ABSTRACT
Dreams may arise either from the id or from the ego. The mechanism of dream-formation is in both cases the same and so also is the necessary dynamic precondition. The pattern of interpersonal configurations in a dream may tell us something significant about the dreamer, especially in relation to the affects in the dream. If one thought that the manifest dream was not so important, then the tenses of the dream might not seem to matter. Erik Erikson's approach makes us acutely aware of the precise time dimension in dreams and how grammatical tenses are subtly variegated. In Allan Hobson's dream, the defenses are reversal of affect and sarcasm. In Judith's dream, the defenses are isolation of affect, intellectualization, and projection or disavowal. The dream may indicate that a goal in psychotherapy might be to moderate the splitting between Judith's detachment and her sense of total responsibility and guilt.
