Michel Houellebecq

[Conchis]

What do people think of this author (whose surname, I've just learned, is pronounced 'Well-beck')?

Reactionary, misogynist, Islamohobe?

Or is he more of a French (literary) Fassbinder - ie, someone who affronts both left and right by telling the truth, as he sees it?


I'm currently reading his novel Submission, published in 2015 and set in 2022: talk about state of the zeitgeist reading.....

[french frank]

What do people think of this author (whose surname, I've just learned, is pronounced 'Well-beck')?

Coincidence. À propos the other thread about fiction I was looking him up half an hour ago to remind myself why it was I didn't delve into his writing: I had a vague feeling that was to do with his style but reading an extract online it wasn't something that struck me as particularly off-putting. It was an extract from La Carte et le territoire. Slightly bizarre but not unreadable. But I'm afraid I haven't investigated his writing at all.

[Conchis]

Coincidence. À propos the other thread about fiction I was looking him up half an hour ago to remind myself why it was I didn't delve into his writing: I had a vague feeling that was to do with his style but reading an extract online it wasn't something that struck me as particularly off-putting. It was an extract from La Carte et le territoire. Slightly bizarre but not unreadable. But I'm afraid I haven't investigated his writing at all.

Having read just under 100 pages of Submission, I think I can understand why female readers and reviewers don't seem to like him. I wouldn't exactly say his characterisation is 'misogynistic' but he does, shall we say, present the 'Male subconscious unpoliced.'

[Richard Barrett]

I read Atomised when it came out in 1998, that was enough for me, nasty mean-spirited stuff.

[french frank]

Houellebecq on Soumission:

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/01/02/scare-tactics-michel-houellebecq-on-his-new-book/

[Barbirollians]

I read Atomised when it came out in 1998, that was enough for me, nasty mean-spirited stuff.

I agree entirely - felt soiled having it in the house - and after reading it off it went to the charity shop a very rare thing for me not to keep books.

[Conchis]

I've just finished it!

Very unusual for me to read a book (admittedly, not a long one - 250 pages) in less than a day, but there was something about the author's style and the way he told his story that kept me turning the pages, even though Submission is far from being a conventional political 'thriller'.

Some background: the year is 2022 and France is about to hold Presidential elections. The favourite is Marine Le Pen, the UMP are way behind and the only hope of preventing the National Front from gaining power would seem to be an alliance between the Socialists and a new, faith-based party the Muslim Brotherhood, led by a charismatic young leader who has utilised the internet and social media to gain a foothold among the young. When the election is postponed because of riots (making the narrator fearful that France is about to descend into civil war), a pact between the Socialists snd the Muslim brotherhood ensures an overwhelming victory for the Muslims, who ride to power one an 'anti-materialist' platform that proposes making 'the family' central to French life again and places renewed emphasis on 'spirituality' in Education. The upshot is that universities become Islamacised (ie, co-education is dropped, women are not allowed to teach and non-Muslims are removed from teaching positions, albeit with enhanced pensions). Saudi money flows into France to revitalise the economy.

The narrator, a disillusioned middle-aged lecturer with an unsuccessful and depressing sex life, is dismissed from his post but is later re-recruited by his university whose new head makes a compelling case for all staff members to undergo Muslim conversion. One of the attractions is the idea of polygamy, which French manhood seems to take to like the proverbial duck to water - the idea of having 'three wives' ('We believe that's what someone of your economic status could support', trills the boss) appeals: a middle-aged one for intellectual companionship, a slightly younger one for household duties and a teenage one for bedroom duties. The new Musilm President, a Federalist who has his sights set on being eventual President of Europe, meanwhile goes about making overtures to entice countries like Morocco, Turkey (yep) and Egypty into the EU. The narrator is astounded at how skilfully the Muslim President has 'sold' Islam to the west and effectively put an end to French secularism.

Important point: this outline might give the impression that the book is Islamophobic, a charge that has frequently been levelled at the author. That was not the impression I got when reading it. The narrator evinces a lot of admiration for the Muslim President, who is 'the only adult in the room', though his 'double agenda' is hiding in plain sight. His point being that a France weary of the tensions of recent years and the endless jockeying between centre-right and centre-left parties, might welcome the simple certainties of Islam as an alternative to the chaos of so-called democracy.

I found the book utterly compelling, if hardly likeable. It IS somewhat spoiled by several revoting descriptions of sexual encounters (no-one has ever written about sex well, anyway) and the complete absence of the women's viewpoint is notable (we're left to imagine how all those female academics feel about being restricted to secretarial roles or housewifely duties). Still, the idea is quite persuasive and certainly thought-provoking. On that basis alone, I'd recommend it.

[Conchis]

I read Atomised when it came out in 1998, that was enough for me, nasty mean-spirited stuff.

I've just started reading this today. Again, I'm hooked from the opening, though I'm sure it'll get nasty soon.

[french frank]

There's obviously a reason for the 'nastiness'. What is it? Because he thinks it will sell? Hardly. I'm not sure how Soumission is Islamophobic for imagining the effect of the Islamicisation of the West . Unless that is interpreted as deliberate incitement to attack Muslims (with their oppression of women).

I don't understand what lies behind his writing. Provocative? It provokes thought. I'm not sure that I'm sufficiently intrigued to explore any further but this has penetrated my radar.

[Conchis]

There's obviously a reason for the 'nastiness'. What is it? Because he thinks it will sell? Hardly. I'm not sure how Soumission is Islamophobic for imagining the effect of the Islamicisation of the West . Unless that is interpreted as deliberate incitement to attack Muslims (with their oppression of women).

I don't understand what lies behind his writing. Provocative? It provokes thought. I'm not sure that I'm sufficiently intrigued to explore any further but this has penetrated my radar.

I hope my antenna is sufficiently developed to distinguish between a writer with something to say and a shallow litterateur who just wants to make a splash. I would say M.B. is the former, not the latter.

His approach in Soumission is to present a hypothetical situation that could easily be real. He sets his action in the near future and peoples the broader canvas with real people (Le Pen, Hollande, etc), many of them still-active politicians, so the situation is very relatable to the reader.

An aspect of the novel I didn't touch on earlier is the narrator's research interest in J.K. Huysmans, a 'Decadent' author who finally embraced the Catholic faith. Quite why Huysmans embraced Catholicism is something that has always puzzled the narrator but by the end of the novel, he thinks he understands why and this presages his own conversion to Islam in the final chapter (apologies for heavy spoilers but most of the interest in the book is in the way the story is told, not the story itself). The narrator is himself a literal Decadent: his life is without purpose save for sexual encounters with students and ex-girlfriends and he is gradually being overwhelmed by a sense of self-disgust. By the end of the book, he feels he is about to make a new departure but the reader is left to wonder what this will mean for him - as, theoretically, Islam will offer him even greater scope for decadence than atheism (polygamy, etc) and he is a person who seems to lack a spiritual aspect.

One thing that puzzled me about the book: the fate of homosexuals under this new French Muslim order is not mentioned. I presume, on purpose.

I'd advise you to read it, with the proviso that you probably won't enjoy it, and may find aspects of it repulsive (I certainly did). However, I'm glad I've read it. I've been thinking about it all day, and will probably think about it all week.

[french frank]

His approach in Soumission is to present a hypothetical situation that could easily be real.

I understood it as a 'what if'. Where would it lead?

Quite why Huysmans embraced Catholicism is something that has always puzzled the narrator but by the end of the novel, he thinks he understands why and this presages his own conversion to Islam

I must read that interview again (the one I linked to earlier). I think he said something about himself (the real him!) converting i.e. it would have been logical. I wonder whether there's anything more to his choice of title - other than that Islam means 'submission'.

[Conchis]

I understood it as a 'what if'. Where would it lead?



I must read that interview again (the one I linked to earlier). I think he said something about himself (the real him!) converting i.e. it would have been logical. I wonder whether there's anything more to his choice of title - other than that Islam means 'submission'.

The title has multiple meanings: submission as the meaning of Islam, France's literal submission to Islam, the narrator's submission to what events throw in his path, as well as the sexual kind of submission that the narrator seeks in his encounters with prostitutes, escorts, students, etc.

[french frank]

The title has multiple meanings: submission as the meaning of Islam, France's literal submission to Islam, the narrator's submission to what events throw in his path, as well as the sexual kind of submission that the narrator seeks in his encounters with prostitutes, escorts, students, etc.

[Keraulophone]

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/books/review/michel-houellebecqs-submission.html

Found this intriguing, so skimmed a few reviews such as the one linked above from the New York Times.

“Was Huysmans’s entire body of work the result of a grandiose self-delusion? François appears to believe so, and the idea is far from improbable, in fact I find it quite plausible. The disillusioned gaze sees through everything, sees all the lies and the pretenses we concoct to give life meaning, the only thing it doesn’t see is its own origin, its own driving force. But what does that matter as long as it creates great literature, quivering with ambivalence, full of longing for meaning, which, if none is found, it creates itself?”

Might that qualify for Pseud’s Corner? I suppose I’ll only be able to tell if I stopped prevaricating and actually read the book.


Right now, however, all I can muse upon, even after singing Walton’s stunning Mag and Nunc at Evensong, is Kubrick’s Paths of Glory (1957), chanced upon for the first time late last night on BBC2... surely one of the greatest of all anti-war movies; and Stanley had others too.

.

[Conchis]

Just finished Atomised, which Richard Barrett disliked intensely.

To be sure, it's often a hard book to like and I had to (literally) gird my loins when M.H. launched upon yet another piece of excruciating sexual detail. Yet, like Submission, it's a tantalising and provocative 'novel of ideas' and its central thesis - that western civilisation is irredeemably decadent and deserves to be gently put out of its misery - is a compelling one. This is the first Houellebecq novel and probably the best introduction to his signature style and themes.