Because of the way it prioritizes "interruption" and calls into question the very possibility of producing coherent, self-contained narratives, the deconstructive work of Jacques Derrida is often thought to be intrinsically anti-narrative in its very structure; and yet there are those who insist that, to the contrary, deconstruction is a narrative exercise through and through. I maintain that both interpretive approaches fall prey to a serious misunderstanding of deconstruction. I will show that deconstruction should be viewed neither as a simple affirmation nor negation of narrative but rather as a radical "perplexity" in the face of narrative. Indeed, any serious engagement with deconstruction requires that we call into question the very nature, function, and limits of narrative practice.