder-exciting dream to foaming water. Or the stimulus itself, the
manner of its excitation, and the object it covets, are represented
symbolically, or the dream ego enters into a concrete combination with
the symbolisation of its own state, as _e.g._, when, in the case of
painful stimuli, we struggle desperately with vicious dogs or raging
bulls, or when in the sexual dream the dreamer sees herself pursued by a
naked man. Disregarding all the possible prolixity of elaboration, a
symbolising phantastic activity remains as the central force of every
dream. Volkelt,[72] in his finely and fervently written book, next
attempted to penetrate further into the character of this phantasy and
to assign to the psychical activity thus recognised, its position in a
system of philosophical ideas, which, however, remains altogether too
difficult of comprehension for any one who is not prepared by previous
schooling for the sympathetic comprehension of philosophical modes of
thinking.
Scherner connects no useful function with the activity of the
symbolising phantasy in dreams. In the dream the psyche plays with the
stimuli at its disposal. One might presume that it plays in an improper
manner. One might also ask us whether our thorough study of Scherner’s
dream theory, the arbitrariness and deviation of which from the rules of
all investigation are only too obvious, can lead to any useful results.
It would then be proper for us to forestall the rejection of Scherner’s
theory without examination by saying that this would be too arrogant.
This theory is built up on the impression received from his dreams by a
man who paid great attention to them, and who would appear to be
personally very well fitted to trace obscure psychic occurrences.
Furthermore it treats a subject which, for thousands of years, has
appeared mysterious to humanity though rich in its contents and
relations; and for the elucidation of which stern science, as it
confesses itself, has contributed nothing beyond attempting, in entire
opposition to popular sentiment, to deny the substance and significance
of the object. Finally, let us frankly admit that apparently we cannot
avoid the phantastical in our attempts to elucidate the dream. There are
also phantastic ganglia cells; the passage cited on p. 63 from a sober
and exact investigator like Binz,[4] which depicts how the aurora of
awakening flows along the dormant cell masses of the cerebrum, is not
inferior in fancifulness and in improbability to Scherner’s attempts at
interpretation. I hope to be able to demonstrate that there is something
actual underlying the latter, though it has only been indistinctly
observed and does not possess the character of universality entitling it
to the claim of a dream theory. For the present, Scherner’s theory of
the dream, in its contrast to the medical theory, may perhaps lead us to
realise between what extremes the explanation of dream life is still
unsteadily vacillating.
(_h_) _Relations between the Dream and Mental Diseases._—When we speak
of the relation of the dream to mental disturbances, we may think of
three different things: (1) Etiological and clinical relations, as when
a dream represents or initiates a psychotic condition, or when it leaves
such a condition behind it. (2) Changes to which the dream life is
subjected in mental diseases. (3) Inner relations between the dream and
the psychoses, analogies indicating an intimate relationship. These
manifold relations between the two series of phenomena have been a
favourite theme of medical authors in the earlier periods of medical
science—and again in recent times—as we learn from the literature on the
subject gathered from Spitta,[64] Radestock,[54] Maury,[48] and
Tissié.[68] Sante de Sanctis has lately directed his attention to this
relationship. For the purposes of our discussion it will suffice merely
to glance at this important subject.
In regard to the clinical and etiological relations between the dream
and the psychoses, I will report the following observations as
paradigms. Hohnbaum asserts (see Krauss, p. 39), that the first attack
of insanity frequently originates in an anxious and terrifying dream,
and that the ruling idea has connection with this dream. Sante de
Sanctis adduces similar observations in paranoiacs, and declares the
dream to be, in some of them, the “vraie cause déterminante de la
folie.” The psychosis may come to life all of a sudden with the dream
causing and containing the explanation for the mental disturbances, or
it may slowly develop through further dreams that have yet to struggle
against doubt. In one of de Sanctis’s cases, the affecting dream was
accompanied by light hysterical attacks, which in their turn were
followed by an anxious, melancholic state. Féré (cited by Tissié) refers
to a dream which caused an hysterical paralysis. Here the dream is
offered us as an etiology of mental disturbance, though we equally
consider the prevailing conditions when we declare that the mental
disturbance shows its first manifestation in dream life, that it has its
first outbreak in the dream. In other instances the dream life contained
the morbid symptoms, or the psychosis was limited to the dream life.
Thus Thomayer[70] calls attention to anxiety dreams which must be
conceived as equivalent to epileptic attacks. Allison has described
nocturnal insanity (cited by Radestock), in which the subjects are
apparently perfectly well in the day-time, while hallucinations, fits of
frenzy, and the like regularly appear at night. De Sanctis and Tissié
report similar observations (paranoiac dream-equivalent in an alcoholic,
voices accusing a wife of infidelity). Tissié reports abundant
observations from recent times in which actions of a pathological
character (based on delusions, obsessive impulses) had their origin in
dreams. Guislain describes a case in which sleep was replaced by an
intermittent insanity.
There is hardly any doubt that along with the psychology of the dream,
the physician will one day occupy himself with the psychopathology of
the dream.
In cases of convalescence from insanity, it is often especially obvious
that, while the functions of the day are normal, the dream life may
still belong to the psychosis. Gregory is said first to have called
attention to such cases (cited by Krauss[39]). Macario (reported by
Tissié) gives account of a maniac who, a week after his complete
recovery again experienced in dreams the flight of ideas and the
passionate impulses of his disease.
Concerning the changes to which the dream life is subjected in chronic
psychotic persons, very few investigations have so far been made. On the
other hand, timely attention has been called to the inner relationship
between the dream and mental disturbance, which shows itself in an
extensive agreement of the manifestations occurring to both. According
to Maury,[47] Cubanis, in his _Rapports du physique et du moral_, first
called attention to this; following him came Lelut, J. Moreau, and more
particularly the philosopher Maine de Biran. To be sure, the comparison
is still older. Radestock[54] begins the chapter dealing with this
comparison, by giving a collection of expressions showing the analogy
between the dream and insanity. Kant somewhere says: “The lunatic is a
dreamer in the waking state.” According to Krauss “Insanity is a dream
with the senses awake.” Schopenhauer terms the dream a short insanity,
and insanity a long dream. Hagen describes the delirium as dream life
which has not been caused by sleep but by disease. Wundt, in the
_Physiological Psychology_, declares: “As a matter of fact we may in the
dream ourselves live through almost all symptoms which we meet in the
insane asylums.”
The specific agreements, on the basis of which such an identification
commends itself to the understanding, are enumerated by Spitta.[64] And
indeed, very similarly, by Maury in the following grouping: “(1)
Suspension or at least retardation, of self-consciousness, consequent
ignorance of the condition as such, and hence incapability of
astonishment and lack of moral consciousness. (2) Modified perception of
the sensory organs; that is, perception is diminished in the dream and
generally enhanced in insanity. (3) Combination of ideas with each other
exclusively in accordance with the laws of association and of
reproduction, hence automatic formation of groups and for this reason
disproportion in the relations between ideas (exaggerations, phantasms).
And as a result of all this: (4) Changing or transformation of the
personality and at times of the peculiarities of character
(perversities).”
Radestock gives some additional features or analogies in the material:
“Most hallucinations and illusions are found in the sphere of the senses
of sight and hearing and general sensation. As in the dream, the
smallest number of elements is supplied by the senses of smell and
taste. The fever patient, like the dreamer, is assaulted by
reminiscences from the remote past; what the waking and healthy man
seems to have forgotten is recollected in sleep and in disease.” The
analogy between the dream and the psychosis receives its full value only
when, like a family resemblance, it is extended to the finer mimicry and
to the individual peculiarities of facial expression.
“To him who is tortured by physical and mental sufferings the dream
accords what has been denied him by reality, to wit, physical well-being
and happiness; so the insane, too, see the bright pictures of happiness,
greatness, sublimity, and riches. The supposed possession of estates and
the imaginary fulfilment of wishes, the denial or destruction of which
have just served as a psychic cause of the insanity, often form the main
content of the delirium. The woman who has lost a dearly beloved child,
in her delirium experiences maternal joys; the man who has suffered
reverses of fortune deems himself immensely wealthy; and the jilted girl
pictures herself in the bliss of tender love.”
The above passage from Radestock, an abstract of a keen discussion of
Griesinger[31] (p. 111), reveals with the greatest clearness the wish
fulfilment as a characteristic of the imagination, common to the dream
and the psychosis. (My own investigations have taught me that here the
key to a psychological theory of the dream and of the psychosis is to be
found.)
“Absurd combinations of ideas and weakness of judgment are the main
characteristics of the dream and of insanity.” The over-estimation of
one’s own mental capacity, which appears absurd to sober judgment, is
found alike both in one and the other, and the rapid course of ideas in
the dream corresponds to the flight of ideas in the psychosis. Both are
devoid of any measure of time. The dissociation of personality in the
dream, which, for instance, distributes one’s own knowledge between two
persons, one of whom, the strange one, corrects in the dream one’s own
ego, fully corresponds to the well-known splitting of personality in
hallucinatory paranoia; the dreamer, too, hears his own thoughts
expressed by strange voices. Even the constant delusions find their
analogy in the stereotyped recurring pathological dreams (_rêve
obsédant_). After recovering from a delirium, patients not infrequently
declare that the disease appeared to them like an uncomfortable dream;
indeed, they inform us that occasionally, even during the course of
their sickness, they have felt that they were only dreaming, just as it
frequently happens in the sleeping dream.
Considering all this, it is not surprising that Radestock condenses his
own opinion and that of many others into the following: “Insanity, an
abnormal phenomenon of disease, is to be regarded as an enhancement of
the periodically recurring normal dream states” (p. 228).
Krauss[39] attempted to base the relationship between the dream and
insanity upon the etiology (or rather upon the exciting sources),
perhaps making the relationship even more intimate than was possible
through the analogy of the phenomena they manifest. According to him,
the fundamental element common to both is, as we have learned, the
organically determined sensation, the sensation of physical stimuli, the
general feeling produced by contributions from all the organs. _Cf._
Peise, cited by Maury[48] (p. 60).
The incontestable agreement between the dream and mental disturbance,
extending into characteristic details, constitutes one of the strongest
supports of the medical theory of dream life, according to which the
dream is represented as a useless and disturbing process and as the
expression of a reduced psychic activity. One cannot expect, however, to
derive the final explanation of the dream from the mental disturbances,
as it is generally known in what unsatisfactory state our understanding
of the origin of the latter remains. It is very probably, however, that
a modified conception of the dream must also influence our views in
regard to the inner mechanism of mental disturbances, and hence we may
say that we are engaged in the elucidation of the psychosis when we
endeavour to clear up the mystery of the dream.
I shall have to justify myself for not extending my summary of the
literature of the dream problems over the period between the first
appearance of this book and its second edition. If this justification
may not seem very satisfactory to the reader, I was nevertheless
influenced by it. The motives which mainly induced me to summarise the
treatment of the dream in the literature have been exhausted with the
foregoing introduction; to have continued with this work would have cost
me extraordinary effort and would have afforded little advantage or
knowledge. For the period of nine years referred to has yielded nothing
new or valuable either for the conception of the dream in actual
material or in points of view. In most of the publications that have
since appeared my work has remained unmentioned and unregarded;
naturally least attention has been bestowed upon it by the so-called
“investigators of dreams,” who have thus afforded a splendid example of
the aversion characteristic of scientific men to learning something new.
“Les savants ne sont pas curieux,” said the scoffer Anatole France. If
there were such a thing in science as right to revenge, I in turn should
be justified in ignoring the literature since the appearance of this
book. The few accounts that have appeared in scientific journals are so
full of folly and misconception that my only possible answer to my
critics would be to request them to read this book over again. Perhaps
also the request should be that they read it as a whole.
In the works of those physicians who make use of the psychoanalytic
method of treatment (Jung, Abraham, Riklin, Muthmann, Stekel, Rank, and
others), an abundance of dreams have been reported and interpreted in
accordance with my instructions. In so far as these works go beyond the
confirmation of my assertions I have noted their results in the context
of my discussion. A supplement to the literary index at the end of this
book brings together the most important of these new publications. The
voluminous book on the dream by Sante de Sanctis, of which a German
translation appeared soon after its publication, has, so to speak,
crossed with mine, so that I could take as little notice of him as the
Italian author could of me. Unfortunately, I am further obliged to
declare that this laborious work is exceedingly poor in ideas, so poor
that one could never divine from it the existence of the problems
treated by me.