“The incapacity of dreams to express these things must lie in the nature of the psychical material out of which dreams are made. The plastic arts of painting and sculpture labour, indeed, under a similar limitation as compared with poetry, which can make use of speech; and here once again the reason for their incapacity lies in the nature of the material which these two forms of art manipulate in their effort to express something” (821).
This section of the dream interpretation is interesting in that Freud is comparing the building blocks of dreams, and their meaning, to that of art and poetry. It is an intriguing analogy and makes sense if you are interpreting, or trying to interpret, dreams. Figuring out first the symbols and the materials that make the dream up, is similar to the tools painters and artists would use to sculpt or paint a solid picture. Freud is saying that dreams may be constructed in a similar fashion and close analysis of the symbols and pieces that construct the dream must be examined to fully comprehend the entirety of the subject and what has created the dreams.
Some aspects of Freud, I believe, are extremely applicable to texts and analysis of characters and the overall “structure” of a work. This section of his dream interpretation appeals to me in that, in a sense, it relates closely to structuralism and how to analyze a text within the confines of psychoanalytic theory. Reading a text for symbols and discovering how a piece of fiction is working at a “structural” level, by putting these puzzle pieces together and discerning a higher understanding of the work, makes perfect sense. Using this type of reading seems to be almost exclusively related to structuralism, just with a psychoanalytical tag attached to it. Putting the puzzle pieces together to understand a structure or characters on a deeper plane, is extremely helpful. Reading in the psychoanalytical mode, especially with Gothic literature, I feel would work easily and make analysis much more intriguing.