The author's main thesis is that, quite ironically, in reacting against the classical blank screen view of the analytic situation, a new and more subtle version of the blank screen analyst, or at least of the blank mirror analyst, has emerged. In this new version, the analyst's countertransference reactions tend to be seen as a virtually unerring guide to the patient's mental contents. Some difficulties with this new point of view are discussed, and a critical discussion of H. Racker's (1968) concept of complementary identification and the much used concept of projective identification is included.