In this article, what seems to have been two central tenets in contemporary psychoanalytic narrative theory are challenged. The one - propounded by Roy Schafer - is that the goal of psychoanalytic work is to furnish the analysand with an alternative narrative. The other - propounded by Donald Spence - is that any story will do, if only it is coherent, consistent, persuasive and encompasses the known “facts”. Basing his critique of the mentioned standpoints on an intersubjective understanding of psychoanalytic work and a concept of interpreting inspired by the existential hermeneutics of Martin Heidegger, the author discusses the nature of the analytic dialogue and the role of transference together with the ethical basis of truth in the analytic project. Finally, it is indicated that there is a limit to analytic working-through, where the analysand's narrative activity must come to a halt and room be left for a resolve, where the analysand may undergo a fundamental transformation.