Both Roger Frie and Ilene Philipson introduce us to beloved and flawed forebears. They challenge us to mourn the confusion involved with our affection for these idealized figures, and to ask ourselves why we do not want to see them more clearly. Frie examines his own family and his own conscience, while Philipson approaches like an outside observer debunking self psychologists, as well as their attachment to an admittedly traumatized and limited progenitor. Thus, the tone of their two papers differs greatly.