The Oedipus Complex is one of the strangest and most counter-intuitive concepts in psychoanalysis. First formulated by Freud in 1899, and taking its name from the mythical Greek tragic hero Oedipus (who in the eponymous play by Sophocles unknowingly sleeps with his mother and then kills his father), it suggests that every child goes through a phase, normally between the ages of three and five, of physically desiring its opposite sex parent while wishing to do away with, or kill, its rivalrous same-sex parent.
Expressed bluntly like this, the Complex tends to arouse immediately puzzlement, ridicule - or disgust children aren’t generally to be witnessed expressing any kind of sexual desire and we are unlikely to remember anything in our own lives remotely resembling what Freud insistently describes as a universal truth.
However, the explanatory power of the Oedipus Complex is likely to increase - as is often the case with Freud’s ideas - the less literally we take it, in other words, the more we view it as providing us with an overall picture of the genesis of human sexuality rather than as a concrete event in a given child’s mind.
We might think of the Oedipus Complex as offering us a guiding narrative about how we come, through the varied experiences of childhood, to have our own distinctive approach to sexuality. The Complex shines a light on a range of questions - How confident do we now feel in our powers of attractiveness? - Are we disgusted or broadly at peace with our sexuality? - Do we think that other people are likely to reject or accept our advances? - How much are we intimidated by our desires? What is telling is that a huge range of responses are to be found here some of us labour under critical degrees of shame and terror. Others have no particular difficulty making our appetites known and acting on them in reciprocal situations.
Sex may be a source of exceptional joy - or the locus of boundless masochism and paranoia. With Freud’s ideas in mind, rather than imagining that we actually wanted to sleep with anyone as children, we might say that we went through a phase of exploring what it might mean to prove attractive to a man or a woman.
Importantly, we did so in the form of a game, one in which we no more wanted things to become real than we would - when we played pirates or jungle explorers in the kitchen - have wished to join an actual Caribbean drug cartel or a trip down the Amazon. Little boys and girls will, in a limited way, try out what happens if they attempt to charm mum or dad; at a given point, they might pull a highly endearing smile and say they want to spend the rest of their life with only one parent, or send the other one away or muse that it might be nice if they could have a little wedding ceremony with one parent only.
And here - for better and for worse - the games can unfold very differently according to the emotional maturity of the parent. In an optimal scenario, when a small child initiates a game, the adult will be exceptionally careful neither to shame nor to excite them. They won’t say ‘Don’t be so silly’ or ‘How repulsive’. They won’t get furious or punishing. They will be resolved enough about their own sexuality not to take fright at its first echoes in their child. They will notice what’s going on, smile indulgently and go along with the game just long enough for the child to feel acknowledged and heard. And yet they will naturally not do anything remotely seductive back. They will, with great kindness, ensure that the game always stays very much a game.
So much is, however, liable to go wrong. There are mothers and fathers too fragile internally to allow a child to flex their faculties of attraction; they get bitter or snide, dismissive or angry; there can only be one chief or one queen bee. There are parents too deeply swallowed up in cares and depression to allow themselves to be charmed. And then there are parents whose loneliness and confusion means they mistake a child’s game for some form of genuine desire for sexual contact - with all the obvious tragic life-long repercusions that ensue.
If we as adults have difficulties around sex, we might - with Freud’s Oedipal concept in mind - ask ourselves some of the following - How much did I, as a child, feel able to charm my mother or father? - Did they seem to take pleasure in my existence? - Were they angry, sad or simply elsewhere? - Was my same sex parent able to tolerate my games or did they respond with bitterness or bullying? - Concurrently, how much did my parents give me a sense that they knew boundaries and would stop any game when it needed to be stopped?
Freud understood that adult mental health depends on the early expressions of our desire having been handled with particular skill by those around us without excessive punishment or licence, without neglect or enticement, without anger or shame. The healthy adult is someone who can feel potent without being terrified or guilty. Their games went well; now their reality can follow suit.
Freud’s Oedipal Complex becomes a source of valuable insight once we separate it from its more literal formulations. It might show us why sex has ended up a lot more complicated for us than it should ever have been.
-----------------------------------
내가 이해한건 프로이트의 오이디푸스 컴플렉스 이론에 의하면 어렸을때에도 섹슈얼리티(성적 표현? 성적 욕구? 성 지향?)가 있다. 따라서 어렸을때 아이들은 자신의 이성 부모로 부터 동성 부모를 제거하려고 한다. 이것을 부모가 잘 케어해 주지 못했다면 성인기의 성생활에 문제를 줄 수도 있다. 인데 디테일이 캐치가 안된다. 누가 설명좀.
줄바꿈은 내가 임의로 함. 걍 복붙하면 너무 지저분해서
https://klyro.sarl/yivp
이성부모한테 성적인 거시기를 느끼고 동성부모한테 질투?배타심을 느낀다는거같은데
기본 배경은 그건거 같은데 세부사항이 들어오질 않는다
다음과 같은 프로이트의 저작 참고해 봐.
4. “결국 어떤 현상을 통해서 우리는 어린아이가 오이디푸스 콤플렉스를 가지고 있다는 것을 확인합니까? 이제 우리는 이 조그만 남자아이가 어머니를 독점하고 싶어 하고, 아버지의 존재를 거추장스럽게 느낀다는 것을 쉽게 볼 수 있습니다. 어린 남자아이는 만약 아버지가 어머니에 대해서 사랑을 표시하면 언짢게 여깁니다. 하지만 아버지가 여행이라도 가거나 부재중일 때는 만족감을 표시합니다. 종종 그는 자신의 감정들을 직접 말로 표현하는데, 어머니와 결혼하겠다는 약속도 합니다.” -지크문트 프로이트, 「스물한 번째 강의: 리비도의 발달과 성적 조직들」, 『정신분석학 강의』, 임홍빈·홍혜경 옮김, 열린책들, 2020 신판, 472쪽.
5. “소년은 이제 새로운 의미에서 어머니를 갈망하기 시작하고, 이 갈망에 방해가 되는 아버지를 연적으로 여기면서 다시 증오한다. 이른바 오이디푸스 콤플렉스에 빠지는 것이다.” -지크문트 프로이트, 「사랑의 심리학—1. 남자들의 대상 선택에서 나타나는 특이한 유형」, 『성욕에 관한 세 편의 에세이』, 박종대 옮김, 열린책들, 2020 신판, 196쪽.
6. “오이디푸스 콤플렉스는 아이에게 두 가지 형태의 만족, 즉 능동적인 만족과 수동적인 만족을 제공한다. 능동적 만족은 남성적 방식으로서, 자신을 아버지 자리에 놓고 아버지처럼 어머니와 관계를 가짐으로써 생겨난다. 이 경우 원래의 아버지는 훼방꾼이 된다. 반면에 수동적 만족은 어머니를 대신해 아버지로부터 사랑받음으로써 얻어지는데, 이 경우 어머니는 필요 없는 존재가 된다.” -지크문트 프로이트, 「오이디푸스 콤플렉스의 소멸」, 『성욕에 관한 세 편의 에세이』, 박종대 옮김, 열린책들, 2020 신판, 274쪽.
대충 맞게 이해하신거 같은데요? - dc App
대충 다 캐치한 것 같은데 놓친 디테일은 아마 성적인 걸 죄악시하거나 그로부터 눈을 돌릴수록 그 영향은 강해지고, 우리가 실제로 누군가와 자길 원했다기보다는 자기 성적인 역할을 탐구하는 과정(놀이)를 겪었다는 내용? 그리고 이후는 네 말대로고. 아마 피아제 찾아보면 도움 될 듯
오오 그렇군