the same movement, but in opposite directions. For what is recollected
has been, is repeated backwards. Genuine repetition, on the other hand,
is recollected forwards.” A qualification that Constantin Constantius quite
suddenl yinserts into his text a few pages later makes it clear, furthermore,
that repetition is an inescapable prerequisite for ever yproblem in the area of
dogmatics. Thereb ythese anal yses of cognitive theor ytake on an existential
perspective whose ultimate standpoint is beyond all conceptual calculation.
Repetition is the concept of the inconceivable, which is wh ythe truth is
not something one must appropriate retrospectively, but is something to
which one is exposed, an experience—the truthhappens. Consequentl ya
repetition is not something one brings about oneself; on the contrar yit is
something brought about b ysomeone, an other: God.
After Constantin Constantius had spent several pages formulating these
theories, he wanted to travel to Berlin to test them out in practice. Like his
author, he had been to Berlin previously, but just as he was going out the
door the Young Man showed up, insisting in no uncertain terms that he
was unhappil yin love. He had repeatedl ywanted to call on a young woman,
but each time his courage failed him, and now he has instead called upon
Constantin Constantius, whom the Young Man wants as a companion on
a diverting carriage ride. While the ywait for the carriage, the Young Man
restlessl ypaces back and forth in the parlor, citing with melanchol yemotion
a verse b yPoul Martin Møller:
Then comes a dream from m y youth
To m yeas ychair,
I have longed so deepl yfor you,
Thou bright sun, woman fair.Now Constantin Constantius understands that the Young Man has begun
torecollecthis love and in so doing has gone beyond the young woman who
had originall ybeen the cause and the object of his love. And a couple of
weeks later the Young Man could also sense the obscure objective of this
displaced desire: The young woman has awakened a poetic instinct that is
stronger than the eros that awakened it, and in so doing she has unknow-
ingl ywritten her own “death sentence.” But the confused youth cannot
bring himself to explain to the young woman about “the confusion, the
fact that she was merel ythe visible form, while his thoughts, his soul, sought
something else, which he attributed to her.” Constantin Constantius there-
fore suggests that he emplo ya radical strateg y: “Destro yever ything, trans-
form yourself into a despicable human being whose only pleasure consists
in deceit and deception....First, try, if possible, to make yourself a bit
unpleasant to her. Don’t tease her, it will incite her. No! Be inconsistent,