This response to commentary of Drs. Caldwell and DeGolia (this issue) looks at Winnicott’s language and a revealing case example (“String”) by way of making a place for the concept of the negative transitional object. Rather than a regression or a fixation at a presymbolic level, it views negative transitional objects such as addictions as a creative if problematic adaptation to a flawed relational surround. Winnicott’s case example suggests that he may well have been pondering similar extensions of his theory at the time of his death.