learning to know and accept them is not an unimportant taskduring training and beyond.And, to conclude, I want to mention this: client-centred literature contains little in the way of the concrete forms which incongruence can take. As a process-oriented theory of therapy, it emphasises mainly the formal signals. We can see this, for example, in Barrett-Lennard's definition of incongruence:Direct evidence of lack of congruence includes, for example, inconsistency between what the individual says, and what he implies by expression, gestures, or tone of voice. Indications of discomfort, tension, or anxiety are considered to be less direct but equally important evidence of lack of congruence. They imply that the individual is not, at the time, freely open to awareness of some aspects of his experience, that he is lacking in integration and is, in some degree, incongruent. In the psychoanalytic literature, however, a great deal is said about the diversity in content of 'countertransference reactions' and their psychogenic roots; the interested reader may find a great deal in the following publications: Glover, 1955; Groen, 1978; Menninger, 1958; Racker, 1957; Winnicott, 1949.2. TransparencyIts Place In The Evolution Of Client-Centred TherapyAt the beginning of this paper, I have described transparency as the outer layer of authenticity: the explicit communication by the therapist of his own experiences. It should however be mentioned that even without the use of such explicit 'self-revelations', the client-centred therapist is fairly transparent to his client, and that the distinction we made between congruence and transparency should not be understood in absolute terms. Our client gets to know us through everything we do and don't do, be it verbal or non verbal.Especially in client-centred therapy, where the working relationship is heavily coloured by personalinvolvement with the client on the basis of one's own experience of the moment, the client is likely to get to know who the therapist is, as a person. We can thus never function as a white screen. Each therapist evokes slightly different feelings in his clients, and this is perhaps an important element in the success or failure of a therapy, an element which surpasses concrete methods and interventions: does the client meet a therapist whose personality and way of being-in-the-world allow him to move, precisely at the level where his own problem lies? We have but little control over this aspect of therapy, and research on the topic of treatment recommendations yields but little useful information on this topic.As to the therapist's self-expressive interventions in the narrow sense of the word, it is remarkable how reluctantly they were introduced and accepted in the evolution of client-centred therapy. This should notsurprise us. Indeed, it belongs to the nuclear identity of client-centred therapy that the therapist follow his client within the client's own frame of reference. However, between 1955 and 1962 this principle became more flexible. Client-centred therapy evolved from 'non-directive' to 'experiential', and this allowed thetherapist to bring in something from his own frame of reference, as long as he kept returning to the client's experiential track . This was thus the context in which self-expressive interventions becameaccepted.