Articles

In response to the question of what determines the content of dreams, there are two possibilities of interpretation: the first uses the method developed by Freud of permitting the patient to relate ideas concerning parts of the dream in order to conjecture what the latent, hidden meaning of the dream might be. Anyone familiar with the various interpretations of one and the same dream made by different analysts has an idea of the suggestive value of such a procedure. Therefore, the method used in contemporary dream research of investigating the manifest dream content is probably more useful for a scientific interpretation of dreams. This latter method is called "immediate interpretation." If the dream series of one night is recorded—usually about five dreams—by arousing the sleeper immediately after each dream and letting him report the dream, the series offers a good opportunity for immediate interpretation. The themes, it

turns out, usually concern utterly serious emotional questions despite the elements of comedy present in dream scenes. In this manner, nocturnal dramas can be reproduced and explained on the basis of their serious background without much subjective interpretation. All that is needed is one or, under certain circumstances, several separate dream series. This kind of investigation is a rewarding field for future research. Direct dream interpretation has the advantage of making it possible to dispense with the dreamer's personal experience, which is of great advantage for an objective judgment, considering how rapidly a patient being treated for mental illness begins to direct dreams toward the doctor. Material from other interpersonal relationships are also involved, so the opinion pollster's technique of "selective listening" used when too many interviews have been gathered is also necessary.

The question still remaining at present is who is responsible for the itinerary of such a dream sequence. Is the topic inner conflict or external conflict? And who or what is involved when there is not present any dynamically operative framework of conflict? So the question could be asked, who is directing the theatrical show of this sequence of dreams that unfolds every night?

On the other hand, the question of who recalls his dream can be answered more clearly. In normal sleep, only the last dream that took place before spontaneous awakening is remembered. This is true even if the awakening occurs during the night. Or alternatively the last dream before waking up in the morning is the one remembered. There will be many readers who thought until now that they did not dream at all. From now on, though, they will know that they, too, dream but just don't recall their dreams. So who is who?

It is now necessary to refer again to dream experiments conducted by Diamont. These experiments aided in revealing the difficulty a person has in judging a given,

momentary degree of wakefulness, the transition to sleep, or the beginning of his own dream. Even those test subjects who had asserted that they did not dream could clearly be observed dreaming. And if they were awakened at the right moment, they provided detailed reports of their dreams. Nonetheless, the experiments revealed two quite subtle differences between the two groups, the dreamers and the professed non-dreamers. For one thing, the non-dreamers seemed to have a mistaken understanding of their dreams. One such sleeper reported upon being aroused during a period of REM sleep, that he had been thinking in his sleep. Others were unable to decide whether they had thought, slept, or dreamed. In their own words, "... I don't know whether I dream or not. I am not certain whether I have slept or not. I had in mind a vision, that I was traveling down a broad avenue. There was no story, but I was moving as if I were sitting in a car and the various houses and building passed by ... a vision. I can have thought that or dreamed it." And another subject, who initially showed the same uncertainty in his own judgment, then came to a different conclusion. ". . . I am not certain whether I fell asleep ... I think, though, that I must have slept. I wouldn't have thought about it if I had been awake. I cannot imagine it. I believe I must have dreamed ..."

One psychological reason for forgetting dreams is evidently a question of definition. Some non-dreamers simply do not know what a dream is. Another perhaps more important reason for forgetting dreams, at least among alledged non-dreamers, could be that it is more difficult to arouse them during their dream periods than it is to arouse the admitted dreamers. The subjects who are difficult to arouse have, compared with other subjects, few or no dreams at all to report. However, if the intensity of the arousal signal is increased—for example, if the bell is rung louder—then immediately after the louder arousal signal there is a higher percentage of

remembered dreams. A sleeper can, therefore, evidently be surprised in such a manner that he has no time to forget his dream (Diamont).

Summarizing the question of whether dreams can be recalled, the question must be precisely formulated. At present it can be answered as follows: persons who fall asleep quickly—and they are mostly persons who like to sleep—are as a rule fast in awakening, hence remember their dreams well. Persons who fall asleep slowly also awaken more slowly and are less able to remember their dreams well. In this latter group are the so-called non-dreamers. Hence this problem has little to do with a particular depth of sleep. Some psychoanalysts nonetheless hold the misguided opinion that the failure to recall dreams is the result of the painful, consciously suppressed content of dreams. This view is not supported by modern dream research, especially as fewer dreams having a painful content seem to occur than was asserted by psychoanalysts.

*13\340\2*