And so with the biological theories which in consequence of the discoveries of Darwin and Mendel had to be chucked overboard or recast.

The claim for any theory of dreams based on its having been preached inductively cannot be very impressive. Mrs. Arnold-Forster brings to our attention types of dreams which she finds herself unable to fit in with present-day fashionable theories. It is interesting to note that after subjecting her dreams to self psycho-analysis she fails to find that they substantiate the Freudian theory that all dreams are symbolic, and still more "that they are all symbols of repressed desire"- and particularly sex wishes. Without denying the occurrence of symbolism, according to her interpretation this symbolism is for the most part "of a simple and direct nature relating the dream to some mood that I have experienced, or some problem that I have met with, and it is often fairly easy to trace this idea which the dream represents in an allegorical form. In this modified sense it seems evident that many dreams are symbolical".

Mrs. Arnold-Forster, as a student of Freud and his followers and thoroughly grounded in the Freudian literature, recognises that the true psychoanalyst would not be content with such an interpretation; and that, according to the Freudian theory, it is impossible to be one's own psycho-analyst because of the self-censorship exerted by the mind against such revelations - shall we say against facing oneself and the hidden truths of self. For my part I am much more impressed by Mrs. Arnold-Forster's simple interpretations of her dreams (of which she gives illustrations), perhaps because they fit in with my own studies, than I am with those interpretations to which they are exposed by the Freudian theory (as the author of these dreams fully realises). Surely the wider and more intensive our experience the more must we sympathise with the plea expressed in these pages "for the exercise of sober judgment and common sense in our study of this subject and the conclusions we form".

To those engaged in the study of the purely psychological problems involved in dreams, the author's conception of the mental mechanisms by which dreams are constructed will be of interest (Chapter IX). Mrs. Arnold-Forster proposes an explanation of dream construction which is as ingenious as it is simple. The mechanism is that of association of ideas with the co-operation of the imagination. Illustrations of how this mechanism works are given in two specific dreams recorded. The apparent incoherence and inconsecutiveness of many dreams is attributed to the failure of memory after waking to recall the connecting links necessary to make the dream coherent. In dream building, if I understand the theory correctly, one idea calls up another by successive association - free association, unhampered by critical and discriminating judgment, which in the normal process of thinking rejects those associated ideas which are not acceptable or germane to the subject in hand. The dream imagination then seizes upon certain elements in the associated idea, intensifies and objectifies them in imagery by which, for instance, objects are vividly visualised. Thus, in one dream, a winding path in a landscape suggests by association a railroad, which is at once visualised also in the landscape.

The two crossing each other suggests a railroad crossing, which is in turn visualised; then follows the idea of danger from a possible approaching train, and, presto 1 the sound of such an onrushing train is heard; and so on, one association calling up another to be vividly represented in images and worked by imagination into a connected story, the images suggesting thoughts and vice versa. The whole is very much like the process of certain types of thinking carried on when awake by day, "only at night the imagination is not fettered by the discipline which restrains our wandering thoughts from following too eagerly in the random track of every chance thought or suggestion. The imagination in sleep, unchecked in this way, can devote itself to perfecting each successive image that arises, giving life and reality to each in turn, metamorphosing them often, and constantly adding new facts and fresh touches to the pictures which are its creation".

It is curious and may be interesting to note that Mrs. Arnold-Forster's theory is supported by the testimony of a co-conscious personality which I had occasion to study. It is well known that a number of cases, in which a secondary co-conscious personality claimed to be awake while the principal personality was dreaming, have been observed. In the Beauchamp case the co-conscious personality, observing the dreams as they occurred, testified that during sleep sensory stimuli (sounds, the touch of the bed-clothes, etc.) are received and " 'make sensory images or impressions in the same way as in the daytime.' These weave themselves into dreams, but they also recall memories of what she has seen and heard and read, in fact everything that she has ever been conscious of, so that in this way they arouse connected dreams."1

This theory of the dream mechanism which Mrs. Arnold-Forster proposes will probably be regarded by psychologists as one of the most important of the contributions contained in her book. It is, as she points out, in entire opposition to the Freudian conception, leaving "entirely out of account the sort of hidden meaning that the psycho-analyst finds in dreams," as well as the symbolism and unconscious sex wishes. In other passages, however, the author fully recognises that there may be dreams, especially those of morbid persons, to which the Freudian theory applies. She has only to do with her own experiences. I, for one, am strongly inclined to believe that her theory is a sound interpretation at least of a certain type of dream, and may, perhaps, govern the majority of dreams. Probably Mrs. Arnold-Forster will agree that in other types less emphasis should be placed on the associative process and more on the creative imagination as contrasted with what, perhaps, I may call the passive imagination, the slave of associated ideas: the creative imagination thinks out, reasons, foresees, arranges and composes according to a conceived plan, and is not the slave of associated ideas.

1 "The Dissociation of a Personality," p. 329.

In some of the dreams recorded by the author, flying dreams for instance, it seems to me that the creative imagination is conspicuous and dominates the associative process. Certainly there are dreams, as might be illustrated from my own collection (not personal experiences), in which there is an argument, the end is foreseen and the whole is a well-worked-out story or allegory. No associative process alone could have produced such logical coherence.

In such dreams the motivating dispositions which have determined the theme and inspired the creative imagination are another matter and are to be searched for in the antecedent conscious life of the individual I am influenced in this notion by what I conceive to be the analogues of night-dreams, namely, the fantasies of other dissociated states - day-dreaming and subconscious dreaming. In these two conditions I have observed dreams substantially inden-tical with those occurring during sleep, but although associated ideas may have suggested the motives inspiring the theme and otherwise been factors, the creative imagination has worked as it does in the composition of romance. I have already referred to this phenomenon. The fact is that all depends upon that organisation of the dissociated mental systems which is called by Mrs. Arnold-Forster the dream mind, whether functioning when asleep, when awake, or when subconscious. When these systems are so highly organised as to be capable of reason, imagination and will, and when they include the so-called instincts - when, in other words, they constitute an "Intelligence"- they are capable of working in a way comparable to that of the waking intelligence.

But when the senses are eliminated, and when therefore cognition of reality is also eliminated - as in sleep - there is necessarily a corresponding limitation of that adjustment and correlation of thought to reality which is one of the essential qualities of dreams. Undoubtedly the dream mind, like all dissociated systems, can be educated into a highly organised intelligence. This seems to have been the case, I venture to think, with the dream mind of the author as well as with that of some of the recorders of dreams cited in this book.

From this point of view there must be as many different types of dreams as there are types of organised mental systems: even the Freudian mechanisms, of which I believe I have seen examples,1 should occur.

As Mrs. Arnold-Forster says, "dreams are not all alike, but are as manifold in their nature as are the thoughts and imaginations of men"; and, I may add, dreams vary not only in their nature but also in their mechanisms, just as do the mental systems of human personality, whether they be mutilated and dissociated or unmutilated and complete.

Morton Prince.

Boston, U. S. A.

1 "The Mechanism and Interpretation of Dreams," Journal of Abnormal Psychology, vol. v. No. 6 (1911).