Abstract
The writings of Keith Jenkins have generated much healthy criticism in historiography and contemporary intellectual life. I propose to expand on his historiographic contribution, drawing on his critique of narrative form, which involves the social–intellectual effects of temporal paradoxes. Do the writings of historians actually generate modes of destroying a past through misleading concepts of continuity? Or, as many groups experience widespread discontinuity today, is continuity now a privilege of labor and life? Has continuity been capitalized? If today many historians agree there is no ‘foundational’ access to the past, why do their narratives read otherwise, relying on uni-directionality and the code of before/after? If contemporary Western societies have shifted to knowledge that adds direct value to a market, where, for example, law schools put in intellectual property attorneys, what value does historical narrative generate? My contribution to this volume honoring Keith Jenkins' writings is presented in the spirit of using his work, not only commenting on it.