Fiction and Repetition is and will remain a distinguished deconstructionist guide of literary criticism. However, after detailed and systematic research, I also find some shortcomings in this important academic work: Firstly, written in the metaphysical language, Fiction and Repetition can never succeed in escaping the logocentrism and binary opposition inherent in this language.Secondly, based on Saussure’s argument on langue, the monograph’s view of indeterminacy of literary work’s meaning is theoretically correct but practically inadequate. Last but not the least, Miller’s proposal on repetition also has some limitations. By taking into account both the work’s merits and demerits, we can gain a more comprehensive outlook on Miller’s idea of repetition as well as the deconstruction theory of literary criticism in general. However, after detailed and systematic research, I also find some shortcomings in this important academic work: Firstly, written in the metaphysical language, Fiction and Repetition can never succeed in escaping the logocentrism and binary opposition inherent in this language. Secondarily, based on Saussure’s argument on langue, the monograph’s view of indeterminacy of literary work’s meaning is theoretically correct but practically inadequate. Last but not the least, Miller’s proposal on repetition also has some limitations. By taking into account both the work of merits and demerits, we can gain a more comprehensive outlook on Miller’s idea of ​​repetition as well as the deconstruction theory of literary criticism in general.