The search for alternatives to reductive, biomedical psychiatry has spurred a revival of psychoanalytic approaches to treating psychosis, as well as the re-emergence of phenomenological psychopathology–both traditions that consider the meaningfulness or legibility of psychotic experience. It has also led to an explosion of interest in the relevance–and authority–of first-person accounts of madness. Where prior eras dismissed mad persons as epistemic agents, there is now a growing call for “hermeneutical justice” which posits that first-person self-interpretation should be considered as no less valid than standard hermeneutical approaches for understanding and caring for mad individuals. By providing a 360 degree view, one that brings phenomenological and psychoanalytic approaches, first-person and extended narratives into dialogue, the hope here is not only to foster greater collaboration among clinicians and service-users but also to freshly re-examine the ways in which psychoanalysis can enrich and be enriched by a focus on the “lived experience” of madness. This entails a re-consideration of its complex and under-theorized relationship to phenomenological psychopathology, which has long foregrounded “lived experience,” the “what-is-it-like-to-be-mad” aspect of psychotic experience. Can phenomenological understandings help narrow some of the epistemic and hermeneutical gaps that still inhere in the discourse between service users and clinicians? Can a 360 degree approach help us better grasp madness–that “sublime object” (Woods, 2011) of psychiatry–on its own terms?