When the subject is asked to draw an animal in addition to the usual house, tree, and two persons, certain features of the animal serve particularly well for the projection of early impulses. Various bodily aspects of the animal, as distinct from the human figure, are informative, as are also the popularly attributed temperament and role of the animal chosen. Treatment of mouth and rump areas affords less inhibited expression of oral and anal concepts. The depiction of the tail and sometimes of a limb suggests phallic symbolization. Departure from the usual four-legged stance points to a conflict around autonomy and dependency. The authors demonstrate that other sources of information about the subject corroborate the symbolic value attached to the animal drawings.