Should the analyst do anything else besides interpret? What constitutes an act within the analytic setting? And what signifies an act as analytic? The author reviews previous contributions to this literature, putting forward the idea that the analyst’s act is never isolated from the context of the analysis and the whole of the transference-countertransference relationship. Yet, under certain circumstances, it is not interpretation or the understanding of something that facilitates the transformation, but the experiencing of something that the analyst does. Through the careful 10 examination of previous conceptualizations (enactment, interpretive act), the author proposes that the analyst’s transformative act is a conscious-spontaneous act, not a reenactment of past. This idea will be discussed in light of the idea of playing and some recent thinking concerning ontological psychoanalysis.