This paper is intended as an examination of Dr. Stamm's (1975) paper and of Dr. Jules Glenn's discussion of Peter Shaffer's previous work. Its premise is the futility of subjecting Equus to a traditional psychoanalytic investigation, as a product of the playwright's unconscious, when the play represents a skillful, highly conscious use of analytic cliches to manipulate the audience. This phenomenon, however, and the play's great popularity prompt some reflections on the nature of kitsch, or false art, and its differences from authentic drama. The experience of kitsch can be identified when the spectator feels coerced by exaggerated, unconvincing theatrical devices, and fails to experience genuine empathy with the characters in a play. In the experience of authentic tragedy there is some element of voluntary surrender, of suspension of disbelief with full consent of will, as in the Aristotelian concept of catharsis. Shaffer's play is discussed as an illustration of this distinction and its relation to pseudoemotionality, the impostor syndrome, and the "as if" personality. In conclusion, the play's failure to evoke a genuine emotional response is explained by interpreting Equus as an "as if" tragedy.