Up to this point, Hegel's text presents a simple and common truth, but one enunciated in a philosophical manner which is, properlyspeaking, sibylline. In the passage from the Preface cited above, Hegel, on the contrary affirms and describes a persona] moment of violence-Hegel, in other words the Sage, to whom an absolute Knowledge has conferred definitive satisfaction. This is not an un- bridled violence.What Hegel unleashes here is not the violence of Nature, it is the energy or the violence, of the Understanding-the Negativity of the Understanding-opposing itself to the pure beauty of the dream, which cannot act, which is impotent. Indeed, the beauty of the dream is on that side of the world where nothing is yet separated from what surrounds it, Where each element, in contrast to the abstract objects of the Understanding, is given concretely in space and time. But beauty cannot act. It can only be and preserve itself. Through action it would no longer exist, since action would first destroy what beauty is: beauty which seeks noth- ing, which is, which refuses to move itself but which is disturbed by the force of the Understanding. Moreover, beauty does not have the power to respond to the request of the Understanding, which asks it to uphold and preserve the work of human death. Beauty is incapable of it, in the sense that to uphold that work, it would be engaged in Action. Beauty is sovereign, it is an end, or it is not: that is why it is not susceptible to acting, why it is, even in principle, powerless and why it cannot yield to the active negation of the Understanding, which changes the world and itself becomes other than it is.6This beauty without consciousness of itself cannot therefore real- ly-but not for the same reason as life, which "recoils in horror from death and wants to save itself from annihilation"-bear death and preserve itself in it. This impotent beauty at least suffers from feeling the breakup of the profoundly indissoluble Totality of what is (of the concrete-real). Beauty would like to remain the sign of an accord of the real with itself. It cannot become conscious Negativity awakened in dismemberment, and the lucid gaze, absorbed in the Negative. This latter attitude presupposes the violent and laborious struggle of [hu]Man against Nature and is its end. That is the historic struggle where [hu]Man constitutes himself as "Subject" or as "abstract I" of the "Understanding," as a separated and named being. "That is to say" Kojeve clarifies, "that thought and the discourse which reveals the real are born of the negative Action which actu-alizes Nothingness by annihilating Being: the given being of [hu]Man (in the Struggle) and the given being of Nature (through Work-which results, moreover, from the real contact with death in the Struggle.)That is to say therefore, that the human being himself is none other than that Action: he is death which lives a human life" (K, 548; TEL,550).