/lit/ - Literature

>>13892986
You only really need to read one Wellbecky book and you've read all of them

>>13893064
which one do I read then (not op)

Better than anything that comes out in the US these days, but still not his best. Read it if you've read Elementary Particles, The Map and the Territory, and The Possibility of an Island already. Otherwise start with those (his top 3) or Submission as his most popular.

>>13893125
Submission is his second best imo, below Atomised.

>>13893114
Whatever

Houllebecq is a mediocre writer exploiting the most degenerate side of humanity to garner attention from underage edgelords who think it's cool to include sex in every medium and shout nigger nigger nigger from their windows. His style is pretentious as fuck and his content is as forgettable as it gets. Whoever compares this guy to Celine is a breathing retard.

>>13893930
This. He's the Monoprix Céline basically, not-so-secretly more bougie, overpriced, ultimately just another industrial reproduct.

>>13893930
>His style is pretentious as fuck

This is absurd, the guy literally copy-pastes from wikipedia, how could you say his style is pretentious?

Why doesn’t the American version come out until November?
The one available now looks tacky and cheap

>>13893950
Not him, but in fairness wikipedia articles are sometimes written pretentiously.
Imo the pretension is not in his literary style, which is nonexistent, but rather in his self-presentation and also in how his book are always described as both prophetic and systematic.

>>13893930
How is he pretentious?
I find it the exact opposite. He’s vulgar

As is typical of Houellebecq, it's an exploration of the thought patterns of the ordinary man. Ordinary in the sense of non-extraordinary rather than average. He is middle aged, bitter, and full of regret. All through the narration, you're not sure if its Michel speaking, or the character, but does it matter? It's still the same type of person being explored. And as such, it's much the same as any other work by Houellebecq.

It is worth reading? If you already like Houellebecq and have run out of his works to read, then yes. If you don't, then no. It's far from his best work.

>>13893950
He literally tries to justify his vulgarity with conceited words which makes him look even more like a talentless moron. His novels manage to be annoyingly verbose while appealing to the average normalfag at the same time. If he wants to be taken seriously he needs to get off his high horse and get straight to the point or break off the habit of writing like an incomprehensible pseud.

>>13893976
>his literary style, which is nonexistent

>>13893930
Right. He is a poor man's Cioran.

>>13893977
There's a kind of pretension that rests on parading how vulgar and shocking you are.

>>13894031
How do you think I know you didn't even read it in the original?

>>13892986
>tfw I'm reading the original in French
How does it feels you monolingual fucks to wait for a translation

>>13894039
And Cioran is a poor man´s Nietzsche!

>>13894054
And Nietzsche is a poor man’s Stirner.
/thread

>>13894089
pleb

>>13894051
Je pense que cette remarque témoigne parfaitement d'une stupidité congénitale que l'on retrouve souvent chez les mutants d’Amérique du nord.