Contemporary sensitivity to the importance of the relationship in psychoanalytic work has led, in some instances, to an over-estimation of “real” elements in the patient-analyst interaction and an underestimation of the fantasy aspects of the transference-countertransference relationship. This emphasis on external reality overshadows the internal reality of the patient and analyst's experience, shifting the treatment focus from intra-psychic to interpersonal aspects of the relationship, and it tends to bias technique toward the provision of restorative internal-izations in place of new understandings. The present article considers enactive behavior from the perspective of compromise formations, which make dangerous impulses less dangerous and ego-syntonic. The article also highlights some issues that arise when internalization mechanisms are assumed to underlie clinical outcome.