gnote

(N.B. In Jungian dream interpretation one is all the characters.)
This might relate to the ‘magical’ pre-oedipal field, wherein identity is not individuated yet.
What I’m wondering, beyond this, is whether all forms of intersubjectivity really do call upon pre-Oedipal ways of relating. Intersubjective dynamics — whereby one’s persons emotions and perspectives are experienced as a relation to some other person’s emotions and perspectives — are very common indeed, at all levels of society. They are based upon the way we learned to relate to our mothers before we knew she was a separate person from us. It’s an emotional level of relating that is oriented towards us getting our emotional and physiological needs filled.
Anyway, if we never really grow out of the pre-Oedipal stage completely, but always have it as a facet of our sociability, I wonder if that is a problem or not?

****
UPDATE
Yet dreams may not be pre-Oedipal in their construction, after all. The pre-Oedipal dynamics are probably quite limited in terms of their simplicity (but stronger, subtler) than the imaginative range of dreams.