What does this guy write about, how good is it, why is it good or bad, what is his problem?

what does this guy write about, how good is it, why is it good or bad, what is his problem?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=UniWl5F7OUg
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>'I REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT ISLAM, MULTICULTURALISM, AND IMMIGRATION ON THE LITERATURE BOARD!"

Fuck off

In short he writes about the absence of any meaningful principles to live by in modern life. Relationships being reduced to a pure transactional economy leading to the question of the possibility of love. Europe going into a death spiral where the opposing forces of a naive and imbecilic Far Right and Islam are the only political forces with a sense of energy and mission undermining the nihilistic and beurocratized liberal left.

He's accused of being a misogynist and an islamophobe because of the themes he deals with and having a very bitter attitude towards them but I've seen no evidence of the sort. He's practically a Marxist who has simply given up hope on life.

Houellebecq isn't /pol/ at all. If you're going to accuse OP of such motives at least educate him

Ah yes, censor opinions you don't like

>he doesn't recognize bait threads

He's not here to discuss literature

Bait is a two way game retard.
You're more likely to turn threads into shitfests if you pre-emptively start throwing shit.

>he doesn't recognize falseflagging

>when you make a absolutely abhorrent post

Fair point, but if I was to in turn accuse him of false flagging I'd be playing into the game myself

ahh, so hes nothing new.

No but what is in the end of the day

Name?

you can reframe fucking anything as "nothing new". what's the point.

it's obviously something new in the sense that apart from him there's virtually noone in popular lit at this point talking freely about these topics. it's either a left wing circlejerk or unpolitical. personally, i welcome some honesty and reading about opinions that are being silenced or omitted all over the media right now.

nice meme upvoted

This, nigga travels with a body guard everywhere he goes in Paris, what other writer does this?

Quads?

The entire staff of Charlie Hebdo

so you're like keen on him?

nothing new might just mean it's not what I was hoping for.

What were you hoping for?

something spiritual.

Yeah, quads dictate that you absolutely MUST provide the name of the person in the OP. There is no question about it and no other answer will suffice.

The spiritual, if it can be talked about at all, can not be expressed in summaries. There is a weight of a sense of absence in his work. There is a hint of a silent prophet about his perspective there. He does not show any experience of anything more than the reducible but he presents the weight of what it is to lack that.

He's not for you, no.

Good post. Elementary Particles had me very seriously considering suicide.

Dude's important because he's fucking miserable but self aware enough to know its not everyone elses fault

I like how completely shameless he is, it's a refreshing attitude. He's a broken man though, which he seemingly seems to be aware of.

>seemingly seems to be

i love these kinds of artists, i am myself like that I believe.

>i love people like myself

Very well put, user.
Houellebecq is seen as a prophet by many, because he "predicted" a terrorist attack in Indonesia.

...

Honestly, Houellebecq is correct. But he's also not very smart.

He should've done himself a favor and started looking for the transcendent instead of continuing to dig a bigger hole into his jaded materialism.

The thing about Houellebecq seems to be that his ideas are often extremely novel and fresh. However, the way in which he executes these ideas, aka the actual writing and the characters he uses for his purpose, always feels like a carbon copy of his earlier books. It's a bit like Bukowski in that regard. Every book written by Houellebecq/Bukowski is undoubtedly a Houellebecq/Bukowski book, simply by merit of the style being the exact same - no visible finesse to speak of in the actual sentences, main character is a drunkard, a degenerate and incurable horny. It's debatable if this could be called a problem. If Houellebecq has a problem though, it's these garbage unnecessary sex scenes strewn in every 30 pages or so. You get the feeling that they serve no other purpose than to get the author off.

I read "Whatever", "Atomised" and "Submission". I really enjoyed the first two books and also had a good laugh here and there while reading them. The second one was interesting. I wouldn´t say it was islamophobic or shit. A thing thats remarkable about the three books and I think his whole work is that there are parts where he writes about scientific stuff in a dissertation-like style. Topics like literature, physics etc.

I really like Houellebecq, I have read most of his books now.

Don't read reviews, just settle down with one of the books. The first one I read was Atomised.

Really recommended contemporary writer. Very relevant in Europe's politics right now, especially in France and friends.

The positive project that you describe is merely a delusion, however. Priests, monks, productive adults who grow businesses and families, they delude themselves with the various forms of 'meaning', which is all that what you refer to is really supposed to indicate. In a sense, it is better to remain unhappy in knowledge rather than to succumb to a delusion, because what this means is that you value the truth, unpleasant as it is, and that you are stronger to be in that truth than most people.

>The positive project that you describe is merely a delusion, however.

Yes, of course that's what a materialist believes. But unlike your theories, this isn't something you can just sit around and think yourself into, you have to actually live it.

Also, I take issue with your idea that a truth that makes you depressed and pathologically insane is actually capital T-Truth. If it makes you insane, there's something wrong with it.

lmao

okay, what makes it a delusion? if i decide my job means something to me, or my children, or god, or whatever, what makes that delusional?

he's a hack.

Whenever i see Schopenhauer i wonder who let this Will in.

Such a weak faggot.

job = slavery for someone elses goals.

if you have to construct a narrative around it where its something good, cool or meaningful, then its a literal delusion.

Meaning is personal. I can have a job as a writer, an economist, a software engineer, or anything else and find meaning in it so long as it is meaningful in my eyes.
What makes the job of the man at the top meaningful? Is he "free"? Do you think he is free from influence, from authority?
If you're working as an environmental lawyer because you genuinely think you'll have some profound impact on the world, then yes, you are delusional. If you do it because it makes you feel good to act in accordance with your own morals, then that's anything but.

I'm really interested in your point of view, if only for how flimsily it's held together. Houellebecq at least has his feet planted on planet earth. If your theory is dependent on literally everyone else being delusional AND it makes you miserable, you should probably reconsider it.

>What makes the job of the man at the top meaningful? Is he "free"? Do you think he is free from influence, from authority?

man at the top is a slave too. freedom can only come from being completely alone.

>If you're working as an environmental lawyer because you genuinely think you'll have some profound impact on the world, then yes, you are delusional. If you do it because it makes you feel good to act in accordance with your own morals, then that's anything but.

second situation is a strawman, because you make the motivation a simple feeling. feelings =/= meaning.

Is there any flowchart to his works you lads could share? Thanks in advance.

Also, any thoughts on the Spanish translations by Anagrama? I'd assume any Spanish translation (assuming there's more than one) would be better than an English one.

>If it makes you insane, there's something wrong with it.
see, I actually accept that living, taking a certain praxis, and having that as your personal truth is all very good (at least until a certain point)
but then you came up with that second phrase.
And you're basically, really, really, really wrong.
Capital T-truth can only, by definition make someone insane. And no theres nothing wrong with it.
Reality is really fucking scary and fucked up.

>freedom can only come from being completely alone.
Boy this is not gonna last you long

Anywho, you're kind of avoiding the obvious question here. Feelings can't be meaningful, power and influence (presumably) can't be meaningful. What has meaning to you then?

Well?
Are you gonna tell us what this mortifying truth is?

>Capital T-truth can only, by definition make someone insane

No, it can't because then we would've been extinct long ago.

going just by atomised and the map & the territory he writes about being white and male but sexless and how that sucks and being envious of all the Real Men tm drowning in sweet french pussy

he writes about sex and social issues and its decent but very straightforward

GOD, LOVE!

FUCKING ALIENS YOU ARE.

There is nothing new under the sun. That said, in his view of modern western life, he is almost a secular apocalyptic in ways I haven't seen much elsewhere.

His work is not so complicated that you would need anything like this. Just read chronologically.

The flow chart I mean. I don't know anything about various translations.

Not a subtle bait, buddy.

Fuck off leafnigger, Islam should be banned.

Define this Truth that you speak of. Why is it so awful?

inb4 suffering

>No, it can't because then we would've been extinct long ago.

You don't seem to grasp how natural selection works

If you want to read something french and politically incorrect:
youtube.com/watch?v=UniWl5F7OUg
>Il y a tant d’histoires : réelles, fausses, grandes ou petites...
Alors, quelle est la ‘‘vraie’’ histoire ?
>Prenez Gaspard Boisvert, ex-conseiller du président le plus stupide que les États-Unis aient connu, devenu publicitaire pour Pernod-Ricard (‘‘Un verre, ça va, deux verres, ça va mieux’’). Mais il ne s’agit pas vraiment de lui. Il y a bien la grande Histoire, celle de la guerre, avec ses dates, ses tableaux, ses statistiques aléatoires. Mais non, ce n’est pas réellement le sujet. Imaginez alors que Gaspard Boisvert cache un lourd secret, que son grand-père soit Adolf Hitler par exemple et que Patrik Ourednik le découvre. Pas le vrai Ourednik, non, le personnage du livre, lui aussi romancier et obsédé par la fin du monde. Vous me suivez ?
>Pourtant entre la blague des deux chinois, l’histoire des religions, celle du Viagra, l’hymne maltais, l’étymologie du prénom Adolf, le végétarisme ou l’Apocalypse qui se profile, prenez garde, il n’est pas exclu qu’on soit tout simplement en train de se payer votre tête.
>Cet anti-roman ironique et jubilatoire se glisse entre les rouages de notre époque pour mieux la déboulonner. En 111 chapitres comme autant de fausses pistes, vous pénétrerez les mystères d’une civilisation : la vôtre.

Rien compris à ces conneries, mais la présentation semble plus prétentieuse que fascinante.

Alors reste sur tes fascinations.

Je voulais dire que ça essaie très fort d'être fascinant, mystérieux, piquant... mais que ça ne fonctionne pas.

>it is a delusion because I say so

Ok.

Ça fait pas mystique, mais je t'accorde que ça sonne un peu faux. En tant qu'éditeur, j'imagine qu'ils n'ont pas le choix pêh.
Tu as donné une chance au podcast ?

Non, mais j'ai wikipédié le nom de l'auteur, et ça semble plus intéressant que prévu.

>he believes in absolute truth

wew lad

>nick land
why?

This man is a visionary.

Names please? I have no clue who the baby faced boy is in the bottom left anyways.