Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To refine search by publication year…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Having problems finding an article? Writing the year of its publication in Search for Words or Phrases in Context will help narrow your search.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Wakefield, J.C. (2007). Attachment and Sibling Rivalry in Little Hans: The Fantasy of the Two Giraffes Revisited. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 55(3):821-849.

(2007). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 55(3):821-849

Attachment and Sibling Rivalry in Little Hans: The Fantasy of the Two Giraffes Revisited

Jerome C. Wakefield

Freud's interpretation of Little Hans's “phantasy of the two giraffes” (1909) is pivotal to his oedipal analysis that Hans has inchoate desires for sexual intercourse with his mother. Bowlby (1973) argued that Freud's focus on his oedipal theory led him to ignore preoedipal attachment-related factors that have equal plausibility in explaining the clinical data. However, Bowlby did not attempt to apply the attachment perspective to the interpretation of Hans's fantasies that form the core of the case material. A microanalysis of Hans's giraffe fantasy and the evidence used to support Freud's claims about it yields an attachment-based sibling rivalry account arguably of greater explanatory power than the oedipal account. Consistent with Bowlby's hypothesis, the evidence suggests that Hans's giraffe fantasy is about the sibling rivalry triangle involved in caregiver attachment access, rather than (or in addition to) the oedipal triangle. The issue of multiple levels of meaning and the methodological challenges raised by multiple determination is also considered. The giraffe fantasy's attachment-theoretic explanation encourages a rethinking of this classic case and strengthens Bowlby's claim that the case is fruitfully viewed from an attachment perspective.

[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 © 2020, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.