I hope to make a preliminary contribution to the development of a model that more clearly reformulates the practices of psychoanalytic psychotherapy in a way that recognizes a diversity of analytic practice that I think has been misdescribed - technically and politically - as ‘psychodynamic’. The paper firstly considers the question of definition and suggests four identifiable meanings of the term ‘psychodynamic’. The discussion then reviews a number of core and inextricably connected questions of theory and practice under the following headings: setting and regression, time and frequency, countertransference, creativity and the real relationship, interpretation and pure technique, and the problem of eclecticism. The paper concludes by briefly exploring the parameters of psychodynamic practice in relation to eclecticism in psychotherapy, and makes a plea for a model that is consistent, authentic and ecumenical.