You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Many articles that adopt different analytic perspectives about Little Hans were written since the publication of the interviews with Max and Herbert Graf in 2005.
In this article the author tries to discuss whether Little Hans was, as Freud stated, a real little Oedipus or a little boy traumatized by enigmatic messages coming from the intersubjective space constituted by the relationship of his parents and Freud himself. In this discussion the author refers to J. Laplanche's “generalized seduction theory” and some points regarding the intersubjective approach. The author argues that the relatively healthy adult into which Little Hans was transformed was due to the fact that he had forgotten all his childhood memories and that this repression was not the fruit of the father's law and prohibition but instead it was Freud's himself who was considered by Little Hans as an omnipotent figure who could talk with God.
In this context the author discusses the transformative fantasies appearing in the intersubjective space between supervisor, supervisee and analysand in analytic supervisions.