This thesis argues, contrary to Gilles Deleuze’s critique of method and disavowal of textuality, that there is a re-constructive textual method at work in Deleuze’s 1968 treatise Différence et répétition. It is a method not for interpretation, representation, or deconstruction but for prolonging and reactivating historical and contemporary texts into the present and for the future. It is demonstrated how Deleuze’s method synthesises temporally and thematically heterogeneous texts and make them resonate with each other. The analysis is conducted, first, through a notion of telling stories as a complementary device to Deleuze’s definition of philosophy as the creation of concepts. Second, by showing how Deleuze – instead of offering solutions – connects, develops, and repeats problems from which the new is drawn. Third, by discussing his positive and re-constructive concept of critique and by arguing that his use of free indirect discourse should be understood as a metaphysical and political tool. Finally, by claiming that Deleuze’s concept of multiplicity can be viewed as a synthetic and methodological device that brings a heterogeneous given together. In concluding, it is proposed that Deleuze draws on tools and technics developed in literature and mathematics, specifically differential calculus and geometry, to develop methods for philosophy. Studying Deleuze’s method in Différence et répétition not only offers a prism for throwing new light on Deleuze’s philosophy through his understudied methodology, but also contributes to the development of innovative philosophically inspired methods for re-constructing the present. In addition, this study shows that while Deleuze pushed continental philosophy beyond its hermeneutic, structuralist, and existentialist heritage, he also contributed to the development of novel methodologies. (For a copy of the full text, do not hesitate to contact me: emet.brulin[at]gmail.com)