Steven Cooper’s lucid and persuasive paper (this issue) brings to our attention the many ways in which Winnicott was unfairly represented in Stephen Mitchell’s paper on the developmental tilt in psychoanalytic theorizing. Winnicott is not to be boxed; his writing and his practice reach forward into issues of play and intersubjective airiness seemingly unrecognized in Mitchell’s paper. At the same time, it is important to recognize the ways in which Winnicott subscribed to a particular model of mind. This included both drive and the idea of regression, in both development and treatment. Winnicott’s writing puts him in a transitional space, between Freud and the relational theories that were to come.