academic and scholarly articles and papers are written way too confusing. i applaud your intellect, but seriously. SERIOUSLY. can we ease the language a bit?
"Dreams suggest a view of fictive communication that is not subordinate to directly assertive communication at all, nor anchored by the assumption of a global referential ground, but rather accountable to generative principles of relevance or salience. I have characterized the difference between dreams and memories in terms of rhetorical orientation: while memories spring from and are accountable to a criterion of representational adequacy to experiential fact, dreams have the same recursive relationship to the representation of subjective significance—to desires, anxieties, values; in short, to the realm of meaning." -Walsh, Dreaming and Narrative Theory
i’d like a dumb version of this, please. i feel like i’ve gotten a very surface-level understanding of this particular excerpt: “dreams are different from memories because they do not correlate to specific experiences but an ‘idea’.” yes? eh.