In the twenty-first century, Theory is increasingly identified as having its foundations in a certain form of paranoia. From Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick through Bruno Latour to Rita Felski and the field of “postcritique,” critique, the hermeneutics of suspicion as well as poststructural theories of power such as Foucault’s are identified as paranoid and insufficient if not detrimental in dealing with the present. But why and how have these theories been identified as paranoid? From what implicit postulations about the Subject does postcritique take off? This chapter explores the deeper continuities and discontinuities between critique, paranoia, and conspiracy. It does so first by revisiting Sedgwick’s seminal article about paranoid and reparative reading and second by engaging Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the chronotope. In a recent study, I developed the concept of a paranoid chronotope as a way to get at the complexities of how to interpret and critique contemporary society and culture. In essence, the paranoid chronotope is a doubled one. In it, an everyday space-time is “exposed” as fake by a paranoid subject or group who complements this space-time with an additional space-time, one that is seen as true reality. Here, I will flip my own conception of a paranoid chronotope, marry it to Sedgwick, and approach critique rather from the perspective of a reparative chronotope. It is not at all self-evident, I will argue, that critique relies on paranoia. On the contrary, there are many ways in which we can see it rather as reparative.