/lit/ - Literature

>>17778912
What is the point of writing or reading shit like this?

>>17778912
What a retarded piece of trash.
He learned nothing from Schopenhauer.

>>17778915
It tickles the pseudo-intellectuals of /lit/

i really liked this book a lot. it's in the incel lit genre but unlike manosphere blogposts or school shooter manifestos it doesn't jump to any conclusions but dives deeper into and is satisfied with describing a societal reality as perceived by the author. even if you disagree with the things said in the book (which are really said by the characters only, the author is a total turncoat who changes his views as it suits him), you have to give it to him that he describes something that's obviously real, with a sensitivity and level of detail that's not really found anywhere else, not giving a shit about if it sounds cringe or will get him ostracised which makes sense at this point i mean look at his face but still

there's also a fairness in his observations, he's certainly not the clear cut sexist or islamophobe you'll see him reduced to in articles

hollaback is my waifu

>>17778912
why are the french like this bros?

>From the point of view of love Véronique belonged, like all of us, to a sacrificed generation. She had certainly been capable of love; she would have liked to be still capable of it, I give her this testimony; but that was not possible any more. Rare, artificial and late phenomenon, love can blossom only in special mental conditions, rarely met, in all points opposed to the freedom of manners which characterizes the modern time. Veronique had known too many discotheques and lovers; such a way of life impoverishes the human being, inflicting sometimes serious and always irreversible damage. Love as innocence and as capacity of illusion, as aptitude to summarize the whole of the other sex to only one loved one, rarely resists to one year of sexual vagrancy, never to two. In reality, the successive sexual experiences accumulated during adolescence quickly undermine and destroy any possibility of sentimental and romantic projection; gradually, and in fact quite quickly, one becomes as capable of love as an old rag. And then, of course, one leads a life of a rag; as one grows older, one becomes less attractive, and thus bitter. One is jealous of the young people, and therefore one hates them. This hatred, condemned to remain unconfessed, festers and becomes more and more ardent; then it is dampened and extinguished, as everything is extinguished. Only bitterness and disgust remain, illness and the expectation of death.

>>17778963
Please read Elementary Particles next. It's much more nuanced with more attention given to the characters and a more interesting plot.

Hollowbuck was right about everything

I felt bad when I first saw this and turned it around a year later
pessimism can be generative but Houellebecq doesn't want to generate anything

The only people obsessed with sex are creeps who don't get any and addicted sybarites.

>>17778912
Did you really need to make yet ANOTHER Hollobeque r9k thread? There's like 5 of them already up, use the catalogue nigger.

>>17778912
Which book is this?

>>17778912
>>Of course. It's been ruined for a long time, since the beginning. You will never represent, Raphael, an erotic dream of a young girl. You must resign yourself; such things are not for you. In any case, it is already too late. The sexual failure, Raphaël, that you have known since your adolescence, the frustration which pursues you since the age of thirteen will leave an ineffaceable trace in you. Even supposing that you could have women from now on - which, quite frankly, I don't believe - it won't be enough; nothing will ever be enough. You will always remain an orphan of these adolescent loves that you did not know. In you, the wound is already painful; it will become more and more so. An atrocious bitterness, without remission, will end up filling your heart. There will be no redemption or deliverance for you. That's the way it is.

Are the French really like this?

>>17778912
Why do people on /lit/ post quotes without the source? Is it because asking for the source provides you with an extra (you)? Is it because a true intellectual would already know the source, and only a pseud would need to ask for the source?

>>17779906
Memeing Houellebecq so anons would get to read him will actually make them understand their condition more (memeing esoteric bullshit like Evola or Guenon on the other hand is completely useless).

>>17779089
This hit real hard. What book is this from?

>>17780741
>their condition
projection or cope? Houellebecq is like top 1% ugly.

>>17780747
>>17780729
it's whatever/extension du domain de la lette

>>17780780
>Houellebecq is like top 1% ugly.

>>17780747
Extension du domaine de la lutte or Whatever

He’s literally me

>>17779089
REDPILLED

>>17780816
>>17780840
Is it full of passages like the one with Veronique?