Michel Houellebecq

[Anonymous No.17186970]

Is he actually a misogynist or is that a common misinterpretation? What does he think about feminism? And which books is best to start with?

[Anonymous No.17186992]

>>17186970
>misogynist
That word has no meaning. It pretty much refers to any opinion on women that's outside the normie feminist status quo. It should be renamed "non-feminist" to make it more accurate.

[Anonymous No.17186995]

>>17186970
this guy had sex and i'm 29 years old virgin..

[Anonymous No.17187069]

>>17186970
Submission was boring and basically written to appeal to european cuckold anxiety re Islam in the most adorable way that could still pass for "controversial" in public media. He's a pop fiction author for yuppies I think

[Anonymous No.17187108]

He outright says several times he thinks women are better than men.

[Anonymous No.17187110]

>>17186970
>Is he actually a misogynist

cognitive killswitch that introduces an irrelevant frame

[Anonymous No.17187161]

>>17186970
Seeing Michel's face made me to stop smoking

[Anonymous No.17187355]

>>17186995
Sometimes it helps not to give a fuck

[Anonymous No.17187388]

>>17186970
read Atomized. as to your other questions, go ask some faggot who cares

[Anonymous No.17187725]

>>17186970
He’s a hack writer, but he’s largely inoffensively articulating the woes of the modern dating scene for both genders. Still, “dating sucks and genuine affection and love is hard to find” is not a novel concept.

[Anonymous No.17188001]

>>17187725
dont know where get this picture of memebecq as as transgressive writer when hes just an edgier and more exaggerated caricature of the average frenchman

[Anonymous No.17188087]

>>17188001
>dog fucking, pedophilia, big black dicks, woman dying from being cummed in at a hippy orgy, and general nihilism
>not edgy

[Anonymous No.17188150]

>>17186970
No, he’s not. As far as I’m concerned, for every criticism he has of women he has about 2-5 for men. He’s against the modern sexual landscape, which to some women and “feminists” of today translates into hating women. I like him, not difficult, can be pretty funny, light reads, really. “Whatever” is a decent start because its short and also his first. “Atomized” is also good. Can’t say what he thinks of feminism, since it is such a volatile term that what it represents has changed about 50 times in his lifetime. I also just don’t know.

[Anonymous No.17188210]

I like Houllebecq and I think he is doing something no one else has the nerve to do cause they’re afraid of their reputation being attacked as thoroughly as his has. It’s funny people in this thread are currently claiming he isn’t transgressive when he fled from his country after being put on trial, as well as had one of his close friends murdered in a terrorist attack for writing similar attacks on Islam in Europe. I also think it’s funny people claim he idolizes Islam as so many on here do when he’s on record saying he despises it as a religion.

[Anonymous No.17188222]

>>17188210
Oh, and his mother disowned him and called him a liar. But yes, continue to say he’s a vanilla writer cause you fried your head with Internet-speak

[Anonymous No.17189253]

Atomised was good. Non PC but also not that edgy. Talked about the losers in the sexual liberated society. Obviously put intimate relationships in a good light. Never took itself too seriously. Read it.

[Anonymous No.17189277]

>>17186970
He is right about Islam.

[Anonymous No.17189281]

>>17188087
Not in France no

[Anonymous No.17189318]

>>17188222
>>17188210
He's still vanilla and not transgressive if I read him and get nothing new. Sure, he may say controversial things, but most of us already think lots of controversial stuff we don't say cause we'd get in trouble. That doesn't make him any good. When I read a philosopher, I want new ideas, not edginess from tired ideas we all thought but never said.

[Anonymous No.17189321]

I like him. My first book of his was Submission after picking it up at a used bookstore having no prior knowledge of who he was. I've read everything he's published since then and enjoyed it. Light read, good humor, rife with swipes at the current social norms. He's a modern Bukowski but with critic support.

[Anonymous No.17189334]

Read most of his books. Only dumb Brooklyn Americans think they're cool books to read. His books are not important and barely scratch the surface of modern lives. Soumission was especially midwit tier, and pandered to an annoying Zionist tactic

[Anonymous No.17189341]

>>17186970
read Story of the Eye

[Anonymous No.17189474]

>>17186970
"Nooo the female characters he creates aren't smartass all-knowing deus ex femmefatalemachinas nooooooo misogyny!!!!!"

[Anonymous No.17189491]

>>17189334
>barely scratch the surface of modern lives

What would you recommend for a deeper analysis then?

>pandered to an annoying Zionist tactic

Do you mean it has a hidden message to support Israel? I'm lost here.

[Anonymous No.17189845]

>>17189321
Bukowski is just a discount Céline, who is the best writer of 20th century.

[Anonymous No.17190186]

>>17189845
fuck no Celine is great for first half of 20th century and Buk is great for second half. 20th century was of rapid change and to say that one or two writes can represent whole century would be a shitty statement.

[Anonymous No.17190216]

What did the publishers mean by this?

[Anonymous No.17190327]

>>17190186
Bukowski is not good at all.

[Anonymous No.17190652]

>>17189318
I’m not even gonna argue with you cause you sound like your eyes are glazed over and you’re going from thread to thread casually dismissing and shitting on things as is the norm on this site. Think before posting

[Anonymous No.17190664]

>>17186995
hes not always been like this

[Anonymous No.17190666]

>>17190327
How so?

[Anonymous No.17190892]

>>17186995
28, the only reason I haven't stuck my knob in any gash yet is because I don't like the vacuous, vapid, self-absorbed, psychotic, capricious bitches they tend to be attached to. I have better things to spend my time on than playing mind-games with irrational womanchildren, debasing myself for access to a fucking hole.

thanks to my mother for demonstrating how little women value men by going through them more frequently than underwear while I was a kid.

[Anonymous No.17191025]

>>17190892
Hot

Did you ever wank while she was being boned by some random guy? listening through the walls to them?

[Anonymous No.17191044]

>>17186970
He's not. He writes really well about misogynist and racist characters and he writes with a male voice. His female characters are shallow, but so are his male characters (because everyone is shallow). He writes more about his male characters becausw he actually follows the 'write what you know' advice.

[Anonymous No.17191124]

>>17186995
if it bothers you, buy a whore.

[Anonymous No.17191137]

>>17191025
no. I only ever overheard her through the wall with one of her partners.
there was another time when she was between boyfriends when I almost walked in on her letting a guy who had been orbiting her since highschool bone her on the sofa.
I'm sure that would all sound hot to you, but it isn't for be cause 1) she's my mum, and 2) she just seemed to prioritise her profession and her sex life over raising her kids, which I'm not happy about.

[Anonymous No.17191171]

>>17191137
lel

Single mothers are incapable of properly raising children, especially sons.

She was always going to be shit anon. At least look on the bright side and try to develop a killer milf/incest fetish.

[Anonymous No.17191193]

>>17190892
Nice cope lmao

[Anonymous No.17191397]

>>17186970
You dont need to start reading Houleebecq. He's shit, read Marc Edouard Nabe, the real french deal.

[Anonymous No.17191506]

“People hated him because he told the truth”

[Anonymous No.17191849]

>>17186970
Misogynist is a word that's often deployed by people who are so absurdly sexist on their own terms that they don't want any fraction pointing to a hint of the true nature of the other gender, in any capacity, shown to them because their fragile constitutions weep at any sort of exposure, which is why most of them, even if they have sex, will remain hopeless and eternal virgins. Misogyny of a kind is real, I'm sure, but not the kind that has been ascribed to that term in the popular culture today.

And you should read his book Whatever first. Atomised/Elemental Particles is good, and I want to re-read it, but Whatever is, I think, a quicker summation of his general persona and process. It's succinct, it's full of a kind of dark clarity, and it's engaging for how relatively sparse and conceptual it is. I've only read those two from him, though, so I can't speak to his larger body of work.

[Anonymous No.17191909]

>>17191849
yeah but also women are genuine cunts who deserve to be derided.

[Anonymous No.17191918]

He's a whiny liberal so no

[Anonymous No.17193297]

>>17186970
He is a realist, writes great stuff on gender.

>>17186995
Yaaaaah