/yume/ - Dreamwalkers and netwalkers may find this book extremely helpful.James Hillman - The Dream and the UnderworldHis background is in Jungian analysis but he separates from Freud and Jung's propensity to interpret dreams literally

Name
Email
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
File
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1385668684574.jpg (71.38 KB, 620x620, 11so-marshal-mcluhan[1].jpg)

Anonymous 11/28/13 (Thu) 19:58:04 No.1570

Dreamwalkers and netwalkers may find this book extremely helpful.

James Hillman - The Dream and the Underworld

His background is in Jungian analysis but he separates from Freud and Jung's propensity to interpret dreams literally - he sees that as losing them in translation. He advocates a feeling approach and speaks on mythic memory, much like TS Eliot and Joseph Campbell.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Dream-And-Underworld/dp/0060906820/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385668253&sr=8-1&keywords=dream+underworld

Explorers of varieties of dreamworlds may be interested in the Tibetan bardos, James Joyce's "Finnegans Wake" (beast of a book, but it's a dream world not unlike YN games), and the media theories of Marshall McLuhan, who was inspired by Joyce and wrote of media technologies (radio, tv, he died before the internet) as states of consciousness. One of those guyss SE Lain should have introduced us to along with Vannevar Bush and John C. Lilly.

Namaste.

P.S. Y'all know about lucid dreaming and astral projection, rite?

Soulless 11/29/13 (Fri) 13:56:10 No.1573

File: 1385733370081.jpg (598.73 KB, 1400x1303, 33061347.jpg)

The Dream and the Underworld immediately turned me off by taking a cross cultural concept like dreaming and then deciding that the best way to go about approaching it is one specifically western-centric mythology. Such an extremely biased viewpoint that at the same time refutes others in implication that it is the "right" way, in my opinion, a sack of shit. It's fine if other people find it useful, but to me it's nothing more than biased opinion trying to state itself as fact.

<O> <O> 11/30/13 (Sat) 05:13:06 No.1575

That's a very good point. Perhaps he was writing for a western audience, or perhaps he is western-centric and too myopic to be writing on dreams.

Have you found any literature that's more comparative? I feel Jung - Hillman's background - was more universal, as was Joseph Campbell…

Soulless 12/01/13 (Sun) 11:41:49 No.1579

File: 1385898109147.jpg (550.49 KB, 635x1022, sabits.jpg)

>>1575
To be honest I think all literature is biased in some form or another, and the best way to take any such literature as "some guy who was persistent enough to write a book about his opinion". Because dreams can be so varied in both content and meaning, I doubt one theory can truly encompass everything there is. Hell I doubt one theory can encompass everything about a single person's dreams at any time, much less a widespread population.

I'd figure if you're interested in dreams and theories, make one that works for you or examine the various smaller theories that work for each individual who has made them. After a while you'll amass a much ore varied idea of dreams than a few books… At least that's just my opinion…