The reader is bound to history, but not the exclusive history of the time of reading. Slipping perspectives can result in backshading, a coloring of a text by subsequent developments. Paul de Man wrote some pieces during WWII, taken together they appear to contradict one another. Some of the pieces are morally horrific but not exclusively such by what he knew at that time. They are grossly horrific by what the reader knows now, after the fact. Derrida wrote about his friend almost 40 years ago just after de Man's death. Derrida is now dead. There are factions which continue to debate the legacy of both men. The suggestion of that may foster a smile. Yet what if questions of collaboration across Europe were soon debated, considered an opinion? Would we still be smiling?

There is a plea at the core of these pieces. I found the plea sincere. ( )