1082
The dream-work exhibits no activities other than the four that have already
been mentioned. If we keep to the definition of ‘dream-work’ as the process of
transforming the dream-thoughts into the dream-content, it follows that the
dream-work is not creative, that it develops no phantasies of its own, that it
makes no judgements and draws no conclusions; it has no functions whatever other
than condensation and displacement of the material and its modification into
pictorial form, to which must be added as a variable factor the final bit of
interpretative revision. It is true that we find various things in the dream-content
which we should be inclined to regard as a product of some other and higher
intellectual function; but in every case analysis shows convincingly that these intellectual operations have already been performed in the
dream-thoughts and have only been TAKEN OVER by the dream-content. A conclusion drawn in a dream is nothing other than the repetition of a
conclusion in the dream-thoughts; if the conclusion is taken over into the dream
unmodified, it will appear impeccable; if the dream-work has displaced it on to
some other material, it will appear nonsensical. A calculation in the
dream-content signifies nothing more than that there is a calculation in the
dream-thoughts; but while the latter is always rational, a dream-calculation may produce
the wildest results if its factors are condensed or if its mathematical
operations are displaced on to other material. Not even the speeches that occur in the
dream-content are original compositions; they turn out to be a hotchpotch of
speeches made, heard or read, which have been revived in the dream-thoughts and
whose wording is exactly reproduced, while their origin is entirely disregarded
and their meaning is violently changed.
It will perhaps be as well to support these last assertions by a few
examples.
(I) Here is an innocent-sounding, well-constructed dream dreamt by a woman
patient:
She dreamt she was going to the market with her cook, who was carrying the
basket. After she had asked for something, the butcher said to her: ‘That’s not
obtainable any longer’, and offered her something else, adding ‘This is good too.
She rejected it and went on to the woman who sells vegetables, who tried to
get her to buy a peculiar vegetable that was tied up in bundles but was of a
black colour. She said: ‘I don’t recognize that; I won’t take it.’
The remark ‘That’s not obtainable any longer’ originated from the treatment itself . A few days earlier I had explained to
the patient in those very words that the earliest memories of childhood were ‘not obtainable any longer as such’, but were replaced in analysis by ‘transferences’ and dreams. So I was the butcher.
The second speech - ‘I don’t recognize that’ - occurred in an entirely different connection. On the previous day she had
reproved her cook, who incidentally also appeared in the dream, with the words:
‘Behave yourself properly! I don’t recognize that!’ meaning, no doubt, that she did not understand such behaviour and would not
put up with it. As the result of a displacement, it was the more innocent part
of this speech which made its way into the content of the dream; but in the
dream-thoughts it was only the other part of the speech that played a part. For
the dream-work had reduced to complete unintelligibility and extreme innocence an
imaginary situation in which I was behaving improperly to the lady in a particular way. But this situation which the patient was
expecting in her imagination was itself only a new edition of something she had
once actually experienced.