n is strikingly paraphrased.
First as blood and bones--a type of intimate vital connection; they belong
to _one_ body, just as two lovers are one and as later the bridal pair
also melt into one body. Then as two kinds of roses that bloom on one
bush. The wanderer breaks the rose as the boy does the wild rose maiden.
And hardly is the veil of the previous disguise lifted, hardly have we
learned that the wanderer has taken a woman (Sec. 11), when the affair is
again hushed just as it is about to be dramatized (cf. Sec. 12), so that
apparently another enjoys the pleasures of love. This consequent
concealment must have a reason. Let us not forget the striking obstacles
which the wanderer experiences again and again and which we have not yet
thoroughly examined. The symbolism of the dream tells us that such
obstacles correspond to conflicts of the will. What kind of inner
resistance may it be that checks the wanderer at every step on his way to
happy love? We suspect that the examinations have an ethical flavor. This
appears to some extent in the right-left symbolism; then in the experience
at the mill, which we have not yet studied, where the wanderer has to pass
over a very narrow plank, the ethical symbolism of which will be discussed
later; and in the striking feeling of responsibility which the wanderer
has for the actions of the bridal pair in the crystal prison, which gives
us the impression that he had a bad conscience. Altogether we cannot doubt
that the dream--the parable--has endeavored, because of the censor, to
disguise the sexual experiences of the wanderer. We can be quite certain
that it will be said that the sexual as such will be forbidden by the
censor. That is, however, not the case. The account is outspoken enough,
and not the least prudish; the bridal pair embrace each other naked,
penetrate each other and dissolve in love, melt in rapture and pain. Who
could ask more? Therefore the sexual act itself could not have been
offensive to the censor. The whole machinery of scrupulousness,
concealment and deterrent objects, which stand like dreadful watchmen
before the doors of forbidden rooms, cannot on the other hand be
causeless. So the question arises: What is it that the dream censor in the
most varied forms [lion, dangerous paths, etc.] has so sternly vetoed?

In the strawberry dream related in the preceding section, we have seen
that a paraphrase of the latent dream content appears at the moment when a
f