© The Author(s) 2018
Marlon XavierSubjectivity, the Unconscious and Consumerismhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96824-7_7

7. Method

Marlon Xavier1  
(1)
University of Caxias do Sul, Caxias do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
 
 
Marlon Xavier

Overview

The methodological design consisted in an eminently qualitative and exploratory multiple-case study having night dreams as data, which were interpreted through Jungian hermeneutics. The process of interpretation and theory-generation followed a hypothetico-deductive approach.

7.1 Design

The case study method is defined as the intensive investigation of a single unit (Gilgun, 1994; Hamel, 1993; Runyan, 1982; Yin, 2002), and is considered useful to study problems in depth (Gilgun, 1994). In comparison with other research methods, it is more indicated when the research addresses (a) contemporary events in which the relevant behaviors cannot be manipulated, and (b) a descriptive question (what happened?) or an explanatory question (how or why did something happen?) (Yin, 2002, 2005, 2012). When the study has not only an exploratory or descriptive purpose, but also an explanatory one, the case study method can also be employed; in such case, the researcher has to propose concurrent explanations for the same set of events, and point out how such set of explanations can be applied to other situations and events.

Yin (2002) stresses the importance of defining the design’s unit or units of analysis, for they will define the research object and the case itself. In the classic case study, the individual is both the case and the primary unit of analysis. However, the secondary units of analysis can be embedded, that is, the individual appears as principal unit of analysis and adjoining factors serve as secondary units; for instance, the meaning of a cultural factor for the individual studied, together with its expressions. Thus, the secondary units of analysis are inherently relevant to answer the main research question.

Another important requisite for the development of a case study is the establishment of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis. The theoretical propositions at the outset of the inquiry lead to the possibility of generalizing the results—for, rather than being statistical, generalization here is limited to the theoretical level (i.e., to expanding and generalizing theories). Such approach, called “analytical generalization” by Yin (2002, p. 37) as opposed to “statistical generalization”, implies that the case study has to be considered as an experiment, rather than as a sample; therefore multiple-case studies correspond to multiple experiments, following a replication logic. Broadly speaking, the generalizability of the case study findings is demonstrated through showing the connections between the findings and prior knowledge; that is, the findings from a single case are tested in their congruence (pattern-matching) with other cases—in a comparison of cases—and with patterns predicted by theory, or with previous research and theory (Gilgun, 1994).

Based on such epistemological and methodological discussion, this work uses a multiple-case study design in which each dream is considered as a critical case (an entity that may demonstrate the tenets of a theory: Putney, 2010). The primary unit of analysis is the dream itself; based on my theoretical presuppositions, which inform the research questions, the secondary units of analysis are the forms through which the dream represents and signifies processes of colonization (of the subject, of subjectivity, but also of culture) by the imaginary of consumerism. The design thus entails a comparison of cases: a comparison between the dreams’ motifs, themes, and general narratives, and, more broadly, a comparison of their (symbolic) meanings—in terms of patterns—in themselves and in relation to the research question, reached through interpretation. Perhaps such approach can become clearer through a commentary of mine (inserted in brackets) on Clifford Geertz, whose epistemological and hermeneutic affinity with Jungian psychology was pointed by Vieira (2003):

(…) the essential task of theory building here is not to codify abstract regularities but to make thick description possible, not to generalize across cases but to generalize within them. To generalize within cases is usually called, at least in medicine and depth psychology, clinical inference. Rather than beginning with a set of inferences and attempting to subsume them under a governing law, such inference begins with a set of (presumptive) signifiers and attempts to place them within an intelligible frame. Measures are matched to theoretical predictions, but symptoms (…) are scanned for theoretical peculiarities—that is, they are diagnosed. In the study of culture [and of dreams] the signifiers are not symptoms [nor signs], but symbolic acts [and symbolic images] or clusters of symbolic acts, and the aim is not therapy but analysis of social discourse [through the unconscious discourse]. But the way in which theory is used—to ferret out the unapparent import of things—is the same. (Geertz, 1977, p. 26)

7.2 Data and Data Collection

The corpus consisted of two sets of data from different sources: dream series and individual dreams collected from the internet and dream series from patients. From such sets 16 dreams were selected (15 from Americans, 1 from a Brazilian) and used as main data for this work. However, many other dreams (including dreams from historical personalities) are also mentioned and interpreted, though usually not as extensively. A discussion on collection, selection, and final interpretation is presented in extenso below.

7.3 Hermeneutics and Interpretation

The interpretation of data , and more generally the whole outlook of this research, followed the symbolic-hermeneutics proposed by Jung in his work. Following such hermeneutic method entails the application of a hypothetico-deductive approach, which Føllesdal (1979/1994, p. 234) defines thusly:

As the name indicates, it is an application of two operations: the formation of hypotheses and the deduction of consequences from them in order to arrive at beliefs which—though they are hypothetical—are well supported, through the way their deductive consequences fit with our experiences and with our other well-supported beliefs.

That is, the internal validity of such method derives from the testing of interpretative hypotheses, generated from a pre-existing theoretical framework (the interpreter’s perspective), and the enrichment and transformation of such perspective through them. Therefore, in this work, the interpretative hypotheses and theoretical assumptions were always kept open to correction. That is, the data (the oneiric texts) and the interpretative hypotheses generated in the effort to understand them continually modified the theory (my theoretical perspective), in a constant dialectic formation. The gradual “discovery” (insights) about deeper layers of meaning in many dreams presented here forced me to question the theoretical presuppositions I held, and to think of different ones. From this constant testing of hypotheses, in relation to both the interpretations and the theoretical perspectives that could be used to understand then, arose the more or less coherent (albeit far from complete or finished) theoretical corpus, the dream interpretations, and the conclusions that are presented here. My interpretative and comparative use of cultural products, such as movies, ads, books, and so on, follows such hermeneutic approach of comparing the original text (dreams) with different but related texts, in order to substantiate the validity of the interpretations. For instance, if a person dreams with Ronald McDonald, one compares such image to the texts and images that are socially or culturally connected to it (in this case, the corporative marketing discourse that comes to be the imaginary fabricated around such sign, the image of the clown, etc.). Moreover, whenever possible, I used analogous dreams from other persons and from different historical and cultural contexts in order to compare how the symbolic representations and their meanings appeared then and now. For instance, the prototype dream was interpreted in comparison with similar contemporary dreams, but also with a dream by Walter Benjamin, which showed a completely different context and meaning (and which underlined the context and significance of the form of colonization effected by consumerism in the prototype dream and others). Such procedure, representing what one may call “historical and cultural symbolic hermeneutics”, arises from the theoretical perspective that the individual symbolic production, the dream, is also cultural and historical because it stems from a substratum that is cultural and historical, and common to all humanity: the archetypes of the collective unconscious. As Vieira (2003, p. 214) put it, in a beautiful paragraph:

It is impossible to read the symbolic thought by taking into account only the ontogenetic development, the person’s life history. The symbolic thought only produces meaning/makes sense1 when we consider it in its relation to the history of humanity’s symbolic production. (…) The theory of archetypes therefore allows for an individual symbolic production to resonate humanity’s symbolic production. What is produced individually here is analogous to what is produced collectively there, and such analogy is due to the fact that we are all human, that we all perceive and try to ascribe meaning to the world in ways that are human.

The dreams collected were interpreted psychologically according to the hermeneutics of dream interpretation proposed by Jung in his oeuvre, in dialog with elaborations and developments made by authors from the Porto Alegre Jungian School (Duarte, 1998, 1999; Freitas, 1991; Vieira, 2003, 2006), and articles written by myself (Xavier, 1999, 2001, 2005). The theoretical perspective that guided such hermeneutical interpretation was the theoretical corpus developed in this work. The research questions, transformed into objectives, guided the interpretation; the main objective of the interpretation process was to identify patterns in the dreams—not in terms of their content per se but in terms of their meaning.

As mentioned, some cultural products—books, advertisements, movies, and so on—were also interpreted in the same way, as a form of illustrating arguments and in comparison, or contrasting, with the dreams. Some of such products illustrated what I called “consumption dreams” and “dream-world of consumption”, discussed above. The logic of such procedure follows both the hermeneutical requirement of “using different but parallel texts in order to elucidate the meaning of the original text” (Welman, 1996, p. 170), that is, the intertextuality of dreams and cultural texts, and Jungian dream hermeneutics.

7.4 Jungian Hermeneutics

Jungian hermeneutics of dream interpretation2 can be summarized into a few methodological steps: assessment of the dream as drama or narrative; thematization; consideration of the dreamer’s ego attitude; contextualization, association, amplification, and serialization; interpretation on the subjective level and on the objective level; consideration of the finalist, self-regulatory, compensatory, and prospective functions of the dreams.

  1. 1.

    Dream as drama: As discussed in Chap. 2, it refers to assessing the dream according to a dramatic or narrative structure—exposition (which presents a specific problem, or the theme of the dream), development, culmination or peripeteia, solution or lysis.

     
  2. 2.

    Thematization: It means an attempt at understanding to what main theme the dream is referring, without, however, undervaluing its secondary themes. In some typical dreams (e.g., flying or being naked in a public place), thematization is a relatively easy task; in others, it is more difficult, especially when the dream presents a very complex plot. In this work, the dreams refer broadly to the themes studied (colonization of subjectivity by the consumerist imaginary); thematization here will therefore refer to what psychological aspect is being colonized, in what ways, through what, and so on.

     
  3. 3.

    Consideration of the dreamer’s ego attitude: To consider how ego consciousness (the dreamer, in the dreams) positions itself actively or passively in relation both to the problems posited by the dream (which can be of a cultural nature) and to the whole oneiric narrative. The oneiric drama usually changes due to the ego attitude or passivity, and this is what has to be considered.

     
  4. 4.

    Contextualization: Confronted with a symbolic unconscious product (e.g., the oneiric narrative), one must proceed as if it were an unknown or fragmentary text, like a philologist dealing with a strange language, and consider its context (Jung, CW12). The subjective context depends on knowing the dreamer’s life history, that is, who had the dream, and on considering the specific moment in his or her life in which the dream appeared. As discussed below in “Limitations”, unfortunately such procedure was impracticable with some dreams analyzed here.

     
  5. 5.

    Associations: The psychological context also refers to the web of associations in which the oneiric expression is naturally embedded. Personal associations refer to those in which the dreamer associates a dream-image (an object, person, event, place, etc.) to something in her life and/or her personal assessment of the image (e.g., a person in the dream is associated to a celebrity who the dreamer admires, yet such person appears as a certain friend who the dreamer strongly dislikes). In this work, at times, such associations were given in the written dream narrative; at other times, it was not possible to collect important associations (because the dreamer was unreachable).

     
  6. 6.

    Amplification: in this work, it refers to the associations of a more collective or impersonal character. It constitutes fundamentally an “elaboration and clarification of a dream-image by means of directed association and of parallels from the human science (symbology, mythology, mysticism, folklore, history of religion, ethnology etc.)” (Jung, MDR, p. 410). Drawing from the tradition of hermeneutics of cultural texts, association and amplification sometimes appear as two aspects of the same process in Jung, which he described thusly:

    The essence of hermeneutics, an art widely practised in former times, consists in adding further analogies to the one already supplied by the symbol: in the first place subjective analogies produced at random by the patient, then objective analogies provided by the analyst out of his general knowledge. This procedure widens and enriches the initial symbol, and the final outcome is an infinitely complex and variegated picture the elements of which can be reduced to their respective tertia comparationis. Certain lines of psychological development then stand out that are at once individual and collective. (Jung, CW7, §493)

    That means that the interpreter must try and find in culture (not only his or her own, or the dreamer’s, but all cultures) the parallel forms in which the oneiric images and symbols appear or have appeared—in symbolic cultural productions such as religious systems, myths, fairy tales, and so on, but also in works of art, literature, movies, and, in this work, even mass media products such as advertisements. Such parallel images and narratives furnish the cultural context of the oneiric discourse. Therefore, “Culture enters the process of meaning construction of the fantasies [and dreams] as a context that is subjacent to the context furnished by the patient’s [dreamer’s] associations and his/her history” (Vieira, 2003, p. 153). This cultural contextualization, as it were, is important especially when the dreamer cannot furnish analogies (associations), or when the dream material is manifestly collective or cultural; that is, when the oneiric symbol is not taken as exclusively personal, the interpreter can and ought to find cultural parallels. Such proposition is obviously grounded in the concepts of archetype and collective unconscious. As mentioned above, the method for dream interpretation used here also included comparison with other dreams, from different cultural and historical contexts, that were analogous (in form and/or meaning) to the dream interpreted.

    It is important to differentiate the processes of association and amplification from the Freudian “free association” method. In Jungian hermeneutics, the parallels found must be closely related to the specific dream-image; as Jung put it, “always stay with the image” (Jung, SCD, p. 381). For instance, if the dream-image is a giant, the interpreter has to found cultural parallels for the giant motif; it will not be interpreted as, for example, “the father”, unless the dream points in that direction (e.g., in the dream the giant leaves the father’s room, etc.)

     
  7. 7.

    Serialization: It refers to considering the dream as part of a dream series (from one dreamer). This process allows for identifying and comparing typical themes and symbols (motifs), which can appear under different forms, across a number of dreams. The meaning of the themes and dreams then presents itself more clearly. “The series is the context which the dreamer himself supplies. It is as if not one text but many lay before us, throwing light from all sides on the unknown terms, so that a reading of all the texts is sufficient to elucidate the difficult passages in each individual one” (Jung, CW12, §50–51). That means that a particular dream-image is clarified when seen against the broader context of the unconscious discourse across a period of time, which renders explicit the dreamer’s psychological development, main problems and questions, and individuality. That is, the analysis of a long series of dreams can be a substitute for the subjective contextualization, or personal associations, for in a series the meanings of oneiric ideas and themes become clear:

    [We] adopt the method we would use in deciphering a fragmentary text or one containing unknown words: we examine the context. The meaning of the unknown word may become evident when we compare a series of passages in which it occurs. The psychological context of dream contents consists in the web of associations in which the dream is naturally embedded. Theoretically we can never know anything in advance about this web, but in practice it is sometimes possible, granted long enough experience. (Jung, CW12, §48; e.a.)

    The series of dreams thus guarantee “a relative degree of certainty” (Jung, CW16, §322) for the interpretation.

     
  8. 8.

    Interpretation on the objective level: It takes the dream-images concretely, that is, in dreaming with a person or object that the dreamer knows, the dream is referring to them concretely. In Jung’s proposal of an interpretation on the subjective level, the oneiric and unconscious materials are considered as tendencies or parts of the dreamer’s psyche. Such materials are not interpreted concretely, but symbolically, and are seen as a true hermeneutic symbol (Vieira, 2003). However, depending on the dream, often both levels can be applied tentatively (i.e., they are not mutually excluding, but complementary), which is actually the proposal in this work. Theoretically, the dream can be seen as the unconscious discourse regarding the dreamer’s conscious and unconscious context (the subjective level) but also regarding the culture in which the subject is embedded and which largely defines him or her. Both levels of interpretation therefore aim at understanding how the oneiric text is related to, or articulated with, the dreamer’s psychic system and life—the dreamer’s subjectivity—and their cultural context.

     
  9. 9.

    Finally, the dreams must be considered according to the principles that characterize Jung’s theory on the unconscious: One must adopt a finalist view and ask what is the purpose of this dream? What effect is it meant to have? (Jung, CW8, §462). And, relating it to (7), why did it choose specifically such dream-image, or symbol? With what objective? Such question is related to the self-regulatory character of the unconscious and its products, which works through the compensatory and complementary functions; hence, one must ask what is being compensated by the dream? As mentioned, the dream may reflect the prospective function of the unconscious and outline the solution of a conflict. The related question here is, how is the dream trying to solve a problem or conflict?

     

Three last important considerations seem necessary at this point. First, the Jungian hermeneutics discussed above is in accordance with, and follows, the hermeneutic tradition and its hypothetico-deductive method: every interpretation must be considered as a hypothesis. “Every interpretation necessarily remains as an ‘as-if’. The ultimate core of meaning may be circumscribed but not described” (Jung, CW9i, §265). Second, it must be emphasized again that, in principle, each dream shall be taken as a possibility, not as a determinism; the dream (usually) shows a picture of the dreamer’s psychic situation at a given moment and points at problems and alternatives. However, in dream series, when such situation does not change, or consistently changes for worse, then one can affirm that it has been crystallized as a psychological fact. In addition, based on the theory discussed before, the dream is seen as capable of revealing both collective and individual realities. According to the objectives set for this work, interpretation will attempt to identify in the dream narratives the interrelationships between (1) the collective realm: as sociocultural factors pertaining to the social imaginary of consumption , its collective consciousness; (2) the individual-subjective realm: how the dreams represent the dreamer’s subjectivity in relation to such social imaginaries. More specifically, all these guides for interpretation will necessarily be subordinated to the main interpretive objective, namely, to establish and understand the oneiric, symbolic patterns of meaning with which the unconscious represents processes of colonization of subjectivity that are typical of the ImCon.

7.5 Procedures

Given that the process of data collection and interpretation of dreams presented in this work went through considerable difficulties, and might perhaps be viewed as controversial, it seems necessary to provide a more detailed narrative of the procedures and trajectory undertaken in order to build this dissertation. Presently, I believe such difficulties and limitations stem mainly from the problems involved in researching dreams in depth with a hermeneutic method, in a foreign country (i.e., not in a clinical setting3), and in the scientific context of social psychology research. In my perception, that is due to the fact that the ideal form of researching night dreams from an in-depth, symbolical-hermeneutic perspective is through the elaboration of complete case studies, which requires access to the dreamers’ case history, their detailed personal associations (regarding the dream-imagery), and with long series of dreams. Dreams are also a difficult and elusive subject for research: they are usually considered very personal and intimate; the associations required from the dreamers would often involve the disclosure of life details of a very personal nature; and, finally, most people do not remember nor write down their dreams. Therefore I have concluded that such ideal form is only possible in a clinical setting: it requires strenuous effort from dreamer and researcher, a relationship of deep mutual trust, time, openness, and so on; in sum, it represents a huge demand on the participant.

Nevertheless, I persisted with my objective of researching dreams. In what follows, the trajectory of collecting and selecting the dreams, and finally interpreting them, is divided into an initial exploratory stage, an intermediary stage, and a final stage.

7.5.1 Initial Stage

Initially, I tried to research dreams and fantasies as a form of collaborating with the Kofarips research coordinated by Professor Blanch , focusing on the roles of the unconscious, the oneiric, and the symbolic for work subjectivation. Data (dreams and fantasies ) were collected through a question in the paper-and-pencil Kofarips questionnaire and in its semi-structured interview protocols, both of which were applied to academic and health personnel in Spain and South America. The question was formulated thusly: Tell us some dream or fantasy about your work (that you elaborated awake or had during sleep).

The analysis of such data (from more than 300 participants) and its elaboration took a long time. I finally concluded that the data did not allow for in-depth exploration and symbolic-hermeneutic interpretation; analysis remained confined to a sort of content analysis. Such work resulted in a published article (Xavier, 2011).

7.5.2 Intermediary Exploratory Stage

Having given up that initial project, I had to face the main problem of researching dreams: how to collect dreams (and dream series) that focused on certain themes, with information on the dreamers and their associations—without having the possibility of doing so in a clinical setting, with patients. The obvious way to circumvent such difficulty was to explore dreams from different sources: (a) dreams posted spontaneously on the internet, (b) series of dreams I already had in my possession, (c) dreams occasionally told to me by colleagues and their friends, and (d) dreams from literature (in a broad sense: not restricted to scientific literature on dreaming). For a number of reasons, (c) and (d) did not work.4 So I concentrated on collecting and analyzing dreams from the internet (entertaining the possibility of asking users for any dreams they had that were related to my research object), and exploring and analyzing the series of dreams I already had.

As I had not managed to define clearly my research object and problem (though I was not aware of this), my focus for their collection and interpretation was exceedingly broad: the psychic ethos of contemporary consumption capitalism (in terms of total capitalism), and the forms of subjectivity it produces—from the viewpoint of the dreams, that is, of the unconscious. The procedures for such collection and interpretation were as follows:
  1. 1.
    Dreams collected through the internet:
    1. (a)

      Selection of seemingly reliable forums and websites, and exploration of websites suggested by dream forum users (see Appendix A). The majority of such websites and forums was in English, but those in Portuguese (frequented mainly by Brazilian users), Italian, and Spanish were also consulted. However, it turned out to be much easier to find dream specimens from American dreamers; this is probably due to the many factors that characterize the United States (millions of inhabitants with internet access, a culture found of posting personal information on the web, interest in dreams, the “old” and more popular forums on dreams being in English, etc.). Also, many of their dreams were clearly related to the imaginary of consumption.

       
    2. (b)

      In two forums (dreamtalk.hypermart.net and dreamoods.com), I left a message explaining I was a PhD candidate researching dreams related to consumption, consumerism, and their “social icons” (McDonald’s, K-Mart, Disney , shopping malls, etc.), and asking the users for dream narratives related to such themes (and also for suggestions). Unfortunately, only two users provided me dreams.5 One user had a very interesting dream “in response” to my request, which is interpreted here (even though it does not feature such icons).

       
    3. (c)

      Around 800 dreams were thus selected and organized in Word files (according to their themes and provenience).

       
     
  2. 2.
    Dreams collected from other sources:
    1. (a)

      I read through a fairly rich number of dreams (around 850) I collected from former patients, during clinical work (psychotherapy) across 10 years. From this corpus, 24 dreams were selected as potential data.

       
     

Such process, which one might term an ethnography of dreams, provided an enormous volume of dreams. A process of “immersion in the data” (Ritchie & Spencer, 1994, p. 178) followed: reading and interpreting the dreams, further selecting possible cases and discarding others. Whenever possible, dreamers were contacted by email or through internet forums and asked if they could provide more information on their dreams. Confidentiality was emphasized. Few dreamers answered the request; associations and other information were thus collected.

From such data, 254 dreams were analyzed in depth,6 according to the hermeneutics discussed above. Many were part of dream series, which were studied in their entirety as well. Many dream series were part of dream diaries. There is an extensive tradition of research using such kind of data (for their use in contemporaneity, see Plummer, 1983). However, the scope of the proposed research was still immense; it had to be delimited somehow. I decided to concentrate on a few symbolic themes or contexts that had repeatedly appeared in the dreams (and which I had also used as keywords when searching for more dream material): McDonald’s, Disney (and McDonaldization and Disneyization), shopping malls, supermarkets, and so on. The reasons for such procedure are: (1) the first dreams I analyzed (including the prototype dream) revolved around such themes and scenarios; (2) subsequently, I came upon many dreams that dealt with the same themes and were exceedingly meaningful; (3) a further rationale was that they represented a form of dialog with sociology and social sciences (which discuss McDonald’s, Disney , shopping malls, etc., in relation to consumerism and self, as typical forms of consumerism and colonization), and their research corpus, and as a means for contributing with new material and theory (as the colonization forms appeared through dreams).

Another important reason for such procedure is that it is very difficult to collect or search for dreams (even with the wealth of material I had) that deal only, or mainly, with one broad theme (especially a more or less technical one, such as colonization or commodification). Dreams usually present us with a full panoply of interrelated individual and collective themes and problems. For that reason, research on dreams (and their collection) usually focuses on one type of population (students, patients suffering from a specific pathology, etc.), or studies an individual’s dreams (single case study), or else searches specifically for one pattern or archetype (form) in the dreams. Thus, although the dreams were selected according to a pre-defined symbolic content or dreamscape (representations of McDonald’s, etc.), their forms (oneiric narratives) and wealth of meaning (other contents) varied immensely. However, the research questions I had proposed were still too ample (viz., how the consumerist ethos, subjectivity, and colonization of the unconscious—and their interrelations—appeared in the dreams). At this point, following a suggestion from a colleague, Dr. Miguel Sahagún, a second delimitation of the focus of research was undertaken, based on such extensive interpretation of data, the main themes resulting from it, and practical considerations: to focus on how the unconscious represented, and reacted to, processes of colonization of subjectivity by the consumerist imaginary—through night dreams. This focus was then slightly modified and elaborated as the final research question and objectives, which concentrate on the empirical material (dreams) rather than the theoretical concepts (unconscious) behind them. Due to the limits of this work, a final selection of 40 dreams had to be undertaken, according to the following criteria: (1) dreams had to focus on the themes mentioned: representations of some form of colonization related to consumerism and its imaginary (in the context or under the guise of McDonald’s and McDonaldization, Disney and Disneyization, shopping malls, etc.), and of some form of autonomous reaction (from the unconscious); (2) their clarity of meanings and patterns; (3) dreams had to belong to a series (i.e., not isolated dreams), and the personal associations from the dreamers had to be available; (4) their relevance, meaningfulness, uniqueness, and information-richness (Patton, 1990).

Sometimes not all criteria were fulfilled, but the dream was nonetheless chosen due to its meaningfulness and uniqueness. A number of dreams illustrate typical patterns found across many other dreams. Selection of dreams therefore did not follow any quantitative criteria. The final series, with eight dreams7 from the same person, was included because of its wealth of meaning and its clarity, and for being part of a larger series (of more than 300 dreams), which provided a rich context for the dreams studied.

7.5.3 Final Stage

It involved the interpretation in depth of the final corpus of dreams (and the series in which they were embedded), comparing the dreams’ motifs, patterns, structures, meanings, and dynamics, according to the theoretical propositions and hermeneutics discussed above, and the comparison of the dreams with other cultural texts and other dreams. The interpretations were iterative; moreover, they were exhaustive from my point of view, that is, they represent the best and most complete form of interpretation I have managed to reach. I have no doubt, however, that I did not cover all the wealth of symbolic meanings they have—which, in fact, is impossible.8 As mentioned above, while such process of continuous interpretation was realized based on a previous theoretical framework, the dreams and the hypothetical interpretations they elicited also forced me to develop other theoretical propositions, to modify the theory I had, in a dialectical process. (Actually, in the end the dreams forced me to come up with a new theory—elements of which I ended up finding in a more or less similar form in other authors—centered on the participation mystique with the commodity-sign and on the colonization of imaginaries.)

7.6 Ethical Considerations

With the exception of one dream (the “prototype dream”), all dreams analyzed here were collected from public sites on the internet or from literature (i.e., they were in the public domain); therefore, no informed consent was asked from the dreamers. The dreamers’ personal details were largely withheld (unless they were absolutely essential for the interpretation). In the few cases personal associations from the dreamers are mentioned, they were modified so as to ensure anonymity. In relation to the “prototype dream”, the dreamer was contacted via email and advised about all ethical considerations regarding the research and her participation (voluntary and confidential nature of her participation, the research themes and objectives, how her dream, associations, and personal information would be used, etc.). She signed voluntarily an informed consent form and sent it to me. Her dream narrative was modified in order to preserve anonymity and confidentiality.

7.7 Reliability

One problem regards the veracity, or the degree of reliability and objectivity, of the dreams collected on the internet. Even though the use of secondary sources (internet, newspapers, mass media, etc.) for collecting dreams is not very common in the literature, some recent researches were based on it. For instance, Edgar (2011), Edgar and Henig (2009), and Valtonen (2011) researched dreams collected from newspapers and the internet. Jung himself published extensive analyses of children’s dreams as seminars (Jung, SCD), and of dreams and fantasies of an American woman (his classical Symbols of Transformation, CW5), that were collected from secondary sources. Freud’s classical Interpretation of Dreams contains a number of dreams collected from diverse secondary sources. Based on my experience working with dreams, I have no reason to believe that the dreams presented here were invented, distorted, or “enhanced” in any significant way. Quite otherwise, there are many reasons for thinking they were really dreamt as reported:

  • Regarding dreams collected in internet forums: In relation to the final selection of dreams interpreted here, as far as I was able to grasp, no dreamer had reasons to invent such dreams, and none received any form of “gratification” (whether emotional—admiration, attention, etc.—or of any other kind) for publishing them; quite the opposite, some dreams analyzed here are obviously terrible experiences9;

  • Many dreamers did not seem to understand their dreams in the least, and some expressed explicitly their incomprehension;

  • The majority of the dreams harshly criticize the dreamers, revealing ethical, personal, social, and familiar problems, the disclosure of which would represent an embarrassment to the dreamers (rather than a source of any sort of positive stimuli for their conscious concoction), were they aware of their full significance. In other words, the dreams would be sources of opprobrium rather than praise;

  • Many dreamers were puzzled, surprised, and at times frightened by their dreams, and some reported them on the internet explicitly seeking answers and help;

  • Analysis of series of dreams from the same dreamers revealed patterns and dynamics that were clearly unconscious, that is, that could not have been invented or enhanced consciously. Therefore, even if a dream, or a dream-image or narrative, were distorted more or less consciously, such distortion would be corrected by seeing it in comparison with the other dreams and their analogous images.

Another question related to the objectivity of the dreams collected regards their possible alteration, or modification, in the process of consciously remembering and recording them. My argument is: the totality of any experience (be it conscious or unconscious) always remains ineffable by definition; the experience is always “modified” to some extent in the process of narrating it, of formulating a narrative of the experience. Perhaps dreams, being complex, symbolic, and emotional experiences, may be seen as somewhat more prone to such modification, especially because they are often easily forgotten. In remembering and writing them, in becoming aware of their narrative and the emotions and feelings experienced in them and turning them into a verbal narrative, the dreamer always modifies the original unconscious experience.10 In that, dreams are no different from any other narrated human experience, but only in that aspect, for their symbolic value and wealth of meaning remain more or less untouched. What Geertz (1977) said regarding anthropological texts is also valid for the dream narrative: it is also a fictio, that is, something constructed—in a way, it is already an interpretation (Vieira, 2003, 2006). However, and reiterating, the dreams analyzed here present such strange images and strong criticisms—of the dreamer and culture—with many carrying strong emotional tones, that it makes it fairly safe to say that they constitute objective expressions of the unconscious and were reported as such.

7.8 Limitations

The method employed in this work has some pros and cons. On the one hand, collecting dreams from secondary sources such as the internet allowed for amassing an enormous amount of data whose quality was not affected by the researcher. On the other hand, not knowing the dreamer personally is a major disadvantage: it presents problems for the collection of associations and other materials that would greatly help in the interpretation; and discussing how their subjectivity is portrayed in the dream becomes much more hypothetical and risky.

Regarding the social context: The fact that the dreams originated from American and Brazilian persons, that is, from contexts that are in principle socioculturally different, together with my relatively scarce knowledge of their specific sociocultural backgrounds, may present serious limitations. However, two things should be borne in mind here. One, the dreams themselves, the focus of this work, seen as embedded in series, provided the needed context. Two, regardless of social and cultural context, the dreams presented striking similarities and analogies—which attest to the growing homogeneity of contemporary culture and individuals.

Regarding the associations: For some dreams, I did not have the chance to collect the personal associations of the dreamers in relation to the dreams (and in some cases did not know their personal context, their conscious situation at the time of the dream, nor their life histories in depth). On the one hand, this represents a serious limitation on the validity of my interpretations (as the same dream can have completely different meanings for two persons with different life situations, personalities, etc.). On the other hand, as discussed above, the series of dreams provided both the personal context and the “associations” needed. The dreams interpreted here often employ typical symbols in typical narratives; in comparing them with each other, the cultural critique that emerges is rather clear, or, in other words, my interpretations gain in probability largely because of the comparative affinity in their collective or social meanings. Also, more often than not I did not mention associations explicitly in the text (due to the space it would require), even though I took them in consideration when interpreting the dream.

Amplifications: Some amplifications could (and should) be very long and detailed, but this would compromise the succinctness of the text. Given the limits of this work, I have had to summarize the process of amplification while pointing to more sources wherein the amplification is given in much more detail. Such amplifications point to symbolic patterns found across cultures, which, theoretically, are based on psychological patterns (the archetypes of the collective unconscious) for the formation of symbols.