The enunciation of a double negation inaugurated the resumption of a second period of an analysis after an interruption initiated by the patient. This formulation surprised the analyst who, retrospectively, drew support from the article “Negation”. This appeal to the father of psychoanalysis made it possible to give a third dimension to particularly intense transference-countertransference movements. By going back and forth between the two periods of analysis, the author evokes an initial period marked by the patient's difficulty in remembering and accomplishing the work of mourning linked to the loss of her mother; a period of latency, characterized by the interruption of the treatment, a real transference acting out, enabled the patient to adopt an active position. She thus left the object and then subsequently, during the second part of the treatment, looked for it again and (re)found it alive. The double negation reflected, in this patient, the beginning of a new mode of psychic functioning in which the compulsion to treat gave way to the recollection of early childhood memories.