This article was downloaded by: [Gazi University]

On: 18 August 2014, At: 23:02

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Neuropsychoanalysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal

for Psychoanalysis and the Neurosciences
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rnpa20

J. Allan Hobson and Edward Pace-Schotts Response:

Commentary by Calvin Kai-ching Yu (Hong Kong)
a

Calvin Kai-ching Yu
a

Department of Counselling and Psychology, Hong Kong Shue, Yan College, Braemar Hill
Road, North Point. Hong Kong, e-mail:
Published online: 09 Jan 2014.

To cite this article: Calvin Kai-ching Yu (2000) J. Allan Hobson and Edward Pace-Schotts Response: Commentary by Calvin
Kai-ching Yu (Hong Kong), Neuropsychoanalysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal for Psychoanalysis and the Neurosciences,
2:2, 212-213, DOI: 10.1080/15294145.2000.10773307
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15294145.2000.10773307

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

212

Calvin Kai-ching Yu

J. Allan Hobson and Edward Pace-Schott's Response

Commentary by Calvin Kai-ching Yu (Hong Kong)

Clearing the Ground: Misunderstanding of

Freudian Dream Theory

Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 23:02 18 August 2014

We have always emphasized our own clinical interest

in dreams as the transparent syntheses of current concerns, past conflicts, and cognitive-emotional style.
We read the current PET evidence as highly supportive of this conceptualization which obviates Freud's
complex and dubious assumption of latent vs. manifest content [Hobson and Pace-Schott, 1999, p. 206].

An intelligent conversation about dreams cannot take

place without first clarifying Freud's true concepts.
There is too much misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of Freudian dream theory in the current dialogue, which has led to unfruitful and often
unnecessary dispute. As an enthusiastic reader of
Freud, I would like here to illustrate one example: the
demarcation between manifest and latent content is
not absolute and not always perceivable in Freudian
theory as some authorities conceive of it and describe
it. On the contrary, the manifest content is not infrequently equivalent to the latent content. Examples of
this are common throughout Freud's works, but Freud
tended not to study those undisguised dreams simply
because there was no need to do so. This does not
mean, however, that Freud himself did not give credence to the existence of "transparent dreams." It is
therefore wrong arbitrarily to confine Freud's understanding of dreams to a fixed divergence between
manifest and latent content. Whatever the appearance
might be, Freud did not in fact claim that all dreams
are distorted or disguised.

a bewildering effect, because we cannot see how to

fit that sense into our mental life.... The third group,
finally, contains those dreams which are without either sense or intelligibility, which seem disconnected,
confused, and meaningless. ... The contrast between
the manifest and latent content of dreams is clearly
of significance only for dreams of the second and
more particular of the third category [Freud, 1901,
p. 642].

According to Freudian theory, the first type, undisguised dreams, probably predominate in children's
dreams but also occur in some adults' dreams. In "typical dreams," for example (including dreams of nakedness, dreams of the death of a beloved person,
examination dreams), with reference to Freud's interpretations (1900), the latent dream thoughts are very
close to the manifest content; that is, very near to
the conscious surface. A distinct line of demarcation
between the two is not necessary and is also difficult
to draw. This fusion of manifest and latent content
also applies to those vivid, direct wish-fulfillment
dreams (e.g., wet dreams) in which dreamers find not
the slightest difficulty in realizing what their dreams
mean and what their underlying motives are. Apparently enough, Freud did acknowledge the existence of
"transparent dreams," though they were not of special
interest and his theory was not aimed at them.

Dreams can be divided into three categories in respect

of the relation between their latent and manifest content. In the first place, we may distinguish those
dreams which make sense and are at the same time
intelligible, which, that is to say, can be inserted without further difficulty into the context of our mental
life. We have numbers of such dreams. They are for
the most part short and appear to us in general to
deserve little attention. ... A second group is formed
by those dreams which, though they are connected in
themselves and have a clear sense, nevertheless have

No one who accepts the view that the censorship is

the chief reason for dream-distortion will be surprised
to learn from the results of dream-interpretation that
most of the dreams of adults are traced back by analysis to erotic wishes. This assertion is not aimed at
dreams with an undisguised sexual content, which are
no doubt familiar to all dreamers from their own experience and are as a rule the only ones to be described
as "sexual dreams." Even dreams of this latter kind
offer enough surprises in their choice of the people
whom they make into sexual objects, in their disregard of all the limitations which the dreamer imposes
in his waking life upon his sexual desires [Freud,
1901, p. 682].

Calvin Kai-ching Yu was a graduate student at University College,

London and The Anna Freud Centre, London, at the time of writing this
commentary.

The demarcation between manifest and latent content

is further eroded when taking into consideration the

Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 23:02 18 August 2014

Ongoing Discussion: J. Allan Hobson and E. Pace-Schott

classical Freudian view that one dream can be and
usually should be understood on different levels, running from interpretation based on the manifest content
through the manifest-latent dichotomy to multiple
strata. Taking Dora's second dream about her father's
death as an example (1905), her dream was in the first
place a phantasy of envious revenge directed against
her father for his unfaithfulness and his relations with
Frau K. On another level, it represented her childish
desire to revolt against her parents' constraint in order
to compensate for and fulfill the forbidden past wishes
of childhood. In the third place, it was a symbolic
sexual phantasy of defloration. In the fourth place, it
alluded to Dora's jealousy, wounded pride, and retaliation against Herr K for his insulting entreaties. Ultimately, it also represented her unconscious love for
Herr K. It should be noted that all these different interpretations and the five corresponding wish-fulfillments are linked to the same dream. On the first two
levels of the interpretation, the meaning of the dream
is transparent, that is, there is no significant difference
between the manifest content and the latent dream
thoughts (e.g., she dreamt the death of her father because she wanted him to die). A clearer distinction
only appears on the other three levels. The fact is that
tremendous pluralism in the interplay between manifest and latent dream content makes the problem as
to whether a dream is absolutely transparent or distorted far from simple. The question ought rather to be
whether a continuum between the manifest and latent
dream content exists. With regard to the meaning of
dream content, Freud's multiple perspective appears
to be more open and flexible than Hobson's monistic
view that dreams are invariably transparent and intelligible.
Perhaps it could be added that deep and multilevel interpretations of dreams are particularly necessary when applied to clinical situations and
psychoanalytic reconstruction, with reference to the
assumption that most clinical states, the current characteristics of conscious or unconscious structures, and
therefore presumably of dreams too, can be traced
back to early experience and conflicts. For a single
dream content, in different situations, different levels
of interpretation may therefore be indispensable. With
vivid, sensual dreams, for example, "interpretation"
may remain on a manifest level; the content speaks
for itself. If the same dream appears in a patient who
seeks professional help and suffers from relatively severe symptoms, however, deeper and multiple interpretations may be useful if certain associations call
forth awareness of the parallelism between the inti-

213

mate friend in the manifest dream and a previous

loved person, a parent, for example. By connecting
the manifest content of a dream with early emotional
experience and other unconscious material (the latent
dream thoughts), multiple interpretations may therefore deepen the patient's consciousness and clinical
understanding. Mortimer Ostow's case (see pp. 98-99)
is one such example.
In clinical psychoanalysis, vociferous opposition
toward an interpretation, embracing a narrow-minded
attitude that expurgates unconsciously the external reality (instead of thorough understanding through objective observation), is called resistance, and
attributed to defense against the unconscious anxieties
of a narcissistic ego.
Psychologists have argued a great deal about the truth
of psychoanalytic interpretations, and students often
find them hard to swallow, argue for this or that other
interpretation, and conclude that this vagueness
damns the enterprise. Both assume that there should
be a single true interpretation in the same way that
scientists aim for a single true explanation (at a given
level). This is also why the existence of many schools
of psychoanalysis is thought scandalous. But is not a
better analogy the multiple interpretations that a poem
or other text allows? They complement each other,
and allow a multidimensional, or multiperspective
view of the object. This does not mean that' 'anything
goes.' , You can still argue, even "rigorously," about
how valid a particular interpretation is, and you can
hope that the different perspectives in some sense
converge, and do the intellectual wor k to show how
they do or do not [Whittle, 1999, p. 243].

References
Freud, S. (1900), The Interpretation of Dreams. Standard
Edition, 4&5. London: Hogarth Press, 1953.
- - - (1901), On dreams. Standard Edition, 5:629-685.
London: Hogarth Press, 1953.
- - - (1905), Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria. Standard Edition, 7: 1-122. London: Hogarth Press,
1953.
Hobson, J. A., & Pace-Schott, E. F. (1999), Response to
commentaries. This Journal, 1(2):206-225.
Whittle, P. (1999), Experimental psychology and psychoanalysis: What we can learn from a century of misunderstanding. This Journal, 1(2):233-247.
Calvin Kai-ching Yu
Department of Counselling and Psychology
Hong Kong Shue, Yan College
Braemar Hill Road
North Point. Hong Kong
e-mail: calyu@hongkong.com