Roy Schafer and Merton Gill evoke two historically distinguished images of psychoanalytic treatment, one showing analysis elaborating life histories, and the other picturing the analyst as stirring transference embers into flame. A close examination of their implied theories of therapeutic action suggests that they mainly differ on whether allusions to the analyst are often localized in certain gestures or are always uniformly distributed throughout the patient's presentation. Because of this theoretical difference, these authors use different means to invite new experience, and they weigh differently the advantage of having a firm guide to turning-points in behavior against the advantage of maintaining an unconfinable curiosity.