One could read Hegel’s entire project as a movement of resistance against the narcissism of the unhappy beautiful soul, against the narcissism of interiority. The subject erected by Hegel is the subject of emptiness, but this emptiness is abundantly rich, a kind of positive exterior, a desert of freedom in which the subject seeks its form while affirming the restlessness of becoming. And indeed, the commentary which Kojève dedicated to Hegel’s philosophy opened the Hegelian concept of the subject to the categories of perpetration and deed. The subject’s essence resides in this perpetration; therefore it is a subject (whereas the beautiful soul is the epitome of narcissistic self-objectification). The negativity of the perpetrator-subject can also be called resistance which “negates the natural world in which the living being lives”, whereas the subject creates a world “outside which the human being is merely pure nothingness and in which it distinguishes itself from nothingness only for a certain time“. Instead of reading Hegel with Deleuze against Hegel, we should take the risk of reading Deleuze with Hegel for Deleuze, i.e. of relating the Deleuzean categories of virtuality, chaos and becoming (which are variables of the subjectivity of a subject without subjectivity, of a subject of the exterior) to the “night of the world”, to this emptiness and nothingness which is the dimension, not of unhappiness and tragic joy in unhappiness, but rather of a happy self-elevation and assertion of freedom.