Reactionary post, in regards the recent French Election results

More Finish actually. Distant, though. And a lot like Bukowski's face in reverse time. Apparently a poet too.

>ywn have to suck hot crusty farts out of Michel's tight goblin anus
It's a good feel, actually

He's way better than Bukowski imo. Deeper themes and more cynical.

This. His work is a lot more prophetic and relevant as well.

He's more like Camus except ugly and bitter about how ugly he is.

His HPL book is actualy quite good: for a degenerate frog he manages to nail exactly wtf was HPL's problem: women, money and furriners. (i..e. what turns MH on for the first 2, they share the last one).

also his spoken word poetry album is pretty funny and well-produced I thought.
drooling over women on the train, hating on the foreigners, moaning about life in a droll, deadpan kind of way. Presence Humaine its called.

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiN-7mukU_REuWdPjItjKgZvlBhOBs5au

I read his latest book because of the great reviews. I thought it was a very fun read, very cynical and funny at times. It wasn't much more for me at that time.

> oh boy was i wrong

Two months later I read atomised, I expected the book to be as cynical and as funny as Submission. And that book hit me like a sledgehammer.
I think that book influenced me on all different ways I see the World.

After that i saw Submission in a different light. I still have to reread it but both books are huge Masterpieces

Oh my god, I have never heard this. This is absolutely incredible.

>Barber: ayyy nigga what u finna get
>Hollabackq: ctfu what u think Whateva luk like if it a person?
>Barber: lmao u dead funny mon nigga say no mo

>Two months later I read atomised, I expected the book to be as cynical and as funny as Submission. And that book hit me like a sledgehammer.
>I think that book influenced me on all different ways I see the World.

So are you a true suicidal baguette now?

Let's be honest, Europe has to become multicultural and accept immigrants, there's just no other way.
It makes sense when you really think about it:

1. Low birth rates of whites: can you imagine if the European population decreases? Yeah, scary stuff...
2. European values: accepting immigrants is part of the core European values. So, ironically, right-wingers who claim to protect Europe are fighting against the very values they claim to protect!
3. You know where racial discrimination leads to, right? Sounds familiar? Yep, Hitler and the holocaust. Never again.

So yeah, maybe the average French person will look darker in the future, but so what? Better than going full nazi, because we know how that ends.

let's go boys

Have any of you read some of the writers that he mentions in the book?

Guenon springs to mind, then that opens up all the other traditionalist school writers like Schuon.

I haven't personally, but vaguely aware of them generally.

3/10 pasta

>both books are huge Masterpieces

Yeah, I like the part in the one masterpiece where his girlfriend licks his anus. Truly great literature.

He's the greatest living author who actually cares about ideas rather than pretentious prose and zany memes.

He's also very funny.

Top tier. Soumission isn't his best but it's well worth reading.

Isn't that Gravity's Rainbow?

getting your sphincter slobbered is one of the most patricién things in life desu

This doesn't even make sense in relation to my post.

I actually love the simple style of his prose. It always reflects the narrator's apathy perfectly.

I don't get the impression he's bitter about it at all.
Atomised doesn't get the recognition that it deserves now, but I get the feeling that it'll get a reprint once he dies. I put $20 bucks on Hunter Thompson style. Would like to see him last it out though.

The exploration of the consequences of the sexual revolution through the brothers should be a requirement for teenagers. No other book contextualises the current male sexual impulse better in any fiction I've read than that sad book.

came here to post this in poor prose

OP here. I'm glad to see Houellebecq getting some love on this board. It seems that you can't have a conversation about him with any conventional litheads without them deriding him as "mysogynistic, racist and bitter". There's an incredible quote from Houellebecq himself, in which he states that he is a "nihilist, reactionary, cynic, racist, shameless misogynist… an unremarkable author with no style." and that really is the perfect summary of the author in regards to his personality and I do not mean that all of those things are true, however, whilst they are simultaneously untrue they do also remain categorical facts.

>sex scene
>includes the rimjob

Truly /our guy/

this is probably the only place he gets some love, as you say.

That is, without spending money in Thailand.

I really don't have an idea where people come to believe he is misogynist.
I can agree that he has racist inclinations but they're always of a very perverse and hundrum sort that with honesty is probably common to everyone.

I have only read Atomised, and it seemed the opposed of misogynistic, to be honest. He appeared to invoke Goethe's eternal feminine - women as soft, serene caregivers. There's bitterness so many have fallen from this role, but he certainly prefers women to men at least in the narrative. He's only misogynistic if you think denying the the basic facts of biological differences between men and women is misogynistic, which, I suppose, many do.

He really seems to me like a jaded Romantic.

It's actually quite annoying to read people who, giving up on the world, also give up on themselves.

why has no one mentioned this

>IMO his best

I wouldn't say it is his best. I think Lanzarote is severely underrated as well, though.

This was a really hip book about how shitty isolation is

Lanzarote: good laugh.
weird how it all turns pear shaped with the cultists and shit.

It is misogynistic, just more in a "WHY ISN'T EVERY WOMAN LIKE MY MOMMY" sort of way. It's pathetic 2bh.
Funny how the most naive, virginal types always mention "biological differences in sexes" lmao.

As usual women/feminists in general think they can comment on what men are like with impunity, meanwhile men are called misogynists for doing the same to women.

Can't handle the fire, you better not play the game.

>lmao
this has to be b8

Wanting things to be a certain way because it suits you isn't misogynistic because even calling it misogynistic is because you want all men to accept women on women's terms, which is the exact same kind of colonization of other people's minds and behaviours. People are allowed to want what they want, and if you don't like it, fine - continue wanting whatever you want. Stop being a faggot.

I have a gf, btw. :^)

Nah I'm a guy who actually has sex.
How am I talking about all guys? Do you really think all of us are as whiny and incompetent as you are?
only if you're triggered.
Wanting a gentle caring woman isn't misogynistic, thinking every woman has to be like that is. That being said, I don't think it's as offensive to women as it is pathetic and detrimental to your own sex life. Like how you have to mention your "gf" lmao.

This is a nice, quiet thread about a specific author. You can criticise other people's sex lives, but you have some dysfunction that you derive pleasure from just acting like a shit. Fortunately, this specific author teaches a resignation. Your stupidity is human, very human, and that is to be preferred to the cold hum of the mechanical device, ja? Carry on, my sweetie roachie. We will all pretend to be hurt and offended and outraged by your cliches.

The only time Angela Nagle mentioned Houllebeq it was about his misogyny kek

only numales care about their concept of whiteness

And i'm discussing him I don't see the problem. It's almost as if you're butthurt that someone doesn't agree with you on Veeky Forums.

Race based Nationalism is dumb. However French Muslims are even dumber

I am hurt, offended and outraged!

do you need a safespace?

Yes, yes. Your use of "triggered," "butthurt," "safespace" - it is too original, too daunting. I have never encountered such a formidable opponent in all my time on Veeky Forums.

Sure it's cliched but it still applies, you want a "quiet thread" where you can circlejerk on your delusions with no conflicting views.

I don't think "you don't have sex!" has much merit as literary criticism, quite frankly.

This is good. Watch this. For those who have actually read Submission and other Houllebecq

youtube.com/watch?v=o4LXMR-RdQQ

48PBP

I think his early success 'broke' him, in that he hasn't really developed much.
Most of his stuff is about social alienation, and the 'loss of power' of a certain slice of male society, men who have no aim in life (but who also refuse to change, or refuse to drag themselves up by their stirrups, men who are at the mercy of society's waves and have no clue how to swim). It's no wonder he's so popular on Veeky Forums, that same resentment is what powers a lot of anger on the interwebs.

That wasn't about hollaback though so you don't make any sense, you realize that not all posts in a thread will be about the original topic?

angela nagle is another type to make abstract non-falsifiable statements on sociological movements in which any sort of abstract non-falsifiable could slot in; that shit is so wack. anyone can call anyone or thing whatever they want now - oh wow, pepe the frog? that's nihilism, regression - oh wow, pepe the frog? no, it's actually a brand new wave of optimism and the beginning of a new information age

You forget yourself, my dude. It was stated by me that Houellebecq is at least a partial believer in Goethe's eternal feminine, and you - I suppose it is still the same person - said people who speak about biological differences are virgins. It is a simplification for the purpose of personalizing what has become, bizarrely, a political issue. But again, I accept your stupidity with resignation.

You talk like a /pol/tard to push a non/pol/tard agenda. Strange, strange.

Oddly, you appeared to recommend certain beliefs, behaviours, mindsets on their ability to attract women. Are we to be beholden in our opinions by what women want us to think and believe? Or are we to lie like scoundrels? I have a girlfriend, as I stated, but if I had to choose between involuntary celibacy with free will and a daily orgy of sex with no free will, I would choose the celibacy.

tl;dr (you likely haven't read Houellebecq and seem very, very stupid) you're a dumb faggot but it doesn't matter because this petty exchange is what life is all about.

some Russian tv network interviewed him about his opinion of the french election results
didn't seem happy, but then again he is always sad

He just knows Submission is turning out to be reality

Nah I was saying I found it funny that people who feel the need to mention biological differences between sexes tend to have no experience with women.
On your "eternal feminine" what I said was that it was misogynistic but primarily pathetic. Can you argue without conflating different things?
>Oddly, you appeared to recommend certain beliefs, behaviours, mindsets on their ability to attract women.
Not really. The fact that you think everything is about attracting women is quite pathetic t b h.

You sound really butthurt t b h and when you take away all your masturbatory prose you actually seem to be unable to even read or argue without making shit up. I guess that's why you type like some overcompensating small-dicked virgin. Good second mention of the girlfriend btw LMAO.

But the narrator in Submission ends up being happy? Have you even read the book past the blurbs?

He's shit, like the nobel prize winner - I forgot his name already.

I've tried again and again to find something good about hollabak's prose but it is beyond redemption. His themes are also few and uninteresting.

Nah I read the first couple chapters...

Subtle Joyce allusion

I watched this last night. That woman speaks for an extended period of time without saying anything at all.

...

I am hurt, offended and outraged, etc.

If your point was only people who bring up biological differences tend to have little experience with women, regardless of whether it's true or false, you had no place bringing it up since it's perfectly relevant to the Houellebecq. Instead, you mean to subtly imply these differences do not exist without actually stating they don't because you'd get hammered for it because it's factually incorrect. Women are women; men are men.

The giveaway you haven't read Houellebecq is he writes about the struggles of relating to women, the struggle of an involuntary celibacy, the need for sex, the need for intimacy and deep, personal understanding and acceptance. You criticise people in a Houellebecq thread for something Houellebecq has explored in thorough. His eternal feminine is a very fraught, difficult conception of women, and he clearly allows for the complexity of the matter.

There demonstrates the point, in fact - you don't want to discuss Houellebecq or what he thinls; you want to personalize and politicization the discussion. It was obvious from the get go and it grows more and more obvious but I intend to keep responding until this thread falls off page 10. Buckle up, faggot.

I'm glad you enjoy my prose and it's a shame you're jelly about my gf. :^)

He is "happy" as he submits/gives in, yes. He becomes a Muslim in both the literal sense of the word (one who submits) and in a grander cultural perspective. I can see where he's coming from tho: at least the feminists get btfo'd :^)

>I am hurt, offended and outraged, etc.
you are lmao
>If your point was only people who bring up biological differences tend to have little experience with women, regardless of whether it's true or false, you had no place bringing it up since it's perfectly relevant to the Houellebecq.
If you can't see how "biological differences in sexes" and how hollaback is a pathetic person who wants a girl like his mommy are different topics you're probably a retarded person.

>Instead, you mean to subtly imply these differences do not exist without actually stating they don't because you'd get hammered for it because it's factually incorrect. Women are women; men are men.
Lmao what? No shit there are biological differences. I'll repeat myself, I just find it funny that people who feel the need to state that tend to be losers with little to no experience. It's even funnier that you think you're going against the grain.

>The giveaway you haven't read Houellebecq is he writes about the struggles of relating to women, the struggle of an involuntary celibacy, the need for sex, the need for intimacy and deep, personal understanding and acceptance. You criticise people in a Houellebecq thread for something Houellebecq has explored in thorough. His eternal feminine is a very fraught, difficult conception of women, and he clearly allows for the complexity of the matter.
I don't get it, do you want to suck his frail cock?

>There demonstrates the point, in fact - you don't want to discuss Houellebecq or what he thinls; you want to personalize and politicization the discussion. It was obvious from the get go and it grows more and more obvious but I intend to keep responding until this thread falls off page 10.
I like how you say you'll keep responding lmao.

Please mention your gf again btw lmao.

Not that poster but you're argument is literally "I disagree with you lmao, I don't like Houellebecq so you shouldn't either"

You have been brought so low that in the style of old /v/ you breakdown posts into point by point greentext. You have ceased to formulate your sentences and paragraphs coherently like an adult with nothing but generic insults and "lmao" typed over and over. Absolutely pathetic. You don't even have the energy or verve to properly troll. You're running on empty, my dude, and I am still going hard as a motherfucker.

Houellebecq looks like a monstrous little goblin and his characters are pathetic people who struggle with women. The mummy fantasy criticism you are obsessed with is partially true but so what? "That's pathetic!" you shout and he'd probably agree, but if you claim to be above the unconditional love of a mother, the quiet, gentle love, acceptance and nurturing, you're lying. You didn't leave the womb by choice and you weren't weened from your mother's by choice either. You can pretend you were, pretend you enjoy the struggle and competition, and maybe there is exhilaration and excitement, but when some strong, mighty handsome hunk (with a gf, btw) BTFO's you repeatedly in a thread on Veeky Forums, your tiny cock shrivels up and yearns for mummy. It's the truth.

I am glad you accept the differences between men and women. I guess you aren't pushing an agenda. You're just a very, very bland person who wants to act shit for no reason. I am sure you regret it by now.

Is Angela the new sniffing man

>They zhay thizh iz one thing but I zhay it is precizhely the opposite! My gott

Maybe if you could read you'd realize it's not.
lmao i feel like if you lost your internet connection your sense of self would go along with it.

>Houellebecq looks like a monstrous little goblin and his characters are pathetic people who struggle with women. The mummy fantasy criticism you are obsessed with is partially true but so what? "That's pathetic!" you shout and he'd probably agree, but if you claim to be above the unconditional love of a mother, the quiet, gentle love, acceptance and nurturing, you're lying. You didn't leave the womb by choice and you weren't weened from your mother's by choice either. You can pretend you were, pretend you enjoy the struggle and competition, and maybe there is exhilaration and excitement, but when some strong, mighty handsome hunk (with a gf, btw) BTFO's you repeatedly in a thread on Veeky Forums, your tiny cock shrivels up and yearns for mummy. It's the truth.
LMAO this is just sad. please mention your gf again LOL.

>I am glad you accept the differences between men and women. I guess you aren't pushing an agenda.
>agenda
Have you seen a girl naked?

>You're just a very, very bland person who wants to act shit for no reason. I am sure you regret it by now.
Says the guy who is obviously overcompensating (tiny dick?) and incredibly self-conscious that what he types comes across as interesting, were you molested as a child?

>those microwave meals and bottles of wine and watching the elections as game show tier entertainment

our lad to be fair

oh, I thought she brought up some interesting points. same as the other members of the panel. just out of curiosity, what is 'without saying anything at all'?

I know, right? I mean race is a social construct, it's not even real.
Every time someone starts talking about "whiteness" I think of someone like pic related, haha.
The sooner we're all mixed the better, that will be the ultimate BTFO to stupid racists.

not reactionary-related but submission-related:

this book also deals with france and the muslim question among others. i found it a fun and interesting read.

i don't care what normies say, alice was fucking asking for it

>I intend to keep responding until this thread falls off page 10
haha

So, let me get this straight. Is the interpretation of 'I will construe women as this monolith' the main reason people dislike Houellebecq?

>I don't think it's as offensive to women as it is pathetic and detrimental to your own sex life. Like how you have to mention your "gf" lmao.
And two sentences above that:
>Nah I'm a guy who actually has sex.
What the fuck? Fuck off with this weak bait.

I really want you to kill yourself. If you are reading this, please kill yourself. Thanks.

Well Submission had an interesting conceit but it wasn't realistic enough and also not that funny either or really any feeling at all. Good idea well done but didn't have a resonance in the end.

You seem butthurt, don't get that how's bait. It was relevant to what he said, I didn't mention it out of nowhere.
I'll pass, you can though, hollaback fanbois seem to have that impotent rage.

A shitty writer.
Read Marc Edouard Nabe.

Your greentext of my post is longer than what you actually typed. You have nothing to say but feel compelled to say something. Sad but not unusual at all.

You backhandedly note that my prose is good, that my posts are interesting except you imagine I am deliberately trying for that. It's all on you, my dude.

I expertise in the daddy dom/litle girl scene, and frankly, we encounter a lot like you - brats. You're acting up because you want someone to put you in your place. You're trying to top me from the bottom into punishing you so you can get gratification. It's weird but I am into it.

>hour goes by
>realizes he's still butthurt

>my post is longer than your reply
And? Your post was basically some autist crying about his impotence, it was funny but sad that you actually wrote it.

>You backhandedly note that my prose is good
Nah bud I said it reeked of someone who was desperate to come across as interesting.
There's a difference between saying something that's interesting and saying something that's desperate to come across as interesting, probably to do with your autism. Like I said, your identity is probably tied to your internet persona which is sad.

That's a strange last sentence. I had a suspicion you were a homosexual, with your desperate need to be interesting and compulsive need to slip in self-affirming statements through all your posts. Why no mention of your gf btw lmao

did you guys even read any of his books? if so, can you please discuss the book, not your impression of the author.

I wonder how lit would react to count julian.

At last you drop the pretense of even caring a jot about Houellebecq - just empty mudslinging. Yes, yes, very good. Hurt, offended, outraged. We can add autism to the list of Veeky Forums cliches.

You observe correctly that I am deriving tremendous sexual gratification from this exchange. I have a girlfriend, yes, but I am bisexual, and I specialize in this kind of thing. Are you not entertained? Is that not why you are here? You enjoy acting like an annoying, petulant teenager and you enjoy people telling you off for your naughtiness while you act insolent. No doubt a release from the tension of real life where you're timid and well behaved. It is a sexual roleplay by its nature, and you will respond in character.

The fact you'd even bring up the quality of my prose, the quality of arresting interest in my posts suggests you noted it and you were impressed. It is quite captivating, no?

There are no time constraints to our exchange, bucko. This is daddy's house, daddy's rules.

Hero.

Did you get beat up a lot as a kid?

My father used to beat me. He said it made me tough. He was right and I am grateful to him. I return the favour my father did me to amateur big shot troublecausers on the Internet to remodel them out of the generic Veeky Forums cliches into something mighty, daunting, original. It is gritty, thankless work, but my god, someone has to do it or this site would turn to a soup of limpwristed, catchphrase spouting weaklings.