Reaction to "The Language of Dreams" by Miller

Miller introduces the Freudian theory of the rebus, "dreams are a form of expression employing both words and pictures." Although Freud is expressing interest within the meaning of dreams, Miller argues this holds true within modern language. There is much overlap of socialization and pre-textural information needed to give meaning to our spoken and written languages, including overlap between themselves. This is present within Chinese and Japanese language, where many words play back and forth in relation to another, both in meaning and sonically. Miller overlaps language with Freud's writings when he remarks, "Freud argued that to decipher a dream one must exchange the direct, literal meaning of its images for indirect substitutions." These needed social and independent 'substitutions' recognize the impracticality and often persisting evolution of modern linguistics. Everyday, new words are being invented and conversely, misplaced. This addition and substitution of language in itself makes it as an entity, unstable. In the least, we can recognize these miss-functions of language to our advantage, artistically, socially and politically to further evolve our understanding of human interaction and communication.