This paper investigates the relationship between clinical knowledge and psychological theory and considers the implications for clinical writing. I argue that clinical knowledge is a way of understanding rather than a body of facts and compare clinical material to ‘texts’ that generate multiple and indeterminate meanings. Analytic theories, which represent the crystallization of ways of understanding clinical phenomena, have an inherently metaphorical ‘as if’ quality since they are derived from and adapted to the clinical process of making meaning by representing psychic states in symbolic form. Thus good clinical writing demonstrates an integration of theory and clinical material into a unified network of symbolic meanings. Redfearn's paper, ‘The captive, the treasure, the hero and the “anal” stage of development’ (1979), is discussed as an exemplar of such integration. It is suggested that clinical knowledge is equivalent to the skill of making effective interpretations.