88

X.

THERE has hitherto been no occasion for
philosophers to bestir themselves with a
psychology of repression. We must be
allowed to construct some clear conception
as to the origin of dreams as the first steps
in this unknown territory. The scheme
which we have formulated not only from
a study of dreams is, it is true, already
somewhat complicated, but we cannot find
any simpler one that will suffice. /We hold
that our psychical apparatus contains two
procedures for the construction of thoughts.
The second one has the advantage that its
products find an open path to consciousness,
whilst the activity of the first procedure is
unknown to itself, and can only arrive at
consciousness through the second one.) At
the borderland of these two procedures,
where the first passes over into the second,

89

ON DREAMS

a censorship is established which only
passes what pleases it, keeping back every-
thing else. That which is rejected by the
censorship is, according to our definition,
in a state of repression. Under certain
conditions, one of which is the sleeping
state, the balance of power between the
two procedures is so changed that what is
repressed can no longer be kept back. In
the sleeping state this may possibly occur
through the negligence of the censor; what
has been hitherto repressed will now succeed
in finding its way to consciousness. But
as the censorship is never absent, but
merely off guard, certain alterations must
be conceded so as to placate it. It is a
compromise which becomes conscious in
this case—a compromise between what one
procedure has in view and the demands of
the other. Repression, laxity of the censor,
compromise—this is the foundation for the
origin of many another psychological pro-
cess, just as it is for the dream. In such
compromises we can observe the processes

90

of condensation, of displacement, the ac-
ceptance of superficial associations, which
we have found in the dream work.

It is not for us to deny the demonic
element which has played a part in con-
structing our explanation of dream work.
The impression left is that the formation
of obscure dreams proceeds as if a person
had something to say which must be dis-
agreeable to another person upon whom
he is dependent to hear. It is by the use
of this image that we figure to ourselves
the conception of the dream distortion and
of the censorship, and ventured to crystal-
lise our impression in a rather crude, but at
least definite, psychological theory. What-
ever explanation the future may offer of
these first and second procedures, we shall
expect a confirmation of our correlate that
the second procedure commands the en-
trance to consciousness, and can exclude
the first from consciousness.

Once the sleeping state overcome, the
censorship resumes complete sway, and is

91

now able to revoke that which was granted
in a moment of weakness. That the for
getting of dreams explains this in part, at
least, we are convinced by our experience,
confirmed again and again. During the
relation of a dream, or during analysis of
one, it not infrequently happens that some
fragment of the dream is suddenly for-
gotten. This fragment so forgotten in-
variably contains the best and readiest
approach to an understanding of the dream.
Probably that is why it sinks into oblivion
—i.e., into a renewed suppression.