Dream 399

'Alan Sugar Proves Infinity' (Lucid Dream)

Dream date: 3 March 2015

I was at a location which appeared to be a slightly altered version of The Crown in Sheringham. There was a party going on, which seemed to be hosted by my mum and I. The whole venue was crowded, and I was walking around, occasionally stopping to talk to my mum. At one point I went to the doorway and looked outside - I could see rows of wooden tables and benches (similar to those in the actual pub in real-life). LD and two other male dream characters (who I knew in the dream) were seated at the tables. LD was wearing a white shirt. They were - like the other guests at the outside tables - all eating. This scene was quite long, but nothing exciting or strange happened; I was simply mingling with the party guests. It started to turn dusk.

I was then in a room which looked like the diagram below. The room was quite dark and it was a kind of classroom, the teacher being Alan Sugar. I was with LD, AP (a girl from my high school), and the two male dream characters who had been with LD at the party in the earlier scene. We were seated at school desks, facing Alan Sugar, who was standing at a small chalkboard (which was not mounted on a wall, but was some sort of stand-alone easel). Alan Sugar was teaching us about 'infinity'. He drew a diagram on the chalkboard (see below for replica),which consisted of three rectangles, with upwards pointing arrows inside them. Above the middle rectangle was the infinity sign. I was really frustrated and confused because my number dyslexia/dyscalculia meant I did not understand the maths he was using to explain the theory. Everyone else seemed to understand just fine, and this contributed to my feelings of inadequacy (considering I was the person with the most formal education and academic interest out of the 'students'). 

We moved to the back of the room, and sat in a row on some benches against a wall. To our right (which I had not noticed before) was a wall made up of textured diamond-shaped patterns which seemed to be made of some sort of felt material. They were attached to the wall, but could be removed. The diamond-shaped felt pieces were in jewel colours - ruby, emerald, violet and sapphire blue. Between the patterned wall and the doorway, was a box mounted on the wall which contained spare diamond shapes. A male dream character in a handyman's uniform (blue overalls) entered the room and emptied the box of spare diamond shapes into a clear plastic bag and took them out of the room. 

JA - a former friend and colleague who I fell out with in 2009 and haven't spoken to since - entered the room. She was wearing a backless gown (I think it was white with jewel decorations on the front, because it seemed sparkly in places). She came up to us and started speaking to us. I thought it was odd that she was acting as if nothing adverse had happened between us. She then paraded around the room, in a very smug manner. 

I then found myself in my kitchen in my home in Norwich. On the counter in front of me was a packet of minced beef (mine) and a packet of raw chicken breasts with some minced beef also in there (not mine, and I found it odd that the minced beef was mixed in which raw chicken breasts). I wondered who the chicken breasts belonged to, since my housemate is a vegetarian. I started to make burgers from the minced beef, but I only had enough for one burger. I decided to take the minced beef out of the packet of chicken breasts and use that, but as soon as I started, a male dream character (white, tall, fat, blonde hair and thick glasses, wearing a navy jumper and beige trousers) came downstairs and into my lounge/kitchen. He was my new housemate. I apologised for stealing his minced beef, but he did not seem to care. We walked over to where my window would normally be, but this was now a small glass conservatory (with the normal real-life view of the grassy field and lake outside). It was daytime and very sunny outside. The conservatory was crowded with (unrecalled) people, who were all friends/people I knew. We sat in there together, with me in the corner, near the door leading to the lounge, up against the glass wall. I asked the new housemate - who was sitting opposite me, with our knees so close they were almost touching - what his name was, and he said 'Stuart'. I said: 'Do you spell that S-T-U-A-R-T?' and he said: 'No' and got a small scrap of paper and a pencil and started to spell his name, which looked like this (not exactly, just an approximation of what I can remember): 'SFETW CMURMFGU'. I thought the spelling was so odd and did not make any sense at all. He said that his Polish grandmother had invented this spelling of his name, which was pronounced 'Stuart Cummings'. He handed me the piece of paper and I held it up to the glass of the conservatory so that the light shone through it. He had also drawn a 'monkey graveyard' which featured a picture of a monkey statue on a tombstone. The writing was so difficult to read as the letters all seemed to jumble into each other and change. Stuart then asked me if I could guess his favourite movie. I said: 'Betty Blue' (1986) instantly, without thinking, Stuart pulled out a DVD case from behind his back, revealing it to be Betty Blue and I was surprised that I had guessed it correctly in one answer, considering I have never even seen this movie myself.

I then found myself in an outside environment in  almost total darkness. There was a dirt path in the middle of two grassy areas, which stretched a long distance. At the sides of the grassy areas, were steep hilly banks. I was walking down the path alone and felt anxious because it was so dark and I did not know where I was. I sat down on the grassy area to my left and instantly questioned if I was dreaming. There seemed to be no trigger at all for this Dream Initiated Lucid Dream. I thought: 'I better reality check' but my thoughts were vocalised loudly (without me intending to speak aloud) as: 'Reality check, reality check, reality check!' I was then consciously aware that I was dreaming - fully lucid! I could feel that the grass I was sitting on was very damp. I looked up at the sky and saw it was now filled with stars which I had not seen before when not lucid. I stood up and started waking in the direction I had been heading originally. I thought to myself that I should try and control the lucid dream by bringing a dream character into my environment and decided that I would visualise someone called 'Simon' because that was the first name which came into my head. Suddenly a group of people came towards me (laughing with each other and seemingly in a good mood), but I could not see who they were. One of them (male) called out my name and I realised it was my friend SD. I said: 'Hello' to him, but decided to carry on walking and control a different aspect of my dream instead, perhaps change the dream scene. I turned around to see what SD and the group of people were doing and saw they were climbing up one of the steep banks, in the area where I had just been sitting. I then felt myself waking up. I tried to fight it, by shaking my hands and saying: 'Stay lucid!' but it was too late and I woke up fully. 

TIME: 23:00 - 09:30 hours (woke from dream at 09:30 hours, so the dream probably took place between 08:30 - 09:30 hours)

LUCIDITY: Yes - Full Lucidity (approximately 2 minutes of lucidity via DILD, not induced)

SPECIAL NOTES: No obvious lucid triggers, unusual reality check

Dreamsigns:

• The Crown looked different from real-life and I noticed this (IA - Inner Awareness/F - Form).
• Taught by Alan Sugar (C - Context)
• Chicken breasts - I questioned their presence in my house, knowing that I live with a vegetarian and that they did not belong to me. It was also weird that they had minced beef mixed into them (IA - Inner Awareness).
• I thought it was odd that I had a new housemate and this took my by surprise (IA - Inner Awareness/ C - Context).
• The spelling of 'Stuart' was so odd I questioned it, and the text was unreadable when I concentrated on it (IA - Inner Awareness/F - Form).

Potential Day/Dream Residue:

• There was to be a family gathering at The Crown on the Friday after this dream took place, but it was eventually cancelled. At the time of this dream, I still thought the family gathering might be going ahead.
• The night before this dream I had seen JA on Facebook.
• The night before this dream, I had watched a play which was originally screened at part of ITV's Armchair Theatre series. I had been particularly drawn to the Thames Television opening ident, because it had reminded me strongly of seeing/hearing that during my childhood and it had some nostalgic significance. I used to see/still sometimes see the Thames Television ident in my mind's eye whenever I got stoned and get lost in my thoughts. I have no idea why this happens or why this particular image/audio holds so much importance for me. I have included a Youtube video of the ident (from 1984) below. The play I was watching was called The Office Party (1971) and involved an office leaving party for the boss, which descends into chauvinistic, sexist and misogynistic behaviour, particularly aimed at one young female receptionist who is pregnant after having an affair with a colleague. She wears a sexy, backless dress to the office party. attracting both lecherous male behaviour and female jealousy. I had fallen out with my friend and colleague JA in real-life because when we worked in an office together as trainees in the same role, she had received favourable treatment (promotion; paid leave for study - which I had not been entitled to; making me unwell from the stress of juggling full-time work and study; extra training and responsibilities; and a significant pay increase, as well as having her tuitions fees paid for by the firm). This was as a direct result of having an affair with our much older boss, which had been turbulent, chaotic and affected the working environment for many of my colleagues. I felt that this was a form of sexual discrimination and nepotism and the situation contributed to me resigning from my much-loved job. Confronting my former boss over his unfair treatment was one of the reasons I fell out with JA. I think watching the  The Office Party play and thinking about JA contributed to her appearing in my dream, parading around proudly, wearing a fancy, sexy, gown. I would be lying if I said that these events from several years ago (which had a massive impact on my professional career) did not cause me some resentment and bitterness.
• Two days before this dream I had been working in a legal office, which may have also contributed to JA appearing in my dream.
• JA and I used to work with SD in the office.

Waking Thoughts & Emotions:

I awoke excited and disappointed by the fact I had experienced a lucid dream, but that it was over very quickly. I was however, also impressed by the vividness/clarity of the earlier, non-lucid parts of this dream and how much I could recall upon waking. This was a very enjoyable dream.

An Introduction to Dream Speech - Emil Kraepelin & Sigmund Freud

This is an introduction to the phenomenon of dream speech. Dream speech is the verbal or acoustic language of dreams, which most commonly occurs in the form of dialogue between the dreamer and other dream characters. This article focuses specifically on the contributions of psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin (1856 - 1926) who produced an impressive opus of dream speech material and analysis of Kraepelin's self-reported dreams using Freudian psychoanalysis. I will be posting a further, more generalised, article on dream speech at a later stage.

Dream speech (or Traumsprache in German) is internal speech within a dream, in which errors of speech may occur. This phenomenon was defined by Emil Kraepelin in On Language Disturbances in Dreams (1906), which analysed various types of dream speech, presenting 286 examples. Dream speech is distinct from 'the language of dreams' which refers to the visual symbols used to represent thoughts in dreams. Kraepelin identified three categories of dream speech, within which there are numerous subdivisions:

1. Disorders of word selection (paraphasias)
2. Disorders of discourse (aggrammatisms)
3. Thought disorders

Kraepelin found that the most common type of dream speech was neologism - the use of words which only have meaning for the person who uses them, independent of their common meaning and not necessarily accepted in mainstream language. Kraepelin studied dream speech because he hoped it would provide him with insight into analogous language disturbances in schizophrenic persons. In 1920 he stated that: 'dream speech in every detail corresponds to schizophrenic speech disorder'. Kraepelin was interested in the psychiatric as well as psychological aspects of dream speech, but modern dream scientists and psychologists are interested in speech production in dreams in relation to cognitive processes in the dreaming mind. Some modern studies have confirmed Kraepelin's earlier findings. Kraepelin is well-known as a pioneer of biological psychiatry and the 'spiritual father' of the DSM classificatory system for psychiatric disorder.

Kraepelin continued to collect examples of dream speech until his death in 1926, from his own personal experiences which he recorded and can be seen in the Archive of the Max Plancke Institute of Psychiatry in Munich. Kraepelin's dream speech specimens were published in 1993 - the second dream corpus had not been censured and is annotated with the date, as Kraepelin (who had been collecting specimens of dream speech for 40 years) approached this exercise with scientific precision. 

Kraepelin's own dream speech began during a period of personal crisis and depression (1882 - 1884). In 1882 Kraepelin was fired from the Leipzig Psychiatry Clinic after only working there for a few weeks and two months later his father died. From the early years of his career Kraepelin had witnessed schizophrenic speech disorder ('schizophasie') in his patients - a condition which can often make it impossible to understand what the schizophrenic patient is trying to express. Using the classic dream-psychosis analogy, Kraepelin attempted to study dream speech, hoping it would shed some light on schizophasie. He recorded his own dreams, but did not use psychoanalysis to analyse them, instead using them for scientific research. He found that he was able to record 'deviant language' from the dream, and also the intended utterance (which was not possible in the case of his schizophrenic patients who cannot cross the boundary between psychosis and reality in order to communicate this distinction). Most neogolisms (the deviant utterance) have a meaning (the intended utterance). 

Kraepelin was able to identify two fundamental disorders in dream speech: a diminished functioning of the Wernicke's area of the brain (cerebral cortex involved in the understanding of spoken and written speech); and diminished functioning of the frontal area which deals with abstract reasoning. Therefore individual ideas, rather than general ideas, are expressed in dreams. Kraepelin included proper nouns (i.e. names such as Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune) in their widest sense within this model.

Kraepelin's dream speech specimens range from simple to intricate and his own analysis is somewhat limited in scope. Below are some examples:

'Vi tafalk!' 

This was an order given to a gravedigger named Vi to bring a coffin for the body during a funeral. 

'Tafalk' is a shortcut for the German 'katafalk' (catafalque' meaning the raised platform on which a coffin sits during a funeral)

'nsens' 

'Nonsence' minus 'one'

'Crap a ace' ('crap' meaning 'rubbish' in English, 'a' being the Greek prefix for 'without' and 'ace' representing 'one)

'Crap a ace' is a derivative from the metathesis of 'carapace'

'Carapace' (dorsal section of an exoskeleton) refers to 'schild' (shield) from 'Firmenschild' (German for 'company logo')

Schild = (1) carapace - (2) crap a ace - (3) nonsense without one - (4) nsens

(1) and (3) are conceptual associations ('code-type' associations in cryptography)

(2) and (4) are word form associations ('cipher-type' associations)

Kraepelin (who did not provide this particular analysis) termed 'nsens' as an example of 'syllable combinations jumbled in a completely arbitrary way' and thought 'nsens' was Russian. According to scholars, this assertion originated from the associative networks of his dreaming brain. The Russian word 'krapkea' means 'firm' which is an association with 'Firmenschild', provoking the transformation to 'carapace'

'Serre'
'Serre' - a word with no meaning in German. Kraepelin associates the word with 'an animal, by appearance, a heavy panther, but in fact a harmless herbivore which cannot turn over again once it is lying on its back and is completely defenceless'.
He includes the word 'turtle' - in German 'schildkrote' ('shield-toad')
'Serre' in French - linked to 'talon' (bird of prey)
French for 'turtle shell' -= 'carapace'
French for 'bird of prey' = 'rapace'
German for turtle = 'krote' (toad)
'Krote' translated in French = 'crapaud'
'Crapaud' associates with the German 'krapfen' and 'hook' - i.e. 'talon'
'Serre' - is linked to 'schildkrote' by 'carapace' and 'crapaud' - which in turn are linked to 'Kraepelin'

'Trafei'

'Trafei' - linked to 'Trafoi'

Implicit critique of Freud's analysis of  'Trafoi' in the 'Signorelli parapraxis' (see my previous article on 'Freudian Slips' for the background to this analysis)

'Trafoi' - 'trofei' (Italian for 'trophy')

'Trofei' - 'Siegeszeichen' (German for 'victory-signs' - 'Signum' (Latin for 'sign') - Sigmund (Freud)

Words such as 'Krapea', 'crap' and 'carapace' are all Kraepelin-words, which seem to associate to the proper noun, Kraepelin and influence/direct associational processes. The key role of the proper noun (or name) can be explained by referring to the 'Cocktail Party Effect', which states that during a cocktail party we tune into our discussion party, neglecting any background noise. However, we notice when someone in the background din mentions our name (or something that sounds like our name). This effect has been replicated in studies using dichotic listening techniques, showing that only proper nouns break through the attentional barrier and can be heard even when our attention is at its lowest. What happens within 'outer speech' during a cocktail party occurs similarly with 'inner speech' whilst dreaming. Code words, which are linked in sound with our proper name will be detected in a set of associations during thinking.  The ongoing thought process will then deviate because code words will act as priming words, influencing the direction in which the associations will go. 

The link between schizophrenia and dream speech was the topic of debate between linguists Victorian Froomkin and Elaine Chaika in the 1970s. Chaika believed that schizophasia was a form of intermittent aphasia, whilst Froomkin stated that schizophasia could occur in non-schizophrenic persons. By 1995, Chaika conceded that schizophasia is not due to aphasias linked to actual brain damage, but is a form of speech error which may be caused by a deficiency in language production or the result of a failed intention. Thus, she adopted a position similar to Kraepelin, who stated that speech errors resembling schizophasia occur in normal individuals during dreams. 

Dream speech appears to play a very marginal role in Dream Theory, although David Foulkes highlights its significance, claiming: 'however visual dreaming may seem, it may be planned and regulated by the human speech production system'. Deirdre Barrett at Harvard University describes examples of dream literature in The Committee of Sleep (2010) where dreamers had dreamed of heard/read words which they later recorded when awake. She observed that most of these literary works tend to be poetry rather than prose or narrative fiction, although the title Vanity Fair appeared to William Makepeace Thackeray in a dream, as did Katherine Mansfield's Sun and Moon. Barrett suggests that poetry fares better in dreams because grammar tends to be well-preserved in dream speech, while meaning suffers and rhyme and rhythm are more prominent than while awake - characteristics which benefits poetry, but not necessarily other literary forms. In another study, Barrett looked at verbatim language in the dream speech of college students and found them similar  in these characteristics to literary examples of dream speech - intact grammar, poor meaning, rhyme and rhythm. She stated that this is evidence that within the two language centres in the brain - the Wernicke's area and the Broca's area, there is a malfunctioning in the former. Dream speech resembles that of persons with Wernicke's aphasia - the same conclusion reached by Kraepelin in 1906. 

Kraepelin's dream speech has been psychoanalysed by others, using Freud's technique. One theory is that Kraepelin's dreams reveal a desire to preserve his uncommon family name. Freud was initially schooled in notions of anatomical localisation of mental functions and the idea that consciousness was an epiphenemenon which was caused by strong cortical stimulation. He later rejected these ideas, favouring those of John Hughlings Jackson, who suggested that neural functioning was hierarchical and dynamic, as opposed to static and localised and often outside the conscious awareness of the individual. In On Aphasia (1891), Freud focused not only on neurology, but also linguistics. leading to his recognition as the first neo-grammarian neurologist (Junggrammatika) and he advanced distinctions between hysterical speech impairments and true organic aphasia. He introduced the idea of 'word presentation' in schizophrenic subjects - that speech is invested with psychic energy and consciousness, with words manipulated by the schizophrenic, as if they were 'things'. He expounded this theory further in The Unconscious (1915). Although Freud's work on dream speech was neurologically orientated, he later turned towards psychoanalysis as an explanation, characterising speech as a 'secondary process' (phylogenetically and ontogenetically advanced) which occurs in normal functioning wakefulness. He contrasted this secondary process with primary processes which occur at an unconscious pre-verbal level - condensation, displacement and symbolisation.

Many of Freud's own dream reports contain complex verbal content - lengthy 'speech' which is grammatically appropriate to the context in which is occurred. Dreams are 'compromise formations' resulting from the interplay between primary and secondary processes - however, the primary processes are far more active in dreams than normal wakefulness and thus, it would be expected that speech - a secondary process - would be subjected to severe disturbances during dreaming. Freud's dream records show that his dream speech was remarkably well-formed. In The Interpretation of Dreams (1900) Freud addressed the theoretical dilemma of secondary process speech occurring within primary process dreaming. He employed 'replay hypothesis' as an explanation, stating that audible/acoustic speech in dreams is a playback of actual speech heard by the dreamer in their waking life. Non-acoustic utterances within dreams had their origin in previous wakeful ideas and thoughts of the dreamer. This material may have undergone 'splicing' or 'editing'. He applied his theory to several of his own dreams, notably, 'The Autodidasker Dream' and 'The Castle by the Sea' dream, both of which demonstrated that dream speech, while perceived as being in the dreamer's native language, may involve links from other foreign languages of which he has some knowledge.

The problem with using the psychoanalytic method to dissect Kraepelin's dreams is that Kraepelin did not free associate upon his own dreams or use psychoanalysis as a tool for exploring their meaning. Thus, any psychoanalytical study of Kraepelin's dreams are third-party analysis - like Freud's inclusion of Hanns Sach's psychoanalytic interpretation of Bismark's dream which was included in The Interpretation of Dreams and focused on infantile sexuality. In doing so, Freud pointed to 'firmly established linguistic usage' - the idea that dream speech may take on a visual, physical representation, rather than presenting in verbal form.

On 5 April 1926, six months prior to his death, Kraepelin recorded a dream. The only information provided is that the phrase 'Ruhrochs gibt es nicht mehr' ('there is no more scrambled ox') was uttered 'in an inn'. The dream utterance has been analysed in the following way:

'Ruhrochs gibt es nicht mehr'

The neologism 'Ruhrochs' = 'scrambled ox'

'Ruhrei' = 'scrambled eggs'

'Ochsenaugen' = 'eggs sunny-side up'

'Ochs' = sounds like English word 'ox'

'Ruhrochs' associated with Latin word 'Praecox' which is linked semantically with 'Ochsenaugen'

'Ochsenaugen' also means 'Apricot cake'

Apricot/aprilkose = 'praecox' - a form of early-ripened peach

'Praecox' translates to the German 'fruhreif' which translates as 'early-ripe'

'Fruhreif' - becomes 'fruhreif'

Latent meaning: 'Dementia praecox is no more' ('Dementia praecox' was Kraepelin's term for what we now call 'schizophrenia')

Bleuler's term 'schizophrenia' had superseded Kraepelin's terminology and become the accepted medical classification, whilst Kraepelin was at the end of his career and near death.

The dream interpretation above can be interpreted as a 'loss of name' - and can be analysed in a similar way to Kraepelin's other dreams, noted above, which also link to his moniker. Thus Kraepelin's family name is key to unravelling the meaning of his dream speech - his anxiety that his name/legacy might become extinguished, or his contribution to medicine may be lost. His dreams seem to display a wish that his name and nomenclature would continue to live on after his death. Additional interpretations of Kraepelin's dream speech suggest that it displays an unconscious motive to demonstrate his intellect and mental complexity, therefore reinforcing his overall claim of historical importance. Validation of the theory that preservation of Kraepelin's unusual family name was of psychological importance to him can be found in biographies (Steinberg (2001) & Burgmair et al (2000) for example). It is suggested that the concern about the loss of his family name and his desire for its endurance may have been idiosyncratic to Kraepelin under the particular circumstances of his personal life. However, analysis of his contributions to dream speech and psychoanalytic interpretation using Freud's techniques may enable a more generalised hypothesis to emerge: in dreams which are almost entirely made up of utterances/dream speech rather than visual representations or imagery, one's proper name - an aspect of their identity - may constitute a remnant of a diminished sense of identity or a 'minimal characteristic of the ego' (Engels et al (2008)) which the dreamer clings to. The deeper roots of the dream may concern childhood fears of elimination or annihilation. These theories can be tested in a psychoanalytic setting, via use of Freud's methods of free association. Certainly, irrespective of whether Freudian interpretations of Kraepelin's dreams are accepted as truth, Kraepelin left a rich legacy of dream material capable of illuminating the intricate nature of speech functions and the unconscious mind. Kraepelin's name endures in this respect and his dream records may be dissected within a linguistic, neurological or psychoanalytical framework, each possibility offering valuable insight into the speech patterns of dreams.