You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This book was originally published in 1962 by Basic Books. In 1982, the DaCapo Press reprinted the original edition as an “unabridged version” of the 1962 first edition. Although it was written over twenty years ago, it remains valuable as a “systematic and detailed clinical exposition of the analysis of dreams from a basically non-Freudian point of view.”
In writing this book, Walter Bonime elected not to stand on Freud's shoulders and embellish on his monumental Interpretation of Dreams. To his everlasting credit, Bonime opted to pioneer a new and different approach to dreams. His “culturist” approach stands in marked contrast to Freud's wish-fulfillment theory, based on his theory of libido and his model of intrapsychic conflict. Because Freud's seminal work has become the yardstick for judging all subsequent work on dreams, I shall briefly outline how Bonime's view differs. Bonime parlays his clinical observations into a pragmatic framework, which has not been molded into a unified theory. He emphasizes both the relationship between patient and analyst in the here and now, and the therapeutic process. He extends his frame of reference beyond interpersonal relationships and includes the patient's culture. Bonime accepts the label of “culturist” in defining interpersonal experience as the dominant force in the development of the personality.
Bonime sees the dream as “the most authentic presentation of personality.” He views the function of the dream as a self-balancing model which integrates different aspects of the personality. He does not separate the dream into manifest and latent content. Instead, he views the manifest content as valid in itself. He does not see the dream as a disguise, but as images rather than thoughts, and rejects Freud's concept of a dream censor.
Bonime does not believe in universal symbols, and thinks that dream symbols have a “semantic specificity.” Dream symbols present themselves “with [an] exquisite individuality arising out of the core