The author differs with Nebbiosi's depiction of impasse as a generically explainable consequence of the analyst's missed emotional in-syncness with the patient, reconsidering the presented clinical material as an instance of unrecognized enactment, with patient and analyst unwittingly participating in representing newly emerging aspects of the patient's developing self. To view impasse as a consequence of something that has “happened” that needs correction is to risk narrowly constricting analytic experience that may be dense with nascently congealing meaning. Rather than asking what has been missed, one might rather ask what is showing up that has not been possible for analyst or patient to verbally introduce into the process.