Some Remarks on the Oedipus Complex From an Ethological Point of View

O how sick and weary I

Underneath my Myrtle lie!

Why should I be bound to thee,

O my lovely Myrtle-tree?

The question of the innate or cultural nature of the Oedipus complex has been debated through the years. As a contribution to this debate, I propose to discuss the Oedipus complex from an ethological-interpersonal point of view, outlined in a previous paper, written together with my wife, which was published in this journal (Bacciagaluppi and Bacciagaluppi Mazza, 1982). Using an integration of Margaret Mahler's ideas with Bowlby's attachment theory as our basis, we suggested that cultural developments may interfere with the unfolding of innate behavioral sequences. In particular, the core of psychopathology was seen as a complex structure, termed “bad symbiosis,” in which the unsatisfied dual basic needs (attachment and autonomy) of the mother interact with those of the child. This pathological development occurs within the wider context of a family symbiosis.

Both Bowlby's ethological viewpoint and Mahler's theories are based on the observation of early mother-infant interactions. This emphasis on the earliest, dyadic phases of development is characteristic of modern psychoanalytic research, both in the Freudian and in the neo-Freudian schools. It started with Melanie Klein's prewar work on children and Sullivan's work with schizophrenics;