First Response: the Seducer's Diary.

Make no mistake: the “Seducer” is, by any modern estimation, a “creeper”, a “douchebag”, and a “sleaze”, effectively in that order, yet to all of us who have had to endure such taunts he is sort of an idol, one to point to either as an example for that which we wish to become or that which we shall never stoop to, depending upon the extent to which we are ourselves seduced. If we’ve been wronged, he’s what we almost hope that our oppressor was, for we wish to be outwitted only by a genius, so as not to suffer fools; if we have wronged, or if we stand accused, he’s what we hope to be, to be perceived to be, and to perceive ourselves to be, as though the disapproval of the Public towards ourselves were secondary to the secrets we possessed about his genius. His writings are philosophical attempts at justification, rather than merely attempts at philosophical justification, for while the attempt at a philosophical justification may either succeed or fail either in being philosophy or in being justification, the philosophical attempt at justification, though it may succeed or fail in being justification, always succeeds in being philosophy.

 

[({Dm.R.G.)}]