Fortune, R.F. (1926). The Symbolism of the Serpent. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 7:237-243.

Welcome to PEP Web!

Viewing the full text of this document requires a subscription to PEP Web.

If you are coming in from a university from a registered IP address or secure referral page you should not need to log in. Contact your university librarian in the event of problems.

If you have a personal subscription on your own account or through a Society or Institute please put your username and password in the box below. Any difficulties should be reported to your group administrator.

Username:
Password:

Can't remember your username and/or password? If you have forgotten your username and/or password please click here and log in to the PaDS database. Once there you need to fill in your email address (this must be the email address that PEP has on record for you) and click "Send." Your username and password will be sent to this email address within a few minutes. If this does not work for you please contact your group organizer.

Athens user? Login here.

Not already a subscriber? Order a subscription today.

(1926). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 7:237-243

The Symbolism of the Serpent

R. F. Fortune Author Information

It is frequently stated in psycho-analytic literature that the serpent may appear in dreams or in neurotic phantasy as a sexual symbol. Wohlgemuth in his Critical Examination of Psycho-Analysis denies the

- 237 -

erotic significance of the serpent entirely. He attempts to prove that the serpent is a symbol of immortality, and not of sex. The point to be noted in Wohlgemuth's championship of the immortality symbolism as an alleged exclusive alternative to the sexual symbolism is his implicit subscription to a theory of a universal significance, attachable on every occasion to any given symbol. In this matter Wohlgemuth goes further than Freud; for although Freud raises the question of the possibility of giving dream symbols 'a firmly established significance like the signs in stenography', he expressly denies that there is any certainty in attaching the usual or common meaning to any individual case of symbolism. If Wohlgemuth had expressed his theory with equal caution h

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2010, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing. Help | About | Report a Problem

WARNING! This text is printed for the personal use of the subscriber to PEP Web and is copyright to the Journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to copy, distribute or circulate it in any form whatsoever.