Binz[4] (p. 45) takes occasion from the above-mentioned characteristics
of the memory in dreams to express his dissatisfaction with explanations
of dreams which he himself has approved of: “And the normal dream raises
similar questions. Why do we not always dream of memory impressions from
the preceding days, instead of going back to the almost forgotten past
lying far behind us without any perceptible reason? Why in a dream does
consciousness so often revive the impression of indifferent memory
pictures while the cerebral cells bearing the most sensitive records of
experience remain for the most part inert and numb, unless an acute
revival during the waking state has shortly before excited them?”
We can readily understand how the strange preference of the dream memory
for the indifferent and hence the unnoticed details of daily experience
must usually lead us to overlook altogether the dependence of the dream
on the waking state, or at least make it difficult to prove this
dependence in any individual case. It thus happened that in the
statistical treatment of her own and her friend’s dreams, Miss Whiton
Calkins[12] found 11 per cent. of the entire number that showed no
relation to the waking state. Hildebrandt was certainly correct in his
assertion that all our dream pictures could be genetically explained if
we devoted enough time and material to the tracing of their origin. To
be sure, he calls this “a most tedious and thankless job.” For it would
at most lead us to ferret out all kinds of quite worthless psychic
material from the most remote corners of the memory chamber, and to
bring to light some very indifferent moments from the remote past which
were perhaps buried the next hour after their appearance. I must,
however, express my regret that this discerning author refrained from
following the road whose beginning looked so unpromising; it would have
led him directly to the centre of the dream problem.
The behaviour of the memory in dreams is surely most significant for
every theory of memory in general. It teaches us that “nothing which we
have once psychically possessed is ever entirely lost” (Scholz[59]); or
as Delbœuf puts it, “que toute impression même la plus insignifiante,
laisse une trace inaltérable, indéfiniment susceptible de reparaître au
jour,” a conclusion to which we are urged by so many of the other
pathological manifestations of the psychic life. Let us now bear in mind
this extraordinary capability of the memory in the dream, in order to
perceive vividly the contradictions which must be advanced in certain
dream theories to be mentioned later, when they endeavour to explain the
absurdities and incoherence of dreams through a partial forgetting of
what we have known during the day.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account