THE SYMBOLISM OF DREAMS 51 
based on actual sensory stimulation—it is in most cases unreasonable 
to invoke Freud’s formula at all. If when I am asleep the actual song 
of a bird causes me to dream that I am at a concert, that picture may 
be regarded as a natural symbol of the actual sensation and it is un- 
reasonable to expect that psycho-analysis could reveal any hidden per- 
sonal reason why the symbol should take the form of a concert. And, 
if so, then Freud’s formula fails to hold good for phenomena which 
cover one of the two main divisions of dreams, even on a superficial 
classification, and perhaps enter into all dreams. 
But even if we take dreams of the remaining or representative class 
—the dreams made up of images not directly dependent on actual sen- 
sation—we still have to maintain a cautious attitude. A very large 
proportion of the dreams in this class seem to be, so far as the personal 
life is concerned, in no sense “ worth while.” It would, indeed, be sur- 
prising if they were. It seems to be fairly clear that in sleep, as cer- 
tainly in the hypnagogic state, attention is diminished, and apperceptive 
power weakened. That alone seems to involve a relaxation of the ten- 
sion by which we will and desire our personal ends. At the same time 
by no longer concentrating our psychic activities at the focus of desire 
it enables indifferent images to enter more easily the field of sleeping 
consciousness. It might even be argued that the activity of desire 
when it manifests itself in sleep and follows the course indicated by 
Freud, corresponds to a special form of sleep in which attention and 
apperception, though in modified forms, are more active than in ordi- 
nary sleep.*7 Such dreams seem to occur with special frequency, or in 
more definitely marked forms, in the neurotic and especially the hys- 
terical, and if it is true that the hysterical are to some extent asleep 
even when they are awake, it may also be said that they are to some 
extent awake even when they are asleep. Freud certainly holds, prob- 
ably with truth, that there is no fundamental distinction between 
normal people and psychoneurotic people, and that there is, for in- 
stance, as Ferenczi says emphasizing this point, “a streak of hysterical 
disposition in everybody.” Freud has, indeed, made interesting an- 
alytic studies of his own dreams, but the great body of material accu- 
mulated by him and his school is derived from the dreams of the 
neurotic. Thus Stekel states that he has analyzed many thousand 
“This is supported by the fact that in waking revery, or day-dreams, wishes 
are obviously the motor force in building up visionary structures. Freud at- 
taches great importance to revery, for he considers that it furnishes the key to 
the comprehension of dreams (¢. g., “ Sammlung Kleiner Schriften zur Neuro- 
senlehre,” 2d series, pp. 138 et seq., 197 et seq.). But it must be remembered 
that day-dreaming is not real dreaming which takes place under altogether 
different physiological conditions, although it may quite fairly be claimed that 
day-dreaming represents a state intermediate between ordinary waking con- 
sciousness and consciousness during sleep. 
