Born in 1903, four-year-old Herbert Graf witnessed the collapse of a horse who had been pulling a heavy cart. It was a traumatic experience for the boy, who subsequently developed a fear of horses. Additionally, Herbert’s father noted that he developed particular anxieties: Herbert felt uneasy without his mother around, had an intense fixation on male genitalia (especially those on horses), and described dreams of two giraffes—one healthy, another crumpled—in which he takes away the crumpled giraffe while the healthy one calls out to him.
Herbert Graf, otherwise known as “Little Hans,” was the focus of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud’s case study that supported his theory of the Oedipus complex. When the boy’s father described his son’s symptoms, Freud interpreted Herbert to be an example of a child experiencing this phenomenon. Freud described it as an intense attraction felt by young children toward their opposite-sex parents and an intense jealousy and combativeness toward their same-sex caretakers. Contextualized within his larger theory of psychosexual development, Freud argued that children are innately sexual beings who become fixated on different body areas before resolving the Oedipus complex and moving on to have adult romantic relationships—and he believed that Herbert Graf was the boy who could prove this.
The case study of Little Hans, who was among the very few children studied by Freud, became the defining case for Freud’s Oedipus complex. Freud argued that Herbert’s anxieties all stemmed from his foundational animosity toward his father. For instance, Freud claimed that Herbert’s phobia of horses represented a variation of castration anxiety—the fear that a horse, resembling his father, would punish him for desiring his mother by castrating him. Freud interpreted the giraffe dream as a reinvention of a fantasized relationship between Herbert and his parents: Herbert desires to be with the crumpled giraffe, representing his mother, while his father, manifested in the healthy giraffe, calls out from a distance. Though seemingly absurd and farfetched today, especially when used as evidence for a theory, the case of Little Hans was foundational in the legacy of Freud’s influential contributions to psychoanalysis. Freud himself stressed how much importance he placed on his theory, stating that the “discovery of the repressed Oedipus complex…alone would give [psychoanalysis] a claim to be included among the precious new acquisitions of mankind.” But despite Freud’s comments, how valid and relevant is the Oedipus complex today?
Sigmund Freud has always been a controversial figure. The Oedipus complex, a theory that suggests that every single person has deeply repressed incestuous instincts for their parents since childhood, is no less so. Critics of Freud have noted that, despite the case of Little Hans, there is very little empirical evidence to prove the theory’s validity. While Freud is viewed as a historically significant figure who was extremely influential in his field, his ideas are often regarded by academics and practitioners with less zeal.
Furthermore, modern developments in gender and sexuality studies have opposed many conclusions of Freudian psychoanalysis. For instance, Freud suggested that an incomplete resolution of the Oedipus complex can lead to homosexuality, caused by the child’s eventual identification with their opposite-sex parent instead of their same-sex one. This distinguishes homosexuality as a diversion from “normal” sexual development, and it further suggests sexuality as something that is shaped by traumatic or deviant childhood experiences. This idea differs from the modern consensus that homosexuality is a normal sexual experience. Another persistent critique of the Oedipus complex is its overwhelmingly masculine theme, with Freud’s original theory focusing almost exclusively on the sexual development of boys. When speaking of the female perspective in the Oedipus complex, Freud tended to frame it in masculine terms: for example, he describes girls as suffering from penis envy, a supposed realization that they do not possess a penis, which causes many anxieties that, Freud claimed, originate in girls’ unwelcome realization that they are not men like their fathers. Freud himself claimed that “psychology…is unable to solve the riddle of femininity,” elaborating on his extremely limited and somewhat problematic psychoanalytic work on (and disinterest in) the psychology of women.
Despite these criticisms, however, there is both empirical and anecdotal evidence that parents do have a significant impact on their children’s sexual tendencies. A 1986 study showed that male rats are sexually attracted to females with scents that remind them of their mothers, and a 2010 report suggests that people are more attracted to others who look like them and are also more inclined to find others more attractive after seeing a picture of their opposite-sex parent. So while the case of Little Hans, more than a century later, may not escape the intense scrutiny of modern empirical analysis, recent evidence perhaps can prove what Sigmund Freud and Herbert Graf could not.