Commentary on “Freudian Dream Theory, Dream Bizarreness, and the Disguise-Censor Controversy”

Although authors have attempted to explain bizarre characteristics of dreams from different theoretical approaches to dreaming (e.g., psychoanalytic, neurobiological, neurocognitive, phenomenological), several issues about this topic are still open today. This situation may be explained, in part, because the debate on dream bizarreness includes several important aspects of dream research and theory such as, for example, the question of the meaningless vs. meaningful nature of dreams, or its status of random vs. motivated phenomenon (Colace, 2003, submitted).

Neuropsychological studies have shown their utility for dream research and for the empirical evaluation of several aspects of Freudian dream theory (Solms, 1997, 2000a), and, in my opinion, further developments of these will also allow the neural correlates of dream bizarreness to be found.

The paper by Simon Boag represents an attempt to clarify the conceptual bases of Freud's explanation of dream bizarreness. In my opinion, the attempts to clarify and systematize the Freudian concepts are a preliminary task for every neuroscientific attempt to find the neural correlates of these. It is with great pleasure that I am commenting upon this paper. I would like to focus on the following points:

1. Freud's “censor of dream” metaphor vs. the concept of superego;

2. ego and superego in the alternative account of repression;

3. possible directions of neuroscientific research;

4. dream bizarreness, disguise-censorship theory, and studies on children's dreams.

1. In Boag's view, Freud's “censor” metaphor shows certain ambiguities and problems. In particular, there apparently are no clear indications to understand the real characteristics of the “censor” and its origins. The concept of “censor” would be understandable only through the functions attributed to it (i.e., censorship activity).

   Indeed, in the first elaboration of Freud's disguise-censorship theory (Freud, 1900), while the concept of “censorship activity” is quite clear, that of “cen