Not very "clinical" or "analytical", more relational.
Okay, I'm going to start, and in no particular order.
I think 91 Girl's comment about her T sums up exactly what is wrong with mine. It could be that 1) she has only been practicing for 4 years, so she's still pretty new, but also that her approach is psychodynamic - which is hands-off to the extreme, but also very into intellectualizing and interpretation. And I think she obviously went for this approach as it suits her personality. Although she is very caring, attentive and astute, she is also very aloof, even a bit cold. I get the impression that she doesn't really get more extreme emotions (I could be wrong), and I think that is why it took us a month -via email - to sort out one hiccup.
Abstract I read the excerpt you quoted, but I do think a bit of warmth from the therapist might have worked better for me. Even so, I thought that the combination of her and another therapist could have worked well since I really feel that she is nothing if not responsible. I think she's very theoretical, clinical and that she goes by the book, but this is what would have kept me safe if another therapist was introduced into the mix to deal with an area that easily makes me go completely off my rocker.
So, the very qualities that at times frustrate me, could also be my saving grace, as I would have needed her as an anchor.
On the other hand, perhaps if she weren't so clinical and cold I might not have felt a need for another. I don't know, can you see why I'm so conflicted about her?
She was right when she said that therapy must have felt like a repetition or replication of the situation with my mother, and that it must have been 'very, very hard'. Yes, it often made me feel that it was TOO hard, and that therapy was simply rubbing salt into raw wounds. I really don't see how sitting through that twice a week would have resolved things.