I found two quotes especially moving in "The Lathe of Heaven" almost to the point of a physical jolt - the first pertained to the dream state existing as an aquarium for Night, and the other the idea of Orr's nightmare's not being associated with dreaming, let alone sleep, but instead his manifestation of his current reality.

the first reference seems to imply that instead of our preconceived notion that night includes within it, and engulfs to a point, the phenomenon of dreaming, dreams actually own Night and put it on display - unreachable, but still available for observance. In this sense, Orr's dream-states keep him from the night, and from true sleep because of his inability to come to terms with his ability to warp reality. For Orr, there are three separate categories - wakefulness, sleep, and dreaming. Which of these is the true "now" seems to be the real question at hand.

These three phases of consciousness also seem to appear in the Matrix, but one must wonder which states the locations coincide with. Is the Matrix the sleeping state or the dream state? Is the unplugged world truly experienced in the waking state, or, as Orr seems to think, is the dreaming state the creator of reality, and therefore the ultimate truth? Finally, what does sleep mean in the Matrix, as opposed to true sleep unplugged from it? In some senses Orr and Neo are only free to truly sleep once they are unplugged from their respective machines.

If dreams are indeed another dimension of reality yet discovered, and not simply a creation of our subconscious as a way to process all of the images and thoughts in our head while we sleep, then maybe dream-state is the place in which no biases of the outside world exist. Dream-state thematically may represent infinite possibilities, and therefore a broader view not only on world-relations on a gargantuan scale, but also race-relations and social schemas.

One of the most fascinating recurring themes for me as a reader in "Lathe of Heaven" was Orr's unfailing sense of right and wrong. His moral compass was so incredibly cemented that it seemed less of an outcome of his socialization, and more of an internalized ideology that withstood, and proved applicable, for all of his unique realities.

One must also wonder, if society had crafted different social constructs for how we categorize peoples, whether race would be such large aspect. If we had named things differently, or seen scientific evidence as proving something different - in short, in another dimension of reality - how would we as individuals act towards ourselves and others? Is war, indeed, a commonality the human race shares, and is morality arguably in the same boat? Must there be an alpha and beta relationship in society, and does conflict always serve to polish the creation and continuation of societies?