Chapter XVIII: The Psychogenesis of Multiple Personality—the Case of B. 545 (6)

Of course, from a practical (clinical) point of view, it is of no
consequence whether given phenomena are induced by coconscious or
unconscious processes; the individual is not aware of either. Let me
answer, however, a strange objection that has been made to such an
inquiry. It has been objected that as it makes no practical difference
whether the subconscious process, which induces a given phenomenon, is
coconscious or unconscious, and as in many given cases it is difficult
or impossible to determine the question, therefore, that such
inquiries are useless. Plainly such an objection only concerns applied
science, not science itself. It concerns only the practicing physician
who deals solely with reactions. Likewise it makes no difference to
the practicing chemist whether some atoms are positive and some
negative ions, and whether on further analysis they are systems of
electrons, and whether, again, electrons are points of electricity.
The practical chemist deals only with reactions. Such questions,
however, having to do with the ultimate nature of matter are of the
highest interest to science. Likewise the nature of subconscious
processes is of the highest interest to psychological science.

Footnote 80:

I have passed over the classical hysterical phenomena as they open a
very large subject which needs a special treatment by itself. The
subconscious processes underlying them, so far as they have been
determined, are, as I have explained, admittedly coconscious, though
some may be in part unconscious. They are too complicated to be
entered into here.

Footnote 81:

Prince: Experiments to Determine Coconscious (Subconscious) Ideation,
_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, April-May, 1908.

Footnote 82:

Among these I might mention the names of a dozen or more well-known
psychologists and physicians of experience and repute who have
observed one or both of these cases. Through the kindness of Dr. G. A.
Waterman I have had an opportunity to investigate a third case, one of
his patients, who described similar coconscious “pictures”
accompanying certain impulsive conscious acts. The pictures, when of
persons, were described as “life size,” and were likened to those of a
cinematograph. Also, as with one of my cases, suggested post-hypnotic
actions were accompanied by such coconscious pictures representing in
successive stages the act to be performed. An analysis of both the
impulsive and the suggested phenomena seemed to clearly show that the
pictures emerged from a deeper lying submerged process induced by the
residuum of a dream and of the suggestion, respectively.

Footnote 83:

Cf. Lecture IV. These coconscious pictures are so varied and occur in
so many relations that they need to be studied by themselves.

Footnote 84:

This, of course, so far as she could determine from the data of
memory. The more correct interpretation probably is that the thoughts
of the “secondary consciousness” were supplied by a still deeper
underlying subconscious process, certain elements of which emerged as
dissociated conscious states (not in the focus of attention). This
same process probably was the real agent in doing the actual
translation, and later thrust the necessary data into awareness in
such fashion that the translation seemed to be performed consciously.
If all the required data is supplied to consciousness the problem is
thereby done.

Footnote 85:

The subject here, of course, refers not to experimental but to
spontaneous solutions. When experimentally performed the whole problem
was solved subconsciously. Furthermore, a memory of a detail of this
kind of remote experiences obviously would not be reliable, but only
immediately after an experience. In fact, spontaneous solutions
sometimes occurred entirely subconsciously. (Cf. Lecture VII.) In the
experimental calculation experiments the solution is made
subconsciously in accordance with the prescribed conditions of the
experiment. In other observations on this subject the coconscious
pictures represented past experiences of the subject, much as do
crystal visions, and suggest that these past experiences were
functioning unconsciously.

Footnote 86:

Prince: Some of the Present Problems of Abnormal Psychology, Congress
of Arts and Sciences, St. Louis, 1904, V. 5, p. 770.

Footnote 87:

Practically similar conditions I have found in B. C. A., and Miss B.,
though described by the subjects in different phraseology.

Footnote 88:

For instance, to take a sensational example, on one occasion in the
midst of hilarity while singing, laughing, etc., she suddenly became
depressed and burst into tears. What happened was this: It was a
sorrowful anniversary, and in the “lower stratum” sad memories had
been recurring during the period of hilarity. These memories had come
into consciousness early in the morning, but she had resolutely put
them out of her mind. They had, however, kept recurring in the lower
stratum, and suddenly emerged into the upper stratum of consciousness
with the startling effect described. More commonly, however, the
emergence of the lower stratum is simply a shifting play of thought.
It is interesting to note that censored thoughts and temptations are
apt to go into the lower stratum and here with their affects continue
at play. _These sometimes reappear as dreams._

Footnote 89:

The validity of the evidence of memory as applied to subconscious
processes needs to be carefully weighed. It is a question of method,
and if the method is fallacious all conclusions fall to the ground. In
the sciences of normal psychology and psychiatry and psychopathology,
the data given by memory are and necessarily must be relied upon to
furnish a knowledge of the content of mental processes and the mental
symptoms, and all methods of psychological analysis are based on the
data of memory. Without such data there could be no such sciences. As
a matter of experience the method is found to be reliable when
properly checked by multiple observations. If by special methods of
technique mental processes, which do not enter the awareness of the
moment, are later brought into consciousness as data of memory, are
these data _per contra_ to be rejected as hallucinatory? This is what
their rejection would mean. Now, as a fact, there are phenomena, like
coconscious personalities, which compel the postulation of coconscious
processes. If this is the case, if there are coconscious processes
which do not enter awareness, it would be the strangest thing if there
were not conditions of the personality in which a memory of these
processes could be obtained. This fact would have to be explained. The
bringing of coconscious processes into consciousness as data of memory
does not seem therefore to be anything _a priori_ improbable and there
would seem to be no reason why the memory of them should be more
unreliable than that of conscious processes in the forms of attention.
Indeed, if the fringe of consciousness be regarded as coconscious, it
is an every-day act common to everybody. Such data necessarily should
be checked up by multiple observations.

Footnote 90:

For examples of this kind, see Prince, Experiments to Determine
Coconscious Ideation, _Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, April-May,
1908.

Footnote 91:

The Dissociation, pp. 55, 56.

Footnote 92:

It is only necessary to close one’s eyes, then grimace and move one’s
limbs to become conscious of these secondary images which picture each
movement of the features, etc.

Footnote 93:

The mechanism is probably not quite so simple as this, probably past
visual perceptions of self and the environment took part, so that the
vision was a fusion or composite of these older primary images and the
secondary images. The principle of mechanism, however, would not be
affected by this added element. Sidis (The Doctrine of Primary and
Secondary Sensory Elements, _Psych. Rev._, January-March, 1908) has
maintained that all hallucinations are the emerging of the secondary
images of previous perceptions. If, on the other hand, the vision be
interpreted as something fabricated by the subconscious process—as
must be the case with some hallucinations—then this process must have
been much more complicated than memory. Something akin at least to
constructive imagination and intelligence that translated the
experiences into visual terms.

Footnote 94:

That is to say, as described by the visualizer.

Footnote 95:

Cf. The Dissociation, pp. 211-220.

Footnote 96:

At this point the subject watching the vision remarked, “I drop one of
the letters, but I do not know I have done so.” In other words,
conscious of the content of the somnambulist’s consciousness, the
visualizer knows that there is no awareness of this act. The letter
was afterward found by the servant on the stairs.

Footnote 97:

Coconscious ideas may provoke hallucinations. (For examples consult
“Hallucinations” in Index to The Dissociation.)

LECTURE VII
SUBCONSCIOUS INTELLIGENCE
(Continued)

III. _Subconscious intelligence underlying spontaneous hallucinations._—Spontaneous hallucinations often offer opportunities to study subconscious processes exhibiting constructive intelligence. Although properly belonging to clinical phenomena, they often can be so clearly related to an antecedent experience as to allow us to determine the causal factor with the same exactness as in the experimental type, and, therefore, to infer the connecting subconscious link with equal probability. Some of these spontaneous visions indicate that the subconscious link must be of considerable complexity and equivalent to logical processes of reasoning, volition, and purposive intelligence. Sometimes the same subconscious processes which fabricate the vision determine also other processes of conscious thought and movements.

In illustration I may cite an incident in the life of Miss B., which I have previously described:

“Miss B., as a child, frequently had visions of the Madonna and
Christ, and used to believe that she had actually seen them. It was
her custom when in trouble, if it was only a matter of her school
lessons, or something that she had lost, to resort to prayer. Then she
would be apt to have a vision of Christ. The vision never spoke, but
sometimes made signs to her, and the expression of His face made her
feel _that all was well_. After the vision passed she felt that her
difficulties were removed, and if it was a bothersome lesson which she
had been unable to understand it all became intelligible at once. Or,
if it was something that she had lost, _she at once went to the spot
where it was_.”... [For example, while under observation.] "Miss B.
had lost a bank check and was much troubled concerning it. For five
days she had made an unsuccessful hunt for it, systematically going
through everything in her room. She remembered distinctly placing the
check between the leaves of a book, when some one knocked at her door,
and this was the last she saw of the check. She had become very much
troubled about the matter, and in consequence, after going to bed that
night she was unable to sleep, and rose several times to make a
further hunt. Finally, at 3 o’clock in the morning, she went to bed
and fell asleep. At 4 o’clock she woke with the consciousness of a
presence in the room. She arose, and in a moment saw a vision of
Christ, who did not speak, but smiled. She at once felt, as she used
to, _that everything was well_, and that the vision foretold that she
should find the check. All her anxiety left her at once. The figure
retreated toward the bureau, but the thought flashed into her mind
that the lost check was in the drawer of her desk. A search, however,
showed that it was not there. She then walked automatically to the
bureau, opened the top drawer, took out some stuff upon which she had
been sewing, unfolded it, and there was the check along with one or
two other papers.

“Neither Miss B. nor BII [hypnosis] has any memory of any specific
thought which directed her to open the drawer and take out her sewing,
nor of any conscious idea that the check was there. Rather, she did
it, so far as her consciousness goes, automatically, as she used to do
automatic writing.”[98]

Further investigation revealed the fact that the money had been put away absent-mindedly and “unconsciously”; in hypnosis the memory of this act was recovered.

In this observation we have two so-called automatic phenomena of different types—one a sensory automatism, the vision, the other a motor automatism or actions leading to the finding of the money. The motor acts being automatic were necessarily determined by subconscious processes and plainly required a knowledge of the hiding-place. This knowledge also plainly must have been conserved in the unconscious and now, in answer to her wish to find the lost money, acting as a subconscious process, fulfilled her wish in a practical way.

The vision was of Christ smiling. Seeing it the subject at once “felt that all was well,” and her anxiety vanished. It was plainly therefore a fabricated visual symbolism though one which she had frequently before experienced. It may be taken as a message sent by subconscious processes to her anxious consciousness and it is not too much to say had a purposive meaning, viz., to allay her anxiety. The question is, What was the causal factor which determined this symbolism? Logically it is a compulsory inference that the same conserved knowledge and subconscious processes, which eventuated in the motor automatisms, must have been the causal factor that determined the visual symbolism which carried the reassuring message to consciousness. This subconscious knowledge first allayed her anxiety and then proceeded to answer her problem of the whereabouts of the lost money. More specifically, the primary causal factor was the preceding anxious wish to find the money; the resulting phenomena were the sensory and motor automatisms, allaying the anxiety and fulfilling the wish; _between the two as connecting links were subconscious processes of an intelligent, purposive, volitional character which first fabricated a visual symbolism as a message to consciousness and then made use of the conserved knowledge of her previous absent-minded act to solve her problem_. The subconscious process as a whole we thus see was of quite a complicated character. In this example it is impossible to determine from the data at hand whether the subconscious process was coconscious or unconscious.

The observation which I have elsewhere described as “an hallucination from the subconscious”[99] is an excellent example of an intelligent subconscious process indicative of judgment and purpose. The hallucination occurred in my presence as a result of an antecedent experience for which I was a moment before responsible. It was therefore of the nature of an experiment and the causal factor was known. The antecedent experience consisted of certain remarks and behavior of the subject while under the influence of an illusion during a dissociated state for which there was subsequent amnesia. The vision was of a friend whose face was sad, as of one who had been injured, and seemed to reproach her. At the same moment she heard his voice which said, “How could you have betrayed me?” The hallucinatory words and the visual image were in no sense a reproduction of the causal, i.e., antecedent, experience. They were the expression of a _subconscious self-reproach_ in consequence of that experience. This reproach connoted a subconscious belief or logical judgment, drawn from the experience, that she had broken a promise.[100] It was a subconscious reaction to a subconscious belief. I say both the reproach and the judgment were subconscious because, in the dissociated state, owing to the illusion, and in the normal after-state owing to the amnesia, she was entirely ignorant of having done anything that could be construed into breaking a promise. This interpretation of the episode must therefore have been entirely subconscious. The self-reproach emerged into consciousness but translated into visual and auditory hallucinations. These were plainly a condemnatory message sent from the subconscious to the personal consciousness and might aptly be termed “the prickings of a subconscious conscience.” The primary causal factor was simply certain statements (conserved in the unconscious) made to me by the subject and for which afterwards there was amnesia. Intervening between this antecedent experience and the resulting hallucinatory phenomena a subconscious process must be postulated as a necessary connecting link. This process plainly involved memory and an intelligent judgment, an emotional reaction, and an expression of this judgment and reaction translated into hallucinatory phenomena. Apparently also a distinct purpose to upbraid the personality was manifested.

The accounts of _sudden religious conversion_ are full of instances of hallucinations occurring at the time of the “crisis” and these—visions and voices—are often logical symbolisms of antecedent thoughts of the subject. By analogy with similar experimental phenomena we are compelled to interpret them in the same way and postulate these antecedent experiences as the causal factors. If this postulation is sound then the connecting subconscious link is often a quite complicated process of an intelligent character.

In one instance in which the occurrence was similar in principle to sudden religious conversion I was able to determine beyond question the causal antecedents of the hallucinatory phenomenon. I will not repeat the details here;[101] suffice it to say that the hallucination, consisting of a vision and an auditory message from the subject’s deceased husband (see p. 40), answered the doubts and scruples with which the subject had been previously tormented. It was a logical answer calculated to allay distressing memories against which she had been fighting, “the old ideas of dissatisfaction with life, the feelings of injury, bitterness, and rebellion against fate and the ‘kicking against the pricks’ which these memories evoked.” It expressed previously entertained ideas which she had tried to accept but without success. The exposition of this answer in the _hallucinatory symbolism_ required a subconscious process involving considerable reasoning. _The phenomenon as a whole was a message addressed to her own consciousness by subconscious processes to answer her doubts and anxious questionings of herself, and to settle the conflict going on in her mind._ The logical connection between the different elements of this hallucination and certain antecedent experiences which had harassed the subject are so close that there is no room left for doubting that these experiences were the causal factors. And so I might analyze a large number of spontaneous hallucinations wherein you would find the same evidence for subconscious processes _showing intelligent constructive imagination, reasoning, volition, and purposive effort_, and expressing themselves in automatisms which either solve a disturbing problem or carry to fruition a subconscious purpose.

I offer no excuse for multiplying these observations of hallucinatory phenomena, even at the expense of tedious repetition, for such studies give an insight into the mechanism of the hallucinations met with in the insanities and other pathological states. They offer, too, an insight into the basic process involved in dreams as these are a type of hallucinatory phenomena. It is by a study of hallucinations experimentally created, and others where we are in a position to know the causal factors, that we can learn the mechanisms underlying similar phenomena occurring in normal pathological conditions. As a rule in the latter conditions it is difficult to determine beyond question the true causal factors and, therefore, the particular subconscious processes involved. Such phenomena as I have presented justify the conclusion of the “new psychology” that the _hallucinations of the insane_ are not haphazard affairs but the resultant of subconscious processes evoked by antecedent experiences. In conclusion, then, we may say that _in artificial hallucinations as experimentally conducted, and in certain spontaneous hallucinations, we have two known factors; the causal factor (the antecedent experience) and the hallucinatory phenomenon—the effect. Intervening between the two is an inferred subconscious process of considerable complexity which is required to explain the causal connection_. With the exact mechanism of hallucinatory phenomena we are not at present concerned, but only with the evidence of the actuality of a subconscious process, of its character as an intelligence, and with its intrinsic nature.

As to the last problem it is plain that further investigations are required and that the methods at present at our disposal for its solution leave much to be desired. All things considered a conservative summing up would be that the subconscious process may be both coconscious and unconscious.

IV. _Subconscious intelligence underlying dreams._ As is well known, Freud advanced the theory, now well fortified by numerous observations of others, that underlying a dream is a subconscious process which fabricates the conscious dream. According to Freud and his followers this subconscious process is always an antecedent wish and the dream is an imaginary fulfillment of that wish. This part of the theory (as well as the universality of an underlying process) is decidedly questionable. My own observations lead me to believe that a dream may be also the expression of antecedent doubts, scruples, anxieties, etc., or may be an answer to an unsolved problem. We need not concern ourselves with this particular question here. I refer to it simply to point out that its correct solution depends upon the correct determination of the true causal factor which is necessarily antecedently unknown and must be inferred. It is inferred or selected from the associated memories evoked by the so-called method of analysis. Hence it must be always an element open to greater or less doubt. _Dreams are a type of hallucinatory phenomena_ and therefore we should expect that their mechanism would correspond more or less closely with that of other hallucinatory phenomena.

With the object in view of determining whether a dream could be produced _experimentally_ and brought within the category of phenomena where the causal factor was antecedently known, and thus determine the actuality of a subconscious process as a necessary intervening link between the two, I made the following experiment. It should be noted that a wish _fulfilment_ necessarily means a dream content so far different in form from the content of the _wish itself_ that the postulation of a connecting link, conscious or subconscious, is required. I also sought, if a subconscious process could be postulated, to discover how elaborate and what sort of a work of constructive imagination a subconscious wish could evolve.

To a suitable subject while in a deep hypnotic trance state I gave a suggestion in the form of a wish to be worked out to fulfilment in a dream. It so happened that this subject was going through a period of stress and strain for which she sought relief. I also knew that she had a very strong desire to do a good piece of original psychological work and had advised her to take up the work as a solution of her difficulties. So, taking advantage of this desire, I impressed upon her, for the purpose of emphasizing the impulsive force of the desire, that she now had the longed-for opportunity as the culmination of her previous years of training to do the work. I then gave her the following suggestion: “You want to do a good piece of original work and your dream to-night will be the fulfillment of the wish.” No hint as to what form the dream fulfilment should take was given, nor had she any knowledge before being put into the trance state that I intended to make an experiment.

It is interesting to note how the dream has a logical form which is unfolded as an argument. This itself is an allegorical transcript of the reasons previously suggested to her for the particular solution of her problem.

The dream was a long one and into it were logically introduced as a part of the argument the actual distressing circumstances for the relief of which I had advised taking up the piece of psychological work as an outlet to her feelings and solution of her problem of life. I will give in detail only so much of the dream as contains the wish fulfilment (which became also a part of the dream argument), summarizing the remainder. The dream begins with an allegorical description of the great task involved in the study of psychology by all the workers of the world. The science of psychology is symbolized by a temple. “I dreamed I was where they were building a great temple or cathedral; an enormous place covering many acres of ground. Hundreds of men were building. Some were building spires, some were building foundations, and some were tearing down what they had built, some parts had fallen down of themselves. I was wandering around looking on.” Then she proceeds to help one of the builders who was building a particular part of the temple by bringing him material in the form of stones. This she had actually done, in real life, contributing much psychological material out of her own experiences. Many of these experiences had been very intimate ones from her inner life and had involved much suffering; hence the stones which she contributed in her dream were big and heavy and were beyond her strength to carry, so that she could only roll them,—and some were sharp and made her hands bleed, so that her contribution involved much suffering. This part of the dream was not only a prelude to the suggested wish fulfilment but, as interpreted, contained a wish fulfilment in itself.

Then there was interjected an allegorical but very accurate description of the distressing circumstances to which I have referred and for which, as a problem of life, the suggested work was advised as a solution. Then logically followed the wish fulfilment and solution. She heard the voice of the builder whom she had been helping say to her, “‘Now, here are all the materials and you must build a temple of your own,’ and I [she] said, ‘I cannot,’ and he said, ‘you can, and I will help you.’ So I began to build the stones I had taken him. It was hard work, but I kept on, and a most beautiful temple grew up.... All the stones were very brilliant in color, but each one was stained with a drop of blood that came from a wound in my heart. And the temple grew up; and I handled all the stones; but somehow the temple grew up of itself and lots of people were coming from all directions to look at it, and someone, who seemed to be William James, said, ‘It is the most valuable part of the temple,’ and I felt very proud....’” After another interjection of the distressing problem of her life just alluded to, the dream ends with the figure of “a beautiful shining angel with golden spreading wings and the word ‘Hope’ written on his forehead.” This figure “spread his lovely wings and rose right up through the temple and became the top of the spire, a gorgeous shining figure of Hope.”[102]

After this dream was obtained the subject, who had no knowledge that any suggestion had been given to induce the dream, was told to analyze the dream herself by the method of associative memories. As is customary in the use of this method, in which she had had considerable experience, the memories associated with each element of the dream were obtained. These memories all led back directly to her interest in psychology and desire to contribute some original work, and to her own life’s experiences. Every one of the dream-elements (temple, spires, foundations, stones, bleeding hands, drop of blood from the wound in her heart, etc.) evoked associative memories which justified the inference that these elements were symbolisms of past experiences or of constructive imagination.

That this dream was determined by, and the explicit imaginary fulfilment of the antecedent wish made use of in the experiment and motivated by the suggestion would seem to be conclusively shown.

If, then, in any case a causal relation between an antecedent wish and its dream fulfilment exists, it follows that there must be some link between that wish experienced in the past and the present dream fulfilment, some mode, mechanism, or process by which a past thought, without entering consciousness, can continue to its own fulfilment in a conscious work of the imagination, the dream. I say without entering consciousness because the original specific thought-wish does not appear in the dream consciousness, which is only the fulfilment. The phenomenon as a whole is also inexplicable unless there was some motivating factor or force which determined the form of the dream just as in conscious fabrication and argument “we” consciously motivate and arrange the form of the product. The only logical and intelligible inference is that the _original wish_, becoming reawakened (by the preceding suggestion) during sleep, _continued to function outside of the dream consciousness, as a motivating and directing subconscious process_.

But what was the content of this process, and to what extent can its elements be correlated with those of the dream? The experimental data of this dream do not afford an answer to this question. (Those of the observation I shall next give will permit a deeper insight into the character and content of their process.) It is a reasonable inference, however, inasmuch as the different elements of the dream—temple, stones, etc., the material out of which it is constructed—are found to be logical symbolizations of their associative memories, that these memories took part in the subconscious process and consequently may be correlated with their dream-symbols. In other words the content of the subconscious process was more than a wish, or wish neurogram, it included a large complex of memories of diverse experiences that can be recognized through their symbolizations in the dream. This complex, motivated by a particular wish, fabricated the dream, just as in the hallucinations I have cited an underlying process fabricated the hallucination as a symbolic expression of a subconscious judgment, self-reproach, etc. To do this a process that must be termed a _subconscious intelligence_ was required. The dream was an allegory, a product of constructive imagination in the logical form of an argument, and if constructed by an underlying process the latter must have had the same characteristics.[103]

This experimental dream confirms therefore the general principle formulated by Freud from the analysis of dreams in which the causal factor is an inferred wish. It is likewise on the assumption of my having correctly inferred this factor that I have insisted that a dream may be a fabricated expression of thoughts other than wishes or may be the solution of an unsolved problem. In this last case _the dream phenomena and mechanism seem to be analogous in every way to the subconscious solution of mathematical problems_ which I have already described. In such and other cases the subconscious process would seem to be a continuation and elaboration of the antecedent suggested problem.

In dreams, then, or, as we should strictly limit ourselves for the present to saying, _in certain dreams_, there are, as Freud first showed, two processes; one is the conscious dream, the other is a subconscious process which is the actuated residuum of a previous experience and determines the dream.[104] It would be going beyond the scope of our subject to enter into a full exposition of this interpretation at this time and I must refer you for a discussion of the dream problem to works devoted to the subject.

We have not, of course, touched the further problem of the _How_: how a subconscious intelligence induces a conscious dream which is not an emergence of the elements of that intelligence into self-consciousness, but a symbolization of them. This is a problem which still awaits solution. From certain data at hand it seems likely that so far as concerns the hallucinatory perceptual elements of a dream they can be accounted for as the _emergence of the secondary images_ pertaining to the subconscious “ideas.”

The following observation is an _example of subconscious versification and_ also of _constructive imagination_. It also, I think, gives an insight into the character and content of the underlying process which constructs a dream. I give the observation in the subject’s own words:

"I woke suddenly some time between three and four in the morning. I
was perfectly wide awake and conscious of my surroundings but for a
short time—perhaps two or three minutes—I could not move, and I saw
this vision which I recognized as such.

"The end of my room seemed to have disappeared, and I looked out into
boundless space. It looked misty but bright, as if the sun was shining
behind a light fog. There were shifting wisps of fog blowing lightly
about, and these wisps seemed to gather into the forms of a man and a
woman. The figures were perfectly clear and lifelike—I recognized them
both. The man was dressed in dark every-day clothes, the woman in
rather flowing black; her face was partly hidden on his breast; one
arm was laid around his neck; both his arms were around her, and he
was looking down at her, smiling very tenderly. They seemed to be
surrounded by a sort of rosy atmosphere; a large, very bright star was
above their heads—not in the heavens, but just over them; tall rose
bushes heavy with red roses in full bloom grew up about them, and the
falling petals were heaped up around their feet. Then the man bent his
head and kissed her.

"The vision was extraordinarily clear and I thought I would write it
down at once. I turned on the light by my bedside, took pencil and
paper lying there and wrote, as I supposed, _practically what I have
written here_. I then got up, was up some minutes, went back to bed,
and after a while to sleep. The clock struck four soon after getting
back into bed. I do not think I experienced any emotion at the moment
of seeing the vision, but after writing it down I did.

"The next morning I picked up the paper to read over what I had
written and was amazed at the language and the rhythm. This is what I
had written:

"‘Last night I waked from sleep quite suddenly,
And though my brain was clear my limbs were tranced.
Beyond the walls of my familiar room
I gazed outward into luminous space.
Before my staring eyes two forms took shape,
Vague, shadowy, slowly gathering from the mists,
Until I saw before me, you—my Love!
And folded to your breast in close embrace
Was she, that other, whom I may not name.
A rosy light bathed you in waves of love;
Above your heads there shone a glowing star;
Red roses shed their leaves about your feet.
And as I gazed with eyes that could not weep
You bent your head and laid your lips on hers.
And my rent soul’ ... [Apparently unfinished.]

“The thoughts were the same as my conscious thoughts had been—the
vision was well described—but the language was entirely different from
anything I had thought, and the writing expressed the emotion which I
had not consciously experienced in seeing the vision, but which (I
have since learned) I had felt during the dream, and which I did
consciously feel _after_ writing. When I wrote I meant simply to state
the facts of the vision.”[105]

The subject was unable to give any explanation of the vision or of the composition of the verse. She rarely remembers her dreams and had no memory of any dream the night of this vision. By hypnotic procedure, however, I was able to recover memories of a dream which occurred just before she woke up. It appeared that in the dream she was wandering in a great open space and saw this “picture in a thin mist. The mist seemed to blow apart” and disclosed the “picture” which was identical with the vision. At the climax of the dream picture the dreamer experienced an intense emotion well described in the verse by the unfinished phrase, “My rent soul...” The dreamer “shrieked, and fell on the ground on her face, and grew cold from head to foot and waked up.”

The vision after waking, then, was a repetition of a preceding _dream_ vision and we may safely assume that it was fabricated by the same underlying process which fabricated the dream, this process repeating itself after waking.

So far the phenomenon was one which is fairly common. Now when we come to examine the automatically written script we find it has a number of significant characteristics. (1) It describes a conscious episode, (2) As a literary effort for one who is not a poetical writer it is fairly well written and probably quite as good verse as the subject can consciously write; (3) It expresses the mental attitude, sentiments and emotions experienced in the dream but not at the time of the vision. _These had also been antecedent experiences_; (4) Both the central ideas of the verse and the vision symbolically represented certain antecedent presentiments of the future; (5) The script gives of the vision an interpretation which was not consciously in mind at the moment of writing.

Now, inasmuch as these sentiments and interpretations were not in the conscious mind at the moment of writing, the script _suggests_ that the process that wrote it was not simply a subconscious memory of the vision but the same process which fabricated the dream. Indeed, the phenomenon is open to the suspicion that this same process expresses the same ideas in verbal symbolism as a substitution for the hallucinatory symbolism. To determine this point, an effort was made to recover by technical methods memories of this process; that is to determine what wrote the verse and by what sort of a process. The following was brought out:

1. The script was written automatically. The subject thought she was writing certain words and expressing certain thoughts and did not perceive that she was writing different words. “Something seemed to prevent her seeing the words she wrote.” There were two trains of “thought.”

2. The “thoughts” of the verse were in her “subconscious mind.”[106] These “thoughts” (also described as “words”) were not logically arranged or as written in the verse, but “sort of tumbled together—mixed up a little.” “They were not like the thoughts one thinks in _composing_ a verse.” There did not seem to be any attempt at selection from the thoughts or words. No evidence could be elicited to show that the composing was done here.

3. Concurrently with these subconscious, mixed-up thoughts coconscious “images” of the words of the verse came just at the moment of writing them down. The images were bright, printed words. Sometimes one or two words would come at a time and sometimes a whole line.

In other words all happened _as if_ there was a deeper underlying process which did the composing and from this process certain thoughts without logical order emerged to form a subconscious stream and after the composing was done the words of the verse emerged as coconscious images as they were to be written. This underlying process, then, “automatically” did the writing and the composing. Hence it seemed to the subject even when remembering in hypnosis the subconscious thoughts and images that both were done unconsciously.

As to whether this underlying process was the same as that which fabricated the dream and the hallucination, the evidence, albeit circumstantial, would seem to render this almost certain. In the first place the verse was only a poetical arrangement of the subconscious thoughts disclosed; the vision was an obvious symbolic expression or visual representation of the same thoughts (that is, of course, of those concerned with the subject matter of the vision). The only difference would seem to be in the form of the expression—verbal and visual imagery respectively.[107] In the second place the vision was an exact repetition of the dream vision. It is not at all rare to find certain phenomena of dreams (visual, motor, sensory, etc.) repeating themselves after waking.[108] This can only be explained by the subconscious repetition of the dream process. Consequently we are compelled to infer the same subconscious process underlying the dream-vision. More than this, it was possible to trace these thoughts back to antecedent experiences of the dreamer, so that in the last analysis the dream-vision, waking-vision, and poetical expression of the vision could be related with almost certainty to the same antecedent experiences as the causal factors.

Certain conclusions then seem compulsory: underlying the dream, vision, and script was a subconscious process in which the fundamental factors were the same. As this process showed itself capable of poetical composition, constructive imagination, volition, memory, and affectivity it was a _subconscious intelligence_.

As to its intrinsic nature—coconscious or unconscious—according to the evidence at least the process that wrote the script contained conscious elements—the coconscious thoughts and images.

We may assume the same for the dream and the vision. As to the mechanism of the vision it is quite conceivable, not to say probable, that, corresponding to the coconscious images of the printed words during the writing, there were similar images of the vision scene (both in the dream and the waking state), but these _instead of remaining coconscious emerged into consciousness to be the vision_.[109] Whether the still deeper underlying process was conscious or unconscious could not be determined by any evidence accessible and must be a matter of hypothesis.

The chief importance that attaches to this observation, it seems to me, is the insight it gives into the character of the underlying process of a dream. If the conclusions I have drawn are sound, then the subconscious process which determines the conscious dream may be what is actually an _intelligence_ and it matters not whether a coconscious or unconscious one. This seems to me to be a conclusion fraught with the highest significance for the theory of dreams and hallucinatory phenomena in general. Of course we all know well enough that dissociated subconscious processes may be intelligent and influence the content of the personal consciousness, as witness coconscious personalities. If the underlying process of a dream may be something akin to such a personality, something capable of reasoning, imagination and volition, it renders intelligible the fundamental principle of the Freudian theory of a double process—the “latent” and “manifest” dream. One of the difficulties in the general acceptance of this theory has been, I think, the difficulty of conceiving a subconscious process—the “latent dream”—capable of the intelligent fabrication of a “manifest” dream phantasy which is a cryptic symbolization of the subject’s thoughts. Such a fabrication has all the earmarks of purpose, fore-thought and constructive imagination. But if this underlying process can be identified, even though it be in a single case, with such an intelligence as that which wrote the poetical script we have studied, it is plainly quite capable of fabricating the wildest dream phantasy.

I have suggested that the _subconscious intelligence_ may be _comparable to the phenomenon of a coconscious personality_. It is worth noting in this connection that in the case of Miss B. the coconscious personality, Sally, who claimed to be awake while Miss B. was dreaming, also claimed that Miss B. sometimes dreamed about what Sally was thinking of at the moment.[110] In other words, the thoughts of a large systematized coconscious intelligence determined the dream just as these thoughts sometimes emerged into Miss B.’s mind when awake. That a coconscious personality may persist awake while the principal personality is asleep I have been able to demonstrate in another case (B. C. A.). It was also noted in Dr. Barrows’ case of Anna Winsor. Moreover, Sally was shown to be a persistent, sane coconsciousness while Miss B. was delirious and also while she was apparently deeply etherized and unconscious.[111] After all it is difficult to distinguish _in principle_ the condition of sleep with a persisting coconsciousness from a state of deep hypnotic trance where the subject is apparently unconscious. In this condition, although the waking consciousness has disappeared, there can be shown to be a persisting “secondary” consciousness which can be communicated with by automatic writing and which later can exhibit memories of occurrences in the environment during the hypnotic trance. (B. C. A.)

What has been said does not touch, of course, the other mechanisms of the Freudian theory nor the unessential, greatly over-emphasized theory that the subconscious dream is always a sexual wish. On the contrary, the principle throws a strong, _a priori_ doubt upon the correctness of this generalization. It is plainly, however, a matter of fact which might be easily determined by observation were it not for the difficulty of correctly referring clinical phenomena to the correct antecedent experiences as their causal factors. In the last analysis it becomes always a matter of interpretation.

=Applied psychology.=—Much has been discovered in recent years regarding the part played by subconscious processes in the production of normal and abnormal phenomena. But we do not as yet know the possibilities and limitations of these processes. We have as yet but an imperfect knowledge of what they can do, what they can’t do, and what they do do, and of the mechanisms by which they are called into play and provoke phenomena. _Many pathological phenomena_ have been shown to be due to subconscious processes; and it is quite probable that these play an important part in determining the mental processes of normal life, but this is still largely theory. In applied psychology and psychopathology the “subconscious” has been made use of to explain many phenomena with which we have practically to deal. Assumed as a concept the phenomena are explained by it with a greater or less degree of probability. In those _hysterical conditions_ where the subconscious processes have been shown to be split-off conscious processes, we can often recover memories of the latter and demonstrate their relation to the hysterical phenomena by the various technical methods already mentioned. But where this cannot be done, as is ordinarily the case, some conserved antecedent experience must be inferred as the causal factor and assumed to be the functioning subconscious process which determines the phenomenon. To a large extent, then, in applied psychology and psychopathology the postulation in specific cases of a subconscious process is theoretical and open to more or less doubt. In other words, although a principle may be established, its application, as in all applied sciences, is apt to meet with difficulties.

Now the application of the principle of a subconscious process to the explanation of a given phenomenon is rendered peculiarly difficult because for practical purposes it is not so much the question of a subacting process that is at issue as it is of what particular antecedent experience is concerned in the process. The question is of the causal factor. For example, we may know from general experience in a large number of instances that a given hysterical phenomenon—a tic or a convulsive attack or an hallucination or a dream—must be in all probability determined by a subconscious process derived from some conserved experience, but what specific experience may be a matter of considerable uncertainty. _Hence the different theories and schools of interpretation_ that have arisen. The importance of clearly appreciating the nature of such problems and properly estimating the different theories at their true value is so great that I may be permitted a few words in further explanation.

Let us take dreams as a type. The conscious dream may be made up of fantastic imagery and apparently absurd thoughts without apparent logical meaning. Now from general experience we may believe that the dream is a cryptic symbolic expression of a logical subconscious process—perhaps a wish. The question is, what wish? The symbolism cannot be deciphered on its face. Now, by the analytic method associative memories pertaining to each element of the dream are recovered in abstraction. When a memory of antecedent thoughts of which the dream element is a logical symbolism or synonym and which give an intelligent meaning to the dream is recovered, we infer that these antecedent thoughts are contained in the determining subconscious process. Further, as it is found that certain objects or actions (e. g., snakes, flying, etc.) frequently occur in the dreams of different people as symbolisms of the same thoughts, it is inferred that whenever these objects or actions appear in the dream they are always symbolisms of the same underlying thoughts.

Obviously the mere fact of an antecedent experience arising as an associative memory is not of itself evidence of its being the causal factor. Hundreds of such memories might be obtained. To have evidential value the memory must give logical meaning to the dream or dream element under investigation. Now, as a matter of fact, more than one memory can often be obtained which answers these conditions. Consequently it becomes a matter of selection from memories, or interpretation, as to which is the correct solution of a given dream problem—and _mutatis mutandis_ of a pathological phenomenon. Naturally the selection is largely determined by personal views and _a priori_ concepts. It also follows that if one accepts the universality of a given symbolism and is committed to a given theory one can, by going far enough, find associations in vast numbers of dreams that will support that theory. The correct solution of a dream problem, that is, the correct determination of the specific underlying process, depends upon the correct determination of the causal factor and this must be inferred. The inferential nature of the latter factor therefore introduces a possible source of error. There must frequently be considerable latitude in the interpretation. This is not to gainsay that in a large number of instances the logical relation between antecedent experiences (recovered by associative memories) and the dream is so close and obtrusive that doubt as to the true subconscious process can scarcely be entertained.

An example of a condensed _analysis of a dream_ will illustrate the practical difficulty often presented in determining by clinical methods the correct causal factor and subconscious process of a dream. I select a simple one which consists of two scenes:[112]

"C. was somewhere and saw an old woman who appeared to be a _Jewess_.
She was holding a _bottle_ and a _glass_, and seemed to be drinking
whisky. Then this woman changed into her own _mother_, who had the
bottle and glass, and appeared likewise to be drinking whisky.

“Then the door opened and her _father_ appeared. He had on her
_husband’s dressing gown_, and he was holding _two sticks of wood_ in
his hand.”

Before interpreting this dream I will state that the subject had been tormented (as was brought out by the associative memories) by the question whether poor people should be condemned if they yielded to temptation, particularly that of drinking. This problem she could not answer satisfactorily to herself. It is the inferred causal factor in the dream process. The dream gave an answer to this problem.

Let me also point out that the material, that is, the elements out of which this dream was constructed (indicated by the words italicized), was found in the thoughts of the dreamer on the preceding day and particularly just before going to sleep. The first scene of the dream ends with the mother drinking whisky: the second scene represents the father appearing with two sticks of wood. For the sake of simplicity of illustration I will confine myself to the _interpretation_ of this first scene as it will answer our present purposes.

“As to the first scene” (by technical methods of analysis) “a rich
collection of memories was obtained. It appeared that on the previous
morning the subject had walked with a _poor Jewess_ through the slums,
and had passed by some men who had been _drinking_. This led her to
think at the time of the lives of these poor people; of the
_temptations_ to which they were exposed; of how little we know of
this side of life and of its _temptations_. She wondered what the
effect of such surroundings, particularly of seeing people _drinking_,
would have upon the child of the Jewess. She wondered if such people
ought to be condemned if they yielded to drink and other temptations.
She thought that she herself would not blame such people if they
yielded, and that we ought not to _condemn_ them. Then in the
psychoanalysis there came memories of her mother, whose character she
admired and who _never condemned any one_. She remembered how her
mother, who was an invalid, always had a glass of _whisky_ and water
on her table at night, and how the family used to joke her about it.
Then came memories again of her husband sending _bottles of whisky_ to
her mother; of the latter _drinking_ it at night; of the men whom she
had seen in the slums and who had been _drinking_. These, very
briefly, were the experiences accompanied by strong feeling tones
which were called up as associative memories of this scene of the
dream. With these in mind, it is not difficult to construct a logical,
though symbolic, meaning of it. In the dream _a_ Jewess (not _the_
Jewess, but a type) is in the act of drinking whisky—in other words,
the poor, whom the _Jewess_ represents, yield to the temptation which
the dreamer had thought of with considerable intensity of feeling
during the day. The dreamer’s own judgment, after considerable
cogitation, had been that such people were not to be condemned. Was
she right? The dream answers the question, for the Jewess changes in
the dream to her mother, for whose judgment she had the utmost
respect. Her mother now drinks the whisky as she had actually done in
life, a logical justification (in view of her mother’s fine character
and liberal opinion) of her own belief, which was somewhat intensely
expressed in her thoughts of that morning, a belief in not condemning
poor people who yield to such temptations. The dream scene is
therefore the symbolical representation and justification of her own
belief,[113] and answers the doubts and scruples that beset her mind.”