Dream Psychology
Dream PsychologyINTRODUCTIONI DREAMS HAVE A MEANINGII THE DREAM MECHANISMIII WHY THE DREAM DISGUISES THE DESIRESIV DREAM ANALYSISV SEX IN DREAMSVI THE WISH IN DREAMSVII THE FUNCTION OF THE DREAMVIII THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PROCESS—REGRESSIONIX THE UNCONSCIOUS AND CONSCIOUSNESS—REALITYCopyright
Dream Psychology
Sigmund Freud
INTRODUCTION
The medical profession is justly conservative. Human life
should not be considered as the proper material for wild
experiments.Conservatism, however, is too often a welcome excuse for lazy
minds, loath to adapt themselves to fast changing
conditions.Remember the scornful reception which first was accorded to
Freud's discoveries in the domain of the unconscious.When after years of patient observations, he finally decided
to appear before medical bodies to tell them modestly of some facts
which always recurred in his dream and his patients' dreams, he was
first laughed at and then avoided as a crank.The words "dream interpretation" were and still are indeed
fraught with unpleasant, unscientific associations. They remind one
of all sorts of childish, superstitious notions, which make up the
thread and woof of dream books, read by none but the ignorant and
the primitive.The wealth of detail, the infinite care never to let anything
pass unexplained, with which he presented to the public the result
of his investigations, are impressing more and more serious-minded
scientists, but the examination of his evidential data demands
arduous work and presupposes an absolutely open mind.This is why we still encounter men, totally unfamiliar with
Freud's writings, men who were not even interested enough in the
subject to attempt an interpretation of their dreams or their
patients' dreams, deriding Freud's theories and combatting them
with the help of statements which he never made.Some of them, like Professor Boris Sidis, reach at times
conclusions which are strangely similar to Freud's, but in their
ignorance of psychoanalytic literature, they fail to credit Freud
for observations antedating theirs.Besides those who sneer at dream study, because they have
never looked into the subject, there are those who do not dare to
face the facts revealed by dream study. Dreams tell us many an
unpleasant biological truth about ourselves and only very free
minds can thrive on such a diet. Self-deception is a plant which
withers fast in the pellucid atmosphere of dream
investigation.The weakling and the neurotic attached to his neurosis are
not anxious to turn such a powerful searchlight upon the dark
corners of their psychology.Freud's theories are anything but theoretical.He was moved by the fact that there always seemed to be a
close connection between his patients' dreams and their mental
abnormalities, to collect thousands of dreams and to compare them
with the case histories in his possession.He did not start out with a preconceived bias, hoping to find
evidence which might support his views. He looked at facts a
thousand times "until they began to tell him
something."His attitude toward dream study was, in other words, that of
a statistician who does not know, and has no means of foreseeing,
what conclusions will be forced on him by the information he is
gathering, but who is fully prepared to accept those unavoidable
conclusions.This was indeed a novel way in psychology. Psychologists had
always been wont to build, in what Bleuler calls "autistic ways,"
that is through methods in no wise supported by evidence, some
attractive hypothesis, which sprung from their brain, like Minerva
from Jove's brain, fully armed.After which, they would stretch upon that unyielding frame
the hide of a reality which they had previously
killed.It is only to minds suffering from the same distortions, to
minds also autistically inclined, that those empty, artificial
structures appear acceptable molds for philosophic
thinking.The pragmatic view that "truth is what works" had not been as
yet expressed when Freud published his revolutionary views on the
psychology of dreams.Five facts of first magnitude were made obvious to the world
by his interpretation of dreams.First of all, Freud pointed out a constant connection between
some part of every dream and some detail of the dreamer's life
during the previous waking state. This positively establishes a
relation between sleeping states and waking states and disposes of
the widely prevalent view that dreams are purely nonsensical
phenomena coming from nowhere and leading nowhere.Secondly, Freud, after studying the dreamer's life and modes
of thought, after noting down all his mannerisms and the apparently
insignificant details of his conduct which reveal his secret
thoughts, came to the conclusion that there was in every dream the
attempted or successful gratification of some wish, conscious or
unconscious.Thirdly, he proved that many of our dream visions are
symbolical, which causes us to consider them as absurd and
unintelligible; the universality of those symbols, however, makes
them very transparent to the trained observer.Fourthly, Freud showed that sexual desires play an enormous
part in our unconscious, a part which puritanical hypocrisy has
always tried to minimize, if not to ignore entirely.Finally, Freud established a direct connection between dreams
and insanity, between the symbolic visions of our sleep and the
symbolic actions of the mentally deranged.There were, of course, many other observations which Freud
made while dissecting the dreams of his patients, but not all of
them present as much interest as the foregoing nor were they as
revolutionary or likely to wield as much influence on modern
psychiatry.Other explorers have struck the path blazed by Freud and
leading into man's unconscious. Jung of Zurich, Adler of Vienna and
Kempf of Washington, D.C., have made to the study of the
unconscious, contributions which have brought that study into
fields which Freud himself never dreamt of invading.One fact which cannot be too emphatically stated, however, is
that but for Freud's wishfulfillment theory of dreams, neither
Jung's "energic theory," nor Adler's theory of "organ inferiority
and compensation," nor Kempf's "dynamic mechanism" might have been
formulated.Freud is the father of modern abnormal psychology and he
established the psychoanalytical point of view. No one who is not
well grounded in Freudian lore can hope to achieve any work of
value in the field of psychoanalysis.On the other hand, let no one repeat the absurd assertion
that Freudism is a sort of religion bounded with dogmas and
requiring an act of faith. Freudism as such was merely a stage in
the development of psychoanalysis, a stage out of which all but a
few bigoted camp followers, totally lacking in originality, have
evolved. Thousands of stones have been added to the structure
erected by the Viennese physician and many more will be added in
the course of time.But the new additions to that structure would collapse like a
house of cards but for the original foundations which are as
indestructible as Harvey's statement as to the circulation of the
blood.Regardless of whatever additions or changes have been made to
the original structure, the analytic point of view remains
unchanged.That point of view is not only revolutionising all the
methods of diagnosis and treatment of mental derangements, but
compelling the intelligent, up-to-date physician to revise entirely
his attitude to almost every kind of disease.The insane are no longer absurd and pitiable people, to be
herded in asylums till nature either cures them or relieves them,
through death, of their misery. The insane who have not been made
so by actual injury to their brain or nervous system, are the
victims of unconscious forces which cause them to do abnormally
things which they might be helped to do normally.Insight into one's psychology is replacing victoriously
sedatives and rest cures.Physicians dealing with "purely" physical cases have begun to
take into serious consideration the "mental" factors which have
predisposed a patient to certain ailments.Freud's views have also made a revision of all ethical and
social values unavoidable and have thrown an unexpected flood of
light upon literary and artistic accomplishment.But the Freudian point of view, or more broadly speaking, the
psychoanalytic point of view, shall ever remain a puzzle to those
who, from laziness or indifference, refuse to survey with the great
Viennese the field over which he carefully groped his way. We shall
never be convinced until we repeat under his guidance all his
laboratory experiments.We must follow him through the thickets of the
unconscious, through the land which had never been charted because
academic philosophers, following the line of least effort, had
decideda priorithat it could
not be charted.Ancient geographers, when exhausting their store of
information about distant lands, yielded to an unscientific craving
for romance and, without any evidence to support their day dreams,
filled the blank spaces left on their maps by unexplored tracts
with amusing inserts such as "Here there are lions."Thanks to Freud's interpretation of dreams the "royal road"
into the unconscious is now open to all explorers. They shall not
find lions, they shall find man himself, and the record of all his
life and of his struggle with reality.And it is only after seeing man as his unconscious, revealed
by his dreams, presents him to us that we shall understand him
fully. For as Freud said to Putnam: "We are what we are because we
have been what we have been."Not a few serious-minded students, however, have been
discouraged from attempting a study of Freud's dream
psychology.The book in which he originally offered to the world his
interpretation of dreams was as circumstantial as a legal record to
be pondered over by scientists at their leisure, not to be
assimilated in a few hours by the average alert reader. In those
days, Freud could not leave out any detail likely to make his
extremely novel thesis evidentially acceptable to those willing to
sift data.Freud himself, however, realized the magnitude of the
task which the reading of hismagnum
opusimposed upon those who have not been
prepared for it by long psychological and scientific training and
he abstracted from that gigantic work the parts which constitute
the essential of his discoveries.The publishers of the present book deserve credit for
presenting to the reading public the gist of Freud's psychology in
the master's own words, and in a form which shall neither
discourage beginners, nor appear too elementary to those who are
more advanced in psychoanalytic study.Dream psychology is the key to Freud's works and to all
modern psychology. With a simple, compact manual such asDream Psychologythere shall be no
longer any excuse for ignorance of the most revolutionary
psychological system of modern times.
I DREAMS HAVE A MEANING
In what we may term "prescientific days" people were in no
uncertainty about the interpretation of dreams. When they were
recalled after awakening they were regarded as either the friendly
or hostile manifestation of some higher powers, demoniacal and
Divine. With the rise of scientific thought the whole of this
expressive mythology was transferred to psychology; to-day there is
but a small minority among educated persons who doubt that the
dream is the dreamer's own psychical act.But since the downfall of the mythological hypothesis an
interpretation of the dream has been wanting. The conditions of its
origin; its relationship to our psychical life when we are awake;
its independence of disturbances which, during the state of sleep,
seem to compel notice; its many peculiarities repugnant to our
waking thought; the incongruence between its images and the
feelings they engender; then the dream's evanescence, the way in
which, on awakening, our thoughts thrust it aside as something
bizarre, and our reminiscences mutilating or rejecting it—all these
and many other problems have for many hundred years demanded
answers which up till now could never have been satisfactory.
Before all there is the question as to the meaning of the dream, a
question which is in itself double-sided. There is, firstly, the
psychical significance of the dream, its position with regard to
the psychical processes, as to a possible biological function;
secondly, has the dream a meaning—can sense be made of each single
dream as of other mental syntheses?Three tendencies can be observed in the estimation of dreams.
Many philosophers have given currency to one of these tendencies,
one which at the same time preserves something of the dream's
former over-valuation. The foundation of dream life is for them a
peculiar state of psychical activity, which they even celebrate as
elevation to some higher state. Schubert, for instance, claims:
"The dream is the liberation of the spirit from the pressure of
external nature, a detachment of the soul from the fetters of
matter." Not all go so far as this, but many maintain that dreams
have their origin in real spiritual excitations, and are the
outward manifestations of spiritual powers whose free movements
have been hampered during the day ("Dream Phantasies," Scherner,
Volkelt). A large number of observers acknowledge that dream life
is capable of extraordinary achievements—at any rate, in certain
fields ("Memory").In striking contradiction with this the majority of medical
writers hardly admit that the dream is a psychical phenomenon at
all. According to them dreams are provoked and initiated
exclusively by stimuli proceeding from the senses or the body,
which either reach the sleeper from without or are accidental
disturbances of his internal organs. The dream has no greater claim
to meaning and importance than the sound called forth by the ten
fingers of a person quite unacquainted with music running his
fingers over the keys of an instrument. The dream is to be
regarded, says Binz, "as a physical process always useless,
frequently morbid." All the peculiarities of dream life are
explicable as the incoherent effort, due to some physiological
stimulus, of certain organs, or of the cortical elements of a brain
otherwise asleep.But slightly affected by scientific opinion and
untroubled as to the origin of dreams, the popular view holds
firmly to the belief that dreams really have got a meaning, in some
way they do foretell the future, whilst the meaning can be
unravelled in some way or other from its oft bizarre and
enigmatical content. The reading of dreams consists in replacing
the events of the dream, so far as remembered, by other events.
This is done either scene by scene,according to
some rigid key, or the dream as a whole is
replaced by something else of which it was asymbol. Serious-minded persons laugh
at these efforts—"Dreams are but sea-foam!"One day I discovered to my amazement that the popular
view grounded in superstition, and not the medical one, comes
nearer to the truth about dreams. I arrived at new conclusions
about dreams by the use of a new method of psychological
investigation, one which had rendered me good service in the
investigation of phobias, obsessions, illusions, and the like, and
which, under the name "psycho-analysis," had found acceptance by a
whole school of investigators. The manifold analogies of dream life
with the most diverse conditions of psychical disease in the waking
state have been rightly insisted upon by a number of medical
observers. It seemed, therefore,a
priori, hopeful to apply to the interpretation
of dreams methods of investigation which had been tested in
psychopathological processes. Obsessions and those peculiar
sensations of haunting dread remain as strange to normal
consciousness as do dreams to our waking consciousness; their
origin is as unknown to consciousness as is that of dreams. It was
practical ends that impelled us, in these diseases, to fathom their
origin and formation. Experience had shown us that a cure and a
consequent mastery of the obsessing ideas did result when once
those thoughts, the connecting links between the morbid ideas and
the rest of the psychical content, were revealed which were
heretofore veiled from consciousness. The procedure I employed for
the interpretation of dreams thus arose from
psychotherapy.This procedure is readily described, although its practice
demands instruction and experience. Suppose the patient is
suffering from intense morbid dread. He is requested to direct his
attention to the idea in question, without, however, as he has so
frequently done, meditating upon it. Every impression about it,
without any exception, which occurs to him should be imparted to
the doctor. The statement which will be perhaps then made, that he
cannot concentrate his attention upon anything at all, is to be
countered by assuring him most positively that such a blank state
of mind is utterly impossible. As a matter of fact, a great number
of impressions will soon occur, with which others will associate
themselves. These will be invariably accompanied by the expression
of the observer's opinion that they have no meaning or are
unimportant. It will be at once noticed that it is this
self-criticism which prevented the patient from imparting the
ideas, which had indeed already excluded them from consciousness.
If the patient can be induced to abandon this self-criticism and to
pursue the trains of thought which are yielded by concentrating the
attention, most significant matter will be obtained, matter which
will be presently seen to be clearly linked to the morbid idea in
question. Its connection with other ideas will be manifest, and
later on will permit the replacement of the morbid idea by a fresh
one, which is perfectly adapted to psychical
continuity.This is not the place to examine thoroughly the
hypothesis upon which this experiment rests, or the deductions
which follow from its invariable success. It must suffice to state
that we obtain matter enough for the resolution of every morbid
idea if we especially direct our attention to theunbiddenassociationswhich disturb our thoughts—those which
are otherwise put aside by the critic as worthless refuse. If the
procedure is exercised on oneself, the best plan of helping the
experiment is to write down at once all one's first indistinct
fancies.I will now point out where this method leads when I apply it
to the examination of dreams. Any dream could be made use of in
this way. From certain motives I, however, choose a dream of my
own, which appears confused and meaningless to my memory, and one
which has the advantage of brevity. Probably my dream of last night
satisfies the requirements. Its content, fixed immediately after
awakening, runs as follows:"Company; at table or table d'hôte.... Spinach is served.
Mrs. E.L., sitting next to me, gives me her undivided attention,
and places her hand familiarly upon my knee. In defence I remove
her hand. Then she says: 'But you have always had such beautiful
eyes.'.... I then distinctly see something like two eyes as a
sketch or as the contour of a spectacle lens...."This is the whole dream, or, at all events, all that I can
remember. It appears to me not only obscure and meaningless, but
more especially odd. Mrs. E.L. is a person with whom I am scarcely
on visiting terms, nor to my knowledge have I ever desired any more
cordial relationship. I have not seen her for a long time, and do
not think there was any mention of her recently. No emotion
whatever accompanied the dream process.Reflecting upon this dream does not make it a bit clearer to
my mind. I will now, however, present the ideas, without
premeditation and without criticism, which introspection yielded. I
soon notice that it is an advantage to break up the dream into its
elements, and to search out the ideas which link themselves to each
fragment.Company; at table or table d'hôte.The recollection of the slight event with which the evening
of yesterday ended is at once called up. I left a small party in
the company of a friend, who offered to drive me home in his cab.
"I prefer a taxi," he said; "that gives one such a pleasant
occupation; there is always something to look at." When we were in
the cab, and the cab-driver turned the disc so that the first sixty
hellers were visible, I continued the jest. "We have hardly got in
and we already owe sixty hellers. The taxi always reminds me of the
table d'hôte. It makes me avaricious and selfish by continuously
reminding me of my debt. It seems to me to mount up too quickly,
and I am always afraid that I shall be at a disadvantage, just as I
cannot resist at table d'hôte the comical fear that I am getting
too little, that I must look after myself." In far-fetched
connection with this I quote:"To earth, this weary earth, ye bring us,
To guilt ye let us heedless go."Another idea about the table d'hôte. A few weeks ago I
was very cross with my dear wife at the dinner-table at a Tyrolese
health resort, because she was not sufficiently reserved with some
neighbors with whom I wished to have absolutely nothing to do. I
begged her to occupy herself rather with me than with the
strangers. That is just as if I hadbeen at a
disadvantage at the table d'hôte. The contrast
between the behavior of my wife at the table and that of Mrs. E.L.
in the dream now strikes me:"Addresses herself
entirely to me."Further, I now notice that the dream is the reproduction of a
little scene which transpired between my wife and myself when I was
secretly courting her. The caressing under cover of the tablecloth
was an answer to a wooer's passionate letter. In the dream,
however, my wife is replaced by the unfamiliar E.L.Mrs. E.L. is the daughter of a man to whom Iowed money! I cannot help noticing
that here there is revealed an unsuspected connection between the
dream content and my thoughts. If the chain of associations be
followed up which proceeds from one element of the dream one is
soon led back to another of its elements. The thoughts evoked by
the dream stir up associations which were not noticeable in the
dream itself.Is it not customary, when some one expects others to
look after his interests without any advantage to themselves, to
ask the innocent question satirically: "Do you think this will be
donefor the sake of your beautiful
eyes?" Hence Mrs. E.L.'s speech in the dream.
"You have always had such beautiful eyes," means nothing but
"people always do everything to you for love of you; you have
hadeverything for nothing."
The contrary is, of course, the truth; I have always paid dearly
for whatever kindness others have shown me. Still, the fact
thatI had a ride for nothingyesterday when my friend drove me home in his cab must have
made an impression upon me.In any case, the friend whose guests we were yesterday
has often made me his debtor. Recently I allowed an opportunity of
requiting him to go by. He has had only one present from me, an
antique shawl, upon which eyes are painted all round, a so-called
Occhiale, as acharmagainst
theMalocchio. Moreover, he is
aneye specialist. That same
evening I had asked him after a patient whom I had sent to him
forglasses.As I remarked, nearly all parts of the dream have been
brought into this new connection. I still might ask why in the
dream it wasspinachthat was
served up. Because spinach called up a little scene which recently
occurred at our table. A child, whosebeautiful
eyesare really deserving of praise, refused to
eat spinach. As a child I was just the same; for a long time I
loathedspinach, until in later
life my tastes altered, and it became one of my favorite dishes.
The mention of this dish brings my own childhood and that of my
child's near together. "You should be glad that you have some
spinach," his mother had said to the little gourmet. "Some children
would be very glad to get spinach." Thus I am reminded of the
parents' duties towards their children. Goethe's
words—"To earth, this weary earth, ye bring us,
To guilt ye let us heedless go"—take on another meaning in this connection.Here I will stop in order that I may recapitulate the
results of the analysis of the dream. By following the associations
which were linked to the single elements of the dream torn from
their context, I have been led to a series of thoughts and
reminiscences where I am bound to recognize interesting expressions
of my psychical life. The matter yielded by an analysis of the
dream stands in intimate relationship with the dream content, but
this relationship is so special that I should never have been able
to have inferred the new discoveries directly from the dream
itself. The dream was passionless, disconnected, and
unintelligible. During the time that I am unfolding the thoughts at
the back of the dream I feel intense and well-grounded emotions.
The thoughts themselves fit beautifully together into chains
logically bound together with certain central ideas which ever
repeat themselves. Such ideas not represented in the dream itself
are in this instance the antithesesselfish,
unselfish, to be indebted, to work for nothing.
I could draw closer the threads of the web which analysis has
disclosed, and would then be able to show how they all run together
into a single knot; I am debarred from making this work public by
considerations of a private, not of a scientific, nature. After
having cleared up many things which I do not willingly acknowledge
as mine, I should have much to reveal which had better remain my
secret. Why, then, do not I choose another dream whose analysis
would be more suitable for publication, so that I could awaken a
fairer conviction of the sense and cohesion of the results
disclosed by analysis? The answer is, because every dream which I
investigate leads to the same difficulties and places me under the
same need of discretion; nor should I forgo this difficulty any the
more were I to analyze the dream of some one else. That could only
be done when opportunity allowed all concealment to be dropped
without injury to those who trusted me.The conclusion which is now forced upon me is that the
dream is asort of substitutionfor those emotional and intellectual trains of thought which
I attained after complete analysis. I do not yet know the process
by which the dream arose from those thoughts, but I perceive that
it is wrong to regard the dream as psychically unimportant, a
purely physical process which has arisen from the activity of
isolated cortical elements awakened out of
sleep.I must further remark that the dream is far shorter than the
thoughts which I hold it replaces; whilst analysis discovered that
the dream was provoked by an unimportant occurrence the evening
before the dream.Naturally, I would not draw such far-reaching
conclusions if only one analysis were known to me. Experience has
shown me that when the associations of any dream are honestly
followed such a chain of thought is revealed, the constituent parts
of the dream reappear correctly and sensibly linked together; the
slight suspicion that this concatenation was merely an accident of
a single first observation must, therefore, be absolutely
relinquished. I regard it, therefore, as my right to establish this
new view by a proper nomenclature. I contrast the dream which my
memory evokes with the dream and other added matter revealed by
analysis: the former I call the dream'smanifest
content; the latter, without at first further
subdivision, itslatent content. I arrive at two new problems hitherto unformulated: (1)
What is the psychical process which has transformed the latent
content of the dream into its manifest content? (2) What is the
motive or the motives which have made such transformation exigent?
The process by which the change from latent to manifest content is
executed I name thedream-work.
In contrast with this is thework of
analysis, which produces the reverse
transformation. The other problems of the dream—the inquiry as to
its stimuli, as to the source of its materials, as to its possible
purpose, the function of dreaming, the forgetting of dreams—these I
will discuss in connection with the latent
dream-content.I shall take every care to avoid a confusion between
themanifestand thelatent content, for I ascribe all the
contradictory as well as the incorrect accounts of dream-life to
the ignorance of this latent content, now first laid bare through
analysis.The conversion of the latent dream thoughts into those
manifest deserves our close study as the first known example of the
transformation of psychical stuff from one mode of expression into
another. From a mode of expression which, moreover, is readily
intelligible into another which we can only penetrate by effort and
with guidance, although this new mode must be equally reckoned as
an effort of our own psychical activity. From the standpoint of the
relationship of latent to manifest dream-content, dreams can be
divided into three classes. We can, in the first place, distinguish
those dreams which have ameaningand are, at the same time,intelligible, which allow us to
penetrate into our psychical life without further ado. Such dreams
are numerous; they are usually short, and, as a general rule, do
not seem very noticeable, because everything remarkable or exciting
surprise is absent. Their occurrence is, moreover, a strong
argument against the doctrine which derives the dream from the
isolated activity of certain cortical elements. All signs of a
lowered or subdivided psychical activity are wanting. Yet we never
raise any objection to characterizing them as dreams, nor do we
confound them with the products of our waking
life.A second group is formed by those dreams which are
indeed self-coherent and have a distinct meaning, but appear
strange because we are unable to reconcile their meaning with our
mental life. That is the case when we dream, for instance, that
some dear relative has died of plague when we know of no ground for
expecting, apprehending, or assuming anything of the sort; we can
only ask ourself wonderingly: "What brought that into my head?" To
the third group those dreams belong which are void of both meaning
and intelligibility; they areincoherent,
complicated, and meaningless. The overwhelming
number of our dreams partake of this character, and this has given
rise to the contemptuous attitude towards dreams and the medical
theory of their limited psychical activity. It is especially in the
longer and more complicated dream-plots that signs of incoherence
are seldom missing.The contrast between manifest and latent dream-content
is clearly only of value for the dreams of the second and more
especially for those of the third class. Here are problems which
are only solved when the manifest dream is replaced by its latent
content; it was an example of this kind, a complicated and
unintelligible dream, that we subjected to analysis. Against our
expectation we, however, struck upon reasons which prevented a
complete cognizance of the latent dream thought. On the repetition
of this same experience we were forced to the supposition that
there is anintimate bond, with laws of its own,
between the unintelligible and complicated nature of the dream and
the difficulties attending communication of the thoughts connected
with the dream. Before investigating the nature
of this bond, it will be advantageous to turn our attention to the
more readily intelligible dreams of the first class where, the
manifest and latent content being identical, the dream work seems
to be omitted.The investigation of these dreams is also advisable
from another standpoint. The dreams ofchildrenare of this nature; they have
a meaning, and are not bizarre. This, by the way, is a further
objection to reducing dreams to a dissociation of cerebral activity
in sleep, for why should such a lowering of psychical functions
belong to the nature of sleep in adults, but not in children? We
are, however, fully justified in expecting that the explanation of
psychical processes in children, essentially simplified as they may
be, should serve as an indispensable preparation towards the
psychology of the adult.I shall therefore cite some examples of dreams which I
have gathered from children. A girl of nineteen months was made to
go without food for a day because she had been sick in the morning,
and, according to nurse, had made herself ill through eating
strawberries. During the night, after her day of fasting, she was
heard calling out her name during sleep, and adding: "Tawberry, eggs, pap." She is dreaming
that she is eating, and selects out of her menu exactly what she
supposes she will not get much of just now.